KIBOGORA POLYTECHNIC

FACULTY OF EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

THE IMPACT OF USING ACTIVE METHOD ON THE PERFORMANCE OF

SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN RUSIZI DISTRICT.
Case of G S NYAKABWENDE

A research proposal presented in partial fulfilment for the bachelor’s degree honors with
Education in History and Geography.

PAPER PREPARED BY:

MANIRAFASHA Placide
REG No
&
BIKORIMANA Jean Marie Vianey
REG No:

Supervisor: Dr Phanuel

Kibogora, August, 2022

0
 ABSTRACT

The purposes of this study were to explore the nature of the teaching-learning process in line
with active learning methods and to identify the major challenges hindering the implementation
of these approaches in mathematics classes. Both qualitative and quantitative methods of data
collection were employed which is a mixed method research design. Probability proportional
sampling technique for students and availability sampling technique for teachers were used. 25
mathematics teachers and 369 students were involved in the study. Questionnaires, lesson
observation, and focus groups discussion were the data gathering instruments. The quantitative
data obtained were analyzed using SPSS. The qualitative data were analyzed by narrating the
information obtained from the data. Questioning method, group work, gap lecture, cooperative
learning, and individual work were the methods used commonly by the teachers. Large class
size; the amount of content to be covered; lack of instructional materials; lack of administrative
support; and that it took too much effort from teachers are main challenges that hinder the
application of active learning methods in the classrooms.

1
 DECLARATIONS

Declaration by the Candidate

We, MANIRAFASHA Placide and BIKORIMANA Jean Marie Vianey, do hereby declare
that this is a product of our own original work and not a duplication of any similar academic
work. It has therefore not been submitted to any other institution of higher learning.
All materials cited in this paper which are not our own have been duly acknowledged.

MANIRAFASHA Placide BIKORIMANA Jean Marie

Vianey

Signed …………… Signed…………………………

Date ………………
Date…………………………….

Declaration by the Supervisor

I, Dr ..Phanuel declare that this work has been submitted for examination with my approval as a
KP supervisor.

Supervisor’s Name: Dr, Phanuel

Signed…………………………………..

Date ……………………………………

2
 DEDICATION
To our parents

To our sisters

To our Brothers

To our siblings and friends

We dedicate this Dissertation

3
 AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
All praises, and thanks giving to Almighty God who always the researchers praying over the
abundance of His grace, so that the researchers can be given the strength to complete the
preparation of this research study.
Firstly, we would like to express our great thanks to our Dear Supervisor Dr, Phanuel His
inspiring ideas and knowledge made this work more specific and our special gratitude for his
guidance, encouragement, advice and suggestions during this research project.

We would like to express our appreciation to Kibogora Polytechnic staff be they academic or
administrative for the academic support rendered to us during our studies in the campus.

This work is the result of the great knowledge got from Kibogora Polytechnic. This research
project is successfully based on the collectivity of physical, moral, and intellectual efforts from a
diversity of individuals especially our parents:Thacienne and Marcelline, my husband:Theophile
and our sister and brother: Jeannette and Jonas.

We are also grateful to our fellow colleagues and friends whom we shared all hardships during
the whole time we spent at Kibogora Polytechnic. Their suggestions, advice and moral support
have been helpful towards the completion of this work. Without them our performance would
not be achieved.

4
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Target population and their gender..................................................................................23

Table 2: Gender of respondents.....................................................................................................27
Table 3: Age of respondents.........................................................................................................28
Table 4: Education qualification of respondents...........................................................................28
Table 5: Professional experience of respondents...........................................................................29
Table 6: Prevalence of using active method by teachers...............................................................30
Table 7: Models of evaluation after lesson....................................................................................30
Table 8. The approaches commonly used by the teachers.............................................................31
Table 9: Students’ participation in the lesson................................................................................31

5
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................................1
DECLARATIONS.....................................................................................................................................2
DEDICATION...........................................................................................................................................3
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS.........................................................................................................................4
TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................................5
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS..................................................................................8
CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION..................................................................................9
[Link]................................................................................................................9
[Link] TO THE STUDY....................................................................................9
1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT..............................................................................................10
1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY.....................................................................................11
1.4.1. General objective...................................................................................................................11
1.4.2. Specific objectives..................................................................................................................11
1.5. RESEARCH QUESTIONS..............................................................................................11
1.6. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY...................................................................................12
1.7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY.................................................................................................12
1.7.1. Content scope.........................................................................................................................12
1.7.2. Geographical scope................................................................................................................12
1.7.3. Time scope..............................................................................................................................12
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................13
2.0. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................13
2.1. DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS...........................................................................13
2.1.1. Active method........................................................................................................................13
2.1.2. Teaching.................................................................................................................................13
2.1.3. Learning.................................................................................................................................13
2.1.4. Secondary Schools.................................................................................................................14
2.1.5. Teacher...................................................................................................................................14
2.1.6. Student’s performance..........................................................................................................14

6
 2.2. ACTIVITIES WHICH INVOLVE ACTIVE METHOD IN TEACHING-
LEARNING PROCESS...........................................................................................................14
2.2.1. Games.....................................................................................................................................15
2.2.2. Use of Technology..................................................................................................................15
2.2.3. Cooperation............................................................................................................................15
2.3. APPLICATION OF ACTIVE METHOD DURING EVALUATION.........................16
2.3.1. Exercises for Individual Students.........................................................................................16
2.3.2. Discussion (Q &A) Exercises in active method of teaching.................................................16
2.3.4. Share/Pair...............................................................................................................................17
2.4. ACTIVE METHOD AND STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT..................17
2.5. EMPIRICAL REVIEW ON THE USE OF ACTIVE METHOD IN TEACHING-
LEARNING PROCESS...........................................................................................................18
2.6. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK....................................................................................19
2.7. RESEARCH GAP.............................................................................................................20
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.......................................................................21
3.0. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................21
3.1. RESEARCH APPROACHES..........................................................................................21
3.1.1. Quantitative approach...........................................................................................................21
3.1.2. Qualitative approach.............................................................................................................21
3.2. RESEARCH DESIGN......................................................................................................21
3.3. TARGET POPULATION................................................................................................22
3.4. SAMPLING PROCEDURES...........................................................................................23
3.4.1. Purposive sampling................................................................................................................23
3.4.2. Stratified random sampling..................................................................................................23
3.5. SAMPLE SIZE..................................................................................................................24
3.6. INSTRUMENTS FOR DATA COLLECTION.............................................................24
3.6.1. Questionnaire.........................................................................................................................24
3.6.2. Interview guide.......................................................................................................................24
3.6.4. Electronic sources..................................................................................................................24
3.7. DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES.................................................................................24
3.8. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF MEASUREMENTS..........................................25
3.8.1. Validity...................................................................................................................................25
3.8.2. Reliability of the research.....................................................................................................25

7
 3.9. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS.....................................................................................25
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS..................26
4.0. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................26
4.1. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS................................26
4.2.1. Gender of Respondents..........................................................................................................26
4.1.3 Age group of Respondents......................................................................................................27
4.1.4 Highest qualification of respondents.....................................................................................27
4.1.5. Working experience of respondents....................................................................................28
4.2. PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS..................................................................................29
4.2.1. Prevalence of using active method........................................................................................29
4.2.2. The frequency of using active approaches in teaching........................................................30
4.2.3. Students’ participation in the lesson.....................................................................................30
4.2.4. Challenges in using active methods and supports provided for its implementation.........31
4.3. DISCUSSION OF THE RESARCH FINDINGS...........................................................31
4.3.1. Teachers’ use of active learning in the teaching-learning process.....................................31
4.3.2. The major factors/challenges influencing the implementation of active methods.............33
4.4. The Influence of Active learning on Students’ Academic Achievement......................35
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................35
5.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................35
5.2 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................35
5.3. RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................................36
5.4. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY...................................................................37
REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................37

