1

Style Definition: Heading 1: Font: Bold, English (United

TABLE OF CONTENTS Kingdom), Centered, Line spacing: Double
Formatted: Not Different first page header
Formatted: Heading 1, Left, None, Space Before: 0 pt,
Line spacing: single, Don't keep with next, Don't keep
lines together
Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Space After: 0 pt, Line
spacing: single
 2

Title Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Table of Contents 1 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Chapter I INTRODUCTION Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Background of the Study 3 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab
stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Research Questions 4 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab

stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Theoretical Framework 5 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab

stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Conceptual Framework 7 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab

stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Scope and Limitation 8 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab
stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Significance of the Study 9 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab
stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Definition of Terms 9 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab

stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Review of Related Literature 11 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab
stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Chapter II METHODOLOGY Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab

stops: Not at 0.5" + 1"

Research Design 18 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Participants 18 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Instrument 19 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Data Gathering Procedure 20 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

 3

Data Analysis Procedure 21 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Ethical Considerations 22 Formatted: Heading 1, Left, Line spacing: single

Formatted: Heading 1, Left

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION Formatted: Centered, Line spacing: Double

Background of the Study

Numerous studies have shown that student engagement in school drops

considerably as students get older (Willms, 2003). By the time students reach middle

school, lack of interest in schoolwork becomes increasingly apparent in more and more

students, and by high school, as dropout rates attest, too many students are not sufficiently

motivated to succeed in school. According to Ross (2005), the students’ level of interest

and desire to engage in learning are heavily influenced by the school environment and the

activities that they partake in.

Laboratory activities have long had a distinctive and central role in the science

curriculum and science educators have suggested that many benefits ensue from engaging

students in science laboratory activities (Hofstein & Lunetta, 2001). The objective of

laboratory activities is not only the demonstration of concepts, laws and procedures. There
 4

are some other important achievements such as the attainment of a greater maturity and

autonomy of thought by students, an enlarged capacity of cooperation and the use of

multiple types of instruments in order to reach a result (Blandford and Knowles, 2009). In

the laboratory it is possible to develop learning modalities, such as that of “cooperative

learning” where groups of students that collaborate in a work of in-depth analysis that leads

to the building of new knowledge in order to reach a common objective (Biggs, 2003) and

“learning by doing” wherein the subject, as an active participant, uses his/her own

resources to elaborate and reorganize theories (Norhidayah et al., 2009).

Through lab activities, students gain experience firsthand (Worth, 2010), provide

different learning environments to develop communicating skills, and create a productive

learning environment, therefore influencing students’ perceptions about learning.

Numerous studies have shown that student engagement in school drops

considerably as students get older (Anderman & Midgley, 1998). By the time students

reach middle school, lack of interest in schoolwork becomes increasingly apparent in more

and more students, and by high school, as dropout rates attest, too many students are not

sufficiently motivated to succeed in school. According to Lumsden (1994), the students’

level of interest and desire to engage in learning are heavily influenced by the school

environment and the activities that they partake in.

Laboratory activities have long had a distinctive and central role in the science

curriculum and science educators have suggested that many benefits ensue from engaging

students in science laboratory activities (Hofstein & Lunetta, 1982; Lunetta, 1998). The

objective of laboratory activities is not only the demonstration of concepts, laws and

procedures. There are some other important achievements such as the attainment of a
 5

greater maturity and autonomy of thought by students, an enlarged capacity of cooperation

and the use of multiple types of instruments in order to reach a result (Hodson, 1993). In

the laboratory it is possible to develop learning modalities, such as that of “cooperative

learning” where groups of students that collaborate in a work of in-depth analysis that

leads to the building of new knowledge in order to reach a common objective (Johnson et

al., 1981; Johnson & Johnson, 1985; Lazarowitz & Karsenty, 1990) and “learning by

doing” wherein the subject, as an active participant, uses his/her own resources to

elaborate and reorganize theories (Lazarowitz & Tamir, 1994).

Through lab activities, students gain experience firsthand (Doğdu & Arslan, 1990;

Özmen, 2001), provide different learning environments to develop communicating skills,

and create a productive learning environment, therefore influencing students’ perceptions

about learning (Orion, Hofstein, Tamir, & Giddings, 1997).

Students differ in their perceptions of the learning environment, and these

perceptions affect how and what students learn (Ramsden, 1979). As a result, it is important

to understand what students’ ideas are regarding the purpose of the laboratory and its role

in instruction. Gaining an understanding of students’ perceptions of the laboratory will

provide insight into what students are able to achieve in the laboratory.

This study will add to what is already known regarding students’ perceptions of the

laboratory environment. Previous studies have shown that students’ perceptions of the

chemistry laboratory affect their attitudes toward chemistry (Lang, Wong, & Fraser, 2005),

and that students have a generally favorable attitude toward practical work in chemistry

(Sneddon & Hill, 2011).

 6

This study aims to comprehend the students’ perception towards laboratory

experiments, what reasons the students provide for their beliefs, the benefits they have

received, and how such activities can increase student engagement. By understanding how

students perceive the lab activities in learning, educators can better understand the students’

perspective.

Research Questions

This research study aims to discover how students engage in laboratory activities.

Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. How do students perceive laboratory experiments?

2. How can laboratory experiments increase students’ engagement?

3. What benefits, if any, have the students derived from engaging in laboratory

experiments?

Theoretical Framework

The constructivist learning theory by John Dewey (1933/1998) and the flow theory

by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1934/ present) supports the study of the researchers.

Constructivist Learning Theory

The constructivist learning theory by John Dewey states that one will learn if he/she

experiences such act that will engage them for learning. The idea is that people are

responsible for their own learning and understanding using what they know about past
 7

experiences and they use those past experiences to serve as a source to construct their own

meanings.

Constructivist learning theory relates to the way laboratory experiments are

conducted and how the students perceive it, due to the fact that the main purpose of the

teachers in conducting laboratory activities are to provide the students hands-on learning,

with the opportunity to experiment and manipulate the objects that they are assigned to do.

In laboratory activities, students are given the chance to interact with objects or sensory

data that then will make them construct their own understanding about the experiment

done. The experiences that the students will have in the laboratory experiments can mostly

affect the way that they accumulate and understand the topic taught. Furthermore, teachers

are the number one factors that can change and alter the experiences that the students might

have on those activities. The way they execute the discussion and experiment to the

students might also affect their fascination in doing those activities, thus making them

interested and wanting to go back to the laboratory and do more of what they experienced.

To summarize everything, learners will indeed construct meanings from what they

see, but it lies in what they do and the experience they encounter during those activities.

Most importantly, it depends on the teacher if they really want the learners to construct

their own idea about the topic or experiment done in the laboratory.

Flow Theory

The flow theory by Mhialy Csikszentmihalyi is about a state of concentration and

engagement that can be achieved when completing a task that challenges one’s skills. Dr.

Csikszentmihalyi explained his theory through a fascination of past artists wherein he

 8

explained that artists who were so lost in their works ignored eating food, drinking water,

and most importantly sleeping. With his research he discovered that these occurrences are

also common in athletes, students, authors, and scientists. He describes this hyper-focus

and complete engagement as “optimal experience”.

The flow experience is when a person is completely involved and engaged on what

he or she is doing that every step that has to be done are already well planned in their minds.

In this study, the researchers are tasked to find out the experiences and engagement of the

students in doing laboratory activities making the flow theory by Mhialy Csikszentmihalyi

a great example that can make the students more involved and engaged when laboratory

experiments are done. Two (2) of the five (5) main goals of this theory are: it needs to be

a task that one might find intrinsically rewarding and it must match the skills of the subject.

One won’t achieve this state of flow if he or she is engaging in an activity knowing that no

feeling or rewarding is intact. Additionally, the challenge must match the perceived skills.

In 1987, Mhialy Csikszentmihalyi, Massimmi & Carl published the following 8-channel

model of flow in Finding Flow: The Psychology of Student Engagement in Everyday Life.
 9

Figure 1. Finding Flow: The Psychology of Student Engagement in Everyday Life

Mhialy Csikszentmihalyi says that if a task is too easy then one might experience

apathy or boredom however if the task is too hard then one might be anxious. In the case

of the students’ engagement in laboratory activities, tasks given to the students must relate

to their field of understanding and fascination in order for them to find the activity

interesting, thus making them excited for being engaged with the help of optimal

experience or the so-called flow experience.

Conceptual Framework Formatted: Font: Bold

Formatted: Heading 3, Left, Line spacing: single

Students
Experiences and Focus Group
Discussion Results and
Engagement in
Discussions
Science Laboratory Thematic Analysis
Experiments
Figure 2. Conceptual framework used as the guide in conducting the study
Figure 2. Conceptual framework used as the guide in conducting the study

This conceptual framework is derived and constructed by the researchers in order

to be used as a basis in conducting the study. In addition, the variables mentioned will serve

as the backbone of the study. Where it involves the following variables; experiences and

engagement of students to sciences laboratory. In order to attain the results of this

undertaking the researchers will utilize Focus Group Discussion and Thematic Analysis.
 10

Scope and Limitation

This research is focused on the experiences of the Junior High School students

engaging in science laboratory experiments. Furthermore, it focuses on how the students

perceive laboratory experiments and the benefits that it may provide to the students.

Before conducting the focus group discussion, the researcher handed out a consent

form to the selected participants using convenience sampling from grades 7, 8, 9 and 10.

In each year level there will be a total of five (54) participants with a total of twenty twelve

(2012) participants out of the total population of the Junior High School Department.

However, only eleven (11) participants were able to be present for the discussion.

Additionally, there was a lack of related literature regarding integration due to the

limited amount of available literature.

The researchers will be limitedrestricted to the area of the Bacolod Tay Tung High

School, Inc. school grounds S.Y. 2018-2019. Thus, restrictingconfining the study to a

specific area.

The researchers in this study will be using the reactions, opinions, and data gathered

from the focus group discussion in order for them to determine the experiences of the Junior

High School students engaging in laboratory activities.

Significance of the Study

This research paper will benefit the following:

 11

Administrators. The gathered data would help guide the administrators to improve

and give insights which can encourage them to plan curriculums designed to enhance the

quality of laboratory experiments in the field of science-related subjects.

Science Teachers. This will help them to figure out new approaches in engaging

the students in laboratory experiments. Thus, will also help them to understand the

importance of laboratory experiments and how they are going to improve their skills in

engaging students to laboratory experiments.

Students. As a result, they will be able to grasp the relevance of having this

laboratory experiments shared by the researchers as part of their science related subjects.

Future Researchers. This research paper will help them as bases on their study.

This can also provide the future researchers to further develop and to further understand

the factors affecting the students’ engagement in laboratory experiments.

Definition of Terms Formatted: Not Highlight

The following terms are defined conceptually and operationally:

Chemistry. According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term chemistry is the science

that deals with the composition and properties of substances and various elementary forms

of matter.

Operationally, the term chemistry is a branch of science which is being learned by

the students of Bacolod Tay Tung High School.

 12

Cooperative Learning. According to the Cambridge DictionaryWikipedia, the

term cooperative learning is an educational approach which aims to organize classroom

activities into academic and social learning experiences.

Operationally, the term cooperative learning refers to the laboratory experiments

which is a are methods to organize classroom activities into academic and social learning.

Experience. According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term experience is the

practical contact with and observation of facts or events

Operationally, the term experience is a knowledge obtained when someone already

experienced it beforehand.

Experiment. According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term experiment is a

scientific procedure undertaken to make a discovery, test a hypothesis, or demonstrate a

known fact.

Operationally, the term experiment is the activity where we try to use chemicals or

items in order to know and understand certain scientific situations and theories.

Laboratory. According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term laboratory is a room or

building equipped for scientific experiments, research, teaching, and manufactureand

manufacture of drugs or chemicals.

Operationally, the term laboratory is the place where the students go to do their

experiments.

Perception. According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term perception is the state

of being or process of becoming aware of something through the senses.

Operationally, the term perception IS CHU2refers to the views of the Junior High

School students in regards to their engagement in laboratory experiments.

 13

Science. According to Cambridge Dictionary, the term science is

the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the natural and physical world, Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
or knowledge obtained about the world by watching it carefully and experimenting.
Field Code Changed

Operationally, the term science serves as the subject which supports Chemistry, Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
Biology, etc and etc. Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
Review of Related Literature Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
To undertake the presentation of the précis of this research, the researchers
Field Code Changed

subscribed to helpful information from the following studies which have been made Field Code Changed
Field Code Changed
available in this undertaking.

1. Students’ Perceptions of Laboratory Experiments

The laboratory can achieve many goals and purposes. What the laboratory does achieve

depends on the nature of the experiments, student attitudes, teacher attitudes, and how

activities are structured. Most of the research on the purpose or goals of the laboratory has

focused on the instructor perspective (Nakhleh, Polles, & Malina, 2002). This study is a

response to Nakhleh, Polles, and Malina’s call for more understanding of the student

perspective of the laboratory. Students differ in their perceptions of the learning

environment, and these perceptions affect how and what students learn.

The current higher education context could be characterized by academics’ efforts to

lessen the tension that is sometimes generated between research and teaching and make

use of the most valuable features of each. More than ever, the link between research and

teaching is attracting significant international attention from both academics and policy

makers. There is a growing body of research on the topic, mainly consisting of qualitative
 14

studies, which sets to examine various dilemmas, such as the need for lecturers to cultivate

a commitment to both activities (Magi & Berkens, 2015), students’ awareness, experiences

and perceptions of research integration in the courses and seminars taught at university

(Healey, Jordan, Pell & Short, 2010), the connection between research integration and

students’ learning process (Roberts, 2007), and the relation between the participation in

undergraduate research and grade point average (GPA) (Bennett & Bauer, 2003;

Fechheimer et al., 2011; Haave & Audet, 2013).

a. Advantage (Information)

In some respects, the staggering expansion of new assessment tools like laboratory

experiments, especially those yielding statistically significant results, has been one of the

most important innovations brought about by scientific teaching (Yarime & Tanaka, 2012).

At present, the development of new assessment tools to measure skill competence are a

major topic of interest in education research (Kogan, Holmboe, & Hauer, 2009). Tools for

quantifying a student’s ability to understand and apply genetics knowledge, for example,

are devices with immense potential in helping instructors evaluate whether students are

learning what is intended. Being able to make distinctions in this competence is equally

important. Just because a student correctly describes what the law of independent

assortment is does not guarantee she can apply that knowledge correctly to a balancer

chromosome fly genetics problem.

Treffinger, Young, Shelby, & Shepardson (2002) concluded creativity’s relation to

the discovery process and considered hands-on experiments to be one of the ways to

develop the discovery process, and thus to develop creativity as well.

