THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING IN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN BOOK KEEPING AND ACCOUNTING IN SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS. A CASE STUDY OF IGBO ETITI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA

ATTENTION:

BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!

INFORMATION:

YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420

WHATSAPP US ON 08137701720

THE EFFECT OF COOPERATIVE LEARNING IN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN BOOK KEEPING AND ACCOUNTING IN SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS. A CASE STUDY OF IGBO ETITI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA

ABSTRACT

Multiple teaching methods are used by teachers in order to improve learning of students. The most popular is lecture method, while very effective is cooperative learning method. Later teaching method had been preferred for teaching science and languages as cited by previous research studies. However, in the subjects of social sciences and humanities, its importance cannot be ignored. Following study is an effort to determine effect of cooperative learning method on students’ achievement in subject of Education. Qusi experimental design, with pre and post test of control and experimental group was used to achieve target of the study. Sample of the study consisted of 63 female students enrolled in grade 12 of a public college. An achievement test was used as a pre-test, the students were than divided in experimental and control groups. Multiple cooperative learning activities were performed with experimental group by using three common methods of cooperative learning i.e., STAD, TGT and Jigsaw II. The control group was taught by lecture method only. After 8 weeks a post test was administered on both experimental and control group in order to identify difference in achievement. The independent sample t-test was used to measure the mean scores difference between achievement scores of control and treatment groups on pretest. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups (p=.825) leading to assumption that both groups were on equal level of achievement before intervention. Same test was applied to find out difference between two groups before and after intervention. The results showed that there was a significant difference in scores of control and experimental group in post-test. In addition to this paired sample t-test was conducted to compare the effect of intervention on achievement scores of experimental group. The results showed that there was significant difference between scores of experimental group before and after intervention (p=.000). It can be concluded from results that cooperative learning activities had a positive effect on academic achievement of students enrolled in the subject of Education. This study is a contribution in knowledge body of teaching methods for social sciences. This had clarified that cooperative learning activities are equally helpful for the subject that was considered truly a lecture subject. The teachers can use this teaching method in their classes.

Keywords: Cooperative learning, academic achievement, teaching methods

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

In the era what we call information society, one of the most important skills is cooperation. In early days, studying with someone else was defined as an indicator of dependency, but today learning together and asking for help is considered among the best strategies for learning to learn (Chen, 2002). Producing information, theorizing or developing models in a field requires more complicated information and skills. Therefore, common mind is better than the single best mind. The common mind is more effective for the mentioned novelties or, in other words, in creating acceptable change in society. All the systems from health to economics, law to education, information industry to the service industry consider cooperative working among priorities in order to keep up with the times and make a difference in th e society. The output of the education system provides the labor force input for other systems. For this reason, the efficiency and productivity of the education system is proportional to its ability to raise the desired labor force for other systems. Unde r these circumstances, cooperative working habit should be brought in to students at all levels of education systems (Slavin , 1987; Johnson & Johnson, 1999 ). Cooperative learning cannot be taught through verbal instruction. Students can adopt cooperative learning through a process that involves working together in groups, developing a product at the end and examining both the product and cooperative learning skills. “Cooperative learning” (CL) method emerges in the literature as a method that assists instr uctors in carrying out this process. CL emerges when students gather in order to reach a common goal (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Each member of the group reaches his goal only if all the other members reach their own learning goals (Deutsch, 1962). Acikgoz (2002) defines cooperative learning as working of students in small groups and helping each other in the learning process. There are certain principles and requirements for the implementation of CL. These are;

• Positive Interdependence: Each individual depends on the other members of the group. Each individual complements others.

• Individual Accountability: Individual accountability is the evaluation of each individual’s performance and effect of the result on individual and group success.

• Face to face interaction: Group members reach success by helping each other and sharing ideas. As face to face interaction increases in this process, the sense of responsibility and social solidarity increases.

• Social Skills: As the students are in a group in the cooperative learning, they acquire social skills better.

• Evaluation of the Group Processing: At the end of the group work, students gather

and discuss the productivity of the project and whether they have reached the

goals (Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 1998).

