Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.

org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!2
Guided-discovery Learning Strategy and Senior School Students
Performance in Mathematics in Ejigbo, Nigeria
1
()an*u& +. (le, and
1
-a.e*idag/a& +. #lu/usu0i
1epart*ent of Science Education& -acult0 of Education& 2ni3ersit0 of Ilorin& Ilorin& Nigeria.

Abstract
45e concern of t5is stud0 was to in3estigate t5e effect of guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 on students
perfor*ance in +at5e*atics alongside influence of gender and scoring le3els a/ilit0 of t5e students. 2'2 SSI
Students fro* two selected pu/lic co-educational sc5ools in E.ig/o 6ocal 7o3ern*ent (rea of #sun State
constituted t5e sa*ple of t5e stud0. 45e researc5 was a 8uasi-e,peri*ental one and t5e *ain instru*ent for data
collection was a 2'-ite* *ultiple c5oice +at5e*atics (c5ie3e*ent 4est drawn fro* 9est (frican E,a*ination
:ouncil past 8uestions on Set 45eor0. 45ree researc5 8uestions was raised wit5 t5ree corresponding 50pot5eses
tested. ;esults re3ealed a significant difference in fa3our of t5ose e,posed to guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0
co*pared to t5ose not taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0. 45oug5 /ot5 *ale and fe*ale students
perfor*ed e8uall0 well w5en taug5t using guided disco3er0 strateg0& t5e stud0 s5owed t5at 5ig5 scoring
students /enefited *ost w5ile t5e perfor*ance of low scoring students was also en5anced. It was reco**ended
a*ong ot5ers t5at *at5e*atics teac5ers s5ould *a)e t5e teac5ing-learning of *at5e*atics an interacti3e and
acti3it0 < /ased one for t5e students using strateg0 t5at all students could gain fro* irrespecti3e of t5e a/ilit0
le3els of t5e students and& go3ern*ent /ot5 at -ederal and State le3els s5ould periodicall0 asides regular
wor)s5ops for teac5ers de3elop a *ean of re3iewing = assessing t5e i*pact of teac5ing strategies.
ey !ords" 7uided-disco3er0& learning& strateg0& students& perfor*ance& +at5e*atics