8
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CBC: Competence Based Curriculum

e: Margin of Error
G S: Groupe Scolaire
GPA: Grade Point Average
KBC: Knowledge Based Curriculum
n: Sample Size
N: target Population
NUR: National University of Rwanda
Q&A: Question and Answer
REB: Rwanda Education Board

9
 CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.0. INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides the background to the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the
study, research questions and significance of the study. It also contains limitations of the study,
the scope and the organization of the study.
1.1. BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Following dynamic social changes, teaching has been in a continuous changing process. Notably, a
paradigm shift has been taking place in recent decades. Hence, the emphasis shift from the teacher to the
student center that promotes students to actively participate in the acquisition of knowledge and skills.
Močinić, (2012). Current education theories emphasize the teaching research methodology courses
generally rely on making the research process understandable. Hence, this would be achieved by the
practice of active student-centered modes of teaching. Keenan and Fontaine, (2012). The approach has
emerged as a body of knowledge of the constructivism theory. Hence, the learning based on self-
responsibilities of the students. Thus, the learners construct knowledge and skills through the guidance of
the instructors. Furthermore, the student-centered approach encourages learning through active interaction
with the teachers, students, and the learning environment. Barraket, (2005). A study by Kilburn et al.
(2014) also emphasized its usefulness for the students in facilitating the learning process.

From an innovation point of view, active teaching techniques change the pace of the classroom, and are a
creative way to increase students’ involvement, motivation, excitement, attention, and perceived
helpfulness and applicability of the class. Binek-Rivera & Mathews, (2004); Bonwell & Eison, (1991);
Guthrie & Cox, (2001); Stewart-Wingfield & Black, (2005). From a cognitive perspective, experientially
taught students may engage in higher-order thinking such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Anderson
& Krathwohl, (2001); Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill & Krathwohl, (1956); Bonwell & Eison, (1991);
Hackathorn, et al., (2010). They are also better able to identify the concepts in the real world, manipulate
phenomena for their own purposes, think about the material in new and complex ways, comprehend
phenomena conceptually, and recall, retain, and memorize the material better. Donovan, Bransford, &
Pellegrino, (1999); Driscoll, (2002); Rubin & Hebert, (1998); Serva & Fuller, (2004); Whetten & Clark,
(1996).

Therefore, it is assumed that, by investigating the use of active method and its impact on
students’ performance is urgent and crucial students given the context in which it is carried out,
10
and the aspect under investigation. Also, the gained knowledge could raise awareness on the
existence of successful students’ strategies to meet cognitively challenging content and increase
conceptual attainment despite the problematic language skills. This knowledge may inform
pedagogical practice and help newcomers to become integrated into the use of direct method to
make students more successful.

1.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

Active learning is not a new term, and educators should not ignore or exclude it from teaching-
learning process. Young, Robertson, and Alberts (2009) stated, “secondary teaching popularly
and historically revolves around the traditional ‘chalk-and-talk’ lecture method” (p. 41). In
contrast, they explained, the active learning philosophy uses constructive and task-related
activities to break up the lecture. Young et al., (2009). Researchers know that students learn in
different ways and want recognition as an integral part of their learning. Typical teacher-centered
programs, however, are content heavy and focus on what faculty members want to teach, not
what students need to learn. Candela, Dalley, & Benzel, Lindley, (2006).

Active learning projects such as case studies, debate, and group exercises can enhance learning
and provide meaning. These projects engage students, encourage critical thinking, teach medical
terminology in context, and help medical students solve problems. Active learning projects are
learner centered rather than teacher -centered because they engage the student in activity,
creating a learning environment of exploration. “The learners’ role in a learner-centered
classroom is to participate actively and creatively in learning, using both the materials they study
in the course and their own knowledge and language resources” Liang, (2007, p. 12). “A central
concept of learner centered education is that teachers and students are both learners, working
together to explore and develop students’ abilities” Candela et al., (2006, p. 59). Active learning
allows students to engage in activity that will enhance their learning by exploration.

Some recent research studies such as Andersson [Link], have underlined the incongruity between
Rwandan learners’ English language abilities and the cognitive academic requirements they meet
in advanced phases of education, Andersson and Kagwesage, (2012); NUR (2010); Parliament of
Rwanda (2010). Reasonably, if language abilities do not match with the conceptual requirement,
this would lead to frustration and a request to change the medium as Obilan, (2015) revealed that
teachers’ usage of active method in teaching is still low and greatly impacts their students’

11
participation in the classroom. It is due to this backdrop therefore, it became imperative to
investigate the use of active method in teaching-learning process and how it relates to academic
performance. It was for this reason this study was conducted.

1.3. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study may contribute to ongoing professional development programs for the implantation of
competence-based curriculum (CBC) across the country. Secondary school teachers will learn
how to facilitate learners with active learning projects, students should increase their ability to
think critically and make sound decisions. Moreover, they will be able to apply the information
from the classroom in their work places and adjust well in the society.

1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1.4.1. General objective
The main objective of the current study was to investigate the reasons which push teachers to use
active method in teaching- learning process in secondary school.

1.4.2. Specific objectives

The specific objectives of the present study stood as the following:

i. To identify different activities applied in active teaching-learning.

ii. To identify the impact of using active method on secondary school students’
achievements.
iii. To examine the level of usage of active method in teaching-learning process in
secondary schools.

1.5. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The present research strived to answer the following questions:

i. What are different activities that teachers use to apply active method in teaching-
learning process?
ii. What is the impact of active method on the performance of secondary school
students?
iii. To what extent is the active method used by secondary school teachers in teaching-
learning process?

12
1.6. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The study was conducted in secondary schools in Rusizi district. This study has different
limitations. First and foremost, Rusizi is hilly District, its schools are scattered in different areas,
for this reason, it is difficult to reach every secondary school of Rusizi District due to long
distance and location of some school. To address this problem, one school was purposively
selected basing on its location.
The last limitation was the availability of school head teachers who bear other administrative
responsibilities, to solve this problem; the researcher left the questionnaire of head teacher who
may not be available at the time of responding questionnaires, and the filled questionnaire was
returned after two days.
1.7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
1.7.1. Content scope

This study focused on investigating the impact of using active method in teaching-learning
process on secondary school students’ academic performance in Rusizi district. The researchers
picked this topic since Rwanda Education Board (REB) announced the shift from Knowledge-
Based Curriculum(KBC) to Competence-Based Curriculum(CBC) in 2016. Thus; it helped the
researchers to collect the recent data related to the study.
1.7.2. Geographical scope
The present study was conducted at G S NYAKABWENDE located in Rusizi district, Western
province, Rwanda. This school is selected by the researchers because there are all levels of secondary
education namely: ordinary level and advanced level as well as different combinations whereby teachers
have to apply different teaching techniques. In addition, it is not far from the researchers which eased
them with the research owing to funds shortage.

1.7.3. Time scope

The Research based on the data in the period of academic year 2020-2021 This period was
appropriate for this study because it rendered full and reliable information and data related to the
topic under study.