 15

There appears to be no general consensus about whether or not the purpose of the

laboratory is to bridge theory and practice. In the study of Galgano, Loffredo, Sato, &

Seoud (2012), they cited a quantitative study of current students, recent graduates, and

practicing scientists about the observed and preferred aims of the laboratory. The study

found that only the current students ranked “to illustrate material taught in lecture” and “to

help bridge theory and practice” in the top five preferred aims while the recent graduates

and practicing scientists ranked those issues much lower (e.g. illustrating material taught

in lecture was ranked as 14 and 17 out of 22 items, respectively). Similarly, graduates and

scientists ranked “to train students in observation” and “to foster critical awareness” in the

top five preferred aims, while current students ranked those issues lower (e.g. students

ranked these same items 7 and 14 out of 22, respectively).

b. Advantage (Experiences)

In contrast, other works show that some professors purported that the aim of the

laboratory is to make connections between practice and theory through direct

implementation of concepts (Wilkinson & Ward, 1997, as cited in Weaver, 2008). The

Wilkinson and Ward study evaluated student and teacher perceptions of the purpose of the

laboratory. The study asked participants to rank survey items (e.g. “to gain practice at

making accurate observations and interpreting them”, “to help students understand

theoretical parts of science”, and “to make science more interesting and enjoyable through

actual experience”), each of which was a supposed aim of the science laboratory, on a 5-

point Likert scale. The study found that teachers ranked “to make science more interesting

and enjoyable through actual experience” as most important, with “to gain practice at

making accurate observations and interpreting them” and “to help students understand
 16

theoretical parts of science” tied for the second most important aims of the laboratory.

Interestingly, “to give training in solving problems and conducting investigations” was

ranked seventh out of the ten items by the teachers. The absence of consensus on the issue

of theory-and-practice may well indicate a deeper gap in the literature, namely knowledge

about the constructed link between theory and practice in the minds of student learners.

c. Advantage (Rapport)

According to the National Research Council (2006), the science learning goals of

laboratory experiences include enhancing mastery of science subject matter, developing

scientific reasoning abilities, increasing understanding of the complexity and ambiguity of

empirical work, developing practical skills, increasing understanding of the nature of

science, cultivating interest in science and science learning, and improving teamwork

abilities.

The research suggests that laboratory experiences will be more likely to achieve

these goals if they (1) are designed with clear learning outcomes in mind, (2) are

thoughtfully sequenced into the flow of classroom science instruction, (3) integrate

learning of science content and process, and (4) incorporate ongoing student reflection and

discussion. Laboratory experiences also promote a student’s ability to collaborate

effectively with others in carrying out complex tasks, to share the work of the task, to

assume different roles at different times, and to contribute and respond to ideas.

Teamwork and collaboration appear in research on typical laboratory experiences

in two ways. First, working in groups is seen as a way to enhance student learning, usually

with reference to literature on cooperative learning or to the importance of providing

opportunities for students to discuss their ideas. Second and more recently, attention has
 17

focused on the ability to work in groups as an outcome itself, with laboratory experiences

seen as an ideal opportunity to develop these skills. The focus on teamwork as an outcome

is usually linked to arguments that this is an essential skill for workers in the 21st century

(Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2003).

Although much research has focused on associations between the classroom

learning environment and student achievement and attitudes, less attention has been paid

to relationships between teacher–student interaction and student outcomes. Past research

suggests that teachers’ interpersonal behaviour is associated with student outcomes (Fraser,

Lang, and Wong, 2005). In the Netherlands, research with the Questionnaire on Teacher

Interaction (QTI) revealed statistically significant relationships between teacher–student

interaction and student outcomes.

d. Process (Time)

Hart, Mulhall, Berry, Loughran, & Gunstone (2000) noted that students often

participated in laboratory courses with the expressed purpose of linking theory with

practice, but that they often failed to make the connections between lecture and laboratory

settings. This failure to make a connection may stem from 1) insufficient integration

between theory and procedures in traditional laboratory manuals, 2) too much material

covered during the laboratory period (i.e. an over-emphasis on breadth of content or

procedural experience at the detriment of depth of understanding), or 3) the prominence of

hands-on practice in the laboratory to the almost complete exclusion of theory and its

connections to practice. Students placed in a context wherein the explicit goal is to

complete the experiment, especially when given a small time window, are likely to first

follow the procedures, with little notion of the theory as it affects the methods involved.
 18

Gardner and Gauld (1990) claim that challenging and open-ended lab work may

engage students. However, depending on students’ experiences in the laboratory,

practical work can lead to negative attitudes towards science. If there is not enough

time to complete the experiments, this can lead to negative attitudes about lab and

science in general. The authors assert that “merely being in the laboratory and

doing lab work there do not, by themselves, foster scientific attitudes: it is the

qualityof the experiences that students have there that is crucial”.

e. Process (Materials)

In addition to this, the contribution of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

to the improvement of science education should not be underestimated (Beyessa, 2014). It

is obvious that schools have to provide necessary materials (books, classrooms, laboratory

materials, guidance on teaching learning of science education and others) for students so

that students have to get access in achieving their science subjects effectively (Norhidayah

Ali, et. al., 2009).

This is supported by a study of Grossarchive (2010), it was concluded that the

availability and regular use of the biology laboratory science equipment brings about better

performances of students in biology.

According to ScienceFirst (2018), schools are able to contribute a lot in the

scientific advances yet to come by virtue of equipping themselves with the latest and the

advanced materials and supplies. The advances and developments in the field of medical

science and technology would not take place if schools did not prepare brilliant and

dedicated scientists and researchers. Children develop interest in scientific research in

science labs. When they observe various things and carry out different experiments, their
 19

reasoning skills are honed and they start thinking deeply on those theories and concepts.

Schools thus play a vital role in bringing up the next generation of engineers and doctors.

Thus, schools must have the latest science lab supplies and equipment to make science

interesting and effective for students and to encourage them to make significant

contributions in the field of physics, biology, chemistry, and other streams of science later

in life.

f. Process (Environment)

The learning environment has a strong impact on students’ learning experiences

and outcomes; it dictates what, how and why students learn (Bakhshialiabad, Bakhshi, and

Hassanshahi, 2015). Also, it affects students’ level of enthusiasm and degree of learning

effectiveness. According to Lizzio, Wilson, and Simons (2002), the relationship between

educational environment and students’ achievement has been a fertile area of investigation,

and the literature provides a proven connection between educational environment and the

valuable outcomes of students’ achievement, satisfaction and success. Furthermore,

evidence from previous studies shows that students who perceive the educational climate

favourably achieve higher academic success than those who perceive it negatively (Hamid,

Faroukh, and Mohammadhosein, 2013).

The educational climate surrounding students is considered as one of the factors

determining academic success (Ross, 2005). Though difficult to define (Genn & Harden, Formatted: Not Highlight

1986), the educational climate or environment is seen by several authors as consisting of

an objective external environment, everything that happens within the classroom,

department, faculty or university (Roff & McAleer, 2001; Genn, 2001) and an internal

subjective perception by the students (Ostapczuk et al, 2012).

 20

g.f. Process (Instruction)

Students differ in their perceptions of the learning environment, and these

perceptions affect how and what students learn. Therefore, it is important to understand

what students’ ideas are regarding the purpose of the laboratory and its role in instruction.

Gaining an understanding of students’ perceptions of the laboratory will provide insight

into what students are able to achieve in the laboratory. In a survey study of university

students in Australia, Lizzio, Wilson, and Simons (2002) found that student perceptions of

their learning environment affected both their approaches to learning and their learning

outcomes. Students who perceived the workload as heavy were more likely to adopt

surface-level approaches. Students’ perceptions influenced learning outcomes both

directly, and indirectly, by influencing their approaches to learning. Perceptions of teaching

quality also affected the learning approaches chosen by students. These perceptions were

not influenced by students’ previous grades.

In particular, greater student responsibility and freedom, as well as understanding,

helpful/friendly and leadership behaviours from the teacher, were associated with Formatted: Not Highlight

improved student attitudes towards classes. On the other hand, uncertain, dissatisfied,

admonishing and strict teacher behaviours were related negatively to student attitudes.

Earlier studies also showed that students whose teachers were directive (i.e., those who

provided a well-structured and task-orientated learning environment) and

tolerant/authoritative (i.e., those who provided a pleasant, well-structured environment and

who had a good relationship with students) showed the greatest cognitive and affective

gains. The lowest student gains were associated with teachers who were
 21

uncertain/aggressive (i.e., those who offered an aggressive kind of disorder) and

uncertain/tolerant.

Teaching clarity and organization is also positively related to student grades

(Roksa, Trolian, Blaich & Wise, 2016) and both student satisfaction and persistence

(Pascarella, Salisbury, & Blaich, 2011). Experiencing clear and organized instruction has

a positive impact on the extent to which students engage in higher-order learning, reflective

learning, and integrative learning (Wang, Pascarella, Nelson Laird, & Ribera, 2015).

Clear and organized instruction is also positively related to students' academic

motivation and their belief that their faculty are committed to teaching and student

development. On the whole, experiencing clarity and organization in instruction across

courses benefits student development on a range of important outcomes beyond mastering

the specific content in courses (Loes & Pascarella, 2015).

h.g. Obstacle (Stress)

Researchers usually define stress as the undesirable response people have to

extreme strain or other sort of burden placed on them. Stress occurs when a person deal

with a situation that they recognize as irresistible and cannot manage. In an advanced

educational organization such as University (Smith, Johal, Wadsworth, Smith & Peters,

2000) where the load placed on students is based on time limit and difficulty to stand out

in tests or examination, students are prone to experience stress. Most psychologists assert

that moderate stress motives individuals to achieve and fuels creativity, although stress

may hinder individuals from performance on the difficult task. (Nelson & Simmons, 2003).
 22

Student’s academic performances can be affected by many factors. Bernstein et al.

(2008) define the sources of stress as every circumstance or event that threatens to disrupt

people’s daily functioning and causes them to make adjustments. Similarly, Phinney and

Haas (2003) stressed out sources of stress more specifically as a unique set of stressful

encounters among student which includes a heavy academic load. Stress arises when there

are burden on the person which exceed his available assets. If stress is harsh and extended,

it can lessen academic performance, hinder with a student’s capability to involve in and

add to campus life, and raise the probability of substance abuse and other potentially

destructive behaviors (Richlin-Klonsky & Hoe, 2003). Researchers (Vermunt &

Steensman, 2005; Topper, 2007; Malach-Pines & Keinan, 2007).

In the American College Health Association National College Health Assessment

report alone in 2010, there was 25 percent of students suffered from having a decreased in

their grades. Those students also had difficulties to finish their courses. A number of

researchers have discovered that psychological stress affects the thinking skills and brain

development of even the youngest student.

Among college students, a strong relationship is found between stressful life events

and reduced academic performance as well as there is a link between health related quality

of life and stress (Dusselier, Dunn, Wang, Shelley & Whalen, 2005; Misra & McKean,

2000).

Wintre and Yaffe (2000) concluded that high level of stress during the first year of

college forecast lower level of overall adjustment and can make the students more

susceptible to many social and psychological problems, thus leading to a lower grade point

average (GPA) in the final year. Many studies have addressed this issue and it was found
 23

that many psychological problems, such as depression, anxiety, and stress have an impact

on the students’ academic achievement.

This is further supported by Williamson, Birmaher, Ryan, and Dahl (2005) who

reported that in anxious and depressed youth, stressful life events are considerably elevated

which in turn lead to low performance in academics.

i.h. Obstacle (Comprehension)

Most of the research on the purpose or goals of the laboratory has focused on the

instructor perspective (Nakhleh, Polles, & Malina, 2002). This study is a response to Formatted: Not Highlight

Nakhleh, Polles, and Malina’s call for more understanding of the student perspective of the

laboratory. Students differ in their perceptions of the learning environment, and these

perceptions affect how and what students learn. Students in the study of Russell & Weaver

(2008) provided insight into their perceptions when indicating that the only goal they

perceive for the laboratory is to complete the activities, but not mentioning any integration

of theoretical understanding as a perceived goal.

One of the most important overall conclusions that has been drawn through the

wealth of scientific teaching literature is that an explanation is not enough. Instructors are

often lulled into the belief that having explained something once or twice should be

sufficient for students to retain that information accurately (Sinclair & Ferguson, 2009).

Scientific teaching research clearly demonstrates this is a misconception on the part of

instructors. Instead, it appears that long-term retention of new information often requires

students to apply that information in some way, often more than once, a goal that active

learning is specifically designed to facilitate (Taraban et al, 2007).

 24

It must be accepted that there are several barriers to implementing hands-on

experiments in classrooms. On one hand, in conducting an experiment, learners would

construct their own ideas by interpreting what they hear, read and see but on the other hand,

students requiring more guidance find difficulties in interpreting the experiment Formatted: Not Highlight

(Thanasoulas, 2001).

According to the findings of Armbruster, Patel, Johnson, & Weiss (2009),

continued work on assessments of educational outcome by a variety of authors has

effectively confirmed lectures are not to be favored. This lack of effectiveness is evident

in knowledge learning (Powell, 2003) but even more pronounced in skill learning (Hake,

2001; Pukkila, 2004). This latter fact is of particular importance in the sciences because

laboratory and science process skills are often considered the basic foundations of proper

training (Roth & Roychoudhury, 2003).

i. Obstacle (Misunderstanding) Formatted: Not Highlight

j. Capato (2004) investigated students’ perceptions of the presence of the ethic

of care in a sub-urban, high school. Factors that contribute to the ethic of care were also

under consideration such as caring, nurturing, belonging, moral education, community and

student-teacher relationship. The results of the study indicated that an ethic of care existed

and it was practiced at high school was extremely vital to the students’ sense of

membership and connection to the school. These high school students’ reported a strong

desire for opportunities to sit in small groups and discuss personal concerns and social

issues with their teachers.

 25

k.j. Obstacle (SettingEnvironment) Formatted: Not Highlight

Researchers generally conclude that without adequate facilities and resources, it is

extremely difficult to serve large numbers of children with complex needs. Besides general

maintenance and construction issues, researchers have found most schools lack 21st

century facilities in the form of infrastructure, laboratories, and instructional space

(Pennsylvania State University, 2015).

The learning environment has a strong impact on students’ learning experiences

and outcomes; it dictates what, how and why students learn (Bakhshialiabad, Bakhshi, and

Hassanshahi, 2015). The educational climate surrounding students is considered as one of

the factors determining academic success (Ross, 2005).

2. Student Engagement

The laboratory can achieve many goals and purposes. What the laboratory does achieve

depends on the nature of the experiments, student attitudes, teacher attitudes, and how

activities are structured.

Student engagement has been defined as “participation in educationally effective

practices, both inside and outside the classroom, which leads to a range of measurable

outcomes” (Kuh et al., 2007), and as “the extent to which students are engaging in activities

that higher education research has shown to be linked with high-quality learning outcomes”

(Krause and Coates, 2008, 493). Coates (2007) describes engagement as “a broad construct

intended to encompass salient academic as well as certain non-academic aspects of the

student experience”, comprising the following: (1) active and collaborative learning; (2)

participation in challenging academic activities; (3) formative communication with

 26

academic staff; (4) involvement in enriching educational experiences; and lastly, (5)

feeling legitimated and supported by university learning communities. Formatted: Not Highlight

a. Involvement (Participation)

In the study of Lin et al (2012), paths relating to engagement and future interest are

much stronger for interest and enjoyment than for self-efficacy and self-concept.

Additionally, there is no significant separation between science competency and future

science interest or engagement. Results suggest that the affective and cognitive pathways

to scientific competency are divergent and that they might be differentially activated by

different contexts and activities. This indicates that school science educators might wish to

reconsider the merit of overemphasizing achievement in comparison to interest, and that

the development of science competency per se may not be the best way to ensure public

engagement and understanding of science.

While increasing participation is an obvious goal in courses that include frequent

discussions and small-group work, it is also important in a lecture course. In short, if only

a few students participate by volunteering answers, asking questions, or contributing to

discussions, class sessions become to some extent a lost opportunity to assess and promote

learning (Washington University, 2009).

