next
In the experimental class, teachers collaborate in teaching according to the teaching process we have designed.
In the control class, teachers collaborate to teach using the methods they normally use.
+ Discuss with two collaborating teachers after each lesson in the experimental class and the control class to
Collect comments on that lesson.
+ Collect students' comments on the experimental class through discussions after each class.
learn.
+ Organize tests in both TN and DC classes with the same questions, in the same period.
time.
+ Collaborate with teachers to summarize, analyze and process results objectively.
mandarin.
+ Based on the results obtained, draw conclusions about the topic to be researched.
3.3. BASIS FOR EVALUATING TNSP RESULTS
a) Qualitatively
We base this on observations of students' positive performance in Physics class; the specific bases are:
- Students pay attention and voluntarily participate in learning tasks.
- Students propose models (hypotheses) and experimental plans to test according to the Physics Science Curriculum diagram (both correct and incorrect).
- Students answer questions correctly according to the requirements to memorize knowledge in class.
- Students apply knowledge to solve exercises and explain real-life phenomena.
b) Quantitatively
We evaluate based on the results of the tests. The grading is as follows:
+ Excellent: 9, 10 points; + Fair: 7, 8 points;
+ Average: score 5, 6 + Weak: score 3, 4;
+ Poor: points 0, 1, 2.
From the test results of students, use statistical methods to process and analyze the results of the experiment.
Based on the results obtained qualitatively and quantitatively, it will be possible to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of teaching; thereby testing the stated scientific hypothesis.
3.4. CONDUCTING TNSP
3.4.1. Controlling unwanted effects on TNSP results
+ Choose TN class and DC class with similar characteristics and learning quality
each other
+ The exercises are arranged according to the program distribution.
+ The experimental teacher teaches in both experimental and control classes; the remaining collaborating teacher is always present.
present in teaching hours in TN and DC classes.
+ Test two classes TN and DC with the same content (see appendix) and time, without prior notice.
3.4.2. Preparing for TNSP
a) Select collaborating teachers:
+ Bac Son High School:
- Teacher: Mr. Tran Trung Kien
- Teacher observing: Ms. Nguyen Thi Luan
+ Luu Nhan Chu High School:
- Teacher: Ms. Hoang Thi Binh
- Teacher observing: Mr. Nguyen Hoang Long
+ Vo Nhai High School
- Teacher: Ms. Nguyen Thi Tu Anh
- Teacher observing: Mr. Giang Minh Dong
b) Select knowledge to teach TN
With time constraints and agreement with collaborators when considering the content and distribution of the Physics 10 program (basic), we chose three lessons from the chapter "Gas" for TNSP:
+ Isothermal process. Boyle-Mariotte law.
+ Isochoric process. Charles's law.
+ Equation of state of ideal gas (section 1).
c) Choose TN class and DC class
Table 3.1 : Characteristics of the TN class and the DC class
School
Class | Number HS | Physics results semester 1 | ||||||
Good | Medium | Weak, poor | ||||||
High School Bac Son | TN - 10A1 | 48 | 8 | 16.7% | 33 | 68.8% | 7 | 14.6% |
DC - 10A4 | 50 | 7 | 14% | 37 | 74% | 6 | 12% | |
High School Liu Ren Zhu | TN - 10A1 | 44 | 7 | 15.9% | 31 | 70.5% | 6 | 13.6% |
DC - 10A2 | 44 | 7 | 15.9% | 33 | 76.7% | 4 | 9.3% | |
High School Vo Nhai | TN - 10A2 | 47 | 7 | 14.9% | 32 | 68.1% | 8 | 17% |
DC - 10A3 | 46 | 8 | 17.4% | 30 | 65.2% | 8 | 17.4% | |
Maybe you are interested!
-
Research Results on the Effects of Tillage Practices -
Research Results on the Effects of Fertilization on Growth and Productivity of Planted Forests -
Initial Results and Comments -
Completing the organization of accounting for revenue, sales costs and determining business results at Hai Phong Paint Joint Stock Company - 1 -
Results of Testing Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient of Independent Variable
During the experiment, we were only interested in the results of 32 students in each class: 32 students in the experimental class and 32 students in the control class had similar proportions of good - excellent, average, weak - poor (among these, we excluded students with poor or excellent academic performance):
Good: 7 students (21.9%); Average: 21 students (65.6%); Poor: 4 students (12.5%)
3.5. TNSP RESULTS
3.5.1. Observation results of the expression of the level of positivity in learning activities
Based on the observations of the collaborating teachers and the evaluation of the tests collected after each lesson, we obtained the results presented in Table 3.2 (page 76).
