The Use of Computer Simulated Instruction (CSI) on Optics to G10 Student of BNHS

SY 2017-2018 and its Effect on their Performance

RESEARCHER

SHIELA MARIE D. BAHIA

Teacher III
 ABSTRACT

The present study investigated whether the use of computer

simulation instruction was more effective than face-to-face instruction in
increasing G10 students of Balayan National High School’s performance in
optics. The research design employed for this study was quasi- experimental
research design of two groups’ pre test, post test control design. The study
lasted for a period of two weeks due to the experimental nature of the
research. Topics on optics covered in Grade 10 Science K to 12 Curriculum
was provided through a simulation program found in the website
https://simbucket.com/lensesandmirrors/ using ray diagrams to the
experimental group, whereas the control group had the same instruction
through face-to-face teaching methods. A pre test post test composed of
twenty multiple choice questions addressing the contents on optics was
given to both groups. Based from the results obtained from the study, a
computed t (100)= 1.72 which is less than the t-critical for two-tailed test, t
crit=1.98 and p>0.05 was obtained from an independent t-test of the pre test
of both groups. This implies that the two groups selected for the study were
homogeneous since there is no difference in their performance. Also, there
was a significant difference between the post test of both groups. This is
shown by a computed t (100)=7.83 which is greater than the t-critical for
two-tailed test, t crit=1.98 and p<0.05. By implication, the students that were
taught with computer simulation outperformed the students that were
exposed to the traditional method of teaching. Thus, the treatment given to
the experimental group is effective and responsible for the differences in the
performance of students in favour of the treatment class. It was therefore
recommended that the use of computer simulated instruction (CSI) should
be encouraged so as to complement other methods of teaching science in
high school students.
I. Rationale and Problem

Compared with other subjects, teaching Science is deemed to be a lot more

challenging especially when dealing with complex concepts that require concrete

visualizations to be easily understood by students. Even the most passionate science

teacher may feel frustrated whenever his students fail to comprehend even a simple

science concept.

Concepts in Physics are considered to be least understood by high school

students since they usually involved solving problems alongside with memorizing

mind-boggling formulae. It has always been the greatest desire of a science teacher

for his student to understand how varying the force of gravity affect an object’s motion

; investigate nuclear fission at the molecular level and discover whether the daughter

atoms are always the same; or move tectonic plates while investigating the differences

between divergent and convergent boundaries.

With the advent of computer simulations, such interactive, authentic and

meaningful learning opportunities can now be possible. Actual observation,

exploration, reinvention, and receipt of real-time feedback about real objects,

phenomena, and processes that would otherwise be too complex, time-consuming, or

dangerous can now be enjoyed by the learners.

As such, this study is perceived important so as to accelerate the learnings of

high school students of Balayan National High School specifically on concepts of

optics. This is in line with the science in the K to 12 curriculum’s thrust to produce

world-class learners as well as globally competitive leaders in the future. The use
such computer simulation will definitely address the problem on students’ less interest

on complex science concepts.

II. Objectives

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of using computer simulation in

teaching concepts in optics by attempting to answer the following research questions:

A. Is there any difference between the pre-test scores of the students taught with

conventional and computer simulation for understanding concepts in

optics?

B. Is there any difference between the post-test scores of students taught with

conventional and computer simulation for understanding concepts in

optics?

III. Literature Review

Bell and Smetana (2015) defined computer simulations as “computer-

generated dynamic models that present theoretical or simplified models of real-world

components, phenomena, or processes. They can include animations, visualizations,

and interactive laboratory experiences. In a simulated environment, time changes can

be sped up or slowed down; abstract concepts can be made concrete and tacit

behaviors visible. Teachers can focus students’ attention on learning objectives when

real-world environments are simplified, causality of events is clearly explained, and

unnecessary cognitive tasks are reduced through a simulation.”

Students nowadays tend to learn more when using audio-visual teaching

strategies which also caters to them having a short attention span due to their

exposure to different electronic gadgets such as celphones, tablet, ipad, gamepad,

and a lot more. A lot of researches agreed on the effectiveness of using computer

simulation for supporting science teaching and learning. In a study conducted by

Bayrak (2008), findings revealed that instruction of geometric optics using computer

was more successful than face-to-face instruction. The impact of simulations on

students’ understanding of mechanics, thermodynamics and optics was studied by

Zacharia and Anderson (2003), with the target group being the future teachers of

physics. Once the research had been done, the authors agreed that the use of

simulations had a positive impact on students’ being able to predict and explain the

phenomena.

Other research studies show that the use of computer simulations appears to

make easier student’s conceptual understanding (Zacharia, 2007), (Stern, Barnea and

Shauli, 2008), (Sarabando, Cravino and Soares, 2014), requires less time as

traditional methods (Gibbons et al., 2004), and improves the ability to predict the

results of experiments (McKagan et al., 2009).

