A STUDY ON IMPACT OF BRAIN-BASED LEARNING APPROACH ON STUDENTS ACHIEVEMENT AND RETENTION OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT WORK-ENERGY TOPIC Dilek ERDURAN

AVCI1
1

Rahmi YABASAN2

Faculty of Education, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, TURKEY 2 Faculty of Education, Gazi University, TURKEY

1. INTRODUCTION Education has been stepping into quite important and exciting age. This is brain age. Today we know much more about human brain and biology of learning than later. Our knowledge has been increasing with the contribution of new investigations [1]. Until the near past, knowledge about human brain was restricted with surgical methods or autopsy studies. But in this age displaying and measuring techniques and studies performing on animals [2] have been proving of brain researches with increasing haste. Neurological researches about the brain have been continuing for about two centuries. In addition especially from 1990s to today, a lot of researchers have interested in how the brain learns in teaching process and related this with education [3,4,5,6,7,8-9]. Using the results of researches performed in neurology, physchology and education, rules of brain-based learning approach are defined [3-10]: 1. Brain is a parallel processor. 2. Learning engages the whole physiology 3. The search for meaning is innate. 4. The search for meaning comes through patterning. 5. Emotions are critical to patterning. 6. The brain processes wholes and parts simultaneously. 7. Learning involves both focused attention and peripheral perception. 8. Learning always involves conscious and unconscious processes .9. We have (at least) two types of memory systems: spatial and rote learning. 10. The brain understands and remembers best when facts and skills are embedded in natural spatial memory. 11. Learning is enhanced by challenge and inhibited by threat. 12. Every brain is unique. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of brain-based learning approach on 7th grade students achievement and retention of knowledge about workenergy issue. 2. METHOD 2.1. Participants This study was applied to 7th grade students in science lessons to 91 students consisting of 30 experimental group, 30 control group I and 31 control group II. There were 49 female and 42 male. Students attending the study have been training in elementary school at three different classes in Ankara of high socialeconomic district. 2.2. Procedure Study was made in spring session of 2005-2006 school years with one experimental group and two control groups. In this study pre-test post-test control grouped design was used. Research was performed in 24 lessons in a schedule of 3lessons-a-week for all groups. Before experimental process work-energy achievement test and attitude and perception inquiry were applied to the students for the equality of experimental and control groups. Additionally, students science lesson performance scores of the previous term were provided. Students scores which were taken from

applied tests and science lessons were examined by ANOVA. Three classes were chosen that had no significant difference statistically and determined as experimental and control groups. Lectures were performed using brain-based learning approach for the experimental group. Traditional techniques were used for control groups. Students of experimental group and control group-I were instructed by researcher. Students of control group-II were instructed by science teacher. Proving the objectivity of the researcher during the instruction period was aimed by using two control groups. At the end of the intervention, work-energy achievement test was given as the post test. Same test was given to all participants 6 months after the end of the experimental process to find out the retention of the knowledge. Politano and Paquin summarized the brain-based learning approach in 10 main steps during application process [11]. These are namely; uniqueness, assessment, emotions, meaning, multiple paths, brain-body embodiment, memory, cycles and rhythms, nutrition and elimination of threats. In the study, lesson plans have been composed around these basic points transferring brain based learning to the teaching process. 2.3. Data Collection Instruments Work-energy achievement test was improved to determine development in students achievement and validity and reliability studies were done. Work-energy achievement tests consists of 28 multiple choice questions (Cronbach alpha: 0.79, Mean of difficulty value :0.457 and mean of the biserial correlation value of items: 0.496). This test was given to students as a pre-test, a post-test and a retention test. Another measuring tool applied to the students was brain dominance instrument. Brain functions as a whole but its left and right hemispheres are responsible for different mental functions. Brain dominance instrument is a tool that is developed using the different mental capabilities of the brain hemispheres which is used to determine the dominant hemisphere by Davis et.al [12]. This instruments adaptation to Turkish, validity and reliability studies were done. Reliability coefficient was calculated as 0.70. To evaluate this tool, Marianis evaluation critters were taken into consideration [13]. These critters are left-brain dominant (very strong), left-brain dominant, moderate preference for the left, slight preference toward the left, whole-brain dominance (bilateral), slight preference toward the right dominance (bilateral), moderate preference for the right, right-brain dominant and right-brain dominant (very strong). Brain dominance instrument was applied as pre test to determine experimental group students brain dominance. Gained data were taken into consideration while lesson plans preparing. Attitude and perception inquiry was performed as pre-test to determine students attitude toward science and perception of science and way of learning science. It is a 19-question-inquiry of type likert. Its Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient is 0.76 [14]. 3. RESULTS 3.1. The Results of the Brain Dominance Instrument It is detected that 43.3% of the experimental group students have been using slight preference toward the left, 26.7 % slight preference toward the right dominance

and 20% moderate preference for the left. There is no student in other brain dominance levels. It was seen that approximately 66% of the experimental group members have using left section and 30% have been using right section dominantly when data was evaluated gained from brain dominance instrument. 3.2. The Results of the Achievement Post Test Scores Table 1 shows the means and standard deviation (S) values about achievement post test scores.
Table 1. The means and standard deviation values of the achievement post test