What makes CL strong in the literature is its strong theoretical foundation. The method is based on Bandura’s Social Dependency Theory, Behavioral Learning Theory (Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 1998) and Vygotsky’s (1978) “Zone of P roximal Development” theory. Social Dependency Theory assumes that the way to form social dependency is about how social dependency develops, how individual interacts and what the result will be as a result of the interaction. Accordingly, positive interde pendence (cooperative approach) results in such an interaction that the group members encourage, support and improve the efforts of the individuals. Behavioral Learning Theory focuses on the effect of group consolidation and rewards on learning. According to this theory, behaviors, which are rewarded externally, are repeated. While, Skinner (1985), one of the representatives of behavioral cult, focuses on the group coincidences, Bandura focuses on the imitation. Slavin (1987) has recently stated that extern al “group awards” are needed in order to motivate the individuals to learn in groups based on cooperative learning (Saban, 2005). According to the Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development Theory, a student can take his/her learning to the optimum level by a sking for help when he/she is stuck. The person to whom he asks for help may be his/her teacher or friend. It has been found out that CL has important effects on improving academic success of students (Hall, 1988; Tarim, 2003; Kolawole, 2007; Gok. Dogan, D oymus & Karacop, 2009; Ahmad & Mahmood, 2010, Capar, 2011; Parveen & Batool, 2012), developing desirable attitudes toward courses (Yavuz, 2007), providing motivation (Nichols & Miller, 1994; Margolis & McCabe, 2003; Salili & Lai, 2003; Kus, Filiz & Altun, 2014; Yoshida, Tani, Uchida, Masui & Nakayama, 2014;), adopting cooperative working habit (Rienties, Tempelaar, Bossche, Gijselaers & Segers, 2009), and improving favorable competition skills (Kong, Kwok & Fang, 2012) in studies from different fields. Alth ough there are many techniques in CL, Jigsaw and Team Game Tournament (TGT) techniques were used in this study. Jigsaw technique was developed by Aronson (2000). Students are divided into groups of 5 – 6 members in this technique. Each member works on his su bject and students from different groups working on the same subject gather and create expert groups. The subject is discussed in depth in the expert groups. Students learn the subject completely in the expert groups and teach their subject to other studen ts when they return to their original groups. Even if the students are graded individually, students need others for a good mark and therefore this technique requires cooperative working (Slavin, 1987; Arends, 1998; Aronson, 2000; Senemoglu, 2012). TGT tec hnique was developed by Slavin and Oickle (1981). After the teacher or students make the presentation related to the courses, students are divided into heterogeneous groups in this technique. After the students teach the subject to each other, students com pete with the students at the same level from other groups at the tournament table. The team points are calculated by summing the points of students. The groups with high points are rewarded (Slavin, 1995; Arends, 1998). It is stated that individuals have benefited from Science and Technology instruction in using these scientific process and principles for decision – making and in participating in scientific discussions affecting the society and developing their skills to producing ideas on a subject (Akcay & Yager, 2010). According to another approach, Science and Technology instruction is an easy and tangible instruction that should be conducted with proper method and techniques by taking the interests, needs, level of development, desires and environmental facilities of students (Hancer, Sensoy & Yildirim, 2003). As can be understood from the explanations, for an effective Science and Technology instruction, students’ sense of curiosity should be enhanced and an active environment in which students can disc over and produce information should be created. The complicated structure of the Science and Technology course requires cooperation for students to learn the subjects (Yagcı, Kaptı & Beyaztas, 2012). Moreover, implementation of cooperative learning method in the Science and Technology classes is advised by the Ministry of National Education (Ministry of National Education, 2005). It is thought that the use of a learning plan prepared in line with CL in the Science and Technology instruction provides student s with more efficient thinking and problem – solving skills and cooperative working habit, develops students cooperation skills, enables them to present more extensive studies by making use of their shared experiences and supports long – lasting learning by supporting peer learning. For this reason, the efficiency of CL implementation in teaching “Systems in our Body” unit is evaluated in this study. In this context, the purpose of the study is to determine the effects of teaching “Systems in Our Body” unit of Science and Technology course through CL method on students’ achievement and their view regarding the course. The research questions are:

1 – Is there a significant difference between the pre – test and post – test scores of students who studied the systems in our body unit of Science and Technology course based on cooperative learning method?

2 – How do students’ views on the systems in our body unit of Science and Technology course change through the cooperative learning method?

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Defining bookkeeping

Bookkeeping is an indispensable subset of accounting. Bookkeeping refers to the process of accumulating, organizing, storing, and accessing the financial information base of an entity, which is needed for two basic purposes:

Facilitating the day-to-day operations of the entity
Preparing financial statements, tax returns, and internal reports to managers

Bookkeeping (also called recordkeeping) can be thought of as the financial information infrastructure of an entity. The financial information base should be complete, accurate, and timely. Every recordkeeping system needs quality controls built into it, which are called internal controls.