Norman (2005) states that the results of a majority of researches have shown that

students have more interest in Science and other subjects due to being taught using this

method. Besides, hands-on experiments can create excitement among students as they

develop their interest in learning Science (Andersen and Vandehey, 2012). Eventually, Formatted: Not Highlight

students’ intrinsic motivation is build which will encourage them to take their own

initiative to learn more about Science. Interestingly, Dhanapal & Shan (2014) also found
 27

that students’ discipline and behavior improved tremendously in Science classes when

teachers employed hands-on experiments.

However, very few teachers carry out hands-on experiments in their Science

lessons. One of the reasons is because in the past, ‘the textbook was the curriculum for

science and hence what passed as the teaching of science was nothing more than

information-giving by teachers and memorization of the information by students’ (Collison

and Aidoo-Taylor, 1990 cited in Ghartey-Ampiah, et. al, 2004: 2). ‘The theoretical

approach to teaching science was further encouraged by the emphasis it received in public

examinations’ (Ajeyalemi, 1990 cited in Ghartey-Ampiah, et. al, 2004: 2). These have led

to some of the teachers’ beliefs in teacher-centered approach when delivering Science

lessons based on their experiences in school (Jones and Wyse, 2004). One of the teachers

interviewed by Jones and Wyse stated that ‘as a Year 6 teacher, (his) primary concern when

teaching science was to ensure that the children had enough information…to be able to

tackle a variety of Key Stage 2 SATs questions and he claimed that he had achieved that

(2004:51). Besides that, the emphasis of practical works was minimal due to their disbelief

in practical Science to convey the large amount of information that the children are required

to learn (Jones and Wyse, 2004).

In comparison, Mant, Wilson, and Coates (2007) conducted a study wherein 16

schools had interventions wherein the teachers participated in continuing professional

development (CPD) and developed science lessons that had more practical work, more

discussion, more thinking and less (but more focused) writing. The proportion of pupils

achieving the highest level (level 5) in the national science tests at age 11 was compared

in the matched‐school pairs before and after the intervention. Focus group interviews were
 28

also held with a group of pupils in each intervention school. There was a 10% (95%

Confidence Interval 2–17%) increase in the proportion of children achieving the top score

in the intervention schools. The pupils and teachers reported greater engagement and

motivation. These findings suggest that moving from rote revision to cognitively

challenging, interactive science could help improve science education. They merit

replication in other international settings to test their generalizability.

In the study of Afari et al (2010), they found that students involved in games

perceived statistically significantly more teacher support, involvement, personal relevance, Formatted: Not Highlight

enjoyment of the subject lessons and academic efficacy. There is a significant body of

research to support the potential of using games as an educational tool (Annetta et al. 2010;

Paraskeva et al. 2010) and to complement traditional lectures for enhancing students’

learning (Kiili 2005; Tan 2007; Tan et al. 2010). Past research indicates that games have

the potential to draw students into the learning process and to encourage them to participate

through a more interactive environment (Gosen and Washbush 2004; Proserpio and Gioia

2007; Zantow et al. 2005). The use of games can also provide educators with an interactive

means of delivering knowledge that is particularly useful for teaching cause and effect

(Gosen and Washbush 2004; Thompson and Dass 2000). Finally, as an educational tool,

games have the capacity to engage and motivate students (Paraskeva et al. 2010; Prensky

2001) and the learning from games is more likely to be retained (Annetta et al. 2010).

b. Involvement (Learning Expectations) Formatted: Not Highlight

For education in the STEM fields, classes are invariably separated into two basic

types: lectures and labs. Most traditional lab courses are like a cookbook in the sense that

everything is explained beforehand, with nothing new for students to discover (Brownell,
 29

Kloser, Fukami, & Shavelson, 2012). This tendency runs contrary to the reasons why many

students decide to major in science. Often, science majors are motivated by the desire to

discover new things. The main place where this discovery takes place and where students

anticipate it will take place in their academic careers is in lab classes. However, the

cookbook format of most traditional labs often leaves students disappointed about the

amount they learn or get to discover (Gooding & Metz, 2012).

Research tells us what can be expected from a teacher employing instructional

strategies and practices that are proven to lead to increased mastery of lessons. Better

learning happens in a dynamic setting in which teachers offer explicit active instruction

than in situations in which teachers do not actively guide instruction and instead, turn

control over content and pace of instruction to students (Hattie, 2009).

Biggs (2003) has been influential in the field of higher education with his work in

the area of what he Kuhn and Rundle-Thiele Curriculum Alignment 352 calls ‘constructive

alignment.’ The basic premise of constructive alignment is that the curriculum is designed

so that the learning activities and assessment tasks are aligned in order to support students

to attain the goals intended for the course. This concept considers students to be responsible

for their own learning. In fact, Chonko (2003) advises that the most important thing higher

educators can do is persuade students to take full responsibility for their own education.

This requires their active participation to manage the process. If students construct their

own learning, then it makes sense that the real learning can only be managed by them. In

light of this view, the higher education literature prefers educators to think of themselves

more as ‘guides on the side, not sages on the stage.’ This role leaves educators in charge
 30

of coordinating the activities required to facilitate the learning experience and adopting the

necessary supportive learning strategies.

c. Approach (Integration) Formatted: THESIS RRL, Left, Indent: First line: 0", Line
spacing: single
This is supported by a study of Driver (1995), with respect to laboratory

experiences, these instructional units share two key features. The first is that specific

laboratory experiences are carefully selected on the basis of research-based ideas of what

students are likely to learn from them. For example, any particular laboratory activity is

likely to contribute to learning only if it engages students’ current thinking about the target

phenomena and is likely to make them critically evaluate their ideas in relation to what

they see during the activity. The second is that laboratory experiences are explicitly linked

to and integrated with other learning activities in the unit. The assumption behind this

second feature is that just because students do a laboratory activity, they may not

necessarily understand what they have done.

c. Approach (Integration)

d. Approach (Student-Teacher Interaction)

Tomlinson and Allan (2000) define differentiation as “a teacher’s reacting

responsibly to a learner’s needs” (p. 4). Teachers who effectively differentiate instruction

recognize differences in students and seek to address the needs and learning styles of

individual students, rather than applying homogenous methods to classroom learning and

assessment. Teachers can differentiate on three levels: content, process, and products

(Tomlinson, 2001). ‘Content’ addresses input and how students learn, ‘process’ addresses

how students connect ideas and ‘products’ concern how students demonstrate learning.

These areas are further differentiated by the student’s readiness and interest. As not every
 31

child is the same, some will be cognitively ready for material sooner than others and

different interests lead students to pursue various forms of learning and knowledge. In

addition to recognizing student differences in learning, differentiation of content delivery

is important. Studies by Borg and Shapiro (as cited by Lage, Platt and Treglia, 2000) report

that students learn best when the teacher’s instructional methods match the student’s

learning style, suggesting that students who learn best from lecture need to have a strong

lecturer as a teacher.

Researchers have theorized that teacher involvement, support, and caring,

motivates and encourages students to engage with class material, leading to improvement

in grades and achievement (Davis, 2003). Klem and Connell (2004) conducted a

retrospective analysis using longitudinal data sets to test the relationships between teacher

support and engagement and between engagement and achievement.

In particular, greater student responsibility and freedom, as well as understanding,

helpful/friendly and leadership behaviours from the teacher, were associated with Formatted: Not Highlight

improved student attitudes towards classes. On the other hand, uncertain, dissatisfied,

admonishing and strict teacher behaviours were related negatively to student attitudes.

Earlier studies also showed that students whose teachers were directive (i.e., those who

provided a well-structured and task-orientated learning environment) and

tolerant/authoritative (i.e., those who provided a pleasant, well-structured environment and

who had a good relationship with students) showed the greatest cognitive and affective

gains. The lowest student gains were associated with teachers who were

uncertain/aggressive (i.e., those who offered an aggressive kind of disorder) and

uncertain/tolerant.
 32

Researchers have theorized that teacher involvement, support, and caring,

motivates and encourages students to engage with class material, leading to improvement

in grades and achievement (Davis, 2003; Oldfather, 1993; Skinner & Belmont, 1993).

Klem and Connell (2004) conducted a retrospective analysis using longitudinal data sets

to test the relationships between teacher support and engagement and between engagement

and achievement. Surveys were administered to elementary and middle school students and

teachers, and students’ school performance was measured by attendance and test scores.

The authors found that students who perceived a good relationship with teachers were more

likely to report engagement; furthermore, engagement was associated with higher

attendance and test scores. In another study, Hallihan (2008) proposed that students who

had positive teacher relationships would like school more, which was found in previous

research to be associated with increased participation, higher achievement on standardized

academic assessments, better grades, reductions in deviant behavior, and greater chances

of graduating.

Coates (2007) describes engagement as “a broad construct intended to encompass

salient academic as well as certain non-academic aspects of the student experience”,

comprising the following: (1) active and collaborative learning; (2) participation in

challenging academic activities; (3) formative communication with academic staff; (4)

involvement in enriching educational experiences; and lastly, (5) feeling legitimated and

supported by university learning communities.

e. Approach (Holistic Development)

3. Benefits

Butang d sng introoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 33

a. Technical Knowledge (Experience)

According to Carin and Bass (2001), ‘there are three major ways for people to learn

about the world; discover things about the world from personal observations and

experiences with the environment, acquire knowledge transmitted directly from other

people, or construct personal knowledge by transforming discovered and acquired

knowledge in meaningful ways’. Worth (2010) affirms that learning Science is more than

just gaining the facts and understanding on the particular topic. This is where learning

science through hands-on experiments becomes acceptable as an effective option as it

encourages students to experience and discover from observation or feelings.

Hands-on experiment is an active process of student-centered learning whereby it

encourages children to discover and develop new concepts or ideas followed by spurring

children’s mind to be critical and creative (Jones and Wyse, 2004; Wilson, 2008). As

children independently think critically and work through a subject matter, they develop a

sense of independence and autonomy which will ‘enhance their desire and ability to be

self-motivated’ (Blandford and Knowles, 2009). Many researchers have successfully

proven that this method of learning develops the students’ interest in learning Science as

well as other subjects (Norman, 2005).As children independently think critically and work

through a subject matter, they develop a sense of independence and autonomy which will

‘enhance their desire and ability to be self-motivated’ (Blandford and Knowles, 2009: 147).

Many researchers have successfully proven that this method of learning develops the

students’ interest in learning Science as well as other subjects (Norman, 2005).

In the study of Dhanapal & Shan (2014), the findings indicated that a number of

students obtained better results as they learnt and remembered better through hands-on
 34

experiments. There was generally a higher level of participation and intrinsic motivation

shown in the students when they learnt through hands-on experiments.

b. Technical Knowledge (Information) Formatted: Not Highlight

Although most of the goals of experiments were derived from previous research on

laboratory experiences and student learning, the National Research Council (2005)

identified the new goal of “understanding the complexity and ambiguity of empirical work”

to reflect the unique nature of laboratory experiments.

Students’ direct encounters with natural phenomena in laboratory science

courses are inherently more ambiguous and messy than the representations of these

phenomena in science lectures, textbooks, and mathematical formulas (Millar, 2004).

However, Taraban et al. (2007) found that long-term retention of new information often

requires students to apply that information in some way.

b.
c. Personal Growth (Skills)

Both the content and pedagogy of science learning and teaching are being

scrutinized, and new standards intended to shape and rejuvenate science education are

emerging (National Research Council, 2000). Inquiry-type laboratories have the potential

to develop students' abilities and skills such as: posing scientifically oriented questions

(Krajcik et al., 2001; Hofstein et al., 2005), forming hypotheses, designing and conducting

scientific investigations, formulating and revising scientific explanations, and

communicating and defending scientific arguments.

 35

According to Worth (2010), hands-on experiments will lead to the development of

students’ problem solving skills, creativity skills and independent learning skills. The three

main ways of learning highlighted by Carin and Bass (2001) can be performed through

hands-on experiments using Kolb’s theory. ‘The theory presents a way of structuring and

sequencing the curriculum and indicates, in particularly, how a session or entire course

may be taught to improve student learning’ (Healey and Jenkins, 2000).

d. Personal Growth (Values) Formatted: Not Highlight

As children independently think critically and work through a subject matter, they

develop a sense of independence and autonomy which will ‘enhance their desire and ability

to be self-motivated’ (Blandford and Knowles, 2009). Many researchers have successfully

proven that this method of learning develops the students’ interest in learning Science as

well as other subjects (Norman, 2005).

Character-building education is the effort to sprout of and develop good values to

the child based on the prevailing moral (Deni, 2014). Daniel Goleman in Soetarjo (2012)

mentioned that character education is value education and covers nine principles of value

such as: responsibility, respect, fairness, courage, honestly, citizenship, self-discipline,

caring, and perseverance.

 36

CHAPTER 2 Formatted: Left

METHODOLOGY Formatted: Centered, Line spacing: Double

This chapter discusses the research design, participants, instruments,

measuresprocedures, and procedures ethical consideration employed in the study.

Research Design

This research paper is a qualitative type of research where it emphasizes on the

qualities of entities, processes, and meanings that are not experimentally examined or

measured. It is a systematic subjective approach used to describe life experiences which is

especially effective in obtaining culturally specific information about the values, opinions,

behaviors, and social contexts of a particular population. According to Helfferich (2009),

a good interviewer needs the following skills: technical competence, interactive

competence: attention and steering, competencies in communication theory, and knowing

how to deal with previous knowledge and personal bias.

Participants of the Study

The participants in the study will be ranging from grades 7, 8, 9 and 10 officially

enrolled for the school year 2018 - 2019. In total, there are four hundred and ten (410)

students in the Junior High School Department. Furthermore, the diversity of the youths’

ages was obtained to address the issue of generalizability.

The researchers will be using the convenient sampling method in order to address

the number of participants in this research. There will be a total of five four (45) students
 37

from each year level, for an expected sample size of twenty twelve (120) participants

overall. The participants chosen must have the following characteristics in order for them

to be part of the focused group discussion: (1) they must be the leader in their respective

science investigatory projects; (2) they must have background in conducting laboratory

experiments in the laboratory of Bacolod Tay Tung High School; and (3) they must be

recommended by their classmates. This is to ensure the researchers that the participants

can provide valid, concrete, and comprehensive responses to aid in the completion of the

study.

Instrument

The research instrument which will be used in this study is a self-made interview

guide intended for the Focus Group Discussion. In order to address the statement of the

problem of the research, here are some of the possible questions that will be asked:

Guide questions:

1. What is your perception regarding science investigatory experiments (SIP)?

a. What is the role of laboratory experiments for you? Why?
b. How are laboratory experiments conducted? Is it an on-time activity
(aligned to the topic being discussed at the moment)?
c. Is it doable within a given period?
d. Is there constant supervision/instruction from the teacher? What are your
comments?
e. What are your perceptions towards the ambience of the laboratory? Why?
f. Are the materials available or are still being asked to bring?
 38

g. Incase if there are no materials, are there any alternative materials used?
h. Are the visual aids in the laboratory useful? Why or why not?
i. How do SIPs affect your relationship towards yourself, peers, and teachers?
j. Do the experiments being conducted really help you in having a clear
understanding about the subject matter?

2. Describe the experiences/engagement you made while doing experiments. What do

you think are the ways to improve these experiences/engagements?
a. Aside from SIP, what do you think are the other ways which can make
students more engaged in laboratory activities or experiences?
b. Is there a positive attitude on both teachers and students in the conduct of
the experiment?
c. What do you look forward to in doing laboratory experiments?

