EFFECTS OF ADVANCE ORGANIZER TEACHING …indianresearchjournals.com/pdf/IJSSIR/2013/June/3.pdf · teaching experience in Chemistry at secondary schools level. The effect of students‟

International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary Research__________________________________ ISSN 2277 3630 IJSSIR, Vol. 2 (6), JUNE (2013) Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

24

EFFECTS OF ADVANCE ORGANIZER TEACHING APPROACH

ON SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’

ACHIEVEMENT IN CHEMISTRY IN MAARA DISTRICT, KENYA

PROFESSOR SAMUEL W. WACHANGA*;

ANTONY MUGIIRA ARIMBA**;

PROF. ZACHARIAH K. MBUGUA***

* DEAN FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY STUDIES

EGERTON UNIVERSITY, KENYA

**FACULTY OF EDUCATION

CHUKA UNIVERSITY, KENYA

***FACULTY OF EDUCATION

KARATINA UNIVERSITY, KENYA.

______________________________________________________________________________

ABSTRACT

Students‟ achievement in Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE) Chemistry

examinations in Kenya is below average. This could be due to among other factors, the teaching

methods used by teachers. There is need for teachers to use teaching methods that can enhance

students‟ academic achievement in Chemistry in secondary schools. This study investigated the

effects of Advance Organizer Teaching Approach on students‟ achievement in Chemistry. Quasi

–experimental research was employed since intact chemistry classes were involved. This was

because school authorities do not allow classes to be broken and reconstituted for research

purposes. Solomon‟s Four Non-Equivalent Control Group Design was used. The study involved

secondary schools in Maara District, Kenya. The target population was 13,036 secondary school

students while the accessible population was 3,540 Form Three chemistry students. Purposive

sampling was used to select four district co-educational secondary schools in Maara District. The

sample size involved 161 Form Three chemistry students who were in four groups E1, E2, C1

and C2. Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was used for data collection. The CAT was

administered to groups E1 and C1 before teaching started. The experimental groups were taught

using the Advance Organizer Teaching Approach (AOTA) while the control groups were taught

through Regular Teaching Methods (RTM). The CAT was pilot tested to determine its reliability,

while its validity was ascertained by experts from Department of Education of Chuka University

College. At the end of eight weeks of teaching the CAT post-test was administered to the four

groups. Statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) was used for data analysis. Descriptive

statistics (mean, percentages, and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (ANOVA,

ANCOVA, and t- test) were used for data analysis at α= 0.05 level. The study found out that

there were significant effects of the use of advance organizers in Chemistry learning. Students

who were taught using AOTA achieved better in Chemistry learning than those who were taught

through RTM. The findings of this study also indicate that gender has no significant effects on

CAT scores in Chemistry learning when AOTA is used. Based on this study teachers and

curriculum developers should adopt and strengthen the use of advance organizers as a teaching

strategy to enhance Chemistry learning by students.


25

KEYWORDS: Advance Organizer Teaching Approach, Chemistry Achievement Test, Regular

Teaching Method, students‟ chemistry achievement.

Introduction

Chemistry is the science that underpins most of the major discoveries of the 20th century and

still will continue to do so in the 21st century as emphasis moves towards the understanding of

biological approaches and more eco-friendly synthetic systems such as forensic chemistry,

environmental, soil and water chemistry (Webster, 2009). Chemistry courses have low rates of

student success and as a result serve as a gate-way limiting access to science fields (Webster,

2009). Students learn best when they possess an integrated package of skills and beliefs that

support learning.

Cognitive psychologists believe that all of a person‟s prior knowledge is stored in the cognitive

structures of the brain. Ausubel (1960) determined through extensive research that “the most”

dependable way of facilitating retention is to introduce the appropriate subsumers and make

them part of cognitive structure prior to the actual representation of the learning task. The

introduced subsumers thus become advance organizers or anchoring foci for the reception of new

material (Ausubel, 1960). Bransford (2004) and Anderson (2004) agree with Ausubel that

advance organizers are an excellent way to activate and build schema prior to the actual learning

of new material by students. Based on the initial response to the material presented in the

organizer, teachers can modify their lesson plans and materials to better fit the prior knowledge

of their students. In addition, they can efficiently structure their time and the critical points that

need to be covered, while simplifying complicated text Bransford (2004) & Anderson, (2004).