13
 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0. INTRODUCTION
The present chapter covers the available literatures relates to teaching- learning process in
secondary schools worldwide, in Africa and in Rwanda throughout time. It also explores
different approaches which are used to integrate active method in teaching-learning process as
well as the reasons why teachers should focus on it nowadays.

2.1. DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS

2.1.1. Active method
The phrase “active method” typically refers to any instructional method that engages students in
the learning process. Prince, (2004). More importantly they must be engaged in their own
learning process with such thinking tasks as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Bonwell &
Eison, (1991). The active learning umbrella term refers to an array of instructional methods that
transfer the responsibility of learning back to the learner. This student-centered model helps
learners to see themselves and their peers as sources of knowledge, rather than passive listeners.
Hammer & Giordano, (2012)

2.1.2. Teaching
Teaching according to Oriahi, (2006), is the programmed development of the child in a
classroom setting by someone who has undergone the prerequisite training and is ascribed with
the full responsibility of managing the classroom in a such way as to enhance the learning
process. Sequeira, (2012), observed teaching as a set of events, outside the learners which are
designed to support internal process of learning. Teaching is outside the learner while learning is
internal the learners.
2.1.3. Learning
Learning is about a change, the change brought about by developing a new skill. Learning
according to Sequeira, (2012) is a relatively permanent change, usually brought about
intentionally. When we attend a class, search through a book, or read a discussion paper, we set
out to learn.

14
2.1.4. Secondary Schools
They are Schools that provide secondary education for six years (1-6), which include ordinary
level (1-3) and advanced level (4-6) to prepare students to meet societal needs and expectations
or to prepare them for higher or tertiary education as well as further trainings.
2.1.5. Teacher
A teacher is a person who teaches lessons, especially in a school. They are those people who
have power to mound students. Thus, they shape students in academic matters as well as moral
values (Hornby, 2000). In this study the word teacher refers to qualified person who has ability
to mould student behavior together with teaching students in learning environment.

2.1.6. Student’s performance

In this study academic performance is regarded as the extent to which students achieved their
educational goals as measured by examinations. According to Genesee et aI., (2005), academic
performance is viewed as performance on standardized achievement tests, or more broadly, as
measures of general academic outcomes including grade point average (GPA), academic persistence,
and school-related attitudes.
2.2. ACTIVITIES WHICH INVOLVE ACTIVE METHOD IN TEACHING-LEARNING
PROCESS
Auster and Wylie, (2006) discuss four dimensions of the teaching process that create active
learning in the classroom. These dimensions are: context setting, class preparation, class
delivery, and continuous improvement. Context setting has to do with establishing a climate and
setting norms that will facilitate more student involvement. Making students feel comfortable
asking questions and being actively involved are part of creating a context setting that is
appropriate for learning.

Bonwell, (1997) discusses a framework for the introduction of active learning with a special
focus on assessment. It is important to actively assess knowledge in the class by checking the
class during teaching-learning process using short questions such as, “Did everyone get that?”
Questions can be displayed giving students the opportunity to think about them before the
answer is illustrated for the entire class. Practice quizzes and peer assessment ideas are discussed
as ways to actively assess knowledge and help demonstrate important topics to students. Bonwell
also emphasizes the importance of group participation and explains techniques for facilitating
active learning using such groups.

15
2.2.1. Games
The use of games as a method of content delivery is a popular technique in active learning in
secondary schools. This popularity stems from several factors: enjoyment, stimulation of
competitive spirit, and a natural affinity towards games. Games are frameworks students seem to
easily relate to. A common example that has been studied is the Monte Hall problem Umble &
Umble, (2004). In this problem, a contestant is given three doors from which to choose. Behind
one of the doors is a new car, behind the other two doors are goats. Obviously, the goal is to
select the door with the car. After the contestant selects a door, the host (who knows which door
the car is behind) opens a door with a goat behind it. The contestant is then asked if she would
like to switch her choice. Statistically, the contestant should switch as her odds improve from
one-third to a two-thirds chance of winning.

Students take a more hands-on approach to learning through playing the game to review
operations management concepts. Aspects of active learning are clearly involved in this project
in that there is more student participation and opportunity for reflection than in a traditional
lecture review format. In this workshop, students are part of a manufacturing process in which
various departmental costs are derived. The use of popular television game shows can be a fairly
easy and effective method of providing students with active learning experiences. Sarason and
Banbury, (2004) suggest that through the use of these ideas, students achieve higher levels of
learning.

2.2.2. Use of Technology

A number of scholars have performed studies involving the use of technology to promote active
method in teaching-learning process. It is believed that in this age of technology, constant
communication, and interactivity that students will come to expect more technologically
enhanced environments. Li, Greenberg, & Nicholls, (2007). Furthermore, some researchers
believe that such tools will be needed in order to maintain student interest and motivation.
Ueltschy, (2001). An example involves the use of networked computers to allow student
collaboration online to solve more complex problems.

2.2.3. Cooperation
An important part of active method is working and discussing situations with peers. An
instructor may tell students how to solve a particular problem, but oftentimes learning occurs
when students discuss problem-solving techniques with each other. Revans, (1971) suggested

16
that reflection is an important part of the learning process. Active learning using cooperative
approaches is well suited for preparing students because of its social, teamwork, and real-world
applicability. Sims, (2006).

2.3. APPLICATION OF ACTIVE METHOD DURING EVALUATION

Faust and Paulson, (1998) provide a few of the many active learning strategies ranging from
those completed as individuals to those done in groups or teams. Their analysis also reflects the
amount of effort and time required, from the least to most. Ultimately, faculty must decide which
activities are the right fit for the amount of time they have to invest, along with what strategies
make the most sense for their content, Faust & Paulson, (1998).

2.3.1. Exercises for Individual Students

These require less time, and can work well in any type of classroom environment, especially
large enrollment classes where rapport and team work might not be feasible. Faust & Paulson,
(1998).

• Clarification Pauses: when the instructor simply pauses in lecture, after covering an important
point, and then asks if anyone needs clarification

• One-Minute Paper: when the instructor pauses during or at the end of a class, asks a question
(such as “what was the main point of today’s class?”) and allows students to write their response
in one minute. This is a highly effective exercise for checking student progress.

• Muddy/Clear Point: a variation of the one- minute paper, when the faculty asks specifically
about what the muddiest or clearest point was from that day lecture.

• Daily/Weekly journal: an effective tool for motivating students to apply course concepts to
their daily lives. Although feedback is not instant.

• Reading Quiz: helps to measure student comprehension of reading assignments. Faust &
Paulson, (1998).

2.3.2. Discussion (Q &A) Exercises in active method of teaching

Traditionally faculty assess student understanding by asking questions during class. This Socratic
Method has many drawbacks such as favoring a small number of students, students not listening
to their peer’s opinions, and students not listening to the instructor if they have just answered.

17
The following techniques help questioning effectiveness and enable students to “own” the
question Faust & Paulson, (1998):

• Student Summary of Another Student Answer – this encourages students to listen to not just
their instructor, but their peers.

• The Fish Bowl – students put questions on index cards into a bowl; instructor reads some and
the class answers them.

• Quiz/Test Questions – the instructor encourages students to create assessment questions,

allowing them to think more deeply and critically about the material.

2.3.4. Share/Pair
Pairing students together provides some of the same benefits as group work: greater
understanding, satisfaction, and increased retention. Faust & Paulson, (1998).

• Discussion – student’s pair off and work together to respond to a question.

• Note Sharing – helps to develop better note taking skills while helping each other to fill in any
gaps.