Further researches showed importance of instructional support in facilitating

discovery learning through simulation-based learning. For example Veermans, van

Joolingen and de Jong (2006) found out that students’ self-regulation was best

facilitated by providing heuristics explicitly instead of implicitly. Lazonder et al. (2009)

confirmed that it was necessary for learners to have a basic understanding of the

variables that were involved.

Morover, results from the study of Záhorec, Hašková, and Munk, M.(2010)

proved that computer-assisted teaching contributes to the elimination of negative

attitudes to school subjects, including physics. They were succesful in using the

multimedia teaching product Principles of Geometry Optics (either at school or at

home) had a positive influence on the learners‘ answers in the particular post-test

questionnaire items. The use of computer simulations was proven to help students

achieve better comprehension of basic features of oscillatory motion and use their

knowledge to solve creative tasks requiring combination of knowledge from different

fields of physics (Pfefferová, 2015).

With the above-mentioned information at hand, it is established that computer

assisted instruction has the following benefits when use in conjuction with other

teaching strategies: learners are allowed to progress at their own pace, control their

learning, participate in the learning endeavors more willingly, learn more effectively,

get a richer variety of instructional materials, keep track of the learning experiences,

get direct answers for their unique questions, get instant feedback regarding their

strengths and weaknesses, conduct experiments which are hard to realize in real-life,

and learn at a shorter time in a systematic way.

IV. Methodology

Research Design

This study adopted quasi- experimental pre test post test two group design. The

experimental group (X) was exposed to using computer simulation as method of

teaching, while the conventional group (Y) which represents the control group was

exposed to usual science conventional teaching approach. The design of the study

was as follows;

Experimental group X; O1 X O 2

Conventional group, Y O3 Y O 4
Where

O1, O3; pre test (performance of the two groups)

O2, O4 post test (performance of the two groups)

X treatment is given through computer simulation approach.

Y conventional method of teaching

Selection of Participants for the Study

The population of this study consisted of all Grade 10 students of Balayan National

High School for the school year 2017-2018. The sample which was made up of 100

students were selected using purposive sampling techniques. One hundred (100)

students were selected from the population. Experiment and control groups were

randomly assigned from the chosen sample and was given same sets of instruction

by the researcher.

Instruments

The instrument used for this study was designed by the researcher. An

achievement test including 20 multiple choice questions addressing the contents of

the lessons on optics. The students in group X was taught by using the computer

simulation method, the second group Y was exposed to traditional method of teaching

reflection of spherical mirrors for two consecutive weeks. The students’ scores for

pre-test and post test were collected and the hypotheses generated for the study were

analyzed.
Intervention

This study utilized a free online reflection/refraction simulation found in the

website https://simbucket.com/lensesandmirrors/ using ray diagrams to a new level in

order to teach students concepts in optics which is currently covered in Unit 2 of the

G10 Science Curriculum. The researcher and the students have access to concave

and convex lenses and mirrors, point light sources, culminated light sources, and

objects for showing real and virtual images with the click of a mouse. In this dynamic

environment, students are able to visualize and investigate the effects of changing

parameters, such as the focal length of a mirror or the location of a light source.

The lesson begun with students experimenting with a variety of mirrors,

noticing differences in the appearance of an image when viewed through mirrors of

various curvatures (Figure 1). After introducing the term focal length as a description

of how curved a mirror is, the question “What impact does focal length have on the

position and size of the image formed?” was posed. Initial qualitative observations

can be extended to a more in-depth quantitative analysis using the simulation.

Although doing so with the traditional approach of drawing ray diagrams is time-

consuming and tedious for students, this inquiry investigation is easily accomplished

with the computer simulation. Students made and test their predictions using the

Optics computer simulation, insert an object (shown as an arrow, candle or letter) and

a convex mirror on the workbench. Students’ attention were drawn on how the mirrors

reflects the light rays to form an image of the object. At this point, the students already

understood that the ray diagrams shown are only a simplification of reality and that

light given off by an object actually extends infinitely in all directions. The mirror can

be dragged to change the focal length. The size and location of the object and image
are measured by the program, allowing for both quantitative and qualitative analysis.

The investigation can be easily extended to include concave and convex lenses.

Figure 1. A screenshot of the online simulation on reflection and refraction using

mirrors and lenses.

