Impact of Game-Based and Think-Pair-Share Pedagogies on Teacher Trainees’ Performance in Science

Joseph Parker

doi:10.18535/ijsrm/v10i1.el07

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of game-based and think-pair-share pedagogies on teacher trainees’ performance in science. This study adopted an action research design. The study was carried out in Enchi College of Education in the Western North Region of Ghana. Stratified, simple random and systematic sampling techniques were used to select 80 respondents (40 males and 40 females) for the study. The instruments used for the data collection were test. The findings of the study revealed that, the mean value of post-test and pre-test results level 100 respondents exposed to game-based pedagogy differ significantly. The findings of the study again revealed that, the mean value of post-test and pre-test results level 100 respondents exposed to think-pair-share pedagogy differ significantly. This implies that, the game-based pedagogy and think-pair-share pedagogy had impact on teacher trainees’ performance in science. It was therefore recommended that creative approaches such as game-based pedagogy and think-pair-share pedagogy should be adopted by science tutors in Enchi College of Education for effective teaching and learning of science.

Keywords

game-basedthink-pair-sharepedagogystrategycreativity

References

Alhassan, S. (2006). Modern approaches to research administration for research students. Amakom-Kumasi: Payless Publication. .Google Scholar ↗
Babbie, E. R. (2010). The practice of social research (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage.Google Scholar ↗
Baleghizadeh, S. (2010). The effect of pair work on a word-building task. Elt Journal, 64(4), 405-413.Google Scholar ↗
Best, K., & Khan, S. (2005). Real world research. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar ↗
Bhoopathi, P., Sheoran, R., & Välimäki, M. (2006). Educational games for mental health professionals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2(2), 23-33.Google Scholar ↗
Castillo, E. (2001). Maximizing serendipity in fair-division algorithms: The maximal serendipity method. (Doctoral dissertation), St. Mary's University of San Antonio, Texas).Google Scholar ↗
Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar ↗
Fitzgerald, D. (2013). Employing think–pair–share in associate degree nursing curriculum. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 8(3), 88-90.Google Scholar ↗
Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2012). Learning, attentional control, and action video games. Current Biology, 22(6), R197–R206.Google Scholar ↗
Hughes, J. (1999). Altered states: Creativity under the influence. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.Google Scholar ↗
Ismail, S. (2006). Political life in Cairo's new quarters: Encountering the everyday state. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar ↗
Jebur, M. S., Jasim, H. H., & Jaboori, H. R. (2012). The effect of using think-pair-share technique on EFL students' achievement in the course of general English. Journal of College of Basic Education, 15(80), 823–838.Google Scholar ↗
Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2009). Not just for fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers and Education, 52, 800-810.Google Scholar ↗
Lakshmi, H. (2007). Translation studies: Theory and practice. Hyderabad: Booklinks Corp.Google Scholar ↗
McKeachie, W. J., & Svinicki, M. (2006). McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research and theory for college and university teachers (12th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar ↗
Roswati, Z. M., & Radjab, D. (2014). Improving students’ speaking skill by using think-pair-share strategy at the second semester of Syariah Class A at language center of UinSuska Riau. English Language Teaching, 2(1), 1–12.Google Scholar ↗
Ruiz-Primo, M. (2011). Informal formative assessment: the role of instructional dialogues in assessing students’ learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 15-24.Google Scholar ↗
Siegler, R. S., & Ramani, G. B. (2008). Playing linear numerical board games promotes low-income children's numerical development. Developmental Science, 11(5), 655-661.Google Scholar ↗
Sumarsih, M., P. & Sanjaya, D. (2013). TPS as an effective technique to enhance the students’ achievement on writing descriptive text. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 106–113.Google Scholar ↗
Utama, I. P., Marhaeni, A., & Putra, I. N. (2013). The effect of think pair share teaching strategy to students’ self-confidence and speaking competency of the Second Grade Students of SMPN 6. SINGARAJA e-Journal of Postgraduate Program, University of Education, Ganesha, English Study Program of Education, 1, 1–10.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-1] Alhassan, S. (2006). Modern approaches to research administration for research students. Amakom-Kumasi: Payless Publication. .Google Scholar ↗

[refR-2] Babbie, E. R. (2010). The practice of social research (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-3] Baleghizadeh, S. (2010). The effect of pair work on a word-building task. Elt Journal, 64(4), 405-413.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-4] Best, K., & Khan, S. (2005). Real world research. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-5] Bhoopathi, P., Sheoran, R., & Välimäki, M. (2006). Educational games for mental health professionals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2(2), 23-33.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-6] Castillo, E. (2001). Maximizing serendipity in fair-division algorithms: The maximal serendipity method. (Doctoral dissertation), St. Mary's University of San Antonio, Texas).Google Scholar ↗

[refR-7] Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-8] Fitzgerald, D. (2013). Employing think–pair–share in associate degree nursing curriculum. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 8(3), 88-90.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-9] Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2012). Learning, attentional control, and action video games. Current Biology, 22(6), R197–R206.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-10] Hughes, J. (1999). Altered states: Creativity under the influence. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-11] Ismail, S. (2006). Political life in Cairo's new quarters: Encountering the everyday state. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-12] Jebur, M. S., Jasim, H. H., & Jaboori, H. R. (2012). The effect of using think-pair-share technique on EFL students' achievement in the course of general English. Journal of College of Basic Education, 15(80), 823–838.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-13] Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2009). Not just for fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers and Education, 52, 800-810.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-14] Lakshmi, H. (2007). Translation studies: Theory and practice. Hyderabad: Booklinks Corp.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-15] McKeachie, W. J., & Svinicki, M. (2006). McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research and theory for college and university teachers (12th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-16] Roswati, Z. M., & Radjab, D. (2014). Improving students’ speaking skill by using think-pair-share strategy at the second semester of Syariah Class A at language center of UinSuska Riau. English Language Teaching, 2(1), 1–12.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-17] Ruiz-Primo, M. (2011). Informal formative assessment: the role of instructional dialogues in assessing students’ learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 15-24.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-18] Siegler, R. S., & Ramani, G. B. (2008). Playing linear numerical board games promotes low-income children's numerical development. Developmental Science, 11(5), 655-661.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-19] Sumarsih, M., P. & Sanjaya, D. (2013). TPS as an effective technique to enhance the students’ achievement on writing descriptive text. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 106–113.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-20] Utama, I. P., Marhaeni, A., & Putra, I. N. (2013). The effect of think pair share teaching strategy to students’ self-confidence and speaking competency of the Second Grade Students of SMPN 6. SINGARAJA e-Journal of Postgraduate Program, University of Education, Ganesha, English Study Program of Education, 1, 1–10.Google Scholar ↗