THE IMPACT OF ACTIVE AND CONTEXT-BASED,
TEACHING OF PERIODICITY ON STUDENT
PERFORMANCE AND INVOLVEMENT
Reynaldo R. Ibasco
St. John’s Wort Montessori
School
Antipolo City, Rizal
632-9944281
rt3jibasco@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
The BEC curriculum seeks to develop learners who are capable of
critical and creative thinking, self-regulated learning and are able
to apply knowledge to real life in their immediate context and the
future. Teaching that encourages higher order thinking and
interactive learning is still wanting in many classrooms today.
Traditional lecture format and textbook dependent teaching is
more the norm. The present study shows the impact of active and
context-based teaching of periodicity in the performance and
involvement of students in a high school chemistry class. Two
classes of about 20 students each were exposed to two kinds of
methods of teaching: one class (the control group) was taught the
concept of periodicity using the traditional lecture and textbook
based method. The other class (treatment group) was taught the
same concept using a context-based and interactive method of
teaching. A pretest-posttest method was used to measure the
performance of the students for statistical comparison. A student
survey was conducted and the subject teacher was interviewed at
the end to assess the involvement of the students. The test score of
the treatment group showed statistically significant improvement
compared to the control group. The survey and interview gave
some evidence that students in the treatment group showed greater
involvement than the control group. The result of the study was
significant in that it showed that active and context-based teaching
helps to improve student performance and involvement.
Furthermore, it should encourage teachers to develop alternative
methods to teaching chemistry. Lastly, it also helped to offer
insights what may be done to develop higher order thinking
among students studying HS chemistry.
Categories and Subject Descriptors
G.3 [Mathematics of Computing] Probability and Statistics –
miscellaneous (OpenStat)
Conference’04,
Permission to make
Monthdigital
1–2, or
2004,
hardCity,
copies
State,
of all
Country.
or part of this work for
personal or2004
Copyright classroom
ACM use1-58113-000-0/00/0004…$5.00.
is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that
copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy
otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists,
requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
General Terms
Design, Documentation, Measurement, Reliability, Performancee
Independent, Experimentation
Keywords
Chemistry, Context-based, Active, Involvement, Pretest, Posttest,
Gain scores
1. INTRODUCTION
The science teaching in the country has been under close scrutiny
since the coming out of the results of international comparative
studies of TIMSS where the Philippines was among the lowest:
41st among 42 in 1995, 36th among 38 in 1999 and 42nd among 45
countries in 2003 (1). Then there is the dismal performance of
students in the National Achievement Test. The national mean
score in Science was only 48.7% in the 1997 National Secondary
Achievement Test (NSAT). Almost 10 years after, the mean score
was even worse at 38% in 2006 (2,3). There was an apparent
improvement in the scores by 2007 (42%) and 2008(46.7%) but
these tests were taken by 2nd Year students (4). A study shows that
Filipinos have a low level of scientific literacy and a large
percentage cannot seem to apply concepts to real life (5). Some
important questions being asked are: “Are schools providing the
necessary inputs for students to attain higher achievement in
science? What teaching-learning practices could help improve
achievement in science? (6). The Philippine 2002 BEC curriculum
seeks to develop learners who are capable of critical and creative
thinking, self-regulated learning and are able to apply knowledge
to real life in their immediate context and the future (7,8).
Unfortunately, many teachers still resort to lecture even though
studies show that it does not promote higher order thinking (9).
One method thought to improve science teaching and has gained a
lot of attention over the years is interactive context-based
teaching.
1.1 Active Teaching and Learning
Active learning is used interchangeably with “experiential
learning”, “learning by doing” and “hands-on learning” and is
associated with a constructivist-progressivist view of learning
where the learner actively participates in constructing knowledge
as opposed to simply being passive (10, 11). An active approach
to teaching and learning involves the use of strategies for
maximizing student involvement such that students are involved
in more than just listening (12). There is less emphasis on simply
transmitting information; rather there is more emphasis on
developing students' skills in higher-order thinking (analysis,
synthesis, evaluation). The students are engaged in activities (e.g.,
reading discussing, writing), and greater emphasis is placed on
students' exploration of their own attitudes and values (13).
Learning is also viewed as a social process hence the emphasis on
group work or cooperative learning (14). Furthermore, in active
teaching and learning, the teacher’s role is less than that of a
transmitter of knowledge to one more of a guide and support (15,
16). There had been several efforts to make learning chemistry
interactive as opposed to the traditional lecture-based method.
