An Investigation of Some Factors Affecting Students' Attitudes Toward Laboratory Chemistry Peter Aklnsola Okebukofa Faculty of Education, Lagos State University, P.M.B. 1087, Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria The Dumose of this investieation was to examine a number of factors which affect students'attitudes toward chemistry lahoratory work. It is useful and important tostudy the attitudes of students toward chemistr; laboratory procedures as perceived by a sample of chemistry students and teachers. ~
Emerlmental Our sample was composed of 1,638 class-five (eleventh grade) chemistry students enrolled in 78 secondary schuols drawn from rural. wburban, and urban areas of Oyo Slate, Nigeria. Sevrntyeight teachers were also surveyed. Data were gathered by means of the Attitudes toward Chemistry Laboratory Work Scale (ACLWS),the Teachers' Laboratory Information and Attitude Questionnaire (TLIAQ), and the Students' Attitudes to Chemistry Questionnaire (SACQ). ACLWS. develooed and validated bv Hofstein. Ben-Zvi. and Samuel1 used to memure the attitudes of students toward lab-~~~~~~was ~~oratory chemistry. It is composed of tao sertiona. The first solirirs basic information such as student's sex, srhool location, and any physical handicap. Information also was collected on the proportion of time allocated for chemistry devoted to laboratory assignments, and the number of chemistry laboratory sessions performed within the past nine months. Section B is an attitude inventory of the Likert type consisting of 62 items. Sample items include: ~~
~
~~~~
~~~~
~~~~~~~
~~~~
~~
~~~~~~~~~~~
~~
~
~~
~
~
2) The words chemistry laboratory make me shiver. 18) When I am working in the chemistry laboratory I feel I am doing something valuable. 60) With the help of the laboratory chemistry comes alive. The internal consistency of ACLWS calculated es split-half reliability was 0.86. The Teachers' Laboratory Information and Attitude Questionnaire was used to solicit a varietv of information about teacher demographics and experience. Section H of this questionnaire sought informationon theavailability of laboratory space and materials. Section C was a 20-item attitude questionnaire which addressed the feelings of the teachers. Items on the scale include: 1) Laboratory periods are a waste of time to ehemistry students. 2)
Shortage of chemistry laboratory materials is no hindrance to effective practical work far a resourceful ehemistry teacher.
' Hofstein,A.:
Ben-Zvl, R.: Samuel, D. Sci. Educ. 1976, 60, 401. Kyle, C. W.: Penick, J. E.: Shymansky, J. A. J. Res. Sci. Teach.
1979,~12, 69. Drwa, C. A,: Anderson, R. D. J. Res. Scl. Teach. 1983, 20,467.
In Section D, teachers were asked to rank factors that they thought might affect students' attitudes toward chemistry laboratory assignments. These factors were shown during a pilot project to be the most imnortant and are listed in Tables 1and 2. The teachen were askedtdindicate the imnortance of each factor on a five-mint scale t~xtrrmelyimportant, important, fairly importnnl, nut very important, and unimportnnt). 'Cl.lAQ erhhited a cdfiuient of stability of 0.73 (test-retest). The Students' Attitudes to Chemistry Questionnaire was used to find out students' ratings of the factors (Section A) using the same response format as th; teachers. Section B was made up of 32 statements on a five-point Likert scale to find out the attitudes of students toward chemistry as a subject. A Cronbach alpha value of 0.89 ohtained during a field trial of SACQ provided evideye of a high degree of internal consistency and reliability. One hundred thirty second- and-third-year presemice chemistry teachers of Oyo State College of Education, Ilesa, Nigeria, used the same techniques to determine the factors affecting the attitudes of the l l t h grade chemistry students and their teachers in 90 secondary schools to which they had been assigned for a six-week pradice~~
~~~
~
~
tearhinrr " exareire. ~...
Datacollwtion in earhsrhool lasted fm twoweekr.Theprrservice tcacher(s) in cach school filled out Section B of TLIAQ to provide a cheek for the accuracy of the responses of the regular teachers. (No school where data was incomplete was included in the analysis.)
Results T h e mean ranks and rank order of factors affectine students' attitudes toward chemistry laboratory experiments are presented in Table 1.In the view of both the teachers and the students, as shown inTable 1,students'attitudes toward chemistry as a subject and students' participation in laboratory activities are the first and second factors in their effect on students' opinions of laboratory chemistry. Ranking l l t h and 12th, respectively, are availability of laboratory support personnel and school location. The rankings of the teachers agree well with those of the students in allbut ru,o cases. The result of a multiple-correlation analysis is reported in Table 2. It revrals that studcnts'attitudes toward chemistrv as a subject is most strongly correlated with positive attitude toward the laboratorv followed bv students' oartici~ationin laboratory activities- he time ailotted to laboratory activities also was found to be a strong correlate of students' positive attitudes toward the laboratory while the teaching experience of the chemistry teacher was not significant.