3. When doing the experiments, what benefits were you able to get?
a. How has it improved your skills in doing lab experiments?
b. How do these learnings and experiences contribute to your academic
performance?
c. …To your development as a person or as a student?

Data Gathering Procedure

First, the researchers submitted an approval letter addressed to the Junior High

School Department Head of Bacolod Tay Tung High School as an authorization to conduct

the research. After the approval, the researcher determined the sample size using

convenience sampling.

After determining the sample size, the researcher formulated guide questions

intended for the Focus Group Discussion which are appropriate and acceptable in

answering the research questions of the study.

 39

Five (5) participants were chosen from each year level of the Junior High School

Department of Bacolod Tay Tung High School. The participants were given a consent

letter in order to ask their permission to conduct this type of research and were handed out

forms containing the interview materials. The participants were then interviewed during

their vacant times inside a classroom located within the school premises. Their responses

were recorded using a voice recorder.

A semi-structured interview is typically conducted with a series of questions in the

general form of an interview schedule however the sequence of questions can be varied.

The interviewer also has some freedom to probe and explore additional questions in

response to what are seen as significant replies (Bryman, 2004), while at the same time

allowing rapport and empathy to develop between the researcher and the participant. An

interview schedule was prepared in advance to aid the researchers with the structure and

flow of the interview.

Data Analysis Procedure

Thematic analysis is the process of identifying patterns of themes within qualitative

data. It suggests that it’s mainly used when it comes to qualitative method and that should

be learned as it administers the core skills that will be appropriate in conducting other kinds

of analysis (Braun & Clark, 2006).

Thematic analysis a flexible data analysis plan used to generate themes from the

gathered interview data. This data analysis plan is precisely good for both novice and expert

qualitative research because it follows a step by step analysis which are easy to follow but
 40

rigorous enough to generate meaningful findings from the data. There are six phases of

thematic analysis according to Braun and Clark (2013): Familiarization, Generating the

initial code, Create the initial themes, Review the initial themes, Name and define the

themes, and Write the final report.

Ethical Consideration

Utmost confidentiality was properly observed during the conduct of the study.

Consent forms were given to the participants. A letter to the Junior High School

Department Head was submitted to seek permission to conduct the study inside the school

premises and to use the data of the participants for research purposes. The participants were

asked to sign a consent form indicating that they allowed the researcher to use the data of

the audio-recorded interview during the focus group discussion.

 41

Chapter 3 Formatted: Left

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the findings, discussion, and implementation of the data

gathered based on the problem and hypotheses of the study.

The first problem sought to determine the students’ perception of laboratory

experiments.

There were three predominant topics in the first problem: advantage, process, and

obstacle. Each theme will be described along with supporting data and analysis.

I. Advantages

Information

In some respects, the staggering expansion of new assessment tools like laboratory

experiments, especially those yielding statistically significant results, has been one of the

most important innovations brought about by scientific teaching (Yarime & Tanaka, 2012).

At present, the development of new assessment tools to measure skill competence are a

major topic of interest in education research (Kogan, Holmboe, & Hauer, 2009). Tools for

quantifying a student’s ability to understand and apply genetics knowledge, for example,

are devices with immense potential in helping instructors evaluate whether students are

learning what is intended. This coincides with the statements of the participants, when

asked what they perceived of the role of laboratory experiments. Some of which are the

following:

“It is useful for me for the sake that it adds information.”

 42

“The laboratory experiment is a need because if you are the one who’s

making it you can understand about it more and be like ‘ohh this is how it’s

done…this will result to this…’ that’s why we conduct experiments because

we can know how and why the result is like that.”

“…there are times that it adds information”

“Yes, because there are times where the students actually base their

understanding on the actual representations and it becomes even clearer in

regards to the subject matter.”

However, there was also a participant who perceived that the expectation for his

participation in lab is simply to follow the “objectives” set out by the teacher.

“Yes, if you know what you’re expecting and if the teacher gives you a clear

objective to achieve, like what kind of result should be produced after

conducting the experiment.”

From the participant’s perspective, it can be inferred that the nature of laboratory

experiments was to just follow directions. This implies that deviation from such is

discouraged and is considered as failure. Another participant expressed similar sentiments

by saying,

“Sometimes if another group conducts an experiment that is similar to

yours and both of your experiments are on the book and your conclusions

are kind of similar then you learn more about your topic.”
 43

This further cements the fact that such participants perceive laboratory experiments

must reach a predetermined result. This often leads to the commonality wherein students

conduct laboratory experiments for the sake of complying with the curriculum.

“Yes, so that we can understand more about the topic. That’s why it’s

always done on-time because if not, the laboratory experiment will not be

valid if not related with the topic being discussed.”

These students’ perception of the goals of the experiments have led them to

conclude that their participation is limited to following the set courses of action.

Furthermore, such descriptions perpetuate the image of science as perfunctory and dull

without the use of imagination.

These evidentiary pieces show students’ perception of laboratory manual does not

allow for creativity on the part of the students. Such perceptions are against the findings of

Treffinger, Young, Shelby, & Shepardson (2002) where they concluded creativity’s

relation to the discovery process and considered hands-on experiments to be one of the

ways to develop the discovery process, and thus to develop creativity as well.

Experience

In contrast, other participants perceived the role of laboratory experiments as a way

to gain hands-on experience. This concurs with the study of Wilkinson and Ward (1997),

as cited by Weaver (2008) wherein some professors purported that the aim of the laboratory

is to make connections between practice and theory through direct implementation of

concepts.
 44

“The role of laboratory experiments is to help students further

understand…since they are the ones who experience it firsthand, learning

how the result of their experiment came to be and how to do it.”

“For me, the role of laboratory experiments is very important because it

gives us students a hands-on experience as to what some of the scientists

say that is actually true so that we may prove it yet again.”

A participant continued to expound his stand on such by describing a real life

situation he had experienced in his Science subject,

“Yes, it really helps, for example is our experiment on impulse and

momentum. So we conducted the experiment again but had the same result,

so we concluded that it will land at the same time even if you drop it at a

really high place.”

A study found that when ranking the supposed aim of the science laboratory, “to

make science more interesting and enjoyable through actual experience” was ranked as

most important, with “to gain practice at making accurate observations and interpreting

them” and “to help students understand theoretical parts of science” tied for the second

most important aims of the laboratory. (Wilkinson & Ward, 1997, as cited in Weaver,

2008).

Rapport

According to the National Research Council (2006), the goals of laboratory

experiences included improving teamwork abilities. The study found that it promotes a

student’s ability to collaborate effectively with others in carrying out complex tasks, to
 45

share the work of the task, to assume different roles at different times, and to contribute

and respond to ideas. Several students also perceived laboratory experiments as a medium

to improve personal relations.

“…it also helps us cooperate with people.”

“…Each of us can bond with each other and we can learn new things

together.”

According to Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2003), teamwork and

collaboration appear in research on typical laboratory experiences in two ways. First,

working in groups is seen as a way to enhance student learning, usually with reference to

literature on cooperative learning or to the importance of providing opportunities for

students to discuss their ideas. Second and more recently, attention has focused on the

ability to work in groups as an outcome itself, with laboratory experiences seen as an ideal

opportunity to develop these skills. However, other students also perceived it as a tool to

differentiate those who were of help in conducting the experiments and those who didn’t

cooperate.

“In the relationships towards peers, there you can see that true nature of

one another. Because there you can see who is really willing to help and

those who don’t.”

“…This can also affect our relationship with our peers because here, you

can truly differentiate those who are willing to help when you need them

and those who are just joining the fun.”

 46

All in all, the participants perceived that rapport is one of the key factors among the

so-called advantages influencing their perception of laboratory experiments. The focus on

teamwork as an outcome is usually linked to arguments that this is an essential skill for

workers in the 21st century (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2003).

II. Process

Time

A unanimous response showed that the participants included in the study engaged

in laboratory experiments after a certain textbook topic was discussed. Nonetheless,

students perceived laboratory experiments with the need of extending the time frame

provided to them to conduct such activities.

“No, because there are times where it is inadequate. It needs a lot of time

like 2 hours in the laboratory so if the time given to us is not enough, we

cannot answer and finish the experiment.”

“It really depends on the experiment because sometimes, some experiments

can’t be finished within 1 hour or 2 hours. You need more time. For

example, there is an observation so we need more time to conduct the

experiment. So there are some that are not doable in certain period of time.”

Hart, Mulhall, Berry, Loughran, & Gunstone (2000) noted that students often

participated in laboratory courses with the expressed purpose of linking theory with

practice, but that they often failed to make the connections between lecture and laboratory

settings. Students placed in a context wherein the explicit goal is to complete the
 47

experiment, especially when given a small time window, are likely to first follow the

procedures, with little notion of the theory as it affects the methods involved.

Depending on students’ experiences in the laboratory, practical work can lead to

negative attitudes towards science. If there is not enough time to complete the experiments,

this can lead to negative attitudes about lab and science in general.

Materials

In addition to this, the contribution of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

to the improvement of science education should not be underestimated (Beyessa, 2014). It

is obvious that schools have to provide necessary materials (books, classrooms, laboratory

materials, guidance on teaching learning of science education and others) for students so

that students have to get access in achieving their science subjects effectively (Norhidayah

Ali, et. al., 2009). Most of the participants expressed their own sentiments regarding the

availability of the materials in the laboratory.

“They let us bring the materials if needed if not available in the

laboratory.”

“Only the specific materials are required for us to bring because there are

already some available materials in the laboratory.”

“For us, we are asked to bring the materials but there are also times that

the materials are already available in the lab.”

“Sometimes, we are asked to bring specific materials especially those that

are not available in the lab.”

 48

“I agree to those who said that there are materials that aren’t available in

the lab. If they aren’t available, we bring it.”

A majority of the participants mentioned bringing specific materials on their own

for their laboratory experiments, due to the unavailability of such materials in the lab.

When asked if there were any available alternative materials present in the laboratory, a

participant stated:

“There is this one time that in our last experiment, other sections were

asked to bring yeast except for our section. Thankfully, there was an

alternative to yeast which is magnesium.”

It is imperative for schools to have the latest and high quality science lab supplies

these days. Science is different from any other subject. In order to understand its concepts,

one has to look beyond the books and conventional classroom teaching. Effective teaching

and learning of science involves seeing, handling, and manipulating real objects and

materials.

This is supported by a study of Grossarchive (2010), it was concluded that the

availability and regular use of the biology laboratory science equipment brings about better

performances of students in biology.

In addition, ScienceFirst (2018) found that schools were able to contribute a lot in

the scientific advances yet to come by virtue of equipping themselves with the latest and

the advanced materials and supplies. The advances and developments in the field of

medical science and technology would not take place if schools did not prepare brilliant

and dedicated scientists and researchers.

 49

Thus, schools must have the latest science lab supplies and equipment to make

science interesting and effective for students and to encourage them to make significant

contributions in the field of physics, biology, chemistry, and other streams of science later

in life.

INSERT CHU2 EK2 HERE rrl!! MATERIALS

Instruction

In a survey study of university students in Australia, Lizzio, Wilson, and Simons

(2002) found that student perceptions of their learning environment affected both their

approaches to learning and their learning outcomes. Students who perceived the workload

as heavy were more likely to adopt surface-level approaches. Students’ perceptions

influenced learning outcomes both directly, and indirectly, by influencing their approaches

to learning. Perceptions of teaching quality also affected the learning approaches chosen

by students. A participant mentioned that there was frequent instruction received from the

teacher.

“Yes, they guide us from time to time.”

In contrast, more students stated that there was less frequency of instructions:

“The teacher discusses it before but during the experiment, she doesn’t

supervise anymore. When we ask questions, that is the time she answers.”

In lieu of such statements, a participant recommended that teachers should perform

the experiment beforehand to instruct the students.

“Yes. They need to execute how it is conducted before we do it.”

 50

Additionally, participants mentioned that in order for the instructions given to be

clear, the teacher must be fluent in his/her medium of information dissemination. In this

case, the participants refer to the language the teacher uses to instruct and give directions.

“Yes, the instructions given are clear but there are times where the students

cannot understand, especially if the teacher is not fluent in the medium

he/she uses.”

A barrier to clarity can also be the use of difficult terminologies and jargon, as a

participant mentioned below:

“Sometimes it is clear, but they are times that it isn’t because the terms used

are difficult and the instructions are only included in the concept paper so

it is really difficult to understand.”

All in all, the mode of instruction can greatly affect a students’ perception of not

only laboratory experiments, but the subject matter as well. Teaching clarity and

organization is also positively related to student grades (Roksa, Trolian, Blaich & Wise,

2016) and both student satisfaction and persistence (Pascarella, Salisbury, & Blaich, 2011).

Experiencing clear and organized instruction has a positive impact on the extent to which

students engage in higher-order learning, reflective learning, and integrative learning

(Wang, Pascarella, Nelson Laird, & Ribera, 2015).

Clear and organized instruction is also positively related to students' academic

motivation and their belief that their faculty are committed to teaching and student

development. On the whole, experiencing clarity and organization in instruction across

 51

courses benefits student development on a range of important outcomes beyond mastering

the specific content in courses (Loes & Pascarella, 2015).

III. Obstacle

Stress

Stress arises when there is burden on the person which exceeds his available assets.

If stress is harsh and extended, it can lessen academic performance, hinder with a student’s

capability to involve in and add to campus life, and raise the probability of substance abuse

and other potentially destructive behaviors (Richlin-Klonsky & Hoe, 2003). Researchers

(Vermunt & Steensman, 2005; Topper, 2007; Malach-Pines & Keinan, 2007) have defined

stress as the insight of incongruity between environmental burden (stressors) and person’s

ability to fulfill these demands. Researchers usually define stress as the undesirable

response people have to extreme strain or a situation that they recognize as irresistible and

cannot manage. This coincides with the statements of the participants, when asked how

stress affects the role of laboratory experiments. Some of which are the following:

“The relation towards myself is, of course, stress.”

“It is stressful for my well-being”

However, some of the students are saying that stress is quite beneficial to them due

to the fact that the more stress they get, the more they get used to it, and having such

experience will improve their skills for the next school years.
 52

“Because, of course stress, but it can also be beneficial because the more

stress we get, the better our experiences will be in preparation to upcoming

years.”

It is important to note that stress can have both negative and positive impact on

students. Most psychologists assert that moderate stress motives individuals to achieve and

fuels creativity, although stress may hinder individuals from performance on the difficult

task. (Nelson & Simmons, 2003). In conclusion, stress mostly generates from the

overabundance of academic works and activities. However, the stress that they are

experiencing can help them cope with the school works that they will encounter in the

future, when in moderation.

Stress arises when there are burden on the person which exceed his available assets.

If stress is harsh and extended, it can lessen academic performance, hinder with a student’s

capability to involve in and add to campus life, and raise the probability of substance abuse

and other potentially destructive behaviors (Richlin-Klonsky & Hoe, 2003). Researchers

(Vermunt & Steensman, 2005; Topper, 2007; Malach-Pines & Keinan, 2007) have defined

stress as the insight of incongruity between environmental burden (stressors) and person’s

ability to fulfill these demands. Researchers usually define stress as the undesirable

response people have to extreme strain or other sort of burden placed on them. Stress occurs

when a person deal with a situation that they recognize as irresistible and cannot manage.

“The relation towards myself is, of course, stress.”

“It is stressful for my well-being”

 53

However, some of the students are saying that stress is quite beneficial to them due

to the fact that the more stress they get, the more they get used to it and having such

experience will improve their skills for the next school years.