Some of these efforts include playing/solving chemistry-oriented
games and puzzles (17, 18); discussing current chemistry events
as gleaned from news media (19); exploring the chemistry
involved in popular books (20–21), movies (22), and television
shows (23); having students write chemical fantasy essays (24),
brief reports on relevant chemicals (25), essays involving
chemistry-related mysteries (26), or even chemical limericks (27);
conducting debates (28) or trials (29) in class; stopping class in
mid-lecture for assessment, feedback, or news breaks (30); having
students participate in role-playing activities (31); and
incorporation of current research topics into the lecture (32).
Another approach is to use real-world examples in the classroom
to illustrate the relevance of chemistry to students’ everyday lives.
(33-36).
1.2 Context-based Teaching
Context-based teaching is an approach wherein context either
precedes or follows concepts (37). In science, context-based
teaching has been taken to be linked or allied closely with STS or
Science-Technology-Sociey approach since both emphasize the
relevance and application of science in the everyday life of the
learner (38). Like active teaching and learning context-based
approach is characterized by a constructivist/progressivist view, a
self-directed, student-centered approach where the teacher plays
the role more of a guide and provider of resources and scaffolder
of learning processes (15, 16, 39).
In context-based approach to science teaching, learning is situated
or put in a context in which scientific concepts are developed. The
teaching unit is typically initiated and developed around a single
real-world topic (e.g. global warming or solar energy) or a
question or an issue that is relevant to the students for themselves
as individuals, for their immediate community or society in which
they live (e.g. Is the hydrogen car the car of the future? How
much do I know about the food I eat?) (40-43).
Some of the curricula which uses the context-based approach
include Chemie im Kontext in Germany (16), ChemCom in the US
(44), and Salters Advanced Chemistry in the United Kingdom
(45). Studies about the effects of these active and context-based
methods show varying results. In the United Kingdom, one study
showed little difference between what students learned using
Salters approach and what students learned in a more traditional
or conventional way although students in context-based courses
seemed to enjoy the course more and realized the relevance of
chemistry to their lives more than students in a traditional, course
(46-48). A study in the United States showed that students taking
up ChemCom, a context-based high school chemistry curriculum,
performed better than students in traditional courses on
assessments that tested for both chemistry knowledge and ability
to apply that knowledge (49).
This study seeks to add more evidence on the impact of active
context-based teaching on the performance and involvement of
students. More particularly, this study looked into the question:
Does active and context–based teaching of periodicity enhance
student performance and involvement? My hypothesis is that
active and context-based teaching of periodicity can enhance the
performance and involvement of students. A quasi-experimental
design involving high school students was developed and
conducted.
2. METHODS
2.1 Study Demographics
The participants are two intact sections of high school students in
a small non-science and private high school. The comparison or
control group consisted of 21 students, 15 male and 6 female. The
treatment group consisted of 21 students, 12 male and 9 female.
The assigning of which is the treatment group and which is the
comparison group was arbitrary.
2.2 Treatment
The two groups or sections studied periodicity for four sessions,
consisting of a total of 290 minutes. The comparison group was
taught using the traditional lecture-based and textbook dependent
approach. There was no mention of any real-world uses and
application of the elements and their periodic properties. Board
exercises and seatwork were conducted during each session.
The treatment group was taught using active and context-based
approach. The specific context used dealt with the question,
“What are the common, everyday uses of the elements?” The
treatment group worked in small groups throughout the duration
of the experiment. The chairs were also rearranged to
accommodate the groupings and the group activities. Group
activities included games, brainstorming, collage-making, short
skit/role-playing, and experiments. Other class activities included
board exercises, seatwork and discussion. A research homework
about industrial uses of elements was assigned, too.
In the first session with the treatment group, I started the class by
dividing the class into groups. Each group was asked to form as
many English or Tagalog words using the symbols of the elements
in the allotted time. The second learning task was to come up with
as many uses of chemicals found in their homes and identify the
elements found in each. As metallic property, atomic and ionic
size trends were discussed, the practical uses of elements used to
illustrate trends were embedded into the discussion. In their
“group huddle”, I asked the students to study the atomic diagrams
(planetary model) of the given elements and explain the trends.
They were supposed to arrange the elements according to some