#$%ntroduction
+at5e*atics is t5e language wit5out w5ic5 science& co**erce& industr0& t5e internet& and t5e entire
glo/al econo*ic infrastructure are struc) du*/. +at5e*atics is regarded as pillar of al*ost all t5e strea*s in
acade*ics gi3en its i*portance in tertiar0 education and *ost careers. It is not onl0 /eneficial /ut also essential.
>ence& +at5e*atics is not onl0 a language and a su/.ect in itself& /ut it is also critical in fostering logical and
rigorous t5in)ing? as suc5 its influence is i**ense.
(*inu (1@@' argued t5at *at5e*atics is not onl0 t5e language of sciences& /ut essential nutrient for
t5oug5t& logical reasoning and progress. +at5e*atics li/erates t5e *ind and also gi3es indi3iduals an assess*ent
of t5e intellectual a/ilities /0 pointing towards direction of i*pro3e*ent. >e concluded /0 sa0ing t5at
*at5e*atics is t5e /asis of all sciences and tec5nolog0 w5ic5 application cut across all areas of 5u*an
)nowledge.
45e essence of +at5e*atics t5erefore lies in its /eaut0 and its intellectual c5allenge. Aot5 scientific
/rea)t5roug5 and tec5nological de3elop*ent are facilitated /0 t5e precise language of +at5e*atics. 45is
i*plies t5at t5ere e,ists a strong lin) /etween progress in *at5e*atics and tec5nological ad3ance*ent. 45us&
e3er0 *an re8uires a certain a*ount of co*petence in /asic topics in *at5e*atics for t5e purposes of 5andling
*one0& prosecuting dail0 /usinesses& interpreting *at5e*atical grap5s and c5arts as well as t5in)ing logicall0.
(Aandura& 1@@7. In spite of all t5ese& t5e su/.ect is still seen as a difficult one and 5as generated p5o/ia a*ong
learners. 45e differential sc5olastic ac5ie3e*ent of students in Nigeria 5as /een and is still a source of concern
and researc5 interest to educators& go3ern*ent and parents. 45is is so /ecause of t5e great i*portance it 5as on
t5e national de3elop*ent of t5e countr0. (ll o3er t5e countr0& t5ere is a consensus of opinion a/out t5e fallen
standard of education in Nigeria ((de/ule& 2''%. Parents and go3ern*ent are in total agree*ent t5at t5eir 5uge
in3est*ent on education is not 0ielding t5e desired di3idend. 4eac5ers also co*plain of studentsB low
perfor*ance at /ot5 internal and e,ternal e,a*inations. 45e annual releases of Senior Secondar0 :ertificate
E,a*ination results (SS:E conducted /0 9est (frican E,a*inations :ouncil (9(E: .ustified t5e
pro/le*atic nature and generaliCation of poor secondar0 sc5ool studentsB perfor*ance in different sc5ool
su/.ects. ( wealt5 of researc5 reported t5at students /la*ed t5eir poor perfor*ance on t5ree /road areasD
teac5ing pro/le*s& negati3e attitudes of students towards t5e su/.ect& and e,a*ination difficult0. 45e degree of
/la*e on t5ese areas as reported is gi3en as teac5ing pro/le*s = *et5od& E7F? negati3e attitude& %2F and
e,a*ination difficulties& 21F. 45is agrees wit5 t5e stud0 of -a.e*idag/a (1@!E w5o 5ad earlier identified
pro/le*s of *at5e*atics learning as studentsG perception of sa*e to /e 5ig5l0 t5eoretical and *eaningless to
e3er0da0 acti3ities. >e also o/ser3ed t5at teac5ers adopt poor *et5ods in t5e teac5ing of *at5e*atics in sc5ools&
and t5at 5ig5 percentage of t5e relati3el0 s*all nu*/er of t5e a3aila/le te,t/oo)s does not reflect t5e culture of
t5e Nigerian c5ildren. >e su/*itted furt5er t5at *at5e*atics teac5ers often sa0 *at5e*atics is useful /ut failed
to s5ow its usefulness. >ence& *ost students could not see reason for stud0ing *at5e*atics (-a.e*idag/a& 1@@@.
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!3
-urt5er to t5is& (re*u and So)an (2''3 su/*it t5at t5e searc5 for t5e causations of poor acade*ic ac5ie3e*ent
in *at5e*atics is unending /ut so*e of t5e *a.or factors t5e0 put forward areD *et5ods of teac5ing& self-estee*
= self efficac0& stud0 5a/its& teac5er consultation and poor interpersonal relations5ips. 45e foregoing see*s to
*a)e it increasingl0 a source of concern considering t5e fact t5at *at5e*atics pla0s a 3ital role in scientific&
tec5nological and social progress of an0 nation and indeed all wor)s of life. 45e de/ate on appropriate teac5ing
strateg0 is inclusi3e and widel0 open to furt5er in3estigation. :onse8uentl0& t5e 8uestion e*erges again& does
learning strateg0 affects students perfor*ance in *at5e*aticsH
45is stud0 in3estigated t5e effect of guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 on students perfor*ance in
*at5e*atics. 45e stud0 also e,a*ined t5e influence of gender and scoring le3el on students perfor*ance in
*at5e*atics.