2.4. ACTIVE METHOD AND STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

There have been a number of researches conducted to show the relationship between teaching
methods and academic success or achievement, and which show that teaching methods can
significantly enhance academic achievement of students at the primary and secondary level,
Bush, (2005). Dedicated teachers have made attempts to enhance their students „academic
achievements in many ways. One of these ways according to Bush, (2005) is to identify each
student’s learning method to determine strengths for academic achievement. In a study of Castro
and Peck, (2011) on learning methods and learning difficulties of foreign language students, they
claimed that the preferred learning method of the student can be a help or a hindrance in the
success of the student in the foreign language classroom. Contemplating rom Bush’s study, it
implies that the students in their study compounded multiple learning styles, hence, they have
capacity to learn independently more effectively, indicating that learning styles make a critical
impact on the students‟ academic achievement. Gilbert, (2005) argued that students who were
taught by an approach compatible with their learning style did better than those whose learning
styles were not matched with the teaching methodologies. A student’s style of learning, if

18
accommodated, can result into improved attitudes toward learning and an increase in thinking
skills, academic achievement, and creativity, Witzier & Kruger, (2003). Kolb further identified
four learning styles in terms of accommodation, assimilation, converging, and diverging and four
learning modes that is to say; concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract
conceptualization, and active experimentation, Kolb, (2013). Marzano, (2004) developed a
comprehensive model dealing with environmental, emotional, sociological, physical, and
psychological learning style elements and concluded that these elements could provide
information directly related to teaching strategies and academic achievement. Wilhelm and
Danube asserted that learning styles enable learners to reflect on how they learn best helps to
develop their meta-cognition. Learning style consideration in learning is therefore an approach
that is directed at meta-learning, similar to setting goals, choosing appropriate strategies and
monitoring progress which are more effective ways of improving learning outcomes and
achievement than those which simply aim to engage learners at the level of presenting
information or understanding and us, Wilhelm, & Danube, (2001).

2.5. EMPIRICAL REVIEW ON THE USE OF ACTIVE METHOD IN TEACHING-

LEARNING PROCESS
Active learning with learner-centered teaching will enhance the quality of education in the
classroom. Constructivism is about change through transformational learning. “Teaching should
promote experiences that require students to become active scholarly participators in the learning
process” Gordon, (2009, p. 39). Constructivism is active. Students want to be and should be
involved in their own learning and be responsible for their education. “At the heart of
constructivism is the idea that learning is neither passive nor a copying process. Rather, it is a
process of active participation” Lew, (2010, p. 10). Action is a component of transformational
learning, and it is important that medical faculty view active learning as component of social
change as it affects curriculum and how the students perform in the medical community.
According to Lew (2010), “A priority of the 21st century is real learning; that is, learning that
includes the ability to think and to apply scientific knowledge for individual and social purposes,
as opposed to merely memorizing and recalling facts” (p. 10)

Wang, Woo, and Zhao, (2007) explained, “Critical thinking and collaborative knowledge
construction have become essential competencies for people in the new information age and the

19
global economy” (p. 95). The 21st century is an informational age, and both students and patients
live in a technological world. It is necessary to encourage critical thinking in each classroom.

Many researchers have conducted studies with positive results for active learning in the
classroom. The following study by Grimley et al. shows how students feel more involved in their
learning, and they appreciate the opportunity to learn under circumstances other than lecture.
Grimley, Green, Nilsen, Thompson, and Tomes, (2011) conducted a study with first-year
students in a Bachelor of Arts Education course using computer games and comparing it with
lectures. They reported, the results indicate the computer game mode invoked perceptions of a
more active and challenging learning experience compared with more traditional lectures. If we
have a constructivist view of learning then ensuring that learners are active and challenged in
learning situations is of paramount importance. (p. 52)

Students need to engage in class rather instead of sitting passively and taking notes. Vandiver
and Walsh, (2010) taught a research class and prepared the students to think critically,
contextually, and independently. By Vandiver and Walsh using active learning in the classroom,
the students were able to apply their findings to social problems, and they had a greater
understanding of the material at the end of the semester. While teaching the research process,
instructors need to demonstrate how the research process and the findings apply to social
problems, because doing so serves to benefit society. Students retain information because active
learning is not about memorizing; rather, it is about engaging students, motivating them, and
helping them in the application of the material. Active learning is about motivating students to
learn and then empowering them to apply the material and make meaning of ideas. Cherney,
(2008) stressed, “active learning enhances student retention of concepts, particularly when the
students are the authors of their own learning” (p. 155).

2.6. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The conceptual framework explains either graphically or in narrative from the major issues in the
study, including the constructs or variables and presumed relationship among them, Kombo and
Tromp, (2006). Figure 2.1 is a conceptual framework which shows the relationship between
three sets of variables in this research. Independent variables are conceptualized as the
participatory methods (recitation, brainstorming, group discussion and demonstration) and non-
participatory methods of teaching lecture, seminars, presentation while dependent variables are

20
conceptualized as the academic and non-academic which in turn have effect on students’
performance.

Fig 1: Conceptual framework

Independent variable Dependent variables

Active method Students’ academic

performance
Recitation
-Classroom participation
Question -answer
- High class score in test
Brainstorming
-High score in examination
Discussion prepared by REB
Intervening variables
Demonstration
Role play
Government policy
Students’ motivation
Class size
Quality of teaching
resources

Source: researchers model, 2022

The conceptual model in Figure 2.1 suggests that the independent variable is conceptualized as
consisting of active method of teaching (participatory method) while the dependent variable is
students’ performance in subject taught in the classroom which is conceptualized as classroom
participation, high class score in tests and examinations and high score in examinations prepared
by Rwanda Examination Board (REB).

2.7. RESEARCH GAP

Constructivist learning theory and literature on collaborative and cooperative learning all
reiterate how valuable active learning, and active learning classrooms, can be to student learning.
Land et al., (2012); Brooks & Brooks, (1999); Prince, (2004); Dillenbourg, (1999). However,
further research is required to make clear when and how active learning strategies should be

21
integrated throughout teaching-learning process in Rwandan secondary schools. The intent of
this research is to present a baseline of the reasons why teacher should use this active method
and its impact the learners’ performance and provide a call for further research that can help
others make the choices best suited in the same field to enhance Rwandan education towards the
required quality.

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0. INTRODUCTION
Each research has a procedure through which the data is presented. However, there are different
types of presentation depending on the researcher’s style and the focus of his/her study.
Therefore, the general methodological framework was used to collect and analyze data. This
chapter includes: research design, target population, Sampling procedures, data collection
instruments, administration of data collection instruments, Reliability and validity, data analysis
procedures and ethical consideration.
3.1. RESEARCH APPROACHES
Basing on types of data and the instruments, the researchers employed both quantitative and
qualitative approaches of data analysis.
3.1.1. Quantitative approach
As regards to the quantitative data, responses were categorized. Percentage was used to
investigate the reasons why secondary school teachers use active method in teaching-learning
process at G S NYAKABWENDE particularly. Appropriate descriptive statistics such as
percentages in table and graphs will be used.

3.1.2. Qualitative approach

Data obtained from document, interview, focus group discussions and class observation were
also stated by narrating the information. The sequence of presentation and analysis of data
obtained using class observation and focus group discussion were presented, analyzed and
interpreted.

22
3.2. RESEARCH DESIGN
Research design is the arrangement of condition for gathering and analyzing information in a
way that aims to combine significance for the purpose of study with economy in operation,
Kothari, (2014). It is, therefore, the conceptual structure within which research is conducted; it
constitutes the blue print for the collection, measurement and analysis of data. A mixed method
particularly convergent parallel mixed methods design guided the study. A convergent parallel
mixed-methods design is an approach to inquiry that combines both qualitative and quantitative
methods concurrently, prioritizing both methods almost equally.