prescribed order in terms of their metallic property, atomic and
ionic sizes. I asked each group to explain why they arranged the
elements the way they did. I discussed some of the
misconceptions and proceeded to give additional examples,
exercises and seatwork. A research homework about industrial
uses of elements was given at the end.
During the second session the topic was on electronegativity,
electron affinity and ionization potential. At the beginning of the
class, I asked a few students to share briefly about their research
homework. I then directed students to post on the walls their
output for the homework. In the lesson proper, I asked volunteers
to come and help me create a “human model” of electronegativity. 4.2 Post Survey
I then asked the different groups to come up with their own The result of the survey is summarized in Table 2 which basically
human model of electron affinity and ionization potential. Each shows that the treatment group rated Items 2, 3, 5 and 6 higher
had to explain to the rest why they have chosen to portray the than the comparison group did.
periodic property the way they did. I clarified some of the
apparent misconceptions and proceeded to give additional
examples, exercises and seatwork. At the end of the class, I shared
about practical uses of ions in the human body and industry.
Table 1. Mean Scores for the Pretest and Posttest
On the third session, the students performed, by group, simple No. Mean Mean Mean
experiments about ions and activity of metals. After a brief Group of (SD) (SD) (SD)
discussion, I had them play a simple game about periodic trends. Compared students p-value p-value p-value
At the end of the class I entertained a few questions, then I t-value t-value t-value
reminded them of the quiz the following day.
Pre-test Posttest Gain
3. DATA COLLECTION AND Score
ANALYSIS Comparison 21 0.81(0.81) 4.67(2.13) 3.86(2.26)
To measure the performance or achievement, a pretest-posttest Treatment 21 1.05(0.59) 6.62(1.91) 5.57(2.09)
was conducted. Students took a 15-item pretest of which 8 items p = 0.28 p= 0.0033 p= 0.015
were tagged. These 8 items cover periodic trends: atomic size, t=-1.098 t=-3.213 t=-2.546
ionic size, metallic property, electronegativity, electron affinity
and ionization potential. The other 7 items were about concepts Male (T) 12 1.17(0.58) 6.42(2.39) 5.25(2.56)
the chemistry teacher discussed with them already. The test was Female (T) 9 0.89(0.60) 6.89(1.05) 6.00(1.22)
validated by the chemistry teacher and was based on standard
p= 0.13 p= 0.42 p= 0.24
exercises found in typical high school chemistry textbooks (51,
t=1.538 t=-0.825 t=-1.212
52). The pretest was administered to all 42 students of the two
sections during the first class session. A 25-item posttest was
given during the fourth class session to all 42 students. The 8 Female (C) 6 0.67(0.52) 5.17(1.33) 4.50(1.38)
tagged questions were repeated on the posttest. The other items Female (T) 9 0.89(0.60) 6.89(1.05) 6.00(1.22)
covered periodic trends as well but were not present in the pretest. p= 0.46 p= 0.026 p= 0.056
t=-0.754 t=-2.663 t=-2.159
Students from both sections also took a 7-item survey (5: Strongly
Agree; 1: Strongly Disagree) at the last session after the posttest.
The survey looks into their perception of the manner by which I
taught the class. The teacher was also interviewed regarding her Table 2. Mean Ratings of Post Survey*
observations of the students from both classes, particularly about T C M F
Survey Items (Std) (Std) (Std) (Std)
the involvement or participation of students during the class.
p-value p-value
A variety of t-tests were performed to determine whether there is 1. The topic was 4.31 4.40 4.33 4.25
a statistically significant difference between the results of the interesting to me. (0.48) (0.51) (0.50) (0.50)
pretest and posttest of the comparison and treatment group. The 0.635 0.795
pretest and posttest scores of the male and female students from 2. I enjoyed the 4.77 3.61 4.67 4.88
the treatment group were also compared and so were the scores of activities done during (0.44) (1.61) (0.50) (0.35)
the female students from the treatment group to the scores of the the class. 0.008 0.328
female students from the comparison group. The result of the 1
survey was also analyzed using t-test to determine any statistically 3. The activities helped 4.53 3.56 4.56 4.50
significant differences in the perception of the two groups about me to understand the (0.51) (1.26) (0.53) (0.53)
the way the class was conducted. In all these, a confidence level concepts. 0.021 0.819
of p ≤ 0.05 was chosen for analysis by independent samples t-test, 6
two-tailed using manual calculation and checked by a Free 4. The class helped me 4.20 4.24 4.25 4.14
Software called OpenStat. to be able to communi- (0.41) (0.75) (0.46) (0.38)
cate the concepts about 0.851 0.621
4. RESULTS periodicity
4.1 Pretest and Posttest 5. I enjoyed the way the 4.61 4.00 4.70 4.50
The mean pretest score of the treatment group was higher than the lessons were discussed. (0.50) (1.15) (0.48) (0.53)
comparison group, 1.05 and 0.81, respectively. The mean posttest 0.045 0.420
score of the treatment group was also higher than the comparison 0
group, 6.62 and 4.67, respectively. The gain scores of both groups 6. The class helped me 4.53 1.42 4.44 4.62
follow the same trend. These are summarized in Table 1, along to know the practical (0.51) (0.51) (0.53) (0.52)
with the standard of deviation (SD) and the results of t-tests. uses of the elements. <0.001 0.491