#$# &esearch 'uestions
45e following researc5 8uestions were raised in t5e stud0.
1. 95at is t5e difference /etween t5e *ean gain scores of students in *at5e*atics taug5t using guided<
disco3er0 learning strateg0 and non guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0H
2. 95at is t5e influence of gender on senior sc5ool students perfor*ance in *at5e*atics w5en taug5t using
guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0H
3. Is t5ere an0 difference in t5e senior sc5ool students perfor*ance in *at5e*atics on t5e /asis of t5eir
scoring le3els w5en taug5t using guided <disco3er0 learning strateg0H
%. Is t5ere an0 interaction effect /etween t5e treat*ent and gender on t5e perfor*ance of students in
*at5e*aticsH
5. Is t5ere an0 interaction effect /etween t5e treat*ent and t5e studentsB scoring le3els on t5e perfor*ance
of students in *at5e*aticsH
#$#$( &esearch )y*otheses
45e following null 50pot5eses were tested in t5is stud0D
>#
1
D 45ere would /e no significant difference in *ean gain scores of t5e senior sc5ool students taug5t using
guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 in *at5e*atics and t5ose taug5t using non guided-disco3er0
learning strateg0.
>#
2
D 45ere would /e no significant difference in t5e *ean gain scores of *ale and fe*ale students in
*at5e*atics w5en t5e0 are taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0.
>#
3
D 45ere would /e no significant difference in *ean gain scores of students wit5 5ig5& *ediu* and low
scoring le3el w5en t5e0 are taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0.
>#
%
D 45ere would /e no significant interaction /etween t5e treat*ent and gender on t5e perfor*ance of
students in *at5e*atics.
>#
5
D 45ere would /e no significant interaction effect /etween t5e treat*ent and studentsB scoring le3els on
t5e perfor*ance of students in *at5e*atics.

($+ &esearch Methodology
45is stud0 was a 8uasi-e,peri*ental researc5 designed to deter*ine t5e effects of guided-disco3er0
learning strateg0 as predictor of learnersB ac5ie3e*ent in *at5e*atics. 45e pre-test and post-test control group
design was considered appropriate for t5is stud0. 45e pre-test& post-test of 2 , 2 , 3 e,peri*ental design was
e*plo0ed. 45e e,peri*ental le3els are as followsD Strategies of teac5ing-learning at 2 le3els (guided-disco3er0
and non guided-disco3er0& 7ender at 2 le3els (*ale and fe*ale and t5e scoring le3els w5ic5 is at 3 le3els (5ig5&
*ediu* and low scorers. 2'2 students fro* two purposi3el0 selected Senior Secondar0 Sc5ool I in E.ig/o 6ocal
7o3ern*ent (rea of #sun State offering +at5e*atics participated in t5e stud0. 45e sc5ools were la/eled ( and A
wit5 sc5ool ( used as e,peri*ental and A as t5e control group respecti3el0.
($# &esearch %nstrument
45e *ain instru*ent t5at was used for data collection was a 2'-ite* *ultiple c5oice +at5e*atics
(c5ie3e*ent 4est (+(4 on t5e concept of Set t5eor0 drawn fro* t5e past 9est (frica Senior Sc5ool :ertificate
+at5e*atics E,a*inations 8uestions. +ini*u* and *a,i*u* scores of ' and 2' were e,pected respecti3el0 to
/e t5e range wit5in w5ic5 t5e perfor*ance of /ot5 groups s5ould fall ('-E categoriCed as low scoring& 7-13
categoriCed as *ediu* scoring and 1%-2' as >ig5 scoring students. -or relia/ilit0 purpose& t5e test was
ad*inistered to an intact class of two non-participating sc5ools. (fter two (2 wee)s& t5e sa*e test was re-
ad*inistered to sa*e set of students. 45eir scores were correlated using PearsonBs Product +o*ent :orrelation
:oefficient +et5od and a coefficient of '.E@ was o/tained.
45e instructional instru*ents were lesson plans drawn on guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 and non
guided-disco3er0 strateg0 in teac5ing t5e e,peri*ental and control group respecti3el0. 45e guided-disco3er0
learning strateg0 was student<acti3it0 centred w5ic5 re8uired a lot of interaction a*ong t5e researc5er& students
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!%
and instructional *aterials. 45e control group was taug5t using t5e non guided-disco3er0 *ode onl0& t5at
is& t5e group was e,posed onl0 to lecture *et5od. Instructions were 5ig5l0 3er/aliCed wit5 *ini*u* interaction
/etween students and instructional *aterials. 45e researc5er assisted /0 t5e researc5 assistant personall0 taug5t t5e
e,peri*ental group w5ile t5e regular *at5e*atics teac5er assisted in teac5ing t5e control group.
4wo periods of fort0 (%' *inutes was spent eac5 wee) t5roug5out t5e treat*ent period. 45e stud0 lasted
for si, (E wee)s of t5ree (3 wee)s teac5ing w5ile first& second and t5e last wee) were used for preparation& pre-
test and post-testing respecti3el0.