Creswell & Clark, (2011), and Creswell, (2014). This means that the quantitative and qualitative
methods complement each other, and provide for the triangulation of findings, hence greater
validity of the emerging inferences.

In quantitative research, researcher used Cross Sectional Survey Design to collect data at one
point in time, Creswell, (2014). For instance, when visiting the school, the researchers collected
data from students, teachers and head teacher. In qualitative approach, the researchers used
phenomenological design to explore the meaning of individual perspectives and lived
experiences of teachers and the use of direct method in teaching a second language to improve
students’ performance. The Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods Design was preferred because
the researcher prioritized the methods (qualitative and quantitative) equally and kept the strands
independent during data collection and analysis and then mixed the results during overall
interpretation. It is also preferred because the researchers compared and relate data collected and
analyzed easily before making interpretation, Teddlie & Tashakkori, (2009).

The advantage of using the mixed methods helped the researchers to get information, which was
overlooked, from one of the paradigm. Convergent parallel mixed methods design is also
preferred to the other mixed methods designs for its suitability and strengths in collecting,
analyzing and integrating quantitative and qualitative research simultaneously in a single study
as advanced by Creswell, (2014). In addition, convergent parallel mixed methods design enables
the combination of both quantitative and qualitative research in order to provide a better
understanding of a research problem than either research approach alone.

23
3.3. TARGET POPULATION

Target population is described as the group of people that the researcher wants to draw a
conclusion about once the research is completed, Odera, (2006). The target population in this
study was composed of 5 administrative staff members and 24 teachers from G S
NYAKABWENDE, a secondary school in Rusizi district. A brief calculated number of the target
population is presented in the table below.
Table 1. Target population and their gender
Figure 1. Target population and their gender

Categories Gender Total %

Male Female
1. Administrative staff members 2 3 5 17.24
2. Teaching staff members 10 14 24 82.75
Total 12 17 29 100
Source: G S NYAKABWENDE archives, 2022
3.4. SAMPLING PROCEDURES

According to Gay (1987), sampling enables the researchers to select a member or a group of
individuals in such a way that those selected represent the large group from which they were
selected. Sampling reduces or eliminates some unwarranted biases, which are the threat to the
credibility of the results of the study. The present study used purposive sampling, stratified
sampling technique and simple random sampling.
3.4.1. Purposive sampling

Purposive sampling is a non-probability technique where particular people are purposively

selected to participate in the research because of their unique features as required by the nature of
the study, Kumar, (2005). Our study intends to investigate the reasons why teachers use active
method in teaching-learning process. Two among 5 staff members were interviewed basing on their
special characteristics of being reliable source of information which the researchers intend to rely on for
adequate input data for the study. They were selected since they are supposed to have information on all
supervisory activiites which take place in the school.

24
3.4.2. Stratified random sampling

Stratified random sampling is a useful method for data collection if the population is
heterogeneous. In this method, the entire heterogeneous population is divided into a number of
homogeneous groups, usually known as Strata, each of these groups is homogeneous within
itself, and then units are sampled at random from each of these stratums. Therefore, using the
sampling technique explained above 8 amidst 24 teachers were selected; i.e. each department
was represented by 2 teachers.
3.5. SAMPLE SIZE

In population of G S NYAKABWENDE in Rusizi district. The sample size was made of two
administrative members and eight teachers from all departments. Therefore, the sample size is 10
respondents.
3.6. INSTRUMENTS FOR DATA COLLECTION
The study will use the questionnaire, interview and focus group discussion to bring about rich
primary and secondary data from staff members and teachers in order to investigate the reasons
why teachers use active methods in teaching-learning process.

3.6.1. Questionnaire
According to Mugenda and Mugenda, (2003), a questionnaire is a set of related questions
designed to collect information from respondents. The questionnaire was the most appropriate
instrument due to its ability to collect large amount of data in a reasonable quick span of time. It
also ensured confidentiality of source of information through anonymity while ensuring
standards. Structured questionnaire was given to teachers to address the specific objectives of the
study.

3.6.2. Interview guide

A face to face interview guide was used on head teacher and his/her deputy to confirm the
information obtained through questionnaires and further information was got for future plans of
the project in the school.

3.6.3. Observation method

An observation was done in all classrooms by the researchers so that they could directly
experience and detect myriad reasons why teachers should use active method in teaching-
learning process.

25
3.6.4. Electronic sources
This source contains a lot of update qualitative and quantitative information needed in the
completion of my research project. Data were also collected through the visit of different
websites.

3.7. DATA ANALYSIS

On the basis of data gathered and the instrument used, both quantitative and qualitative
techniques of data analysis were employed. To get the collected data ready for analysis, the
questionnaires will be checked for completion, and then classified and tailed by the researchers
themselves. The views about the practices and reasons why teachers should use active method in
teaching-learning process will be analyzed quantitatively in terms of percentages through tables
and graphs by using MICROSSFT EXCEL. whereas the qualitative data from the interview and
focus group discussion will complement it by adding other relevant information about the topic
under study.

3.8. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF MEASUREMENTS

3.8.1. Validity
The validity is concerned with the measure of the extent to which the research instrument
measures what it is designed for. The instrument must be relevant with the respect to the content
as is expressed by the research objectives. Mugenda and Mugenda, (1999) explains validity as
the degree as which the result obtained from analysis actually represents the phenomenon under
study. This research study validity was done using content validity which is concerned with the
extent to which the research instrument measures, what it appears to measure according to the
researcher’s subjective assessment. The validity of the instrument was also assured through
experts’ advice of the supervisor.

3.8.2. Reliability of the research

Reliability is the measure to which a research instrument yields consistent results after repeated
trials. Mugenda and Mugenda, (2003). The research used split have technique of accessing
reliability scores from one part are correlated with scores from the second part thus eliminating
chance of error due to differing test conditions. The instruments were then revised.

3.9. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION

Research ethics concern the responsibility of the researchers to be honest and respectful to all
individuals who were affected by their research studies or their reports of the studies’ results.

26
The researchers assured respondents that the study would be strictly academic and that utmost
confidentiality would be observed. The data used in this study would be anonymously coded and
cannot therefore be traced back to individuals. Participation in the research was voluntary, no
participants was forced. The researcher ensured the participants not to reveal their personal
information.

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND

ANALYSIS
4.0. INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents research findings and discussion based on collected information from G S
NYAKABWENDE. The information was collected from teachers, deputy head teacher and the
head teacher. The main objective of the study was to assess the impact of using active method on
students’ academic performance secondary school in Rusizi district.

4.1. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS

This section describes the demographic characteristic of the respondents in terms of occupation,
sex, age group, education qualification, and working experience.

4.2.1. Gender of Respondents

In this study, gender issue was considered. Both males and females were involved in the study.

Table 2: Gender of respondents

Sex of respondents Frequency Percentage

27
 Male 4 40
Female 6 60
Total 10 100
Source: Primary data, 2022

Table 4 indicates that 40% of the respondents (4 respondents) were male and 60%(6
respondents) were female. These results suggest that the selected school accommodated both
male and females even though the number of females is greater than that of males.

4.1.3 Age group of Respondents

This section shows the age group of respondents who participated in this study. As described in
table 5 respondents were categorized into five main groups.