7. I understood most of 4.21 4.11 4.18 4.25

 the concepts discussed (0.42) (0.68) (0.41) (0.46)
in class. 0.597 0.737

Legend: T: Treatment; C: Comparison; M: Male/Treatment; F:

Female/Treatment *NOTE: Rating of 3 or N was excluded

4.3 Teacher Interview

The significant responses from the subject teacher at the end
included:
“Students from the [treatment group] look like they enjoyed the
class”;
“Students from the [treatment group] were very much involved
and participative”;
“The games and activities were very helpful”;
“There were minimal disruptive behaviors”;
“I also learned some creative ways to teach my class”.

5. DISCUSSION
5.1 Pretest and Posttest Scores
The posttest mean scores showed a siginificant difference at the p
≤ 0.05 level and even at the p< 0.01 level. The treatment group
scored an average of 1.95 points higher than the comparison
group. The gain scores of the treatment group showed an average
of 1.71 points higher than the comparison group. This is
statistically significant at the p ≤ 0.05 level and almost at the p<
0.01 level. This shows that active and context-based teaching
helped to improve the performance of students. Studies using the
ChemCon curriculum in the US showed the same conclusion –
students performed better in an active and context-based teaching.
Students emerged with a better understanding of chemistry and
outperformed students taught in a passive and traditional
environment (44, 49). Although other studies show little or no
effect of using active and context-based teaching in the
performance of students (46, 47), the apparent impact on the
performance in the current study and others as well is consistent
with Gardner’s view of multiple intelligences (53).
According to Gardner, students learn in many ways. Furthermore,
he believes that no one style is more superior to others; each
contributes to the process of effective learning. Active and
context-based teaching enhances learning in that it encompasses
all the learning styles (53). Brown and associates argued also that
knowledge is situated being in part a product of the activity,
context, and culture in which it is developed and used (54). They
point to the fact that the context strongly influences what
knowledge is acquired and which competencies are developed.
Active and context-based teaching enhances learning by
presenting concepts in the context of relationships that are
familiar to the student (53).
5.2 Gender Aspects
There are no significant statistical differences in the mean scores
(pretest, posttest and gain scores) of the boys and girls in the
treatment group. It can be said therefore that the significant
difference in the scores between the treatment and comparison
groups is basically due to the methodology, not gender. It can also
be said that both boys and girls in the treatment group responded
positively to active and context-based teaching.
There are also no significant differences in the scores of the girls
from the treatment and the comparison groups.
5.3 Post Survey
The are significant differences in the perception of students from
the treatment and comparison groups about the way the class was
conducted. The mean ratings for survey Items 2 and 5 showed that
students from the treatment group enjoyed the class more than the
students from the comparison group. The mean ratings are
statistically significant at the p< 0.01 level for Item 2 and at the p
≤ 0.05 level for Item 5. This is consistent with other studies which
showed that students in context-based classes seemed to enjoy the
class more and realized the relevance of chemistry to their lives
more than students in a traditional, class (46, 47). This affective
impact contributes to enhancing the motivation of the students
towards the lessons thus increasing their involvement and
participation (48). This can be supported by the perception of the
subject teacher towards the end of the experiment.

The rating of the treatment group for Item 6 is clearly

significantly higher. This is in accordance to the goal of making
the practical uses of the elements as the context for the series of
lessons on periodicity. Except for a bonus question about practical
uses of the elements in the posttest, there was no mention of such
in the comparison group. In contrast the treatment group received
a lot of “exposures” about the uses of the elements throughout the
4 days.

The lower rating of the treatment group for Item 1 seems to

contradict their rating for Items 2, 5 and 6. This may be explained
by noting that perhaps Item 1 was interpreted by the students to
mean their interest on the topic of periodicity. The topic itself may
not be that interesting but nevertheless the students enjoyed the
way the class was conducted. The topic of periodicity may not be
that interesting; however, the students still found the uses of the
elements fascinating.

The difference in the mean ratings for Item 3 between the

treatment and comparison groups is statistically significant at the
p ≤ 0.05 level. This can be interpreted that the active and context-
based methodology helped in the conceptual understanding of
periodicity among students in the treatment group. This may
account for the higher gain scores of the group. The context and
the activities were designed to help students understand the
concepts. According to Ronald A. Berk (55) the only way to get In summary, the present study showed that:
100% retention of information is by: " ... hearing, seeing, doing,
smelling, feeling, tasting, inhaling, injecting and purchasing on (1) Active and context-based teaching enhances the performance
credit ... " The diagram below illustrates how learning is enhanced of students.
as the students become more involved with the learning process (2) Active and context-based teaching enhances the interest,
(active): motivation and involvement of the students.

5.3 Recommendations
The results of the study are encouraging and should spur science
teachers to pursue developing teaching materials, units or even
curricula that reflect active and context-based approach. There is
really strong evidence from the study that active and context-
based approach encourages higher thinking among the students.
Perhaps though, more specific studies can be done to measure the
extent and how this takes place. Some questions are worth
pursuing also to make the impact of the study more relevant? Are
the students experiencing a need to know such that they constantly
experience the relevance of what they are learning? Are the
context chosen really relevant and meaningful to the students, not
just the teachers? One limitation of the study is that the number of
students involved was rather small. The study needs to be
conducted to include more classes in more schools. The lesson
plans need to be standardized to make the treatment consistent.
With greater number, other statistical means can be employed to
make the analysis more powerful. There is also a need to think
about the development of teachers to be able to teach using active
and context-based approach.