,$+ &esults
>0pot5eses one and two were tested wit5 independent (uncorrelated sa*ple t-test statistics w5ile
50pot5eses t5ree& four and fi3e were tested using (nal0sis of :o3ariance ((N:#$(. >0pot5eses one and two
in3ol3ed co*parison of two 3aria/les (e,peri*ental and control? *ales and fe*ales respecti3el0. >0pot5eses
t5ree in3ol3ed t5e co*parison of *ore t5an two 3aria/lesD low& *ediu* and 5ig5 scoring students w5ile
50pot5eses four and fi3e in3ol3ed t5e deter*ination of interaction effects. 45is is in agree*ent wit5 -a.e*idag/a
(1@@5 w5o stated t5at (N:#$( is t5e appropriate statistic to use w5en testing 50pot5esis w5ere effects of *ore
t5an two independent 3aria/les are to /e deter*ined.
)-
#"
45ere would /e no significant difference in post-test *ean scores of t5e senior sc5ool students taug5t using
guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 in *at5e*atics and t5ose taug5t using non guided-disco3er0
learning strateg0.
4a/le 1 re3eals t5at t5e calculated t-3alue I@.3!@ wit5 p-3alue of .''' J '.'5 alp5a le3el. Since t5e p-
3alue is lesser t5an t5e alp5a le3el of '.'5& t5e null 50pot5esis one was re.ected and t5e alternati3e
50pot5esis t5at& t5ere would /e a significant difference in post-test *ean scores of students taug5t using
guided <disco3er0 learning strateg0 and t5ose taug5t wit5out t5e use of guided-disco3er0 learning
strateg0 was up5eld. 4o ascertain w5ere t5e significant difference lies& t5e *ean scores of t5e two
groups were co*pared. 45e *ean scores of t5e guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 (1%.'EE7 is greater
t5an t5e *ean scores (1'.71%3 of t5e non guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0. 45us& it is in fa3our of
guided-disco3er0 learning.
)-
("
45ere would /e no significant difference in t5e post-test *ean scores of *ale and fe*ale students in
*at5e*atics w5en t5e0 are taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0.
-ro* 4a/le 2& anal0sis re3eals t5at t5e calculated t-3alue I .1E! wit5 p-3alue of .!E7 K '.'5 alp5a le3el.
It i*plies t5at t5e null 50pot5esis t5ree w5ic5 state t5at t5ere would /e no significant difference in
posttest *ean scores of *ale and fe*ale students in *at5e*atics w5en t5e0 are taug5t using guided-
disco3er0 learning strateg0 was accepted . In ot5er words& t5e perfor*ance of *ale and fe*ale students
taug5t using guided disco3er0 learning strateg0 s5ows no difference. >ence& t5e 50pot5esis is up5eld.
)-
,"
45ere would /e no significant difference in post-test *ean scores of students wit5 5ig5& *ediu* and low
scoring le3el w5en t5e0 are taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0.
4a/le 3 indicates t5e (nal0sis of :o3ariance containing t5e scoring a/ilit0 le3els& *ean s8uares& f3alue
and t5e corresponding p-3alues. -ro* t5e ta/le& t5e calculated f-3alue is !.%13 wit5 p-3alue
e8uals .'''w5ic5 is less t5an t5e alp5a le3el of '.'5. 45is i*plies t5at t5e null 50pot5esis t5ree is
re.ected and t5e alternati3e 50pot5esis w5ic5 states t5at t5ere would /e a significant difference in post-
test *ean scores of students wit5 5ig5& *ediu* and low scoring le3el w5en t5e0 are taug5t using
guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 is up5eld. 4o furt5er ascertain t5is wit5 respect to w5ere t5e
difference lies& 1uncan post-5oc test was carried out and t5e output is s5own in ta/le %. -ro* ta/le %&
15.1!1! in su/set 3 re3eals t5at students wit5 5ig5 scoring a/ilit0 is *ost significant of all t5e groups. It
is followed /0 students wit5 a3erage scoring a/ilit0 in su/set 2 wit5 13&17E5. 45e least is& low scorers
wit5 @.EEE7 in su/set 1.
)-
.
" 45ere would /e no significant interaction /etween t5e treat*ent and gender on t5e perfor*ance of
students in *at5e*atics.
-ro* ta/le 5& t5ere was no significant interaction effect /etween t5e treat*ent and studentsB gender.
45is was /ecause at -(1& 1@7 I .''2& p L '.'5 t5erefore& t5e null 50pot5esis was accepted. 45is is
furt5er corro/orated in t5e profile plot as s5own in figure 1 w5ere t5e two lines appeared too close
indicating t5at& t5ere was no *a.or difference e3en in t5e treat*ent condition.
)-
/
D 45ere would /e no significant interaction effect /etween t5e treat*ent and studentsB scoring le3els on
t5e perfor*ance of students in *at5e*atics.
4a/le E s5owed t5at t5e co*puted 3alue of -(1&1@E I .171& p M '.'5& t5e null 50pot5esis was re.ected.
45erefore& t5ere was a significant interaction /etween t5e scoring le3els of t5e students and t5e treat*ent.
-igure 2 also re3ealed t5e difference t5at e,isted in t5e treat*ent condition.