This enhances the development of higher order thinking in their students by helping them to

relate concepts previously learned to the new material and enabling them to quickly organize

their thoughts.

Despite many researches that have been done in the efforts to improve achievement in sciences

in secondary schools, performance in Chemistry continues to be poor. Kenya‟s Ministry of

Higher Education Science and Technology (MoHEST) has made several efforts to address the

causes of poor performance in chemistry. For example, the training of chemistry teachers has

been enhanced so as to have trained teachers in all schools. However, the problem of poor

performance in chemistry persists. Emphasis should be among others on the use of innovative

teaching strategies such as the use of advance organizers.

An advance organizer is a statement of inclusive concepts to introduce and sum up material that

follows (Woolfolk, 2001). Ausubel (1960) defines an advance organizer as a cognitive

instructional strategy used to promote the learning and retention of new information. An advance

organizer is information that is presented prior to learning that can be used by the learner to

organize and interpret new incoming material (Mayer, 2003).

In explaining the meaningful learning, Ausubel (1960) introduced the concept of a subsumption

model as a pedagogic device in which central and highly unifying ideas are stated in terms

already familiar to the learner, to which the learner can relate new ideas by subsumption. A

primary process in learning is subsumption in which new material is related to new and relevant

ideas in the existing cognitive structures (Adebola, 2011). The organizer is introduced in advance

of learning itself, and is also presented at a higher level of abstraction (Ausubel, 1960). A few

have been conducted on the effects of advance organizers in learning and learners performance

(Adebola, 2011). For example, Githua and Nyabwa (2007) found out that students taught using


26

advance organizers had significantly higher scores in mathematics achievement test than those

taught in the conventional way. According to Harg and Willerman (1991) students can probably

be helped by the organization and visual relationships of the advance organizer in a way that oral

explanations do not offer. Wachanga and Mwangi (2004) explain that successful teaching and

learning depends partly on the correct use of a teaching method whose activities target most

learning senses.

Chemistry is poorly performed in national examinations and in particular Maara District (KNEC;

2008; 2009). In the present study, teaching of chemistry was done through the advance organizer

approach in order to find out whether students‟ achievement would be affected positively.

Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of using Advance Organizer Teaching

Approach on secondary school students‟ achievement in Chemistry in Maara District.

Objectives of the Study In order to achieve the stated purpose, the following objectives were used to guide the study.

i. To determine whether the achievement of students who are taught through Advance

Organizer Teaching Approach (AOTA)would be different from that of those taught using the

Regular Teaching Method (RTM).

ii. To determine whether students‟ achievement was affected by gender when they are

taught through Advance Organizer Teaching Approach.

Hypotheses The following hypotheses were tested at α=0.05 level of significance.

HO 1: There is no statistically significant difference in achievement scores in

Chemistry between students who are taught using AOTA and those who are taught using RTM.

HO 2: There is no statistically significant difference in achievement in Chemistry between boys

and girls who are taught using AOTA.

Conceptual Framework

In this study advance organizers were used as an intervention in the teaching of the Mole concept

topic in Chemisty. The interrelated variables are shown in Figure 1.

Independent Variables

Intervening Variables Dependent Variable

Advance Organizer

Teaching Approach

(AOTA)

Regular Teaching

Methods (RTM)

Teacher characteristics

-Gender

-Experience

-Training

Learner characteristics

-Age

-Gender

Students‟

achievement in

Chemistry


27

Figure 1: Interrelationships of variables in the study.

The intervening variables were classroom environment, learner and teacher characteristics. To

control for teacher variables, the study involved female trained teachers with at least 3 years

teaching experience in Chemistry at secondary schools level. The effect of students‟ age was

controlled by involving Form Three chemistry students who are approximately the same age.

Effect of students‟ gender was incorporated in the study.

Research Methodology

This study involved quasi-experimental research in which the Solomon‟s Four Non-Equivalent

Control Group Design was used. It was not possible to randomly assign students to groups as

they exist in school as intact groups (Wachanga & Mwangi, 2004). The Solomon„s Four Non-

equivalent Control Group Design is presented in Figure 2.