“Because, of course stress, but it can also be beneficial because the more

stress we get, the better our experiences will be in preparation to upcoming

years.”

In conclusion, stress mostly generates from the overabundance of academic works and

activities. However, the stress that they are experiencing will help them cope with the

school works that they will encounter in the future.

Comprehension

Most of the research on the purpose or goals of the laboratory has focused on the

instructor perspective (Nakhleh, Polles, & Malina, 2002). This study is a response to

Nakhleh, Polles, and Malina’s call for more understanding of the student perspective of the

laboratory. Students in the study of Russell & Weaver (2008) provided insight into their

perceptions when indicating that the only goal they perceive for the laboratory is to

complete the activities, but not mentioning any integration of theoretical understanding as

a perceived goal. This coincides with the following statement of a participant, when asked

how their comprehension affects their perception of laboratory experiments:

“Yes, if you know what you’re expecting and if the teacher gives you a clear

objective to achieve, like what kind of result should be produced after

conducting the experiment. However, there are times where the teacher
 54

doesn’t tell you what will actually happen so you’ll just get confused on

what to do.”

This implies that the learnings the participant can gain from the laboratory is limited

to the predetermined answer, anything else would be invalid. It also implies that the

laboratory does not exist to allow students to elicit their own understandings or meanings

from the experiments. There was also a participant who stated that, due to the usage of

difficult terminologies, she couldn’t understand what was written on the list of procedures:

“Sometimes it is clear, but they are times that it isn’t because the terms used

are difficult and the instructions are only included in the concept paper so

it is really difficult to understand.”

Learners would construct their own ideas by interpreting what they hear, read and

see but on the other hand, students requiring more guidance find difficulties in interpreting

the experiment (Thanasoulas, 2001). As a result, there should be clarity in the instructions

which suit the level of comprehension of the students for a meaningful laboratory

experience.

Meanwhile, another participant mentioned that he gets confused when he doesn’t

conduct the experiment himself.

“It depends if you’re doing the experiment right then you’ll have the right

conclusion on that topic but if you didn’t make the experiment by yourself

and just copied from others then you are going to have no idea on how to

describe it.”
 55

This supported by the findings of Armbruster, Patel, Johnson, & Weiss (2009), who

found that continued work on assessments of educational outcome by a variety of authors

has effectively confirmed lectures are not to be favored. Thus, long-term retention of new

information often requires students to apply that information in some way (Taraban et al,

2007), in this case, conducting laboratory experiments.

Most of the research on the purpose or goals of the laboratory has focused on the

instructor perspective (Nakhleh, Polles, & Malina, 2002). This study is a response to

Nakhleh, Polles, and Malina’s call for more understanding of the student perspective of the

laboratory. Students differ in their perceptions of the learning environment, and these

perceptions affect how and what students learn. Students in the study of Russell & Weaver

(2008) provided insight into their perceptions when indicating that the only goal they

perceive for the laboratory is to complete the activities, but not mentioning any integration

of theoretical understanding as a perceived goal.

“Yes, if you know what you’re expecting and if the teacher gives you a clear

objective to achieve, like what kind of result should be produced after

conducting the experiment. However, there are times where the teacher

doesn’t tell you what will actually happen so you’ll just get confused on

what to do.”

This coincides with the statements of the participants, when asked how the

comprehension of the students affects the role of laboratory experiments. Some of which

are the following:

 56

“Sometimes it is clear, but they are times that it isn’t because the terms used

are difficult and the instructions are only included in the concept paper so

it is really difficult to understand.”

“Yes, if you know what you’re expecting and if the teacher gives you a clear

objective to achieve, like what kind of result should be produced after

conducting the experiment.”

“It depends if you’re doing the experiment right then you’ll have the right

conclusion on that topic but if you didn’t make the experiment by yourself

and just copied from others then you are going to have no idea on how to

describe it.”

To summarize everything, most of the student’s comprehension relies on the

clearness of the instructions given by the teachers or proctors.

Misunderstanding

This coincides with the statements of the participants, when asked how

misunderstandings affect their perception of laboratory experiments. Some of which are

the following:

“It can affect the relationship with others because of misunderstandings regarding

the SIP when you can’t understand what to do and instead of helping each other

you tend to do the opposite.”

“For peers, there are times that you have misunderstandings with them because

there is no clear instruction to whoever will make a certain task, and sometimes

they don’t do it and just rely on you.”

 57

“Peers, because sometimes there are moments of misunderstandings, small

fights and badmouthing but these are the things that we can’t control.”

The participants mentioned the misunderstandings that happen between themselves

and their peers. Their responses imply that misunderstandings occur when there is no clear

distribution of tasks, thus, causing others to rely on their groupmates. Instead of helping

each other, they do the opposite which affects the whole learning experience in the process.

Meanwhile, other participants mentioned misunderstandings in regard to their teacher:

“…there are times where the students cannot understand, especially if the teacher

is not fluent in the medium he/she uses.”

“Speaking of the relationship towards the teacher, there are times that if both of

you don’t understand each other, it results to conflicts to him/her.”

“When it comes to the teachers, especially to our teacher who is assigned in our SIP he/she

doesn’t supervise that much so it results to conflict.”

The results of the study of Capato (2004) indicated that an ethic of care in high

schools was extremely vital to the students’ sense of membership and connection to the

school. They found that high school students had a strong desire for opportunities to sit in

small groups and discuss personal concerns and social issues with their teachers. Thus, it

can be implied that when misunderstandings arise, it must be acted upon for the overall

improvement of the students’ laboratory experiences.RRL

SettingEnvironment

Researchers generally conclude that without adequate facilities and resources, it is

extremely difficult to serve large numbers of children with complex needs. Besides general
 58

maintenance and construction issues, researchers have found most schools lack 21st

century facilities in the form of infrastructure, laboratories, and instructional space

(Pennsylvania State University, 2015). This coincides with the statements of the

participants, when asked how the setting affects their perception of laboratory experiments.

Some of which are the following:

“There isn’t that much stuff and it seems incomplete.”

“…So it’s a basic lab but there is still something lacking.”

Others suggested that the cleanliness and ambience of the school laboratory can

affect how the students perceive and look at the laboratory when entering it, while others

are worrying about health concerns.

“It’s only seldom used so the air inside isn’t fresh when you breathe.”

“For me, I hope that they maintain it from time to time, like cleaning the

laboratory because based on my experience yesterday, I had an allergic

rhinitis attack due to the dust in the laboratory.”

“…there are times that it is not visible to the students. It’s just hidden and

lacking maintenance.”

To sum up everything, the students are mostly concerned about the things and

materials that are missing while others are concerned about cleanliness and health issues

that it may bring up.

The learning environment has a strong impact on students’ learning experiences

and outcomes; it dictates what, how and why students learn (Bakhshialiabad, Bakhshi, and
 59

Hassanshahi, 2015). The educational climate surrounding students is considered as one of

the factors determining academic success (Ross, 2005). Thus, it is important to be more

aware regarding the environment of the laboratory.

A growing body of research has found that school facilities can have a profound

impact on both teacher and student outcomes. With respect to students, school facilities

affect health, behavior, engagement, learning, and growth in achievement. Thus,

researchers generally conclude that without adequate facilities and resources, it is

extremely difficult to serve large numbers of children with complex needs. Besides general

maintenance and construction issues, researchers have found most schools lack 21st

century facilities in the form of infrastructure, laboratories, and instructional space. More

than half do not have sufficiently flexible instructional space for effective teaching to take

place. This coincides with the statements of the participants, when asked how the setting

affects the role of laboratory experiments. Some of which are the following:

“There isn’t that much stuff and it seems incomplete.”

“…So it’s a basic lab but there is still something lacking.”

“Agree to disagree, specifically, there are times that it is not visible to the

students. It’s just hidden and lacking maintenance.”

While others are suggesting that the cleanliness and ambience of the school laboratory

can affect how the students perceive and look at the laboratory when entering it while

others are worrying about health concerns.

“It’s only seldom used so the air inside isn’t fresh when you breathe.”
 60

“For me, I hope that they maintain it from time to time, like cleaning the

laboratory because based on my experience yesterday, I had an allergic

rhinitis attack due to the dust in the laboratory.”

To sum up everything, the students are mostly concerned about the things and

materials that are missing while others are concerned about cleanliness and health issues

that it may bring up.

The second problem sought to determine how laboratory experiments increase

students’ engagement in the laboratory.

There were two predominant topics in the second problem: involvement and

approach. Each theme will be described along with supporting data and analysis.

I. Involvement

Participation

While increasing participation is an obvious goal in courses that include frequent

discussions and small-group work, it is also important in a lecture course. In short, if only

a few students participate by volunteering answers, asking questions, or contributing to

discussions, class sessions become to some extent a lost opportunity to assess and promote

learning (Washington University, 2009).

This coincides with the statements of the participants, who had negative comments

expounding why students do not participate. Some of which are the following:
 61

“…No, because there are students who give up easily and tend to just copy

the conclusion from the other groups that are conducting the same

experiment.”

“For me, mostly yes and seldom no, no because as what my friend said,

there are students who give up easily.”

“… there are many who just rely on other students.”

As a result, the students suggested the following to increase their participation in

laboratory experiments:

“Besides SIPs, I think more science activities about the current issues in the

field can help…”

“For me, a little bit more on the hands-on learning would be good and more

of interesting topics that can blow our minds.”

Additionally, another student suggested that having an educational fieldtrip can

help improve the participation of students as a group by seeing everything in person.

“For me, academic field trips would be a good idea because of the

experiences that will stay in your mind and the fun you would have during

that trip is going to make you learn more about that topic.”

This is supported by Mant, Wilson, and Coates (2007) who conducted a study

wherein 16 schools had interventions wherein the teachers participated in continuing

professional development (CPD) and developed science lessons that had more practical

work, more discussion, more thinking and less (but more focused) writing. The proportion

of pupils achieving the highest level (level 5) in the national science tests at age 11 was

compared in the matched‐school pairs before and after the intervention. Focus group
 62

interviews were also held with a group of pupils in each intervention school. There was a

10% (95% Confidence Interval 2–17%) increase in the proportion of children achieving

the top score in the intervention schools. The pupils and teachers reported greater

engagement and motivation. These findings suggest that moving from rote revision to

cognitively challenging, interactive science could help improve science education.

Furthermore, lower grade levels suggested to have more games during those

laboratory activities saying that at their age, more games in those activities can make

participation a bit more fun.

“For our batch, almost all of us are kind of childish so we would find the

topic more appealing if there are games involved in it.”

In the study of Afari et al (2010), they found that students involved in games

perceived statistically significantly more teacher support, involvement, personal relevance,

enjoyment of the subject lessons and academic efficacy. There is a significant body of Formatted: Not Highlight

research to support the potential of using games as an educational tool (Annetta et al. 2010;

Paraskeva et al. 2010) and to complement traditional lectures for enhancing students’

learning (Kiili 2005; Tan 2007; Tan et al. 2010). Past research indicates that games have

the potential to draw students into the learning process and to encourage them to participate

through a more interactive environment (Gosen and Washbush 2004; Proserpio and Gioia

2007; Zantow et al. 2005). The use of games can also provide educators with an interactive

means of delivering knowledge that is particularly useful for teaching cause and effect

(Gosen and Washbush 2004; Thompson and Dass 2000). Finally, as an educational tool,

games have the capacity to engage and motivate students (Paraskeva et al. 2010; Prensky

2001) and the learning from games is more likely to be retained (Annetta et al. 2010).
 63

To conclude, there are different suggestions given by the students based on their

experiences and perception on laboratory activities.

Learning Expectations

Research tells us what can be expected from a teacher employing instructional

strategies and practices that are proven to lead to increased mastery of lessons. Better

learning happens in a dynamic setting in which teachers offer explicit active instruction

than in situations in which teachers do not actively guide instruction and instead, turn

control over content and pace of instruction to students (Hattie, 2009). This coincides with

the statements of the participants, when asked how the learning expectations of a student

affect their engagement in laboratory experiments. Some of which are the following:

“Clearing out the objectives and goals before doing the experiment.”

“Of course, we will need objectives and goals towards a certain research

because we are looking forward in successfully doing the experiment, but

sometimes, no because usually we are more engaged in the experiment if

we do it correctly.”

However, other students suggest that having a clear understanding or expectation

before doing the experiment is needed for them to successfully conduct the activity.

“I would like them to give us expectations or what we would expect before

doing the experiment so that it would be clear to us that what we are doing

is right.”

In conclusion, students prefer clear instructions from the teachers when conducting

the said experiments.

 64

Learning expectations or goals, according to Biggs (2003) who has been influential

in the field of higher education with his work in the area of what he Kuhn and Rundle-

Thiele Curriculum Alignment 352, calls this ‘constructive alignment.’ The basic premise

of constructive alignment is that the curriculum is designed so that the learning activities

and assessment tasks are aligned in order to support students to attain the goals intended

for the course. This concept considers students to be responsible for their own learning.

INSERT RRL DAPAT MAY OBJECTIVES

In conclusion, students prefer clear instructions from the teachers when conducting

the said experiments.

II. Approach

Integration

When it come to the integration of science laboratories activities, 3 areas were

tackled: before discussion, after discussion, and both. For the integration before discussion,

one of the participants stated that:

“Before because after the experiment is done, the teacher would explain it

further and students will understand it more.”

In contrast, some participants stated that integration of activities should be done

after:

“After the topic because if we do it before, we would have no background

of the topic.”
 65

“After so that the lessons that are applied can be applied in real life

situations.”

However, there were also responses that combines the 2 previous points:

“Both before and after because the curiosity of the students would be

triggered and after because if you conduct the experiment again then you

will have the background on how to do it.”

“I will also go with before and after. Before, so that the students would be

more interested. After, so that they will be more clarified on the topic.”

This concludes that integration of laboratory experiences can come in three

different ways, however, it was mostly suggested by the participants to have it both before

and after. Thus, having it before and after will help them anticipate the next topic (before)

and further understand the scientific theories the topic covers (after).

This is supported by a study of Driver (1995), with respect to laboratory

experiences, these instructional units share two key features. The first is that specific

laboratory experiences are carefully selected on the basis of research-based ideas of what

students are likely to learn from them. For example, any particular laboratory activity is

likely to contribute to learning only if it engages students’ current thinking about the target

phenomena and is likely to make them critically evaluate their ideas in relation to what

they see during the activity. The second is that laboratory experiences are explicitly linked

to and integrated with other learning activities in the unit. The assumption behind this

second feature is that just because students do a laboratory activity, they may not

necessarily understand what they have done.

 66

When it come to the integration of science laboratories activities, 3 areas were

tackled: before discussion, after discussion, and both. For the integration before

discussion, one of the participants stated that:

“Before because after the experiment is done, the teacher would explain it further

and students will understand it more.”

*insert rrl why. In contrast, some participants stated that integration of activities

should be done after:

“After the topic because if we do it before, we would have no background of the

topic.”

“After so that the lessons that are applied can be applied in real life

situations.”

However, there were also responses that combines the 2 previous points:

“Both before and after because the curiosity of the students would be triggered and

after because if you conduct the experiment again then you will have the

background on how to do it.”

“I will also go with before and after. Before, so that the students would be more

interested. After, so that they will be more clarified on the topic.”