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!5
.$+ Summary of 0indings
45e following are t5e su**ar0 of *a.or findings in t5is stud0D
1.t5e e,peri*ental group taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 5ad a significantl0 5ig5er score t5an
t5e control group taug5t using t5e non guided disco3er0?
2. post test *ean scores of *ale students was not significantl0 5ig5er t5an t5at of t5e fe*ale students w5en
taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0? and
3.>ig5er scorers /enefited *ost& followed /0 *ediu* scorers and t5e low scorers /enefitted least w5en taug5t
using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0. 4o furt5er ascertain t5is wit5 respect to w5ere t5e difference lied&
1uncan post-5oc test was carried out and t5e output of 15.1!1! in ta/le ! su/set 3 re3eals t5at students wit5 5ig5
scoring a/ilit0 is *ost significant of all t5e groups.
%. t5ere was no significant interaction effect /etween t5e treat*ent and studentsB gender. 45is was /ecause at
-(1& 1@7 I .''2& p L '.'5.
5.t5ere was a significant interaction /etween t5e scoring le3els of t5e students and t5e treat*ent& -(1&1@E I .171&
p M '.'5.
.$# 1iscussion
45e central focus of t5is stud0 was to in3estigate t5e effects of guided disco3er0 learning strateg0 on studentsB
perfor*ance in +at5e*atics and t5e findings fro* t5e t-test of t5e post-test *ean scores of 50pot5esis one
re3ealed t5at all of t5e e,peri*ental group students e,posed to guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 perfor*ed
significantl0 /etter t5an t5e control group students e,posed to non-guided strateg0. 45e finding of t5is stud0
agrees wit5 t5ose of +artins and #0e/an.iBs (2''' and Aa.a5 and (si* (2''2 w5ere t5e0 found t5at guided
disco3er0 approac5 was *ore effecti3e t5an t5e con3entional or an0 ot5er *et5ods on studentsB ac8uisition of
)nowledge in teac5ing-learning process. 45e stud0 5owe3er s5owed t5at /ot5 *ale and fe*ale students /enefitted
e8uall0 w5en e,posed to guided disco3er0 strateg0 of learning. 45erefore& gender 5ad no effect on t5e
perfor*ance of t5e students in Sets t5eor0 pro/le*s using guided disco3er0 learning strateg0. 45is is si*ilar to
Sal*an (1@@! and Sulei*an (2'1' findings in related studies w5ere t5e0 found out t5at gender 5ad no effect on
students acade*ic perfor*ance in +at5e*atics word pro/le* using (usu/el pre-instructional strateg0 and t5ree
pro/le* sol3ing *odels of Pol0a& Arainford and Stein and 7ic)s respecti3el0.
45e result in ta/les 3 and % /ased on treat*ent inferred fro* 50pot5esis t5ree re3ealed t5at t5e low scorers