From that we have some comments as follows:
+ In experimental classes: Because they directly conduct experiments and observe teachers conducting experiments, students participate in learning tasks with enthusiasm and passion. Most students answer questions correctly according to the requirements for memorizing knowledge. Students are very active in group discussions to come up with hypothetical models, participate in predicting and explaining phenomena. Although at first, not all students come up with the correct hypothetical models, apply the knowledge they have just learned to do exercises and
explain phenomena that occur in reality, but in the following lessons, these abilities of the students increase.
Table 3.2 : Expression of the level of positivity in learning activities
Expression
Number of students participating | ||
TN Group | DC Group | |
Students pay attention and voluntarily participate in learning tasks. | 83 | 47 |
93 | 51 | |
96 | 42 | |
Students propose models (hypotheses) and experimental testing plans according to the Physics Science Curriculum diagram (true and false). | 96 | 0 |
96 | 0 | |
96 | 0 | |
Students answer questions correctly according to the requirements to memorize knowledge in class. | 67 | 63 |
85 | 58 | |
92 | 69 | |
Students apply knowledge to solve exercises and explain real-life phenomena. | 73 | 51 |
88 | 63 | |
95 | 57 | |
+ In the control classes: Students were not allowed to do experiments or observe the teacher doing experiments; they showed little enthusiasm in speaking up to build lessons, passively absorbing knowledge; therefore, they had difficulty in remembering knowledge as well as applying the knowledge they had just learned to solve exercises and explain related real-life phenomena.
3.5.2. Test results
3.5.2.1. General requirements for processing quantitative results of TNSP
* Tests are graded by one person according to a common grading scale agreed upon between the project implementer and the collaborating teacher.
* Steps to process and analyze TNSP results include:
- Create a table of results, a ranking table of student test results and a frequency distribution table.
- Draw ranking charts, frequency distribution graphs.
- Calculate statistical parameters:
+ Average score: TN class:
X n i X i
n
Class DC: Y n j Y j
n
S 2
TN
+ Variance S 2 and standard deviation S: are parameters measuring the dispersion of data around the mean value.
n X
X 2
S
TN class:
2 ii
TN n
; S TN
n Y
Y 2
S
Class DC:
2 jj
DC n
; S DC
S 2
DC
+ Coefficient of variation V indicates dispersion:
TN Class: V TN
DC Class: V DC
S TN 100% ;
X
DC 100 %
Y
+ Student T tt coefficient is the coefficient that tests the existence of the correlation coefficient.
n
X Y
T tt
S 2 S 2
TN DC
In which: X i are the score values of the experimental group
Y j are the score values of the DC group
n is the number of students tested in the experimental or control group n i , n j are the number of students who achieved test scores X i , Y j , respectively .
3.5.2.2. Results and processing of test results
a) Test number 1
Table 3.3 : Results of the first test
Group
TN (96 students) | DC (96 students) | |||||||||
School | North Paint | LN Uncle | Martial arts Chew | Total | North Paint | LN Uncle | Martial arts Chew | Total | ||
X i (Y j ) | SL | SL | SL | SL | % | SL | SL | SL | SL | % |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2.1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4.2 |
4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 7.3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 10 | 10.4 |
5 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 21 | 21.9 | 12 | 11 | 13 | 36 | 37.5 |
6 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 24 | 25.0 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 27 | 28.1 |
7 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 21 | 21.9 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 13 | 13.5 |
8 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 20 | 20.8 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 8 | 8.3 |
9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Table 3.4 : First test classification
Group
Number of students (%) | Least | Weak | T. Binh | Rather | Good | |
0 -> 2 | 3 -> 4 | 5 -> 6 | 7 -> 8 | 9 -> 10 | ||
TN | SL | 0 | 9 | 45 | 41 | 1 |
% | 0 | 9.4 | 46.9 | 42.7 | 1.0 | |
Address | SL | 0 | 14 | 63 | 21 | 0 |
% | 0 | 14.6 | 65.6 | 21.8 | 0 |
Series1
Series2
1 2 3 4
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
12
Series1
Series2 Series3
(%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
TN Group
DC Group
Weak Average Good Excellent
Chart 3.1 : First test ranking chart
Table 3.5 : Frequency distribution 1
X i (Y j )
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
n i | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 21 | 24 | 21 | 20 | 1 | 0 |
P (n i /n) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.021 | 0.073 | 0.219 | 0.250 | 0.219 | 0.208 | 0.010 | 0 |
n j | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 10 | 36 | 27 | 13 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
P ( nj /n) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.042 | 0.104 | 0.375 | 0.281 | 0.135 | 0.083 | 0 | 0 |
P
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
TN Group
DC Group
X i (Y j )
0 2 4 6 8 10
Graph 3.1 : Frequency distribution graph 1
1st statistical parameters :
+ Average score : Experimental group: X = 6.24
Control group: Y = 5.72
+ Variance:
n i X i
S
2
TN n
X 2
= 1.79
S
2
n j Y j
S 2
TN
DC n
Y 2
= 1.49
+ Standard deviation:
S TN
= 1,338
S 2
DC
S DC
= 1.221
+ Coefficient of variation:
V TN
V
S TN 100% = 21.4%
X
S DC 100% = 21.3%
DC Y
n
X Y
+ Student coefficient:
T tt = 2.81
S 2 S 2
TN DC
Looking up the Student coefficient table corresponding to 99% confidence level, we have: t (n > 60;0.01) = 2.66, which means t (96;0.01) = 2.66
Here we can calculate T tt > 2.66 - this proves that the result of test number 1 is completely correct.