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I especially thank Miss Edlyn de la Cruz (St. John’s Wort
Montessori School of Antipolo) for allowing me to conduct my
study to her classes and Mrs. Thessa de la Cruz, the Principal for
permitting me to conduct my study in their school. I also thank
my wife, Terry and my sons for their understanding and support
as I was doing the paper. I thank God more than anyone else for
the strength and wisdom He gave me in completing this research
paper.
7. REFERENCES
[1] Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study 2007
Results. http://nces.ed.gov/timss/.
[2] Antonio E. Batomalaque Basic Science Development
Program of the Philippines for International Cooperation.
http://www.criced.tsukuba.ac.jp/pdf/09_Philippines_Antonio
.pdf
[3] Factsheets 2006, Department of Education.
http://www.deped.gov.ph/
[4] Factsheets 2009, Department of Education.
http://www.deped.gov.ph/
[5] UP NISMED Scientific, Technological, and Environmental
Literacy Study, 2005.
[6] Country Analysis Profile: Philippines, An Analysis of
Learning Outcomes in Math and Science Among 13 Year
Olds in the Philippines.
http://www.adb.org/Education/philippines-country-
analysis.pdf
[7] 2002 Basic Education Curriculum, Pasig City, Metro Manila,
Department of Education.
[8] 2002 Basic Education Curriculum Secondary Level Primer,
Pasig City, Metro Manila, Department of Education.
[9] Zoller, U. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 195-197.
[10] Hendrikson, Leslie. Active Learning. ERIC Clearinghouse
for Social Studies/Social Science Education.1984 ED
253468.
[11] Doll, R.C. Curriculum Improvement, 9th ed.; Boston: Allyn
and Bacon, 1996.
[12] Meyers, C. and Jones, T. 1993. Promoting Active Learning:
Strategies for the College Classroom. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publisher.
[13] Bonwell, C. C., and Eison, J. A.1991. Active Learning:
Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher
Education Report No. 1. ED340272.
[14] Resnick, L. Shared Cognition: Thinking in Social
Practice. In Perspectives on Socially Shared
Cognition, Resnick, L., Levine, J., Teasley, S.,
Eds.; American Psychological Association:
Washington, DC, 1991; pp 1–20
[15] Dubs, R. Zeitschrift für Berufs- und
Wirtschaftspädagogik 1999, 95, 163–167.
[16] Nentwig, P. M., Demuth, R., Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C., and
Ralle, B. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 1439-1444.
[17] Russell, J. V. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 481-
484; this reference contains an annotated
bibliography of many published and commercial
games.
[18] Subramaniam, R.; Goh, N. K.; Chia, L. S. J.
Chem. Educ.
1999, 76, 484–488. Granath, P. L.; Russell, J.
V. J. Chem.
Educ. 1999, 76, 485–486. Russell, J. V. J. Chem.
Educ. 1999,
76, 487–488. Deavor, J. P. J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73,
430.
Tejada, S.; Palacios, J. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72,
1115–1116.
Most, C. Jr. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 1039–1040.
Scarpetti, D.
J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 1027–1028. DeMeo, S. J.
Chem. Educ.
1991, 68, 114–115. Helser, T. L. J. Chem. Educ.
1989, 66, 980.
Stenz, J. C. J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65, 791–792.
Evans, M. H.