Group Experimental Group Control Group I Control Group II Total

N 30 31 30 91

Means 21.233 16.967 15.566 17.912

S 3.430 5.250 4.515 5.036

One way variance analysis (ANOVA) is made to detect whether or not achievement post test scores differentiated. Scheffe test is applied for multiple comparisons to detect differentiation between which groups by making one way variance analysis. Table 2 shows the variance analysis results of achievement post-test scores.
Table 2. The variance analysis results of the achievement post test scores

Source of Variance Between Groups Within Groups Total

Sum of Squares 523.596 1759.701 2283.297

df Mean Squares 2 8 8 9 0 261.798 19.997

F 13.09 2

p 0.00 0

According to table 2 there is a statistically meaningful difference about achievement last test point; between experiment group-control group I in experimental group favor and between experimental group-control group II in experimental group favor (F(2-88) =13.092, p<0.05). 3.3 Results of the Retention Test Scores Table 3 shows the means and standard deviation (S) values about retention test scores.
Table 3. The means and standard deviation values of the retention test

Group Experimental Group Control Group I Control Group II Total

N 30 31 30 91

Means 19.900 15.096 13.733 15.912

S 3.959 4.541 4.891 5.003

One way variance analysis (ANOVA) is made to detect whether or not retention test points differentiated. Scheffe test is applied for multiple comparisons to detect differentiation between which groups by making one way variance analysis. Table 4 shows the variance analysis results of retention test scores.
Table 4. The variance analysis results of the retention test scores

Source of Variance Between Groups Within Groups Total

Sum of Squares 630.878 1767.276 2398.154

df Mean Squares 2 8 8 9 0 315.439 20.083

15.70 . 7 000

Among the retention test scores (table 4), there is a statistically significant difference in favor of experimental group (F(2-88) =15,707, p<0,05). Additionally, mean of the retention test scores of control group I (15,096) that researcher taught is higher than retention test scores mean of control group II (13,733) that science teacher taught. This situation can be concluded that researcher had not acted prejudicially between groups while teaching. 4. CONCLUSION This research proved that the instruction activities which are based on brain based learning approach applied to the experimental group have a great impact on 7 th grade students achievement and retention of knowledge about work and energy subject . The most important aim of teaching is to provide meaningful and permanent learning. Naturally, students achievement will also increase when meaningful and permanent learning became fact. The results of this research have shown that brain based learning have pretty important positive effect on achievement of students and permanence of knowledge. The other research result about this subject also support this results [15,16,17,18,19-20] A very long way is seen to go on brain researches about learning and teaching. It is clear that rooted changes will happen about learning and teaching when detected scientifically how knowledge arranged, constructed, protected and utilized in brain [21]. But today comprehensive and deep researches have been continuing about brain and learning. We have to adapt and use the results that gained from these researches about brain and learning. References [1] Erlauer L 2003 The Brain Compatible Classroom (Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development) [2] Hall J 2005 Neuroscience and Education SCRE Research Report No: 121 [3] Caine R N and Caine G 1990 Educational Leadership October p 66-70. [4] Caine R N and Caine G 1997 Unleashing the Power of Perceptual Change (Virginia:

[5] Sylwester R 1995 A Celebration of Neurons: An Educators Guide to the Human Brain (Alexandra: Association for School Supervision and Curriculum Development) [6] Diamond M and Hopsan J 1998 Magic Trees of the Mind (New York: Dutton Book Penguin-Putnam Group) [7] Jensen E 2000 Educational Leadership November p 34-37 [8] Wolfe P 2001 Brain Matters: Translating Research into Classroom Practice (Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development) [9] Sousa D A 2001 How The Brain Learns: A Classroom Teachers Guide (California: Corwin Pres, Inc) [10] Caine R N and Caine G 2002 Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain. Translate: Glten lgen (Ed.) (Ankara: Nobel Yaynlar) [11] Politano C and Paquin J 2000 Brain-Based Learning with Class (Canada: Peguis Publishers) [12] Davis E C, Nur H and Ruru S A A 1994 English Teaching Forum July-September 32 (3). [13] Mariani L 1996 A Journal of TESOL-Italy XXI No.2/ XXII No.1 Spring [14] Kaya O N 2002 lkretim 7. Snf rencilerinin Atom ve Atomik Yap Konusundaki Baarlarna, rendikleri Bilgilerin Kalclna, Tutum ve Alglamalarna oklu Zeka Kuramnn Etkisi. Yaynlanmam Yksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi niversitesi, Eitim Bilimleri Enstits. [15] Materna L 2000 Impact of Concept-Mapping up on Meaningful Learning and Metacognition Among Foundation-Level Associate-Degree Nursing Students, Ph.D Thesis, Capella University. [16] Caine R N and Caine G 1995 Educational Leaderhip 32 (7) p. 43-48. [17] Caulfield J, Kidd S, and Kocher T 2000 Educational Leadership November p 62-64 [18] engelci T 2005 Sosyal Bilgiler Dersinde Beyin Temelli renmenin Akademik Baarya ve Kalcla Etkisi. Yaynlanmam Yksek Lisans Tezi. Anadolu niversitesi, Eitim Bilimleri Enstits, lkretim Anabilim Dal. [19] zden M 2005 Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Beyin Temelli renmenin Akademik Baarya ve Hatrlama Dzeyine Etkisi. Yaynlanmam Yksek Lisans Tezi. Anadolu niversitesi, Eitim Bilimleri Enstits. [20] Versteeg D A 2002 Principal Leadership 3 (1) September [21] Soylu H 2004 Fen retiminde Yeni Yaklamlar (Ankara: Nobel Yayn Datm)