Table 3: Age of respondent

Age group of respondents Frequenc Percentage

y
21-30 3 30
31-40 5 50
Above 40 2 20
Total 10 100
Source: Primary data, 2022

Table 5 shows the distribution of respondents by their age, as indicated in Table 5, a big number
of respondents were aged between 31-40 50% respondents between the age of 21and 30 were 3
respondents (30%). while the least number 20% of respondents were above 40 years. The
implication here is that most teaching staff at G S St BRUNO GIHUNDWE A were still in their
middle stage of life. This is very advantageous because they are energetic and willing to work
hard and perform better.

4.1.4 Highest qualification of respondents

This section describes the education qualification of respondents. As indicated in Table 4.4,
qualifications fall under students, A2 certificate, Diploma (A1), Bachelor and Master.

28
Table 4: Education qualification of respondents

Education qualification frequency Percentage

A2 Certificate 0 0%
Diploma 2 20%
Bachelor 8 8.0%
Masters 0 0%
Total 10 100%
Source: Primary data, 2022

Table 6 indicates that 20% were holders of Diploma(A1) while those with Bachelor’s degree
were 80%. This result suggests that the study area (G S NYAKABWENDE) was staffed with
qualified personnel.

4.1.5. Working experience of respondents

This section illustrates the work experience of respondents. Work experience concerned only
with teachers, the head teacher and deputy head teacher. Students who were involved in the
study were chosen from senior one, senior two, senior because they were levels which make up
Ordinary level in Rwandan educational system.

Table 5: Professional experience of respondents

Work experience Frequency percentage

Less than three years 1 1o
Between 4-7 years 4 40
Between 7-10 years 2 20
Above 10 years 3 30
Total 10 100
Source: primary data, 2022

As shown in Table 7, 1%(1) of the respondents had experience of less than 3 years, 40%(4) had
between 4-7 years, 2%(2) had between 7-10 years whereas 30%(3) had above 10 years of
teaching experience. Considering employees experience, it is clear that the teaching staff at G S
NYAKABWENDE had some degree of experience in teaching with an assumption that they
know what they are doing.

29
4.2. PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

This section presents information got from the field on both independent and dependent
variables. It also describes the relationship between independent and dependent variable
(teaching methods and students‟ performance in English Language). The study used some
statistical techniques like mean and standard deviation for descriptive statistics. To test the nature
of relationship the study used Pearson correlation coefficient
4.2.1. Prevalence of using active method

This section describes the opinion of teacher respondents on the use of participatory or students
centered method in sampled school. The Table 4.8 shows how respondents evaluated the items
related to the use of students- centered method in teaching.
Table 6: Prevalence of using active method by teachers

How do you teach your subject course Frequency Percentage

Practically 7 87.50
Theoretically 1 12.50
Total 8 100
Source: primary data, 2022

As the table 8 indicates, 87.50% of the teachers said that they teach the courses practically by
letting students apply they shills while 12.50% said that they teach theoretically. To test if active
method was thoroughly used, teachers were asked the models they used while evaluating student
after the lessons. Their responses on that point are presented I the table below.

Table 7: Models of evaluation after lesson

How you evaluate students after a Frequenc Percentage

lesson taught y
In small groups 6 60
Individually 2 20
Altogether( the whole class) 0 0
8 100

Source: primary data, 2022

30
Table 9 shows that teachers used different models of evaluations after teaching. A great number
of teachers 60% asserted that they used to put students in small groups to evaluate them while
only 20% said that they used to evaluate students individually. There was no one who could
evaluate the students as a whole class making up one group.

4.2.2. The frequency of using active approaches in teaching

There many approaches involved in active method of teaching. This section sought to show those
approaches and their frequency when teachers are teaching. The responses from the teachers are
presented in the table that follows.

Table 8. The approaches commonly used by the teachers

Teachers’ questionnaire Lesson observation Interview

Commonly used teaching methods
Group discussion Group discussion presentation of the students
Cooperative learning Cooperative learning Group discussion
Demonstration Practical work Lecturing
Practical work Lecturing Cooperative learning
Least used teaching methods
Individual exercises Individual exercises Individual exercises
Role play Demonstration Demonstration
Lecturing Role play Role play
Source: primary data, 2022

4.2.3. Students’ participation in the lesson

This section describes the opinion of teacher respondents on how the students participate in the
lessons. The table 11 shows how teachers responded to the items related to their students’
participation in the lessons.
Table 9: Students’ participation in the lesson

How do your students participate in the lesson Frequenc Percentage

y
By asking questions 3 37.5
By answering questions 4 50
Trough role playing 1 12.5

Source: primary data, 2022

31
As the table 11 indicates, 37.5% of the teachers said that their students participated in the lesson
by asking questions in English, 50% said that they used to answer different questions asked by
the teacher while 12.5% said that they participated through role play. To test if active method
was thoroughly used, the head teacher in the interview was asked to comment on the models the
teachers used in the evaluation of the lessons. Their responses on that point are presented in the
table below.

4.2.4. Challenges in using active methods and supports provided for its implementation
Using interview supported by classroom observation and focus group discussion, the factors that
hindered the implementation of active approaches in the sample school were mentioned as the
major factors: Students do not want to talk about the lesson during teaching learning process,
lack of necessary materials (e.g. papers diagrams…), many of the time, teacher use lecture
method in the class, shortage of time in the classroom, teachers did not control the group learning
activities (41.66%); teacher negligence in participating students in the class, the result shows

One of the teachers said that using active method demands too much effort from teachers, there
is a lack of time to actively involve students in my classroom teaching, to involve students in
active learning will add too much to my work load, active student learning will create problems
in my classroom management, the amount of content that needs to be covered prevents the use of
active learning in the classroom.

4.3. DISCUSSION OF THE RESARCH FINDINGS

Here, the results of the study are discussed regarding teachers’ use of active learning/teaching
methods in class and major factors affecting the implementation of active learning approaches.

4.3.1. Teachers’ use of active learning in the teaching-learning process

Many educators describe the constructivist approach to learning as a process where by students
work individually or in small groups to explore, investigate and solve authentic problems and
become actively engaged in seeking knowledge and information. In active learning approaches,
students participate actively in their learning and become autonomous learners who actively
construct new meaning within the context of their current knowledge, experiences and social
environments.

32
Active learning gives students the opportunity to learn through their own efforts and to take full
responsibility for their own learning with the teachers as facilitators, Berhanu, (2010). The
results of this study indicate that schoolteachers implemented active learning approaches at
various stages of the instructional process to some extent. It is not only teachers‟ that affect the
implementation of active learning approaches. Students also affect how learning is practiced and
how teaching is organized. In the FGs, some teachers complained that some students had
negative attitudes towards active learning approaches. It is known that learning is active when
students take the initiative and responsibility for their own learning and this is dependent on
students’ positive attitudes. This is not the case in the sample schools, where observation
indicated that some of the teachers mainly used lectures to teach students to solve mathematics
problems and they rarely arranged the students into groups for teamwork. However, students
build and share their own knowledge with others when they interact with each other and with
their teachers, Zweck, (2006). Furthermore, active learning/student-centered approaches such as
the inquiry method; problem solving and discovery methods, which foster the critical thinking
and problem-solving capacity of students, were not widely employed. In this regard Balım,
(2009) emphasizes that students should do more than just listen. They need to read, write, discuss
or engage in problem solving activities. In active learning classrooms, students are engaged in
activities like dialogue, debate, writing, discussion and problem solving as well as higher order
thinking such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation. In the teaching learning process, lessons can
be divided into: Starting phase (summarizing work covered in previous lessons); new content
introduction phase, central phase (explanation of the content); activities phase (students work on
the content); closing (final feedback) phase. The lesson observations showed that all the phases,
with the exception of central phase which takes more than half of the time, are student-centered
approaches. It was also observed that the teachers frequently asked low-level order questions and
only a few students try to answer. This is also supported by the result obtained from the students’
FGs by indicating that their teacher asks oral questions many times and even give the answer
himself. Further, a number of students in the observed classes were responsible only to listen to
teachers, take notes and respond to questions upon request. This is associated with the students‟
prior experience of active learning, as pointed out by most of teachers. Students have no
experience to play the active roles expected of them because many come from authoritarian
cultural backgrounds and therefore talk only when motivated by someone. Teachers do not take