J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62, 1103. Walker, N. J. Chem.
Educ. 1982, 59, 1026.
[19] Myers, R. S. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 769–770.
Fahrenholtz, S. R. J. Chem. Educ. 1989, 66, 217.
Greenberg, F. G. J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62, 227.
DeLorenzo, R. J. Chem. Educ. 1982, 59, 531–532.
Mammano, N. J. J. Chem. Educ. 1980, 57, 286–
287.Kolb, K. E.; Taylor, M. A. J. Chem. Educ.
1980, 57, 20–21.
[20] Southward, R. E.; Hollis, W. G. Jr.; Thompson, D.
W. J. Chem.Educ. 1992, 69, 536–537.
[21] Last, A. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 206–208.
[22] Goll, J. G.; Woods, B. J. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76,
506–508.
Hollis, W. G. Jr. J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 61–62.
[23] Hudson, R. L. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64,
1039–1040.
[24] VanOrden, N. J. Chem. Educ. 1990, 67,
1052.
[25] Bunyan, E. L. S. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63,
858.
[26] DeLorenzo, R. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 503.
DeLorenzo, R.
J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 1042.
[27] Williams, F. D. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 1123–1124.
[28] Singh, B. R. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 432–434.
Streitberger, H. E.J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65, 60–61.
[29] Jones, M. A. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 537.
[30] Olmsted, J. A. III. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76,
525–527.
[31] Grannas, A. M. and Lagalante, A. F. J. Chem.
Educ. 2010, 87, 416-418.
[32] Holme, T. A. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 919–
921.
[33] Singh, B. R. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 1219–
1220. Scharberg, M. A.; Cox, O. E.; Barelli, C. A.
J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 869–870.
[34] Stein, A. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 788–790.
[35] White, M. A. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 1064.
[36] Hoyt, W. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 322.
Fruen, L. J. Chem.
Educ. 1992, 69, 737–740. Mahaffy, P. G. J. Chem.
Educ. 1992,69, 52–56. Sae, A. S. W. J. Chem. Educ.
1990, 67, 895–896.
[37] De Jong, O. Context-based Chemical Education: How to
Improve it? Paper based on the plenary lecture presented at
the 19th ICCE, Seoul, Korea, 12-17 August 2006.
http://old.iupac.org/publications/cei/vol8/0801xD
eJong.pdf.
[49] Sutman, F. X.; Bruce, M. H. J. Chem. Educ.
1992, 69, 564–567.
[50] Endaya, R. R., Osorio, E. C., Franco, A. A., and Romero, D.
L. Interactive Chemistry. ICS Publishing, Inc. 2nd ed. 2007
[51] Punzalan, A. E. Exploring Science and Technology –
Chemistry. Diwa Scholastic Press, Inc., 1st ed. 2008
[52] Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple
Intelligences.New York: Basic Books, 1983, 4-6.
[53] Villalino, F. Context-based Teaching in Science: Bringing
Life to Science. 8th Conference of the Philippine School
Overseas., May 2009.
[54] Brown, J., A. Collins, and P. Duguid. 1989. Situated
Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational
Researcher 18 (1): 32–42.
[55] Berk, R. A. Professors Are From mars. Students Are From
Snickers. Mendota Press, 1998.
[56] http://www.richdad.com/Resource/Image/ConeofLearning.jp
g