*insert RRL

Student-teacher Interaction Formatted: Font: 12 pt

Formatted: Heading 6, Left, Indent: Left: 0.5", Line
Researchers have theorized that teacher involvement, support, and caring, spacing: single

motivates and encourages students to engage with class material, leading to improvement
 67

in grades and achievement (Davis, 2003; Oldfather, 1993; Skinner & Belmont, 1993).

Klem and Connell (2004) conducted a retrospective analysis using longitudinal data sets

to test the relationships between teacher support and engagement and between engagement

and achievement. This coincides to the following responses of the a participants:

“… it involves participation while the teachers are also open.”

“… you will learn about new things and afterwards, you can use what you

learned when you graduate college.”

However, there were also a negative responses that contradicts the previous claims

of the participants.

“No, because our teacher doesn’t supervise us at all and just looks at the

research then scan it and tells us that everything is okay but after the

defense, everything would be totally wrong.”

Meanwhile, another participant suggested that the teacher should conduct the

experiment before the lesson.

“Aside from SIP, I think other ways that can help improve the engagement

of students on laboratory activities is having the teacher to conduct an

experiment before the lesson”

This is supported by a study of Tomlinson and Allan (2000) where, greater student

responsibility and freedom, as well as understanding, helpful/friendly and leadership

behaviours from the teacher, were associated with improved student attitudes towards

classes. On the other hand, uncertain, dissatisfied, admonishing and strict teacher

behaviours were related negatively to student attitudes. Earlier studies also showed that
 68

students whose teachers were directive (i.e., those who provided a well-structured and task-

orientated learning environment) and tolerant/authoritative (i.e., those who provided a

pleasant, well-structured environment and who had a good relationship with students)

showed the greatest cognitive and affective gains. The lowest student gains were associated

with teachers who were uncertain/aggressive (i.e., those who offered an aggressive kind of

disorder) and uncertain/tolerant.INSERT CITATION. Formatted: Not Highlight

There was a participant that recommended to further better the teaching experience

and increase students’ expectations. INSERT CITATION. Formatted: Not Highlight

“… having the teacher to conduct an experiment before the lesson so the

students would be interested in the topic and wonder how and why it was

made. After that the students would be more intrigued on the topic.”

All in all, the students stated that student-teacher interaction is an integral part of

their learning process, a deciding factor whether to engage in laboratory experiments or

not. This is supported by the study of Coates (2007), where he had described engagement

as “a broad construct intended to encompass salient academic as well as certain non-

academic aspects of the student experience”, of which comprises formative communication

with academic staff.INSERTRRL

Holistic Development

There was unanimous response to students’ holistic development, all were to agree

and stated that: *MORE CHECHE

“… because there is a bond that you’ll build with your groupmates.’

 69

“We look forward in doing the experiment and learning while doing the

experiment.” ------------- LEARNING EXPECTATIONS

“We are looking forward in gaining more knowledge about the certain topic

that we are tackling at the moment.”

*INSERT RRL ABOUT HOLISTIC

The third problem sought to determine the benefits the students have received

from conducting laboratory experiments.

There were two predominant topics in the third problem: technical knowledge and

personal growth. Each theme will be described along with supporting data and analysis.

I. Technical Knowledge

Experience

According to Carin and Bass (2001), ‘there are three major ways for people to learn

about the world; discover things about the world from personal observations and

experiences with the environment, acquire knowledge transmitted directly from other

people, or construct personal knowledge by transforming discovered and acquired

knowledge in meaningful ways’. Worth (2010) affirms that learning Science is more than

just gaining the facts and understanding on the particular topic. This is where learning

science through hands-on experiments becomes acceptable as an effective option as it

encourages students to experience and discover from observation or feelings. This

coincides with the statements of the participants, when asked what were the benefits of

laboratory experiments in regards to experience. Some of which are the following:

 70

“You’ll be more exposed to the things that you would not normally

encounter in your daily life.”

“It will help us familiarize the laboratory.”

“We would know more about how laboratory experiments are conducted

and we would also know how to make our paper work.”

“That’s why it becomes easier in terms of using, conducting researches.”

“We would know more about how laboratory experiments are conducted

and we would also know how to make our paperwork.”

Hands-on experiment is an active process of student-centered learning whereby it

encourages children to discover and develop new concepts or ideas followed by spurring

children’s mind to be critical and creative (Jones and Wyse, 2004; Wilson, 2008). In

addition, there were also a participant who mentioned that the level of difficulty in

conducting laboratory experiments has taught him/her how to cope up with difficult tasks.

“I find it easier to do difficult things because I already experienced failures

so I know that I should do it again. So if they give me difficult tasks, I can

do it by myself”

From the participant’s perspective, it can be inferred that the experience can have

a huge impact. As children independently think critically and work through a subject

matter, they develop a sense of independence and autonomy which will ‘enhance their

desire and ability to be self-motivated’ (Blandford and Knowles, 2009: 147). Many
 71

researchers have successfully proven that this method of learning develops the students’

interest in learning Science as well as other subjects (Norman, 2005).

In the study of Dhanapal & Shan (2014), the findings indicated that a number of

students obtained better results as they learnt and remembered better through hands-on

experiments. There was generally a higher level of participation and intrinsic motivation

shown in the students when they learnt through hands-on experiments.

Information

The National Research Council (2005) identified the new goal of “understanding

the complexity and ambiguity of empirical work” to reflect the unique nature of laboratory

experiments. INSERT RRL ABOUT INFO

This coincides with the statements of the participants, when asked what were the

benefits of laboratory experiments in regards to information. Some of which are the

following:

“We learn more about the nature of things and the habitats of micro-

organisms.”

“You are going to get more information about things that you are not really

familiar about.”

“… additional information.”

“Well, you’ll be amazed on the wonders of the world and you could be more

knowledgeable.”

“I would say both because as a person, we continue to learn.”

 72

“We will be prepared on the up-and-coming researches.”

A participant also mentioned how the information he/she gained from conducting

laboratory experiments can benefit himself/herself in everyday life.

“For me, the benefit of all of those is general knowledge in the overall field

of science of physics and chemistry and others. It will improve your general

knowledge on how you will use it in your everyday life.”

From the participant’s perspective, it can be inferred that the information can

benefit many people. Other participants expressed similar sentiments by saying the

information gained can benefit them in older educational institutions.

“The learnings, most likely, can contribute when we reach college because

at least, when were in college we have a lot of background in using the

laboratory and laboratory apparatus.”

“For students, on the other hand, it can add up to your knowledge until you

graduate from college.”

RRL PLESAll in all, their responses imply that the information gained from

laboratory experiments can be of help by providing the students with background

knowledge.

Although most of these goals were derived from previous research on laboratory

experiences and student learning, the National Research Council (2005) identified the new

goal of “understanding the complexity and ambiguity of empirical work” to reflect the

unique nature of laboratory experiments.

 73

Students’ direct encounters with natural phenomena in laboratory science courses

are inherently more ambiguous and messy than the representations of these phenomena in

science lectures, textbooks, and mathematical formulas (Millar, 2004). However, Taraban

et al. (2007) found that long-term retention of new information often requires students to

apply that information in some way.

II. Personal Growth

Skills

Skills help to the personal growth of the student in terms of its laboratory

engagement; especially to the hands-on experience of students. This claim was proven

when a participant mentioned that,

“…your skills on identifying laboratory apparatus and chemicals used

would be improved drastically.”

Three participants also mentioned skills that were not necessarily linked to the

context of scientific laboratory experiments,

“For me, it has improved my skill of time management.”

“It can improve our memory because everything that we do, we need to

recall it and write it down on paper.”

“ ...It usually contributes because you know how to handle time.”

To sum up, it was revealed that the Science Investigatory Project could enhance the

skills of students. Also, it gave better understanding to the claim of Worth (2010), hands-

on experiments will lead to the development of students’ problem solving skills, creativity
 74

skills and independent learning skills. The three main ways of learning highlighted by

Carin and Bass (2001) can be performed through hands-on experiments using Kolb’s

theory. ‘The theory presents a way of structuring and sequencing the curriculum and

indicates, in particularly, how a session or entire course may be taught to improve student

learning’ (Healey and Jenkins, 2000).

Values

As children independently think critically and work through a subject matter, they

develop a sense of independence and autonomy which will ‘enhance their desire and ability

to be self-motivated’ (Blandford and Knowles, 2009). Many researchers have successfully

proven that this method of learning develops the students’ interest in learning Science as

well as other subjects (Norman, 2005). This coincides with the statements of the

participants, when asked what are the values when doing laboratory experiments. Some of

which are the following:

“In doing laboratory experiments, my patience is improved.”

“It also made us more attentive because we should know what is happening

so that we can explain how to do it in the future.”

“We can acquire skills like being determined and hard-working and these

can really help our academic performance.”

“For me, it is both as a person and as a student. Person, because you can’t

just learn more knowledge but you can also learn values like patience,

determination and perseverance.”

 75

“For me, it is as a person. This is because as a person, your way of thinking

becomes more mature while as a student, it is already expected that you

should do it.”

In addition, there were also a participant related their development as a student and

as a person. From the participants’ perspectives, it can be inferred that the personal growth

they gained from laboratory experiments can help them not only as a student, but as a

person as well.

“It can develop me as a student and as a person to become more

hardworking and cooperative with the group like when the experiments are

really hard and we have to finish it, we really have to work hard to finish it.

We also need cooperation in the group.”

Character-building education is the effort to sprout of and develop good values to

the child based on the prevailing moral (Deni, 2014). Daniel Goleman in Soetarjo (2012)

mentioned that character education is value education and covers nine principles of value

such as: responsibility, respect, fairness, courage, honestly, citizenship, self-discipline,

caring, and perseverance. Thus, laboratory experiments are vital in a students’ education

as it fosters values that could be of great help to them not only in the school setting, but

also in their future.

Skills

Skills help to the personal growth of the student in terms of its laboratory

engagement; especially to the hands-on experience of students. This claim was proven

when a participant mentioned that,

 76

“…your skills on identifying laboratory apparatus and chemicals used

would be improved drastically.”

Three participants also mentioned that,

“For me, it has improved my skill of time management.”

“It can improve our memory because everything that we do, we need to

recall it and write it down on paper.”

“ ...It usually contributes because you know how to handle time.”

To sum up, it was revealed that the Science Investigatory Project could enhance the

skills of students. Also, it gave better understanding to the claim of Worth (2010), hands-

on experiments will lead to the development of students’ problem solving skills, creativity

skills and independent learning skills. The three main ways of learning highlighted by

Carin and Bass (2001) can be performed through hands-on experiments using Kolb’s

theory. ‘The theory presents a way of structuring and sequencing the curriculum and

indicates, in particularly, how a session or entire course may be taught to improve student

learning’ (Healey and Jenkins, 2000).

Values

As children independently think critically and work through a subject matter, they

develop a sense of independence and autonomy which will ‘enhance their desire and ability

to be self-motivated’ (Blandford and Knowles, 2009). Many researchers have successfully

proven that this method of learning develops the students’ interest in learning Science as

well as other subjects (Norman, 2005). This coincides with the statements of the

participants, when asked what are the values when doing laboratory experiments. Some of

which are the following:

 77

“In doing laboratory experiments, my patience is improved.”

“It also made us more attentive because we should know what is happening

so that we can explain how to do it in the future.”

“We can acquire skills like being determined and hard-working and these

can really help our academic performance.”

“For me, it is both as a person and as a student. Person, because you can’t

just learn more knowledge but you can also learn values like patience,

determination and perseverance.”

“For me, it is as a person. This is because as a person, your way of thinking

becomes more mature while as a student, it is already expected that you

should do it.”

However, there were also a participant who can develop as a student and as a

person.

“It can develop me as a student and as a person to become more

hardworking and cooperative with the group like when the experiments are

really hard and we have to finish it, we really have to work hard to finish it.

We also need cooperation in the group.”

From the participant’s perspective, it can be inferred that the personal growth can

help you as a person. This implies that deviation from such is discouraged and is considered

as positive.
 78

Character based on Foester in Soetarjo (2012) is something that qualified ones.

Character become identities, distinctive feature, constant characteristic, that contend

contingent experience that is always change. So, character is set of values that become

habitual life and become constant characteristic inside the ones. Character building

education is the effort to sprout of and develop good values to the child based on the

prevailing moral (Deni: 2014). Daniel Goleman in Soetarjo (2012; 79) mention that

character education is value education, that covers nine principles of value such as;

responsibility, respect, fairness, courage, honestly, citizenship, self-discipline, caring, and

perseverance.
 79

CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the findings and advances the recommendations of the

researchers.

Summary of Findings

The salient findings of the study were followed:

1. On the students’ perception of laboratory experiments:

1.1. There are differing views regarding students’ perception of laboratory

experiments. There were three predominant topics in the first problem:

advantage, process, and obstacle.

1.2. The most common advantages mentioned by the participants were

information, experience and rapport. The participants perceived

information as the top advantage.

1.3. The participants noted the lack of the following: time in conducting

laboratory experiments, availability of materials provided in the laboratory,

and clear frequent instructions received from the teacher.

1.4. The most common obstacles mentioned by the participants were stress,

comprehension, misunderstandings, and environment. The participants

perceived misunderstandings caused by their self, peers, and teachers as

the top obstacle.

 80

1.4. Above all the obstacles acquired by the participants, misunderstanding

caused by their self, peers and, teachers.

2. On how laboratory experiments increase students’ engagement in the

laboratory:

2.1. A majority of the students suggested to increase the amount of hands-on

activities and . In addition, most of the students emphasized the importance

of their learning expectations when it comes to participation in conducting

laboratory experiments.

2.2. There are varying opinions revolving around the best approach to engage

students in science laboratory experiments: integration, student-teacher

interaction, and holistic development.

2.2.1. Regarding integration, the participants preferred to conduct

experiments: (1) after, and (2) before and after.

2.2.2.2.2. Regarding student-teacher interactionMeanwhile, the participants

preferred having the teacher conduct the experiment before the lesson.

3. On the benefits the students have received from conducting laboratory

experiments:

3.1. The data gathered suggests that the benefits are not only limited to

intellectual aspects, but also enriches the skills and values.The participants

gained experience a nd information through the conduct of laboratory

experiments.

3.1.
 81

The participants gained skills and values that not only benefit them

academically, but also holistically.

3.2.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. The researchers conclude that there were three predominant topics regarding

the students’ perception about laboratory experiments: Advantages, Process

and Obstacle.

2. The researchers conclude that in increasing students’ engagement, there should

be Involvement and Appropriate Approach.

3. The researchers conclude that that the following benefits were considered:

technical knowledge and personal growth.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions presented, the following recommendations

were suggested.

Administrators. Administrators must make use of the diagnostic information

gained through research to formulate actionable changes. The researchers recommend

administrators to be more mindful regarding laboratory experiments as this provides many

benefits to nurture the students. In addition, the curriculum should place more attention

upon scientific hands-on activities so that there will be full maximization of use regarding
 82

the time, materials, and equipment various schools provide. It is highly recommended to

add more programs involving experiments to engage in science laboratories.

Science Teachers. Through understanding how the students perceived laboratory

experiments, teachers should imply better approaches to engage students to laboratory

experiments to promote active and collaborative laboratory experiments. The researchers

recommend science teachers to move beyond the textbook. Instead, they should seek to

understand the students’ learning experience. Furthermore, there should be greater

awareness on how much the educators affect the overall perception of the students in

regards to laboratory experiments. Once such is put into consideration, science teachers

must optimize their teaching style for the effective integration of the different scientific

theories to be instilled in the students.