E1 O1 X O2

----------------------------------------------------------

C1 O3 _ O4

----------------------------------------------------------

E2 _ X O5

----------------------------------------------------------

C2 _ _ O6

Figure 2: The Solomon„s Four Non-Equivalent Control Group Design

O1 and O3 were pre-tests while O2, O4, O5 and O6 were post-tests and X was the treatment

where students were taught using Advance Organizer Teaching Approach in the Mole Concept

topic in Chemistry. E1 was the experimental group which received pre-test, treatment and a post-

test. C1 was true control group which received the pre-test followed by the control condition and

the post-test. E2 was the experimental group two which received treatment followed by the post-

test. C2 received the control condition followed by the post-test. C1 and C2 were taught using

Regular Teaching Methods.

Maturation and history effects were controlled in this design by having two groups taking a pre-

test and a post-test (Fraenkel &Wallen, 2000). To avoid the effects of contamination, the

treatment and control groups were from different schools which were far apart. Pre-test enabled

the researchers to check the entry level of the students before the experiment started.

Sampling Procedure

Purposive sampling was used to identify the schools with the desired characteristics from the list

of schools in Maara District. The desired features of the schools that qualified for the study were:

a class size of more than thirty Form Three chemistry students, female chemistry teachers, well

equipped chemistry laboratory and district co-educational secondary schools. Group E1 was

from Mwimbi Division while Group E2 was from Muthambi Division. The control groups were

from Mwimbi Division and at an approximate distance of eight kilometers apart. These two

divisions belong to Maara District. From the sampled schools, simple random sampling method

was used to obtain four classes and assigning them to experimental and control groups.


28

Sample Size

According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) at least 30 cases are required in each group for

experimental research. In this study the number of students in the sample size was 161. The

number of students in E1 were 49, C1 were 41 while in E2 and C2 were 36 and 35 respectively.

The total number of students was 161. Table 1 shows the summary of the sample size indicating

the number of the students in the four groups.

Table 1

Summary of the Sample Size

Group

Number of Students

Experimental one (E1) 49

Control one (C1) 41

Experimental two (E2) 36

Control two (C2) 35

Total 161

Instrumentation and Data Collection

The Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT) was used to measure students‟ achievement in the Mole

Concept topic of Chemistry. This test consisted of items that were covered in Mole Concept

during the eight weeks of study. The content tested involved the mole, relative atomic and

molecular masses, empirical and molecular formulae, molar solutions, chemical equations,

titration and molar gas volume. The test contained 10 items having a total score of 25 marks. The

items tested knowledge, comprehension, application and analysis of chemical information. Two

experts from Chuka University in the Department of Education and two examiners from Kenya

National Examinations Council (KNEC) assisted the researchers to ascertain the validity of the

test and also to review the test. Pilot testing was done in Embu East District in a co-educational

district secondary school which had similar characteristics as the sampled schools. The data that

were obtained from piloting assisted the researchers to determine the reliability of the test. The

reliability co-efficient was calculated using the Cronbach‟s alpha method because the items

yielded a range of scores. The test had a reliability coefficient of 0.83. This value was above the

threshold of 0.7. Thus the test was considered to be suitable (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000). The

test was administered at the beginning of the study as a pre-test. At the end of the eight weeks of

study the items of the pre-test were reorganized to serve as the post-test.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, percentages) and inferential statistics (ANOVA,

ANCOVA and t-test) were used for data analysis. The one-way ANOVA was used to analyze

differences in the four means. It was used to establish whether there were significant differences

among the mean scores of four groups. In order to take care of any initial differences among the

groups, an Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was carried out using KCPE marks as the


29

covariate in all the four groups (Thorne & Giesen, 2000). Independent samples t-test was used to

test if there was a statistically significant difference between two mean scores of experimental

and control groups (Mutai, 2000).This is because of its superior power to detect differences

between two means (Borg & Gall, 1989). The level of significance for acceptance or rejection of

null hypotheses was set at α= 0.05.

Results and Discussion

The independent samples t-test was used to analyze whether there were significant differences in

the mean scores of experimental group (E1) and the control group (C1) in the CAT pre-test.

Data in Table 2 shows the t-test results of the pre-test mean scores in CAT for E1 and C1.

Table 2

t-Test Results of the Pre-test Mean Scores on CAT

Group N Mean score (%) SD df t-value p-value

E1 47 20.94 17.10 77 0.65 0.52

C1 32 18.25 19.38

Total 79

E1 had a higher mean score (20.94%) than C1 (18.25%). However, the difference was not

significant t (77) = 0.65, p>0.05. Independent samples t-test was used to analyze whether there

was significant differences between the mean scores of boys and girls in CAT. Data on Table 3

shows the results in CAT based on gender.