[38] Bennet, J. 2005. Bringing Science to Life:

The Research Evidence on Teaching Science in
context. York, UK. University of York,
Department of Education Studies.
[39] Greeno, J. G.; Moore, J. L.; Smith, D. R.
Transfer of Situated Learning. In Transfer on
Trial: Intelligence, Cognition, and Instruction,
Dettermann, D. K., Sternberg, R. J., Eds.; Ablex:
Norwood, MA, 1993; pp 99–167.
[40] Gutwill-Wise, J. J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78,
684–690.
[41] Stout, R. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1301–
1302.
[42] Trogler, W. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 973–
976.
[43] Williams, D. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 971–
973.
[44] American Chemical Society. ChemCom:
Chemistry in the Community, 2nd ed.;
Kendal/Hunt: Dubuque, IA, 1993.
[45] Hill, G.; Holman, J. Chemistry in Context, 5th
ed.; Nelson Thornes: Cheltenham, UK, 2000.
[46] Ramsden, J. M. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1997, 19,
697–710.
[47] Eijkelhof, H.; Lijnse, P. Int. J. Sci. Educ.
1988, 10, 464–474.
[48] Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., and Lubben, F. A
Systematic Review of the Effects of Context-
based and Science-Technology-Society(STS)
Approaches in the Teaching of Secondary
Science, Department of Educational Studies:
Research Paper 2005/02.