Recommendations

Students. Students need to be made explicitly aware of the goals of the laboratory,

both in terms of the laboratory environment and the conduct of experiments to ensure their

thinking process coincides with the goals of the teachers & curriculum. The researchers

suggest that students should not think negatively of the laboratory, despite the obstacles

they might experience as laboratory experiments provide students a hands-on learning

opportunity wherein they can gain many benefits.

Future Researchers. The future researchers should focus on a specific area to

produce more concrete and thorough results. The researchers recommend qualitative

studies, which are set to examine various dilemmas present in the conduct of laboratory

experiments, such as the students’ perception of success in experiments, the connection

between information integration and students’ learning process, and the relation between
 83

the participation in laboratory experiments and grade point average (GPA). Thus, they

would be able to further contribute to the existing body of literature and unveil other factors

that affect the student’s perception and engagement to science laboratories.

Based on the findings and conclusions presented, the following recommendations

are suggested.

Administrators. The school administrator should be wary about the students’

perception towards science laboratory experiments. That they should create curriculum that

aims to improve laboratory experiences and hand-on activities. Thus, maintaining and

securing laboratory materials and equipment.

Science Teachers. By understanding how the students’ perceived laboratory

experiments, teachers should imply better approaches to engage students to laboratory

experiments. Thus, promoting active and collaborative laboratory experiments.

Students. As a student they should be wary about the importance of science

laboratory experiments because this will help them in the future researches.

Future Researchers. The future researchers should focus on a specific area to

produce more concrete and thorough results. Thus, they would be able to further unveil

other factors that affect the student’s engagement to science laboratories.

 84

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. blaThe researchers conclude that

The researchers conclude that

2. bla

The researchers conclude that

3. bla

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions presented, the following recommendations

are suggested.

1. bla

2. bla

3. bla
 85

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0"

Afari, E., Aldridge, J., Fraser, B. J., & Khine, M. (2012). Student's perceptions of
the learning environment and attitudes in game-based mathematics
classrooms. Learining Environment Research.
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based
intruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology , 103(1),
1-18.
Ali, N., Jusoff, K., Ali, S., Mokhtar, N., Salamt, A., & Syafena, A. (2009). The
Factors Influencing Students’ Performance at Universiti Teknologi
MARA Kedah, Malaysia. Canadian Research & Development Center of
Sciences and Cultures, Vol.3 No.4.
Andersen, L. H., & Midgley, C. (2012). Career counceling and development.
United States of America: Brooks/Cole.
Beyessa, F. (2014). Major Factors that Affect Grade 10 Students’ Academic
Achievement in Science Education at Ilu Ababora General Secondary of
Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. International Letters of Social and
Humanistic Sciences, 32, 118-134.
Blandford, S., & Knowles, C. (2009). Developing professional practice. England:
Pearson Education Limited.
Brophy, J. (2010). Motivating students to learn. 3rd Edition. United Kingdom:
Routledge.
Brownell, S. E., Kloser, M. J., Fukami, T., & Shavelson, R. (2012).
Undergraduate biology lab courses: Comparing the impact of traditionally
based "cookbook" and authentic research-based courses on student lab
experiences. Jouranal of College Science Teaching, 41(4), 36.
Carin, A., & Bass, J. E. (2001). Teaching science as inquiry. 9th Edition. New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Doğru, M., Gencosman, T., & Ataalkin, A. (2011). Examination of natural
science laboratory perception levels of students at primary education grade
6 and their attitudes towards laboratory practices of natural science course.
The International Journal of Educational Researchers 2011, 2(1) 17-27.
Ebert-May, D., & Hodder, J. (2008). Pathways to scientific teaching. Sunderland,
Massachusetts, USA: Sinauer Associates.
 86

Federal Aviation Administration. (2009). Aviation instructor's handbook. New

York: Skyhourse Publishing, Inc.
Fendos, J. (2017, November). Scientific Teaching and Active Learning yet to
Revolutionize Education in East Asia. Retrieved from ResearchGate:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320837787_Scientific_Teaching
_and_Active_Learning_yet_to_Revolutionize_Education_in_East_Asia
Ferreri, S. P., & O'Connor, S. K. (2013). Redesign of a large lecture course into
small-group leaning course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 77(1), 13.
Ghartey-Ampiah, J., Tufour, J. K., & Gadzekpo, V. Y. (2004). Teachers' views on
the role of science practical activities in the teaching of science in
Ghanaian senior secondary schools. African Journal of Ecuational Studies
in Mathematics ans Sciences, 2.
Ghazaria, M. (n.d.). Importance of hands-on activities in learning .
Gooding, J., & Metz, B. (2012). folding inquiry into cookbook lab activities.
Science Scope, 42-47.
Gorard, G. (2004). Combining methods in educational and social research.
Berkshire: Open University Press.
Haave, N., & Audet, D. (2013). Evidence in support of Removing Boundaries to
undergraduates research experiences. Collected Essays on Learning and
Teaching, 19.
Hake, R. R. (2001). Lessons from physics-education reformeffort. arXiv preprint.
Hart , C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the
purpose of this experiment? Journal of Reseach in Science Teaching, 655-
675.
Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2000). Kolb's experimential learning theory and its
application in geography in higher education.
Healey, M., Jordan, F., Pell, B., & Short, C. (2010). The research teaching
Nnexus: A case study of students' awareness, experiences and perceptions
of reseach. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 235-
246.
Hofstein , A., Navon, O., Kipnis , M., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Developing
Students' ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-
type chemistry laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 42,
791-806.
 87

Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2003). The laboratory in Science Education:

Foundations for the 21st Century. Science Education, 88, 28-54.
Hoskins, S. G., Lopatto, D., & Stevens, L. M. (2011). The CREATE approach to
primary literature shifts undergraduates' self-assessed ability to read and
analyze journal articles, attitudes about science, and epistemogical beliefs.
CBE-Life Sciences Education,, 10(4), 368-378.
James, H., & McMillan. (2008). Education Research: Fundamentals for the
consumer. 5th Edition. United States: Pearson Education.
Jones, R., & Wyse, D. (2004). Creativity in the Primary Curriculum. London:
David Fulton Publisher Ltd.
Krajcik, J., Mamlok, R., & Hug, B. (2001). Modern Content and the Enterprise of
Science. Science Education in the 20th Century, 205-238.
Labov, J. B., Reid, A. H., & Yamamoto, K. R. (2010). Integrated biology and
undergrated science education: a new biology education for the 21st
century? CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9(1), 10-16.
Lang , Q. C., Wong, A. F., & Fraser, B. J. (2005, September). Student Perceptions
of Chemistry Laboratory Learning Environments, Student'Teacher
Interactions and Attitudes in Secondary School Gifted Education Classes
in Singapore. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11165-005-0093-9
Lin, H., Lawrenz, S., Lin, S., & Hong, Z. (2012). Relationships among affective
factors and preferred engagement in Science-related activities. Sage
Journals 22, 941-954.
Magi, E., & Beerkens, M. (2016). Linking reseach and teaching: Are Reseach-
active staff members different teacher? Higher Education, 218-221.
Mant, J., Wilson, H., & Coates, D. (2007). The effect of increasing conseptual
challenge in primary science lessons on pupils' achievement and
engagement. International Journal of Science, 1707-1719.
Matheson, C. (2008). The Educational Value and Effectiveness of Lectures. The
Clinical Teacher, 218-221.
McMurray, A. J., Pace, R. W., & Scott, D. (2016). The educational value and
effectiveness of lectures. Higher Education, 218-221.
National Research Council. (2001). Inquiry and the National Science Education
Standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
 88

National Science Teachers Association. (2001). Practicing Science: The

investigative approach in college science teaching. Virginia: National
Science Teacher Association Press.
Norman, W. (2005). End the biggest educational and intellectual blunder in
history; a $100,000 challenge to our top educational leaders. Florida:
Scientific Method Publishing Co.
Orion, N., Hofstein, A., Tamir, T., & Giddings, G. J. (n.d.). Development and
Validation of an Instrument for Assessing the Learning Environment of
Outdoor Science Activities.
Overbaugh, R. (2004). An Overview of Jeromebrummer his theory of
Contructivism. United States: Old Dominion University.
Pierce, R., & Fox, J. (2012). Vodcast and active-learning in a "flipped classroom"
model of a renal pharmacotheraphy module. American Journal of
Pharmaceutical Education, 76(10),196.
Powell, K. (2003, September 18). Science Education: Spare me Lecture.
Retrieved from Nature: https://doi.org/10.1038/425234a
Pukkila, P. J. (2004). Introducing student inquiry in large indtroductory genetics
classes. Genetics, 11-18.
Reynolds, R., & Caperton, I. H. (2011). Contrast in student engagement,
meaning-making, dislikes, and challenges in a discovery-based progra of
game design learning. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 59(2), 267-298.
Sneddon, P. H., & Hill, R. A. (2011). Perceptions, Views and Opinions of
University Students about Chemistry Learning during Practical Work at
School. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(3), 312-321,
https://eric.ed.gov/.
Stronge, J. H., Tucker, P. D., & Hindman, J. L. (2004). Handbook for qualities of
effective teachers. United States of America: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
VanNoord, M. L. (2007). Identifying factors of motivation in adult learners
returning to higher education in nursing. Unites States: ProQuest
Information and Learning Company.
Willms, J. D. (2003). Student engagement ast school. A sense of belonging and
participation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development.
Wilson, K., & Korn, J. H. (2007). Attention during lectures: Beyond ten minutes.
Teaching of Psychology, 85-89.
 89

Worth, K. (2010). Science in early childhood classrooms: Content and Process.

Massachusetts: Education Development Center, Inc.
Yung, B. H. (2001). Three views of fairness in a School-bases assessments
scheme of practical work in biology. . International Journal of Science
Education, 985-1005.
 90

Appendix A. Letter of Permission

 91

Appendix B. Sample Validity Sheets

 92

Appendix C. Reliability of the Instrument

 93

Appendix D. Letter to Participants

 94

Appendix E. Informed Consent Form

 95

Appendix F. FGD Protocol

 96

Appendix G. Transcription of the Focus Group Discussion

Moderator: Ok, everyone please stand for the prayer.

-PRAYER-

So before we formally start, can you please settle down anay ah, so before

we formally start, can you please introduce your names and your SIP titles?

So hi guys, my name is John Lester Cartel and I am here, your moderator

for today. So please can you start your SIP title?

Participant 1: ***, wind turbine as an alternative source of electricity.

Participant 2: ***, same with her.

Participant 3: ***, coffee shampoo palette as an alternative to shampoo.

Participant 4: ***, natural dyes from plants.

Participant 5: ***, dalisay oil as an alternative for cooking oil.

Participant 6: ***, amount of plastic disposals and attitudes toward waste segregation.

Participant 7: ***, edible water pods as an alternative to plastic water bottles.

Participant 8: ***, rechargeable battery.

Participant 9: ***, saltwater powered generator.

Participant 10: ***, lemongrass scented mosquito repellant candle.

Participant 11: ***, clip-on booklet with solar panel.

 97

Moderator: Okay, again, John Lester Cartel your moderator for today. So the ground

rules would is that any answer is acceptable. So before we begin, guys don’t

be shy, looking at my face will you still be shy?

Okay, so again guys before we begin, our topic is the “Perceptions of Junior

High School Students Engaging In Laboratory Experiments”, so as you can

see at the last page will be the following questions to be asked to you, so

can you kindly please turn your page there. Please write your name, grade,

section, and from what school you’re from, so Bacolod Tay Tung High

School.

So the starting time of our FGD is 4:10 pm. The date is March 20, 2019.

The place is the ‘special room’. For those who have no papers, it’s okay.

You can pass tomorrow. Can we now begin?

Okay, so now let’s start with the first question. Can I ask what is your

perception regarding laboratory experiments? Any answer is acceptable as

long as you answer the question.

Participant 3: The role of laboratory experiments is to help students further understand

their lessons since they are the ones who experience it firsthand, learning

how the result of their experiment came to be and how to do it.

Moderator: Thank you. Anyone else? So what is the role of laboratory experiments for

you guys? Anyone from the grade 9?

 98

Participant 9: For me, the role of laboratory experiments is very important because it gives

us students a hands-on experience as to what some of the scientists say that

is actually true so that we may prove it yet again.

Participant 6: The role of laboratory experiments is very important because it improves

intellectual development of the students by discovering new experiments in

the laboratory.

Participant 11: It is important because it would be much easier for the students to

understand the lesson.

Participant 2: The role of the laboratory experiments for me is to foster the scientific

learnings of the students in Tay Tung and in different schools and it also

helps us cooperate with people.

Moderator: Thank you very much for your kind answers. Next, a follow-up question.

How are the laboratory experiments conducted? Is it on-time activity or

aligned to the topic being discussed at the moment?

Participant 3: Yes, so that we can understand more about the topic. That’s why it’s always

done on-time because if not, the laboratory experiment will not be valid if

not related with the topic being discussed.

Moderator: So I’ll just ask, do you conduct your laboratory experiments before or after?

Participant 3: After.

Moderator: After the topic?

Participant 3: Yes.
 99

Moderator: So any more answers? On the question that it is on-time? – don’t be shy

guys. It’s okay. Yes ***?

Participant 7: The laboratory experiment is a need because if you are the one who’s

making it you can understand about it more and be like ‘ohh this is how it’s

done…this will result to this…’ that’s why we conduct experiments because

we can know how and why the result is like that.

Moderator: Any answers to that question? Yes?

Ok, so are your experiments doable in a given period? Meaning in a time

period can you finish it in time?

Participant 8: It really depends on the experiment because sometimes, some experiments

can’t be finished within 1 hour or 2 hours. You need more time. For

example, there is an observation so we need more time to conduct the

experiment. So there are some that are not doable in certain period of time.

Moderator: So do you agree that it is doable in a certain time? In the span that the teacher

gives?

Participant 8: Yes.

Moderator: Anyone? Any other opinion?

Participant 4: No, because there are times where it is inadequate. It needs a lot of time like

2 hours in the laboratory so if the time given to us is not enough, we cannot

answer and finish the experiment.

Moderator: So you are not agreeing that it is doable in a given time.

 100

Participant 4: Yes, I do not agree.

Moderator: Is there a constant supervision or instruction from the teacher? What are

your comments?

Participant 4: Yes, they guide us from time to time.

Participant 9: Yes, they guide us, but there are times that they don’t because we already

know how.

All: -LAUGH-

Participant 9: This is because we are already old enough. So we know the proper manners

like cleaning up and not just leaving the place dirty.

Participant 5: The teacher discusses it before but during the experiment, she doesn’t

supervise anymore. When we ask questions, that is the time she answers.

However, she does supervise from time to time.

Moderator: So before the experiment the teacher already instructs you but during the

on-hand activity you do it on your own.

Participant 5: Yes.

Moderator: Anyone else? So are the instructions given before conducting the

experiment by the teacher clear?

Participant 2: Yes, the instructions given are clear but there are times where the students

cannot understand, especially if the teacher is not fluent in the medium

he/she uses.
 101

Participant 3: Sometimes it is clear, but they are times that it isn’t because the terms used

are difficult and the instructions are only included in the concept paper so it

is really difficult to understand.

Moderator: So you need more supervision in terms of use?

Participant 1: Yes. They need to execute how it is conducted before we do it.

Moderator: So demonstration before the actual experimentation. Thank you. So,

regarding the ambiance. What are your perceptions toward the ambiance of

the laboratory?