meaningful and trustworthy rather than random.
b) Second test
Table 3.6 : Second test results
Group
TN (96 students) | DC (96 students) | |||||||||
School | North Paint | LN Uncle | Martial arts Chew | Total | North Paint | LN Uncle | Martial arts Chew | Total | ||
X i (Y j ) | SL | SL | SL | SL | % | SL | SL | SL | SL | % |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 4.2 |
4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 10.4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 9.4 |
5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 11 | 11.5 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 27 | 28.1 |
6 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 26 | 27.1 | 10 | 11 | 10 | 31 | 32.1 |
7 | 9 | 7 | 8 | 24 | 25 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 15 | 15.6 |
8 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 22 | 22.9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 9.4 |
9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3.1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Table 3.7 : Second test ranking
Group
Number of students (%) | Least | Weak | T. Binh | Rather | Good | |
0 -> 2 | 3 -> 4 | 5 -> 6 | 7 -> 8 | 9 -> 10 | ||
TN | SL | 0 | 10 | 37 | 46 | 3 |
% | 0 | 10.4 | 38.6 | 47.9 | 3.1 | |
Address | SL | 0 | 13 | 58 | 24 | 1 |
% | 0 | 13.6 | 60.4 | 25.0 | 1.0 |
Series1
Series2
1 2 3 4
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2nd statistical parameters:
12
Series1
Series2
(%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
TN Group
DC Group
Weak Average Good Excellent
Chart 3.2: Second test ranking chart
Table 3.8 : Second frequency distribution
X i (Y j )
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
n i | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 11 | 26 | 24 | 22 | 3 | 0 |
P (n i /n) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.104 | 0.115 | 0.271 | 0.25 | 0.229 | 0.031 | 0 |
n j | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 9 | 27 | 31 | 15 | 9 | 1 | 0 |
P ( nj /n) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.042 | 0.094 | 0.281 | 0.323 | 0.156 | 0.094 | 0.010 | 0 |
P
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Experimental group Control group
0 2 4 6 8
10
X i (Y j )
Graph 3.2 : Frequency distribution graph 2
2nd statistical parameters
+ Average score : Experimental group: X = 6.48
Control group: Y = 5.78
+ Variance:
n i X i
S
2
TN n
X 2
= 1.75
S
2
n j Y j
DC n
Y 2
= 1.61
+ Standard deviation:
S TN
S DC
= 1.323
S 2
TN
S 2
DC
= 1,269
+ Coefficient of variation:
TN V DC
S TN 100% = 20.4%
X
S DC 100% = 22.0%
Y
n
X Y
+ Student coefficient:
T tt = 3.74
S 2 S 2
TN DC
Looking up the Student coefficient table corresponding to the 99% confidence level, we have: t (n > 60; 0.01) = 2.66, which means t (96; 0.01) = 2.66
Here, we can calculate that T tt > 2.66 - this proves that the result of test number 2 is completely correct.
meaningful and trustworthy rather than random.
c) Third test
Table 3.9 : Third test results
Group
TN (96 students) | DC (96 students) | |||||||||
School | North Paint | LN Uncle | Martial arts Chew | Total | North Paint | LN Uncle | Martial arts Chew | Total | ||
X i (Y j ) | SL | SL | SL | SL | % | SL | SL | SL | SL | % |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 5.2 |
4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 6.3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 9 | 9.4 |
5 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 20 | 20.8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 29 | 30.2 |
6 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 25 | 26.0 | 10 | 9 | 11 | 30 | 31.3 |
7 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 22 | 22.9 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 12 | 12.5 |
8 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 19 | 19.8 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10.4 |
9 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4.2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1.0 |
10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Table 3.10 : Third test ranking
Group
Number of students (%) | Least | Weak | T. Binh | Rather | Good | |
0 -> 2 | 3 -> 4 | 5 -> 6 | 7 -> 8 | 9 -> 10 | ||
TN | SL | 0 | 6 | 45 | 41 | 4 |
% | 0 | 6.3 | 46.8 | 42.7 | 4.2 | |
Address | SL | 0 | 14 | 59 | 22 | 1 |
% | 0 | 14.6 | 61.5 | 22.9 | 1.0 |