Table 3

t- Test Results of the Pre- test Mean Scores on CAT by Gender

Gender N Mean Score (%) SD df t-value p- value

Male 30 15.87 18.54 77 -1.55 0.12

Female 49 22.29 17.38

Total 79

The results indicate that girls had higher mean scores (22.29%) as compared to boys (15.87%).

However, this difference was not significant t (77) = -1.55, p>0.05. Results in Tables 2 and 3

shows that the groups were similar at the beginning of the experiment.


30

Effects of AOTA on students’ Achievement in Chemistry

One way ANOVA was performed to analyze whether there was any significant difference in

achievement scores of students taught using AOTA and those taught using RTM. The results of

the students CAT post-test scores were as shown in Table 4.

Table 4

CAT Post-test Mean Scores Obtained by Students in the Four Groups

Group N Mean Score (%) SD

E1 49 30.37 18.30

C1 41 21.85 14.20

E2 36 31.72 16.04

C2 35 22.74 13.84

Total 161 26.84 16.34

The mean scores of the E1 (30.37%) and E2 (31.72%) were higher as compared with those of the

C1 (21.85%) and C2 (22.74%). This shows that experimental groups achieved better than the

control groups. This study found out that students taught using AOTA achieved better in CAT as

compared to those students taught using RTM. This indicates that the use of advance organizers

enhanced learners to learn Chemistry.

The CAT mean scores for the four groups are shown in Figure 3.


31

Figure 3: Relationships between Post-test Mean Scores in CAT in the Four Groups

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of the post-test mean scores in CAT are shown in Table 5

Table 5

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of the Post-test Mean Scores on CAT

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p-value

Between Groups 3074.70 3 1024.90 4.06 0.01

Within Groups 39658.42 157 252.60

Total 42733.13 160

The results in Table 5 show that the differences between the post-test scores on CAT were

statistically significant F (3, 157) = 4.06, p< 0.05.

Least Significant Difference (LSD) Post Hoc comparisons were carried out to establish the mean

scores which were statistically different. The results are shown in Table 6.

Table 6

Post Hoc Comparisons of Post-test of CAT Mean Scores for the Four Groups

Group Group Name Mean difference Standard error Significance

Name

(i) (j) (i-j) p- value

E1 C1 8.51 3.36 0.01*

C2 7.62 3.52 0.03*

E2 -1.35 3.45 0.70

C1 E1 -8.51 3.36 0.01*

C2 -0.89 3.66 0.81

E2 -9.87 3.63 0.01*

E2 E1 1.35 3.49 0.70

C1 9.87 3.63 0.01*

C2 8.98 3.77 0.02*

C2 E1 -7.62 3.52 0.03*

C1 0.89 3.66 0.81

E2 -8.98 3.77 0.02*

* denotes that the mean differences are significant at 0.05 confidence level.

The results indicate that the differences in mean scores of groups E1 and C1, groups E1 and C2,

C2 and E1, C2 and E2, E2 and C1 were statistically significant at 0.05 level and therefore H01 is

rejected. Since the study was quasi experimental, the researchers carried out Analysis of

Covariance (ANCOVA) using KCPE scores as covariates. The results in Table 7 show the

adjusted mean scores for ANCOVA.


32

Table 7

Adjusted Mean Scores of the Four Groups

Group N Adjusted Mean Scores (%

E1 49 30.51

C1 41 22.30

E2 36 23.24

C2 35 31.10

Total 161 26.84

Table 8 shows the results of ANCOVA.

Table 8

Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of the Post- test Mean Scores on CAT using KCPE marks

as the Covariates

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F sig

KCPE 176.64 1 176.64 0.69 0.41

Group 39481.18 156 253.01 4.28 0.01

Error 3251.32 3 1083.78

Total 158750 161

Corrected Total 42733.12 160

The ANCOVA results indicate that the differences are statistically significant since p<0.05.

Least Significant Difference (LSD) Post-hoc multiple comparisons were used to establish the

means which were statistically different. The results are shown in Table 9.