Data Collection

The study was designed as a quantitative research which uses the pre-test

post-test control group design or also known as true experimental quantitative

research design. A twenty-item pretest questions was designed by the researcher so

as to diagnose the prior knowledge of the participants on optics and was given to both

the control group and the experimental group. Afterwhich, the use of the computer

simulation in solving problems involving mirror equation and ray diagramming was

introduced to the experimental group while the conventional chalk and talk method

was used for the control group. The conduct of the study lasted for two weeks wherein
an Optics-Simbucket Mirror Lab activity was given to each participant for both groups

while going through the different topics on optics. To finally determine the

effectiveness of the treatment/intervention used, a post-test (same questions as

pretest) was given to all the participants. The scores of both their pre-test and post-

test were noted and these data were coded, tallied, and were statistically treated using

the mean, standard deviation, and t-test of significant difference.

Data Analysis

The mean and the standard deviation were used to determine the level

of performance of the students while the t-test was employed to determine the

significant difference of the mean scores of their pre-test and post-test.

V. Results and Discussion

Statistical results of the achievement tests administered before the study and

after the study are provided in Table: 1, Table: 2, Table: 3 and Table: 4. In order to

investigate the prior knowledge of students, both the experiment and control groups

were administered pre-tests.

As indicated in Table 1, students’ prior knowledge measured through the

achievement tests did not differ significantly (t(100)= 1.72, p>0.05). In this respect, it

can be suggested that the prior knowledge levels of the experiment group and the

control group was equal at the inception. Hence, the null hypothesis is therefore

upheld. This implies that the two groups selected for the study were homogeneous

since there is no difference in their performance.

Table 1. Independent-samples t-test conducted with the pre-test results of the

experiment and control groups.

The mean of the students in the experiment group was 7.20, while the mean of

those in the control group was 7.74. The scores of the experiment and control groups

on the pre-test are illustrated in Figure 2 below:

 MEAN PRE-TEST SCORES OF EXPERIMENTAL
AND CONTROL GROUP

7.74
Score

7.2

Control Group EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

Groups

Figure: 2 Means of the experiment and control groups on the pre-test

The results of the independent-samples t-test comparing the experiment and

control groups in terms of the post-test results are provided in Table: 2 below:

Table 2. Independent-samples t-test conducted with the post-test results

of the experiment and control groups.
 As can be seen in Table 2, a statistically significant difference between the post-

tests scores of the experiment group and the control group was found (t(100)=7.83,

p<0.05). The experimental and the control groups were found with differences in the

analysis of their performance in favour of the experimental group. The total mean for

the treatment group (X) is 15.2 and conventional group (Y) is 12.74 showed that the

performance of experimental group was far better than the performance of

conventional group. By implication, the students that were taught with computer

simulation outperformed the students that were exposed to the traditional method of

teaching. This is an indication that the treatment given to the experimental group is

effective and responsible for the differences in the performance of students in favour

of the treatment class.

The mean post test scores of the students who were exposed to computer

simulated instruction (15.2) was significantly higher than that of the control group

(12.74) at a probability value of 5.7402E-12 which is less than the p-value of 0.05.

(See Figure: 3).

 MEAN POST TEST SCORES OF THE
EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP

15.2
15.5
15
14.5
14
SCORES

13.5 12.74
13
12.5
12
11.5
Control group Experimental group
GROUPS

Figure: 3 Mean scores of the experiment and control groups on the post-test

Findings of the study suggested that students in the experiment group who

were exposed to computer simulation instruction were more successful than the

control group students who were exposed to face-to-face instruction. This finding

supports the studies conducted by Chang (2002); Çekbas, Yakar, Yildirim and Savran

(2003); Gönen and Kocakaya (2005), and Hacker and Sova (1998). Through computer

simulations, students had the chance to conduct real-like experiments and see

physical facts, which can only be investigated in laboratory settings. The result of this

study also agrees with other studies assessing the impact of simulations on process

skill development, such as identifying variables, measuring, graphing, interpreting

data, and designing experiments which have shown computer simulations to be

equally as or more valuablethan traditional methods. For example, a study by Geban,

Askar, and Ozkan (1992) investigated the effects of a computer-simulated experiment

on chemistry achievement and process skills. The researchers found greater student

achievement with simulated labs than with hands-on labs.

 Overall, this study showed that interaction with computer simulations resulted

in measurable achievement gains and indicates that simulations are equally, if not

more, effective than traditional methods.

VI. Summary of Findings and Conclusion

Based from the results of this study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. There is no significant difference between the pre test scores of the students

taught with conventional and computer simulation for understanding

concepts in optics. This is shown by a computed t (100)= 1.72 which is less than

the t-critical for two-tailed test, t crit=1.98 and p>0.05. This implies that the two

groups selected for the study were homogeneous since there is no difference

in their performance.

2. There is a significant difference between the post test scores of students taught

with conventional and computer simulation for understanding concepts in

optics. This is shown by a computed t (100)=7.83 which is greater than the t-

critical for two-tailed test, t crit=1.98 and p<0.05. The experimental and the

control groups were found with differences in the analysis of their performance

in favour of the experimental group. The total mean for the treatment group

(X) is 15.2 and conventional group (Y) is 12.74 showed that the performance

of experimental group was far better than the performance of conventional

group. By implication, the students that were taught with computer simulation

outperformed the students that were exposed to the traditional method of

teaching. This is an indication that the treatment given to the experimental

group is effective and responsible for the differences in the performance of

students in favour of the treatment class.