33
this into consideration when they encourage student participation in instructional processes. This
is confirmed by the classroom observation and FGs of teachers. Discussion methods help to
facilitate active learning/student-centred approaches, as indicated by the work of Baines et al.
(2007:674-676). Discussion can help to develop improved cognitions. Most of the teachers stated
that discussion was important. However, a number of the teachers said that interaction occurred
more easily in a relatively small class. In summary, in the sample school instruction/teaching-
learning was mixed (both teachers and student centered) instruction. However, research shows
that learning is enhanced in contexts where students have supportive relationships, have a sense
of ownership and control over the learning process, and can learn with and from each other in
safe and trusting learning environments, McCombs, (2003).

4.3.2. The major factors/challenges influencing the implementation of active methods

According to FGs, many teachers believed that lack of classroom space and large classes
prevented group work. In addition, the following prevented active learning: lack of time to
actively involve students in teaching; the amount of content to be covered; lack of resources;
lack of instructional materials; lack of administrative support; and that is took too much effort
from teachers. This was confirmed during FGs of teachers and students. According to Weimer
(2002), for the effective implementation of active learning/student-centered approaches the
principals and department heads of the school also need to recognize active learning approaches
as building blocks for lifelong learning and provide the support required from them. However, in
this study lack of administrative support and lack of resources inhibited the implementation of
active learning in class. As mentioned, content coverage was a high priority for teachers.
Although some teachers indicated that they covered some or most content with active learning
approaches, other adopters of active learning approaches indicated that they covered less content
than when they lectured exclusively, but that students were learning more.

Silberman in Zweck, (2006) showed that students in contexts in which teachers paused at
intervals and talked six minutes less performed significantly better on the same examination than
students in contents where teacher lectured the entire time. Time was an issue. Based on their
experience, a large number of teachers thought that active teaching would take up more time than
the traditional way of teaching. Some teachers believed that due to time constraints, active
teaching method could not be applied in a short period. They also believed that the students were
passive and that it took a long time to motivate them. The curricular materials and classroom

34
environment were also factors that played a role (FGs of teachers). For active learning, the
materials should include carefully sequenced sets of guiding activities designed to be performed
actively by the students. However, as shown by responses from the majority of teachers and as
observed, the activities during instruction were not presented in a way to encourage independent,
purposive and a reflective way of learning. As mentioned by Feden and Vogel (2003), active
learning and teaching materials should contain plenty of exercises a and samples of work. They
should also be flexible and allow students the time to work at their own pace and using their own
methods. But in the present study, teaching materials were filled with large amounts of
information to be memorized by the students. Thus, many teachers felt

responsible to cover the curriculum in the time provided by a rigid time table. Class size was also
a factor. McKeatchie and Svinicki (2005) stated that in a large class, individualization of
instruction is limited. FGs also indicated that a factor that influences the implementation of the
approach is interpersonal relationships or interactions among individuals. Active learning
approaches are characterized by “empathic, supportive relationships which free students to
discuss their feelings and experiences” so that students are “actively involved in learning through
the given opportunities to predict, infer, generalize, and evaluate” (Duffy and Kirkley, 2003).
The role of the students in active learning approaches is learning by doing. So as to engage
students in learning activities, the classroom should be well equipped with the appropriate
furniture and there should be movable desks for every student to use in different layouts in the
classroom. From this point of view, the arrangement of desks and tables should allow movement
and communication and should be changed whenever necessary. Furthermore, ample teaching
resources should be available to implement active learning approaches as required. In this regard,
the majority of student respondents (64.4%) replied that they were constrained by lack of
adequate resources for using active learning approaches (Table 6). The data obtained from
classroom observation show that some of the classroom seating (the front to back arrangement)
does not allow teachers to employ active learning approaches. The desks and tables in most of
the classrooms were heavy and could not easily be moved.

35
4.4. The Influence of Active learning on Students’ Academic Achievement

There is an abundance of data that suggest that implementing active learning methods in the
classrooms produce a deeper, long lasting understanding and increased enjoyment of course
material. There has been significance amount of research on active learning and its effectiveness
in all aspects of education and active learning is more effective methods of learning than
traditional learning. In light of growing evidences of the effectiveness of student centered
learning approaches. Researchers have consistently shown over the years that active learning is
the most effective way to teach students. In line with this, since the main purpose of this study
was to assess the influence of active learning methodology on students’ academic achievement,
the result was analyzed as follows.

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 INTRODUCTION

5.2 CONCLUSIONS
Secondary school teachers in the sample school encouraged students to ask questions; to deduce
general principles from practical exercises and facilitate some problem solving in different
courses. Besides, some teachers commonly used active teaching methods such as the

36
inquiry/questioning method, group work/ discussion, cooperative learning, individual work and
discovery methods. The basic active learning activities that were not implemented by most of the
observed teachers in the sample school include physical activities such as hands on projects,
manipulative, using cooperative groups for problem solving activities; and facilitating students’
curiosity/interest. The inadequate use of the different active learning methods would negatively
influence the quality of the teaching-learning process; negatively affect development of self-
learning, higher order thinking and problem solving capacities among the students. In this regard
the researchers support active method as pedagogical approach but teachers need to be aware of
the constraints that they may face. By incorporating carefully selected intellectual, social, and
physical activities into the classroom, teachers can meet the unique developmental needs of
young students while teaching the important content these students need to learn to be
empowered to think critically about the world around them. Active learning helps teachers
modify their traditional roles and encourages them to conduct more student-centred applications.
If a program is grounded in, or moving toward, a constructivist paradigm, active learning could
be a valuable tool for helping teachers construct knowledge about teaching and learning.
Teachers should have a more active role as developers of teaching, and they are seen as being
more responsible for the development of their own profession in a larger sense. Teachers‟
culture should provide more active learning experiences to prepare them to use new methods
with their students in schools. Thus, they should be qualified and must be well prepared,
especially in improving the quality of education that faces global challenges.

From the study findings, it was concluded that, students centered method should be used by all
teacher in teaching English language as it has a great influence on students‟ performance in
English language. Secondly, poor performance of students should not only be attribute to poor
teaching methods as there are other factors that impact on students‟ performance.
5.3. RECOMMENDATIONS
The study indicated there were few students are not interested in active learning methods. Lack
of interest can influence the implementation of active method, thus, awareness creations for
students on student centered approach should be carried out continuously.

 Teachers should play a great role in enhancing the students’ interest in applying active
learning.

37
  It is highly recommended that school administrators and teachers by mobilizing
community participation and other stockholders should create conductive environment by
fulfilling or providing instructional materials and laboratory equipment.
 It seems important that other stockholders should play their role in supporting the
implementation
 Teachers should motivate their student to participate actively.
 Teachers should devise their own instructional methods to produce supplementary
teaching aids from the easily available materials.