33

Table 9

Post Hoc Multiple Comparisons of Post- test of CAT Mean Scores for the Four Groups

Group Name Mean difference Standard error Significance

(i) (j) (i-j) p- value

E1 C1 8.20 3.37 0.02*

C2 7.27 3.53 0.04*

E2 -0.59 3.55 0.86

C1 E1 -8.20 3.37 0.02*

C2 -0.94 3.61 0.79 E2

-7.86 3.78 0.04*

E2 E1 0.59 3.55 0.86

C1 8.80 3.64 0.02*

C2 7.86 3.78 0.00*

C2 E1 -0.18 0.09 0.04*

C1 0.09 0.09 0.29

E2 -0.31 0.09 0.04*

* denotes that the mean differences are significant at 0.05 confidence level.

The results indicate that the differences in mean scores of groups E1 and C1, groups E1 and C2,

C2 and E1, C2 and E2, E2 and C1 were statistically significant at 0.05 levels. Therefore, HO1 is

rejected. The study showed that advance organizers are effective in enhancing students‟

achievement in Chemistry. The findings of this study are in agreement with that of Shihusa and

Keraro (2009) that the use of advance organizer teaching strategy results in higher achievement

of students in Biology. Wachanga and Mwangi (2004) also found out that cooperative class

experiment method facilitated chemistry learning more than RTM. Recent research by Njue

(2010) found out that students who were taught using constructivist teaching strategy (CTS)

achieved relatively higher scores in CAT in mole concept in Chemistry than those taught through

RTM. Results of this study show that there is merit in using advance organizer approach to

enhance students‟ achievement.

When students are given advance organizers prior to actual learning the learners‟ attention is

actually directed to the most important aspects of the lesson which involves what they are able to

pick from the lesson in terms of the understanding of the main concepts than the mere ability to

recall facts, definitions and formulae. Adebola (2011) found out that the use of advance

organizers is an effective strategy for teaching and learning Mathematics at senior secondary

school level. Adebola (2011) recommend that behavioral objectives and other forms of advance

organizers should be used by teachers of Mathematics in instructing their students at the

secondary level. Clawson and Bames (1973) attempted to determine the effects of different types

of advance organizers. Their work showed that advance organizers with pictorial, graphic and

manipulated materials were more effective than verbal and expository advance organizers.

Studies of what constitutes an advance organizer have produced conflicting conclusions while

inconsistent results have also been reported in literature on the use of advance organizers

(Adebola, 2011).The findings of this study indicate that the use of AOTA enhances Chemistry


34

learning in the Mole Concept topic. Although teachers use advance organizers during teaching,

perhaps majority of the chemistry teachers are either not familiar or aware of the use advance

organizers and the role they play in Chemistry learning. Strengthening the use of advance

organizers through inservice courses could help science teachers to adopt proper use of the

advance organizers in teaching.

Effects of AOTA on Achievement of Boys and Girls in Chemistry

Independent samples t-test was used to analyze whether there was a significant difference in

CAT mean scores between boys and girls who were taught using AOTA. The results are shown

in Table 10.

Table 10

t- Test Results of the Post- test Mean Scores on CAT by Gender

Gender N Mean score (%) SD df t-value p- value

Male 34 30.00 15.18 83 -0.41 0.69

Female 51 31.57 18.69

Total 85

The results in Table 10 indicate that the differences in CAT mean scores between the male and

female students were not statistically significant, t (83) = - 0.41, p>0.05. Therefore, H03 was

accepted. The findings of this study indicate that gender has no significant effect on Chemistry

achievement when AOTA is used. The results of this study concur with that of Njue (2010) that

gender has no significant effects in chemistry achievement when students are taught using CTS

in the Mole Concept topic. The present study also concurs with those of Rizwan and Muhammad

(2005) findings that science achievement of female students was better than the science

achievement of male students although there were no significant differences in CAT mean

scores. In this study a chart in form of graphic organizer was used to provide a visual

representation of facts and concepts in an organized frame. Novak (1980) asserts that creative

teaching, when well done, includes the selection and use of good advance organizers. New

information about a concept is filled into an existing framework of categories called schemes that

contain specific information (Akinbobola, 2010). If no knowledge is available, advance

organizers are used to give knowledge to the students in order for this framework to be followed

and new information retained for recall and transfer.

Conclusions

Based on this study the following conclusions were made

i. Students who are taught through AOTA achieve higher chemistry learning than those

taught through RTM.

ii. Gender has no effect on students‟ achievement when they are taught through AOTA.