VII. Recommendations

Based on the findings from this study, the following recommendations are hereby

offered:

A. Government should procure multimedia devices and organise seminars for

science teacher on the need to imbibe latest teaching culture.

B. Science teachers should incorporate the use of computer simulation

instruction (CSI) to complement their traditional chalk-talk method of

instructional delivery.

C. Science teachers should frequently use computer simulations during

instructional development, especially when it is inevitable.

D. School authorities should invite specialists (educational technologists,

instructional material technicians, computer experts, etc.) to assist science

teachers with their computer simulation softwares/applications that are relevant

to the subject.
VIII. Work Plan

2017 2018

TASKS

JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB

Writing of proposal

paper

Preparing the

instrumentation

and other

materials needed

for the study

Conduct of action

research

Data analysis

Writing of final

action research

paper
IX. Cost

Item/Materials Quantity Estimated

Amount (Php)

Bondpapers, 100 sheets 1,500.00

ink 1 set of ink

refill

Total Php 1,500.00

VII. References

Bayrak, C. (2008) Effects Of Computer Simulations Programs On University

Students’ Achievments In Physics. Turkish Online Journal of Distance

Education-TOJDE.October 2008 Volume: 9 Number: 4 Article 3

Cekbas, Y., Yakar, H., Yildirim, B. & Savran, A. 2003. Effect of Computer Assisted

Instruction on Students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technolagy

(TOJET),ISSN:1303-6521:2:4, Article 11.

Chang, C. Y. 2002. Does- computer-assisted instruction+problem solving= improved

science outcomes? A pioneer study. The Journal of Educational Research,

95(3), 143-150.

Geban, O., Askar, P., & Ozkan, I. 1992. Effects of computer simulations and prob-

lem-solving approaches on high school students. Journal of Educational

Research, 86, 5-10. doi:10.1080/00220671.1992.9941821

Gonen, S. & Kocakaya, S. 2005. Comparison of Attitudes Towards Physics and

Computer attitudes in High School First Graders According to two Different

InstructionalMethods. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17.

Gibbons, N.J., Evans, C., Payne, A. et al. (2004). Computer simulations improve

university instructional laboratories. Cell Biology Education, 3(4), 263–269

Hacker, R. G, & Sova, B. 1998. Initial Teacher Education: A Study of the Efficacy of

Computer Mediated Courseware Delivery in a Partnership Concept. British

Journal of Education Technology, 29 (4), 333–341.

Lazonder, A.W., Wilhelm, P., van Lieburg, E. (2009). Unraveling the influence of

domain knowledge during simulation-based inquiry learning. Instructional

Science, 37, 437–451.

McKagan, S.B., Handley, W., Pekins, K.K., Wieman, C.E. (2009). A research-based

curriculum for teaching of photoelectric effect. American Journal of Physics,

77(1), 87–94.

Pfefferová, M.(2015). Computer Simulations and their Influence on Students’

Understanding of Oscillatory Motion. Informatics in Education, 2015, Vol. 14,

No. 2, 279–289.DOI: 10.15388/infedu.2015.16 279

Randy L. Bell and Lara K. Smetana. (2015) .Using Computer Simulations to

Enhance Science Teaching and Learning. Researchgate.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265747655

Sarabando, C., Cravino, J.P., Soares, A.A. (2014). Contribution of a computer

simulation to students’ learning of the physics concepts of weight and mass.

Procedia Technology, 13, 112–121.

Stern, L., Barnea, N., Shauli, S. (2008). The effect of a computerized simulation on

middle school students’ understanding of the kinetic molecular theory. Journal

of Science Education and Technology, 17(4), 305–315.

Veermans, K., van Joolingen, W., de Jong, T. (2006).Use of heuristics to facilitate

scientific discovery learning in a simulation learning environment in a physics

domain. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 341–361.

Zacharia, Z., Anderson, O.R. (2003). The effects of an interactive computer-based

simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on

students’ conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics,

71(6). http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1119/1.1566427

Zacharia, Z.C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation:

an effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits.

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 120–132.

Záhorec, J., Hašková, A., and Munk, M.(2010) Impact of Electronic Teaching

Materials on Process of Education – Results of an Experiment. Informatics in

Education, 2010, Vol. 9, No. 2, 261–281 261

Other references:

K to 12 Science Curriculum Guide. Department of Education. January 2012

https://www.simbucket.com/simulation/lens-and-mirror-lab/

https://simbucket.com/lensesandmirrors/