/enefitted least w5en taug5t using guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 . >owe3er& it /enefited 5ig5 scorers *ost.
45e finding of t5is stud0 agrees wit5 t5ose of (i0edun (1@@5& Nusuf (2''% and +an)li) (2''E. 45e0 all found
t5at t5ere was a significant difference in t5e perfor*ance of students in different scoring le3els.
.$( 2onclusion
E3idence a/ound in t5e literatures re3iewed w5ic5 s5owed t5at students still perfor*ed poorl0 in
+at5e*atics despite its pro*inent roles in scientific and tec5nological de3elop*ent of a nation. -actors identified
for t5is include poor teac5ing *et5od& poor foundation and a/stract nature of *at5e*atics lessons and indi3idual
cogniti3e st0le. It is against t5is /ac)drop t5at t5e present stud0 was carried out wit5 a 3iew to in3estigating t5e
effects of guided-disco3er0 learning strateg0 on senior secondar0 sc5ool students perfor*ance in *at5e*atics.
;esults fro* t5is stud0 5a3e s5own t5at t5ere was a significant difference in t5e perfor*ance of
+at5e*atics students taug5t using guided disco3er0 learning strateg0 o3er t5e students taug5t using non guided
disco3er0 strateg0. 45e stud0 5as s5own t5e potenc0 of guided disco3er0 learning strateg0 in i*pro3ing
studentBs perfor*ance. E8uall0& findings fro* t5e present stud0 5a3e also s5own t5at gender 5as no role to pla0
in t5e perfor*ance of t5e students. 45e findings of t5is stud0 5as also re3ealed t5at all scoring a/ilit0 groups
/enefited fro* t5e strateg0 of learning wit5 5ig5 scoring a/ilit0 as *ost significant of all t5e groups.
45is i*plies t5at guided disco3er0 learning strateg0 sti*ulated t5e low& *ediu* and 5ig5 scoring
students to /etter perfor*ance separatel0.
.$, &ecommendations
In line wit5 t5e findings of t5is stud0& t5e following are reco**endedD
1. 7uided 1isco3er0 6earning Strateg0 was found 5elpful in learnersB a/ilit0 to e,tract a si*ple figure
fro* a co*ple, one since it was *ore interacti3e. It is reco**ended t5at t5e teac5ers s5ould *a)e t5e
teac5ing-learning of *at5e*atics an interacti3e and acti3it0 < /ased one for t5e students. 4eac5ers
s5ould use *an0 strategies w5ile teac5ing *at5e*atics& for instance set t5eor0& so t5at all students
could gain fro* t5e teac5ing irrespecti3e of t5e a/ilit0 le3els of t5e students.
2. +ale and fe*ales s5ould 5a3e roles to pla0 in *at5e*atics class since *ales are not superior to fe*ale
in *at5e*atics class as found out in t5is stud0.
3. +inistries of Education at /ot5 -ederal and State le3els s5ould periodicall0 asides regular wor)s5ops
for teac5ers de3elop a *ean of re3iewing = assessing t5e i*pact of teac5ing strategies.


Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!E
&E0E&EN2ES
(de/ule& S. #. (2''%. 7ender differences on a locall0 standardiCed an,iet0 rating scale in *at5e*atics for
Nigerian secondar0 sc5ools in Nigerian. Journal of Counselling and Applied Psychology.1, 22-29.
(i0edun J. #. (1@@5 Influence of acade*ic a/ilit0 of students on t5eir ac5ie3e*ent in secondar0 sc5ool
*at5e*atics. Ilorin Journal of Education. 15& @3-11%
(*inu& J. (1@@'. (ddress /0 t5e >onoura/le +inister of Education. Abacus 2 !1", 22-29.
(*oo S. (. (2''2D (nal0sis of pro/le*s encountered in teac5ing and learning of *at5e*atics. (A(:2SD A
Journal of #athe$atics Association of %igeria. 27 (1 3'-35
(re*u& #. ( O So)an& A. #. (2''3. ( *ulti-causal e3aluation of acade*ic perfor*ance of Nigerian learnersD
Issues and i*plications for national de3elop*ent. 1epart*ent of 7uidance and :ounselling& 2ni3ersit0
of I/adan& I/adan.
Aa.a5& S.4 O (si*& (.E (2''2 :onstruction and Science 6earning E,peri*ental e3idence in a Nigerian Setting.
&orld Council for Curriculu$ and Instruction !&CCI" %igeria. 3 (1& 1'5-11%
Aandura& (. (1@@7. Self-efficac0D 4oward 2nif0ing 45eor0 of Ae5a3ioural :5ange. Psychological 'e(ie) *+,
191 , 21-.
-a.e*idag/a& +. #. (1@!E. 45eoretical /asis for curriculu* structuring. Its significance and i*plication for
secondar0 sc5ool *at5e*atics curriculu* in Nigeria. Journal of 'esearch in Curriculu$ (J#;I:. % (2&
12-2'.
-a.e*ida/ga& +. #. (1@@5. ;esearc5 1esigns and t5eir Statistical I*plications. In S. (. Ji*o5 (Ed. ;esearc5
+et5odolog0 in EducationD (n Interdisciplinar0 (pproac5& 2ni3ersit0 of Ilorin. 6i/rar0 and Pu/lications
:o**ittee& %7-E'
-a.e*idag/a& +. #. (1@@@. 4rends in +at5e*atics Education in NigeriaD Issues (nd Pro/le*s. Abacus. 2 !1",
19-2..
+an)li)& + (2''E. Effects of de*onstration and guided disco3er0 *et5od in correcting *isconceptions in
p50sics a*ongst re*edial students& 2ni3ersit0 of Jos& Jos. 2npu/lis5ed P5.1. 45esis& 2ni3ersit0 of
Ilorin.
+artins& #. #. and #0e/an.i& ;. P. (2'''. 45e effects of in8uir0 and lecture teac5ing approac5es on t5e cogniti3e
ac5ie3e*ent of integrated science students. Journal of /cience 0eachers1 Association of %igeria. 35 (1O2
25-3'
Sal*an& +. - (1@@! Effects of +at5e*atics 6anguage as (d3anced #rganiCer on Senior Secondar0 Sc5ool
Students perfor*ance in +at5e*atics word pro/le*. (n unpu/lis5ed P5.1. 45esis& 2ni3ersit0 of Ilorin&
Ilorin& Nigeria
Sulei*an& A (2'1' Effects of Pro/le*s-sol3ing +odels on Secondar0 Sc5ool StudentsB Perfor*ance in Statistics
:oncepts of +at5e*atics :urriculu* in Qa*fara& Nigeria. (n unpu/lis5ed P5.1. 45esis& 2ni3ersit0 of
Ilorin& Ilorin& Nigeria.
Nusuf. ( (2''% Effect of cooperati3e and co*parati3e instructional strategies on Junior Secondar0 studentsB
perfor*ance in social studies in Pwara State& Nigeria. 2npu/lis5ed P5.1. 45esis& 2ni3ersit0 of Ilorin&
Ilorin.