So when you enter, there are basic instructions and safety guides, pictures

on the wall, descriptions, etc. So what is the feeling that you get when you

are in the laboratory? So is it clear everyone? I’m sure that everyone here

has already gone to the laboratory.

All: Yes.

Moderator: So you have a clear vision of what is laboratory looks like. So what are your

perceptions towards the ambiance of the laboratory?

Participant 2: For me, I hope that they maintain it from time to time, like cleaning the

laboratory because based on my experience yesterday, I had an allergic

rhinitis attack due to the dust in the laboratory.

Moderator: So there should be a follow-up it comes to cleanliness.

Participant 2: Yes.

Moderator: Okay, so next.

 102

Participant 3: It’s okay because the equipment are really the equipment needed in the

laboratory and for experiments but the only thing missing are warnings and

safety instructions.

Participant 4: For me, when I get inside the laboratory, I’m not that amazed because there

isn’t that much stuff and it seems incomplete.

Participant 5: For me, there is something lacking in the lab. Because when you get inside,

your mind remains blank and the ambiance doesn’t make you feel interested

to conduct the experiment.

Participant 6: For me, the laboratory is indeed lacking but there are also basic learnings

present in the lab like the frames so it’s a basic lab but there is still

something lacking.

Participant 9: For me, the laboratory is like a classroom-type and I really appreciate that

there are frames on the wall like the scientists. So I would appreciate it even

more if they add safety precautions and more facts.

Participant 10: Like, it is more comfortable than the old one but it’s only seldom used so

the air inside isn’t fresh when you breathe, but it’s still better now when

compared to the past.

Moderator: So after the ambiance, let’s talk about when it comes to materials. Are your

materials always available or are still being asked to bring?

Participant 2: They let us bring the materials if needed if not available in the laboratory.
 103

Participant 3: Only the specific materials are required for us to bring because there are

already some available materials in the laboratory.

Participant 6: For us, we are asked to bring the materials but there are also times that the

materials are already available in the lab.

Participant 8: Sometimes, we are asked to bring specific materials especially those that

are not available in the lab.

Participant 9: I agree to those who said that there are materials that aren’t available in the

lab. If they aren’t available, we bring it.

Participant 11: There are times that the materials being asked are already available in our

houses which we can bring the next day, but of course there are complex

materials, tools and equipment that are already available in the lab.

Moderator: So in case there are no materials, do you have any alternative materials

being used?

Participant 3: There is this one time that in our last experiment, other sections were asked

to bring yeast except for our section. Thankfully, there was an alternative to

yeast which is magnesium.

Participant 11: There was also this one time that we forget to bring a rag to clean so we

used tissues instead.

All: -LAUGH-

Moderator: Are the visual aids in the laboratory useful? Why or why not?

Participant 1: Kind of useful because there are times that it adds information.
 104

Participant 3: Useful because it adds interest to the students and if they just read what is

posted on the walls, they can really learn even if it’s just bit by bit.

Participant 4: Agree to disagree, specifically, there are times that it is not visible to the

students. It’s just hidden and lacking of maintenance.

Participant 5: It is useful for me for the sake that it adds information but there are times

that it is not noticeable by the students because it can’t catch their attention.

Participant 6: I agree to that.

Participant 9: It is useful, especially the frames hanging on the walls of the lab.

Participant 10: Useful, but it is being outshined by others because of its small size. It’s not

that noticeable.

Moderator: Thank you. So next, how do SIPs affect your relationship towards yourself,

peers, and teachers?

Participant 3: Yes, because each of us can bond with each other and we can learn new

things together.

Participant 4: Yes, it can affect the relationship with others because of misunderstandings

regarding the SIP when you can’t understand what to do and instead of

helping each other you tend to do the opposite. Speaking of the relationship

towards the teacher, there are times that if both of you don’t understand each

other, it results to conflicts to him/her.

Participant 5: In the relationships towards peers, there you can see that true nature of one

another.
 105

All: -LAUGH-

Participant 5: Because there you can see who is really willing to help and those who don’t.

When it comes to the relationship towards teachers, it really depends to

whoever the teacher it is. For example, our English teacher who is really

eager to help us in our paper works.

Participant 6: The relation towards myself is, of course, stress. For peers, there are times

that you have misunderstandings with them because there is no clear

instruction to whoever will make a certain task, and sometimes they don’t

do it and just rely on you. When it comes to the teachers, especially to our

teacher who is assigned in our SIP he/she doesn’t supervise that much so it

results to conflict.

Participant 8: SIP research can affect you towards yourself because sometimes you can be

shocked that a certain research can be done alone. This can also affect our

relationship with our peers because here, you can truly differentiate those

who are willing to help when you need them and those who are just joining

the fun.

All: -LAUGH-

Participant 8: It can also affect the relationship with our teacher because there are other

teachers that will help you especially when they sense that you are already

struggling, they can help you by making you understand, and at least help

the students to finish their papers.

 106

Participant 9: SIP can affect your relationship towards yourself because, of course stress,

but it can also be beneficial because the more stress we get, the better our

experiences will be in preparation to upcoming years. Peers, because

sometimes there are moments of misunderstandings, small fights and

badmouthing but these are the things that we can’t control but still it helps

the group to bond and improve one another. Teachers, well they really help

us but there are times when they are busy that you have to be independent

and resourceful.

Participant 11: It is stressful for my well-being. Speaking of peers, they pressure the one

who’s really responsible or the one who’s really reliable because they are

the ones who are considered more familiar with the topic. And asking the

teacher in regards to your SIP can help strengthen the bond between the two

of you.

Moderator: Last sub-question for the 1st main question, do the experiments being

conducted really help you in having a clear understanding about the subject

matter?

Participant 1: Yes, because there are times where the students actually base their

understanding on the actual representations and it becomes even clearer in

regards to the subject matter.

Participant 3: Yes, if you know what you’re expecting and if the teacher gives you a clear

objective to achieve, like what kind of result should be produced after

conducting the experiment. However, there are times where the teacher
 107

doesn’t tell you what will actually happen so you’ll just get confused on

what to do.

Moderator: How about you guys? Does it really help your understanding? Did all of

your minds clear up while conducting the experiment?

Participant 5: It depends if you’re doing the experiment right then you’ll have the right

conclusion on that topic but if you didn’t make the experiment by yourself

and just copied from others then you are going to have no idea on how to

describe it.

Moderator: How about the grade 9?

Participant 9: Yes, it really helps, for example is our experiment on impulse and

momentum. We tested two coins where we dropped one coin while pushing

the other coin forward until it drops because they’ll land at the same rate

and time.

Moderator: Really?

Participant 9: Yes. So we tested it and at first we were shocked with the results because

the other coin was pushed so why did it land at the same rate? So we

conducted the experiment again but had the same result, so we concluded

that it will land at the same time even if you drop it at a really high place.

Moderator: So a follow-up question, if you conducted an experiment about a certain

topic that tells you to compare this to something then compare both of their

results while doing it on-hand, did it really help you?

 108

Participant 6: Sometimes if another group conducts an experiment that is similar to yours

and both of your experiments are on the book and your conclusions are kind

of similar then you learn more about your topic.

Moderator: So that means it adds more understanding on that specific topic. Okay, thank

you. Second main question: describe the experiences and engagement you

made while doing the experiment. What do you think are the ways to

improve this experience in engagement? First follow up question: aside

from SIPs what other ways do you think that can make the students more

engaged in laboratory experiments? Any recommendations?

Participant 2: Besides SIPs, I think more science activities about the current issues in the

field can help because if we stick to SIP’s then the lesson would be too

boring.

Moderator: So you’re saying that you need more activities?

Participant 3: For me, academic field trips would be a good idea because of the

experiences that will stay in your mind and the fun you would have during

that trip is going to make you learn more about that topic.

Participant 8: Aside from SIP, I think other ways that can help improve the engagement

of students on laboratory activities is having the teacher to conduct an

experiment before the lesson so the students would be interested in the topic

and wonder how and why it was made. After that the students would be

more intrigued on the topic.

 109

Participant 9: For me, a little bit more on the hands-on learning would be good and more

of interesting topics that can blow our minds.

Participant 10: For our batch, almost all of us are kind of childish so we would find the

topic more appealing if there are games involved in it.

Participant 5: Aside from SIP, I think any subject matter that involves science activities

can make use of the laboratory above.

Moderator: So regarding on the students who suggested to add more activities, what can

you suggest? Is it better to do it before or after the topic?

Participant 2: After the topic because if we do it before, we would have no background of

the topic.

Participant 3: Before because after the experiment is done, the teacher would explain it

further and students will understand it more.

Participant 4: For me, after so that the teacher can explain it further.

Participant 5: After so that the lessons that are applied can be applied in real life situations.

Participant 6: I will go with after too because of the background of the topic.

Participant 8: Both before and after because the curiosity of the students would be

triggered and after because if you conduct the experiment again then you

will have the background on how to do it.

Participant 9: For me, I will also go with before and after. Before, so that the students

would be more interested. After, so that they will be more clarified on the

topic.
 110

Moderator: Okay next, is there a positive attitude on both the teacher and the students

while conducting the experiment? So is there a positive attitude in both

parties?

Participant 1: Yes, because it involves participation while the teachers are also open.

Participant 5: Yes, because you will learn about new things and afterwards, you can use

what you learned when you graduate college.

Participant 6: No, because our teacher doesn’t supervise us at all and just looks at the

research then scan it and tells us that everything is okay but after the

defense, everything would be totally wrong.

Moderator: So what you’re saying is, the teacher doesn’t really pay attention and at the

end of the day you’ll realize that everything you did was wrong.

Participant 8: It’s both yes and no, yes because the teacher is always open and no because

there are students who give up easily and tend to just copy the conclusion

from the other groups that are conducting the same experiment.

Participant 9: For me, mostly yes and seldom no, no because as what my friend said, there

are students who give up easily and yes because there are teachers who

discipline us and everyone cooperates.

Participant 11: There are both positive and negative, negative because there is stress and

there are many who just rely on other students. Positive because there is a

bond that you’ll build with your groupmates.

 111

Moderator: What do you look forward to in doing laboratory experiments? So aside

from the existing activities, what else do you look forward to?

Participant 1: We look forward in doing the experiment and learning while doing the

experiment.

Participant 3: I would like them to give us expectations or what we would expect before

doing the experiment so that it would be clear to us that what we are doing

is right.

Participant 5: Clearing out the objectives and goals before doing the experiment.

Participant 9: Of course, we will need objectives and goals towards a certain research

because we are looking forward in successfully doing the experiment, but

sometimes, no because usually we are more engaged in the experiment if

we do it correctly.

Participant 10: We are looking forward in gaining more knowledge about the certain topic

that we are tackling at the moment.

Moderator: So the last major question is, when doing experiments what benefits do you

get?

Participant 2: We learn more about the nature of things and the habitats of micro-

organisms.

Participant 3: You’ll be more exposed to the things that you would not normally encounter

in your daily life.

 112

Participant 4: You are going to get more information about things that you are not really

familiar about.

Participant 5: Maybe quality over quantity, because it’s not about who does the

experiment first or who finishes it first, doing experiments needs time for

you to really understand the topic.

Participant 6: For me, additional information.

Participant 8: For me, if you usually do laboratory experiments, your skills on identifying

laboratory apparatus and chemicals used would be improved drastically.

Participant 9: For me, the benefit of all of those is general knowledge in the overall field

of science of physics and chemistry and others. It will improve your general

knowledge on how you will use it in your everyday life.

Participant 11: Well, you’ll be amazed on the wonders of the world and you could be more

knowledgeable because you will experience everything.

Moderator: Okay. Next follow-up question, how has it improved your skills in doing

laboratory experiments? So did it help in improving your skills?

Participant 1: It will help us familiarize the lab.

Participant 3: We would know more about how laboratory experiments are conducted and

we would also know how to make our paperwork.

Participant 4: We will be more familiar in the tool that we are going to use if we conduct

another experiment.

Participant 5: We will be prepared on the up-and-coming researches.

 113

Participant 6: In doing laboratory experiments, my patience is improved. Sometimes,

there are experiments where I fail to the point where I have no choice but to

get angry but somehow, in my Grade 10 experience, I was able to practice

my patience.

Participant 9: For me, it has improved my skill of time management. You really have to

know how to manage your time. Especially if your experiments lasts for 3

hours or so, you really need to know how to cut that time and do what is

necessary.

Participant 10: It can improve our memory because everything that we do, we need to recall

it and write it down on paper. It also made us more attentive because we

should know what is happening so that we can explain how to do it in the

future.

Moderator: Okay. How do these learnings and experiences contribute to your academic

performance? So this talks about academic performance.

Participant 3: We can acquire skills like being determined and hard-working and these can

really help our academic performance.

Participant 4: I find it easier to do difficult things because I already experienced failures

so I know that I should do it again. So if they give me difficult tasks, I can

do it by myself.

Participant 8: The learnings, most likely, can contribute when we reach college because

at least, when were in college we have a lot of background in using the

 114

laboratory and laboratory apparatus. That’s why it becomes easier in terms

of using, conducting researches.

Participant 9: For me, it is when we become working adults. Although other works many

not be in line with science, it usually contributes because you know how to

handle time and safety. Especially safety.

Moderator: Okay. So follow-up questions to that question. Does this develop you as a

person or as a student? So everyone should answer. Does it develop you as

a person or as a student?

Participant 1: I think both. Because as a student, it is already part of your character.

Participant 2: I would say both because as a person, we continue to learn. And throughout

our lives, we are students. These experiments affect us as persons because

it teaches us to set goals and achieve them. In our life we have an ultimate

goal, and in order to reach this goal, we have to set smaller goals and fulfill

them slowly but surely.

Participant 3: For me, it is also both because your experiences as a student can affect your

personal growth.

Participant 4: For me, it is also both because what I have learned here can affect me as a

person and vice versa.

Participant 5: For me, it is as a person. This is because as a person, your way of thinking

becomes more mature while as a student, it is already expected that you

should do it.
 115

Participant 6: For me, it is development as a person because it is more practical as a

person. Because when you grow up, in life, we consider ourselves as

persons so it is practical. In the future, you can gain knowledge from the

experiments.

Participant 8: For me, it is both as a person and as a student. Person, because you can’t

just learn more knowledge but you can also learn values like patience,

determination and perseverance. For students, on the other hand, it can add

up to your knowledge until you graduate from college.

Participant 9: For me, again, it is both as a person and as a student. Student, because it can

help you in your studies and as a person, it can hone values and improve,

just in the student’s phase, your values. So that in the stage of a person, you

are familiar in the things that you do.

Participant 10: It can develop me as a student and as a person to become more hardworking

and cooperative with the group like when the experiments are really hard

and we have to finish it, we really have to work hard to finish it. We also

need cooperation in the group.

Participant 11: By doing all these experiments, you can learn patience, leadership,

attentiveness and resourcefulness.

Moderator: Okay guys, so before we end, let us all stand and have a little ice-breaker!

So everybody let us just jump jump jump because we all know that you’re

all tired from your answers. So guys we would like to thank you for
 116

accepting our invitation in regards to this interview. Please give yourselves

a round of applause.

All: -CLAPS-

Moderator: Again, there are no right or wrong answers in this interview and we are so

thankful that you have given us your time today. Please write down the

duration of the interview. The time is 5:07. So okay guys, thank you again

for participating in our study. Please pass your papers.

117