Defining accounting

The term accounting is much broader, going into the realm of designing the bookkeeping system, establishing controls to make sure the system is working well, and analyzing and verifying the recorded information. Accountants give orders; bookkeepers follow them.

Accounting encompasses the problems in measuring the financial effects of economic activity. Furthermore, accounting includes the function of financial reporting of values and performance measures to those that need the information. Business managers, investors, and many others depend on financial reports for information about the performance and condition of the entity.

Accountants design the internal controls for the bookkeeping system, which serve to minimize errors in recording the large number of activities that an entity engages in over the period. The internal controls that accountants design are also relied on to detect and deter theft, embezzlement, fraud, and dishonest behavior of all kinds.

Accountants prepare reports based on the information accumulated by the bookkeeping process: financial statements, tax returns, and various confidential reports to managers. Measuring profit is a critical task that accountants perform — a task that depends on the accuracy of the information recorded by the bookkeeper. The accountant decides how to measure sales revenue and expenses to determine the profit or loss for the period.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

There have been a lot of comments in books, particularly those written in Europe and America, which confirmed cooperative learning to be an effective way to structure learning activities. But there is surprisingly very little research effort, particularly in Nigeria, that emphasized cooperative interaction in science and even less that focused on book keeping and accounting at the senior secondary school level. Furthermore, no studies to our knowledge had investigated the effect of cooperativ e learning and its interaction with sex and ability on science achievement and attitude among senior secondary school students in Nigeria. The purpose of this study, therefore, w as to specifically determine, among others, the effects of cooperative learning on students’ achievement in integrated science, students’ attitude toward their studies and to see if the effects were sex and ability- dependent. The statement of the problem, therefore, is; will the application of cooperative learning strategy in the teaching of book keeping and accounting produce differential achievement and attitude scores among senior secondary school s tudents generally and specifically among students of varying abilities and sex?

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficiency of learning plan implementation prepared with the cooperative learning method. In particular, the study addresses the effect of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and their views regarding the ‘Systems in Our Body’ unit of the 6th grade Science and Technology lesson. For this purpose, mixed method was used. The study is conducted in the second term of the 2013-2014 academic year, on a study group consisted of 7 girls and 13 boys, a total of 20 students of a private middle school in Istanbul.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study was carried out on university students to understand the effect of cooperative learning in student achievement in book keeping and accounting in senior secondary schools, the institution selected is higher institutions in igbo etiti local government area of Enugu State.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study reports the result of a quasi-experimental real-life intervention with cooperative learning in an undergraduate course. In-class participation and student approaches to learning were measured before and after the intervention to assess the impact on 140 students’ engagement levels. In addition, open-ended comments were analyzed, revealing what faculty adopting cooperative learning principles in higher education should be especially aware of.

LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The research was limited to the mentioned department since it has direct concern to the research topic. In summary this project work was faced with a number of restricting factors, which made the work impossible to get beyond this scope. The most pressing factors were:-

i. lack of finance

ii. Epileptic power supply

iii. Inadequate supply of data

iv. Inadequate time for the project work.

1.7. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This study was guided by the following research questions.

1. Is there any difference in achievement test scores between students instructed using cooperative learning strategy and those instructed using the traditional classroom teaching method?

2. Is there any difference in attitude scores between students instructed using cooperative learning strategy and those instructed using traditional classroom teaching method?

3. Is there any difference in achievement test scores between male and female students instructed with cooperative learning strategy?

4. Is there any difference in achievement test scores between high ability students taught with cooperative learning strategy and those taught with traditional classroom teaching method?

5. Is there any difference in achievement test scores between low ability students taught with cooperative learning strategy and those taught with traditional classroom teaching method?

6. Are there interaction effects among methods, sex and ability on achievement?

1.8. RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

From the research questions raised, five hypotheses were stated and tested at 0.05 level of significance.

Ho1: There is no significant difference in achievement test scores between students instructed with cooperative learning strategy and those taught using traditional classroom teaching method.

Ho2: There is no significant difference in attitude scores between students instructed with cooperative learning strategy and those taught using traditional classroom teaching method.

Ho3: There is no significant difference in achievement test scores between male and female students instructed with cooperative learning strategy.

Ho4: There is no significant difference in achievement test scores between students of varying abilities instructed with cooperative learning strategy and those taught with traditional classroom teaching method.

H05: There are no significant interaction effects among method, sex and ability on achievement.

HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)

After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to

08068231953 or 08168759420

(1) Your project topics

(2) Email Address

(3) Payment Name

(4) Teller Number

We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert

BANK ACCOUNTS

Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI

Account Number: 0046579864