5.4. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

REFERENCES
Akinoglu, O., & Tandogan, O. (2007). The effects of problem-based active learning in science
education on students’ academic achievement, attitude, and concept learning. Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics, Science & Technology, 3.1, 71-81. Armstrong, D., Gosling, A., Weinman, J., &

Marteau, T. (1997). The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: An empirical

study. Sociology. 31.3, 597-606.

Bickford, D., & Wright, L. (2006). Community: The hidden context for learning. Learning
Spaces. Chapter 4: [Link] Bonwell, C.

C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-Eric
Higher Education Report No. 1. Retrieved from
[Link]

38
Brooks, C. D. (2010). Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student
learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. Retrieved from
[Link]
ocuments/article/oit_article_248303.pdf

Brooks, M., & Brooks, J. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. The Constructivist
Classroom, 57.3, 18-24.

Brown, M. B., & Lippincott, J.K. (2003). Learning spaces: More than meets the eye.
EDUCAUSE Quarterly. Retrieved from [Link]

Brown, M., & Long, P. (2006). Trends in learning space design. Learning Spaces. Chapter 9.
Retrieved from [Link]

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. A Touchstone Book, Kappa Delta Pi, New York.

Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? Collaborative Learning:

Cognitive and Computational Approaches, 1-19. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]/docs/00/19/02/40/PDF/Dillenbourg-Pierre [Link]

Faust, J., & Paulson, D. (1998). Active learning in the college classroom. Journal on Excellence
in College Teaching, 9.2, 3-24.

Feldman, M. S., Skoldberg, K., Brown, R. N., & Horner, D. (2004). Making sense of stories: A
rhetorical approach to narrative analysis. J Public Adm Res Theory, 14.2, 147-170.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The

Qualitative Report, 8.4, 597-607.

Hammer, E. Y. & Giordano, P. (2012). Active Learning. Effective college teaching: Strategies
and tactics for the new professoriate. 99-114.

Leiboff, M. (2010). Rethinking classroom design guidelines. Campus Technology. Retrieved

from [Link]
[Link]?Page=1

Lippincott, J. (2009). Learning spaces. Involving faculty to improve pedagogy. EDUCAUSE

Review, 44. 2, 16-25.

39
McGowan, W., & Graham, C. (2009). Factors contributing to improved teaching performance.
Innovative Higher Education. 34, 161-171.

McCarthy, J. P., & Anderson, L. (2000). Active learning techniques versus traditional teaching
styles: Two experiments from history. Innovative Higher Education. 24.4

McKeachie, W. J. (1999). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and
university teachers. Boston: Houghton.

McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P. R., Yi-Guang, L., and Smith, D. A. F. (1986). Teaching and
learning in the college classroom: a review of the research literature. Ann Arbor, MI: Regents of
the Univ. of Michigan.

Means, T. (2001). Edison Project Proposal, Warrington College of Business.

Michael, J. (2001). In pursuit of meaningful learning. The Claude Bernard Distinguished

Lecture. Advances in Physiology, 25. 3.

Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Advanced Physiological
Education, 30, 159-167.

Michael, J. (2007). Faculty perceptions about barriers to active learning. College Teaching, 55,
42-47.

Michaelson, L. K., & Sweet, M. (2008). The essential elements of team-based learning. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning. Wiley Periodicals. 16. Miller, Herman Inc., Learning
Space [Link][Link]
pages/[Link]

Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning – a cultural change needed in teacher education and schools.
Teaching and Teacher Education,18, 763-780.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering
[Link][Link]
Prince_AL.pdf 69

Schaftel, F. R., & Schaftel, G. (1976). Role playing for social values. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Seeler,

40
D. C, Turnwald, G.H., & Bull, K.S. (1994). From teaching to learning: Part III. Lectures and
approaches to active learning. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education.
[Link]

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.

Education for Information, 22, 63-75.

University of Florida, Warrington College of Business Administration Office of Publications.

(2012, April 12). About Warrington College of Business Administration: History. Retrieved
from [Link]

Van Ments, M. (1994). The effective use of role play. London: Kogan Page.

Whiteside, D., Brooks, C., & Walker J.D., (2010). Making the case for space: Three years of
empirical research on learning environments. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, V. 33.

INTRODUCTION LETTER
Dear respondents,

Our names are MANIRAFASHA Placide and BIKORIMANA Jean Marie Vianey; this
questionnaire is presented to you to help us to carry out our research work in partial fulfillment
of the requirement for the award of Bachelor’s degree in Education honors with History and
Geography.

Our research topic is “The impact of using active method in teaching-learning process on
students’ academic performance in secondary school in Rusizi district with the case of G S
NYAKABWENDWE”. Answering all the questions truthfully will be your important
contribution to our research work. we promise you that your answer will be strictly confidential
and used only for the academic research purposes. Please, do not undersign your name.

41
MAANIRFASHA Placide………………………….

BIKORIMANA Jean Marie Vianey…………………………....

Participant's Consent Declaration

I,………………………………………………. understand that my participation in the research
study entitled “ The impact of using active method in teaching-learning process on students’
academic performance in secondary school in Rusizi district with the case of G S
NYAKABWENDE, as a partial fulfilment of the award of Bachelor’s degree of Education
honors in History with Geography” is voluntary and done with my consent.
I understand that I may discontinue participation at any time without penalty. I declare that, I am
responsible and I have given my consent and I agree to audio taping or I do not agree to audio
taping.

Participant’s Name…………………………Signature:…………………….
Cell phone…………..
Date: ………………………….

42
 TEACHERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE
Section A: Demographic Information
Please respond to the following questions
1. Your gender (tick), Male ( ) Female ( )
2. Teaching experience: 1-5 ( ) 6-10 ( ) 11-15 ( ) 16-20 ( ) 21-25 ( ) 25 and above ( )
3. which subject do you teach?........................................
4. What is your highest qualification?
a. A2 b. A1 c. A0 d. Other, specify……………..
Section B: Prevalence of Use of active Method
I. Level of students’ participation in teaching-learning process
No Research items Responses
1 How do you teach your subject course Practically
Theoretically

43
 2 During teaching-learning process The teacher talks alone
Learners participate actively
3 Do your students perform well when you use Yes
active method in Teaching-learning process No
4 In which way do you give practical exercises In small groups
Individually
Together ( whole class)

II. The approaches mostly used by English teachers

Research items usually sometimes seldo Never
m
Practical work
Reading
Demonstration
Cooperative learning
Group work
Role play
Discussion
Translation
Individual exercises
Lecturing(teacher
talking)

III. Level of students’ performance as a result of using active method

[Link] which way do your students participate in teaching-learning of subject course?
a. by asking questions b. by answering the teachers’ questions c. through role play
2. What is average mark scores of your students in last academic year?
a. Below 20% b. 21-40% c. 41-60% c. 61-80% d. above 81%
5. What factors do you think affect negatively the use of active method during teaching-learning
process?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
6. There is a great relationship between the use of active method and the students’ academic
performance.
a. strong agree b. agree c. I am not sure

44
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR HEAD TEACHER OR DIRECTOT OF STUDIES

1. While supervising them, what methods are commonly used by teachers in teaching subject
course?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
2. How far is active method used while teaching different subjects in your school?
………………………………………………………………………………………..
3. To what extent do you think the use of active method affect students’ performance in different
subjects in your school?
……………………………………………………………………………………….
[Link] would you evaluate the sufficiency and insufficiency of this method in your school?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………

45
5. What do you think can be done to improve students’ performance your school?
…………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you for your cooperation!

46