Effect of Scaffolding Instructional Strategies on Pupils’ Attitude to Basic Science and Technology in Rivers State, Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effect of scaffolding instructional strategies on pupils’ attitude to Basic Science and Technology in public primary schools in Rivers State. Four purpose and four null hypotheses guided the study. Non-randomized pretest, posttest control group experimental design was adopted for the study. The population consisted of 42,409 basic four pupils; 147 pupils in the intact classes of the sampled schools using simple random sampling technique served as sample. The modified Fennema-Sherman Attitude Scale was used for data collection. The data was analyzed using Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). The findings of the study revealed that there is a significant difference in the Basic Science attitude mean score of pupils taught with modeling and cueing questions and those taught with conventional method; the Basic Science attitude mean scores of boys and girls, high achievers and low achievers taught with modeling and cueing questions do not differ significantly with those taught with conventional method; there is no significant interaction effect of treatment, gender and achievement levels on the attitude of pupils towards Basic Science and Technology (BST). Recommendations were made which include that scaffolding instructional strategy should be used in classroom teaching/learning interaction to enhance the teaching and learning of pupils as well as improve their attitude towards Basic Science and Technology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".