35

References

Adebola, S.F. (2011). The Effects of Behavioral Objectives on Students‟ Achievement in

Senior Secondary School Mathematics Instruction when used as Advance Organizers.

American Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research. Accessed on:

http://www.scihub.org/AJSR on 6/7/2011.

Akinbobola, A.O, & Afolabi. (2010). Constructivist Practices through Guided Discovery

Approach: The Effects on Students‟ Cognitive Achievement in Nigerian Senior

Secondary School Physics. Eurasia Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education. 2 (1),

16-25.

Anderson , R. C. (2004). Role of the Readers‟ Schema in Comprehension, Learning and

Memory in R.B. Ruddel, & N. J. Unrau (Eds), Theoretical Models and Processes of

Reading (5th

ed.) pp 594-606. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The Use of Advance Organizers in the Learning and Retention of

Meaningful Verbal Material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 2672.

Borg, W. R, & Gall. M. D. (1989). Educational Research. An Introduction. 5th

Ed. White

Plains. New York, U.S.A: Longman.

Bransford, J. D. (2004). Schema Activation and Schema Acquisition. Theoretical Models

and Processes of Reading (5th

Ed) Newark, DE: International Reading Association, Inc.

Clawson, E. U. & Bames, B. R. (1973). The Effects of Organizers on Learning of

Structured Anthropological Materials in the Elementary Grades. The Journal of

Experimental Education. 42(1), 11-15

Fraenkel, N., &.Wallen, E.(2000). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education.

5th

Ed. New York, U.S.A: Mc Graw Hill.

Githua, N. B. & Nyabwa A. R. (2007). Effects of Advance Organizer Strategy during

Instruction on Secondary School Students’ Mathematics Achievement in Kenya’s’ Nakuru

District. Accessed on 04/01/2010

http://www.springerlink.Com/content/337474762640r124/

Mayer, R. (2003). Learning and Instruction. New Jersey. USA: Pearson Education, Inc

http://www.scihub.org/AJSR%20on%206/7/2011

http://www.springerlink.com/content/337474762640r124


36

Mugenda, O., & Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods. Quantitative & Qualitative

Approaches. Nairobi, Kenya: ACTS press.

Mutai, B. K. (2000). How to Write a Quality Research Proposal. A Complete and a

Simplified Recipe. 1st Ed. My Sore, India: My Sore University Press.

Njue, A. K.(2010). Effects of Constructivist Teaching Strategy on Students‟ Achievement

in Chemistry. Unpublished MEd Thesis. Chuka University College, Kenya

Novak, J .D.(1980). Learning Theory Applied to the Biology Classroom. A Useful Tool

for Science Education. The American Biology Teacher, 42,(5) 280-285

Rizwan, A.R. &Muhammad, Z. I. (2005). Effects of Students’ Self concept and Gender on

Academic Achievement in Science. Bulletin of Education and Research , 27(2), 19-36.

Shihusa, H. & Keraro, F. N. (2009). Using Advance Organizers to Enhance Students‟

Motivation in Learning of Biology. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and

Technology Education . 5(4), 413-420.

The Kenya National Examination (KNEC) (2008).The Kenya National Examinations

Council . Nairobi: Kenya.

The Kenya National Examination (KNEC) (2009). The Kenya National Examinations

Council. Nairobi: Kenya.

Thorne, M., & Giesen, M. (2000). Statistics for Behavioral Sciences. 3rd

Ed. London,

USA: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Wachanga, S.W. & Mwangi, J.G.(2004). Effects of Cooperative Class Experiment

Teaching Method on Secondary School Students‟ Chemistry Achievement in Kenyas‟

Nakuru District. International Education Journal 5(1). Accessed on 24/4/2012 http://iej.

J.c,b net

Webster, G. H. (2009). Attitude Counts. Self-Concept and Success in General

Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education. 86, 6, p. 744.

Woolfolk, A. (2001). Educational Psychology. 8th

Ed. Boston, USA: Allyn and Bacon.

http://iej/

Documents

EFFECTS OF ADVANCE ORGANIZER TEACHING …indianresearchjournals.com/pdf/IJSSIR/2013/June/3.pdf · teaching experience in Chemistry at secondary schools level. The effect of students‟