3able #"
The t-Test Analysis showing difference in post-test mean scores of students taught using guided-discovery
learning strategy and those taught without the use of guided-discovery learning strategy

$aria/les No +ean std df t-3alue sig
7uided @' 1%.'EE7 2.%@%'%
2'' @.3!@ .'''
Non-guided 112 1'.71%3 2.5%%!%

3able ("
The t-Test Analysis showing difference in post-test mean scores of male and female students in mathematics
when they are taught using guided-discovery learning strategy

$aria/les No +ean std df t-3alue sig
+ale %E 1%.'E52 2.5!5%5
!! .1E! .!E7
-e*ale %% 13.@7E7 2.37535
P M '.'5

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!7
3able ,"
ANCOVA Analysis showing difference in the post-test mean scores of students with high, medium and low
scoring level when they are taught using guided-discovery learning
strategy


Source 40pe III Su* of S8uares df +ean S8uare f Sig.
:orrected +odel @7.7!5
a
3 32.5@5 E.15' .''1
Intercept 2517.E55 1 2517.E55 %75.'13 .'''
Pretest %.''E 1 %.''E .75E .3!7
Scoring 6e3el !@.1!E 2 %%.5@3 !.%13 .'''
Error %55.!15 !E 5.3''
4otal 1!3E2.''' @'
:orrected 4otal 553.E'' !@
a. ; S8uared I .177 ((d.usted ; S8uared I .1%!? pJ'.'5


3able ."
Duncan Post-hoc Test

Scoring 6e3el N
Su/set for alp5a I '.'5
1 2 3
6ow E @.EEE7
+ediu* 51 13.17E5
>ig5 33 15.1!1!
Sig. 1.''' 1.''' 1.'''
+eans for groups in 5o*ogeneous su/sets are displa0ed.


3able /"
ANCOVA Computation on Post-test ean !cores of !tudents in the Treatment "roup and "ender
Source 3y*e %%% Sum of
S4uares
df Mean S4uare 0 Sig$
:orrected +odel !2%.7'7
a
% 2'E.177 3@.!@3 .'''
Intercept %535.%@2 1 %535.%@2 !77.5E@ .'''
Pretest 251.E31 1 251.E31 %!.E!! .'''
4reat*ent 372.@'E 1 372.@'E 72.153 .'''
7ender .1%2 1 .1%2 .'27 .!E@
4reat*ent R 7ender .'11 1 .'11 .''2 .@E3
Error 1'1!.1%% 1@7 5.1E!
4otal 31!5'.''' 2'2
:orrected 4otal 1!%2.!51 2'1
a. ; S8uared I .%%! ((d.usted ; S8uared I .%3E

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!!

0igure #" Gra*h on the interaction effect bet!een the treatment and the students5 Gender

3able 6"
ANCOVA Computation on Post-test ean !cores of !tudents in the Treatment "roup and !coring levels
Source 3y*e %%% Sum of
S4uares
1f Mean S4uare 0 Sig$
:orrected +odel 13E2.57%
a
5 272.515 111.213 .'''
Intercept 32@'.'1E 1 32@'.'1E 13%2.E%7 .'''
Pretest 3'.E!1 1 3'.E!1 12.521 .''1
4reat*ent 5@.@1@ 1 5@.@1@ 2%.%53 .'''
Scoringle3el %53.%!E 2 22E.7%3 @2.533 .'''
4reat*ent R Scoringle3el .%2' 1 .%2' .171 .E7@
Error %!'.27! 1@E 2.%5'
4otal 31!5'.''' 2'2
:orrected 4otal 1!%2.!51 2'1
a. ; S8uared I .73@ ((d.usted ; S8uared I .733

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper ISSN 2222-2!!" (#nline
$ol.%& No.12& 2'13

!@
-igure (D Gra*h on the interaction effect bet!een the treatment and the students5 Scoring levels



This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,
Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access
Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is
Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.

More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTEs homepage:
http://www.iiste.org

CALL FOR PAPERS
The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and
collaborating with academic institutions around the world. Theres no deadline for
submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission
instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/Journals/
The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified
submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the
readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than
those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the
journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.
IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners
EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open
Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial
Library , NewJour, Google Scholar