Volume 63 Number 6
June 1986
531
Table 1.
Factors Anecting Student's Annude toward Laboratory Chemistry
Factora 1) Students' attimes to chemistry as a subject 2) Studens participation in laboratory activities 3) Availability of chemistry laboratory materials 4) Teacher's anitude to chemistry laboratory work 5) Availability of laboratory working space 6) Time allotted to laboratory activities 7) Fear of expimion and ol d a m aging expansive equipment 8) Students' physical handicaps (pwr sense of smeli and/ or sight) 9) Teaching experience of lhe chemistry teacher 10) Sex of student 11) Availability of laboratory support personnel 12) Schwi location a
Teachen M~an Rank Rank Order
Multiple Correlation of Factors wnh Attitudes toward Practical Chemlsiry
Students Mean Rank OIder Rank
Factor
MultipieCDneiation Ccefficient
1) Students' annudes toward chemlsby as a subject 2) Students' participationin laboratory activities 3) Availability of chemistry laboratov materials 4) Teachers' anitudes to chemistry laboratory work 5) Time ailoned f a laboratory activities 6) Availability of laboratory working space 7) Availability of laboratory support personnel 8) Students physical handicaps (pow sense of slight andlw smell) 9) Sex of student 10) Fear of explosion and ol damaging expensive equipment 11) Teaching experience of ltm chemistry teach-
ff
0.83
69.85
0.81 0.73 0.69
66.42 53.22 48.56
0.68 0.64 0.55 0.32
46.11 41.63 30.23 10.41
0.32 0.30
10.12 9.36
0.15 (ns)
2.14
0.1 1 (ns)
1.26
er 12) Schwi location
6.9 7.0
10 11
7.9 8.1
10 11
7.3
12
9.0
12
nanked in wdsr 01 decreasing impatanoa
Dlscusslon
This studv led to the identification of 12 factors. which relate t o teacher, student, and lahoratory environment, that influence student attitudes. Thi-: analvsis revealed the multidimensional nature of the factors &d that some of these factors are more imoortant than others. Our data revealed that the attitude of the student toward chemistry as a suhiect is the most i m ~ o r t a n determinant t of the attitude toward the laborator$. One reason may be that the students in the sample chose chemistry as a suhject to he offered in the General Certificate of Education O-Level examination two years before the study was conducted and so are committed and well Dre~ared. ~tude&"participation in lahoratory activities was the second most positive factor. This finding corroborates previous research in which students' engagement in "hands-on" activities resulted in a more positive attitude toward scie n ~ e Doing .~ laboratory work may lead to improved skills, a more desirable attiand the acquired skills mav- orornote . tude toward such work. The location of the school and the experience of the chemistry teacher were not significantly correlated with students' attitudes toward the chemistry lahoratory. This information may he interpreted to mean that schools, regardless of their
532
Table 2.
Journal of Chemical Education
locations, may have other attributes (such as students with positive attitudes toward chemistry as a suhject, chemistry laboratories with ample materials, and chemistry lahoratories with spacious work areas) that have heen found to enhance oositive attitudes toward the chemistrv lab sessions. ~ h e ' f i n d i n of ~ sthis study, suggest that agreater degree of participation in laboratory work may produce more positiue attitudes toward the laboratory. While laboratory eauioment and materials may not he available in sufficient qiantities, being resourcefui is worthwhile. Our students should be more motivated to participate in and perform better in the lahoratory. The results of this study would seem t o indicate two areas for further research. First, an examination of the factors that can lead to the development of favorable attitudes toward lahoratorv chemistrv" hv " teachers should he undertaken. Second, we need to know how students' interactions during the lahoratorv can he structured to i m ~ r o v etheir attitudes toward their ihemistry laboratory proj&. Acknowledgment
Grateful thanks are extended to S. T. Bajah, M. B. Ogunniyi and G. 0. M. Onwu, all of the University of Ihadan, for various roles in carrying out this work. I would also like to acknowledge the contributions of the following to this study: E. A. Joju, the chemistry students of Oyo State College of Education, Ilesa, 'Folahi Olumide, PA1 Ohanya, I. 0 . Osafehinti, E. 0. Oduhunmi, N. C. Nwahoku, and 0. Oluhajo, all of Lagos State University.
