Effects of Forum Method on Senior Secondary School Students’ Interest in Geography Map Work in Plateau State, Central Nigeria.

Effects of Forum Method on Senior Secondary School Students’ Interest in Geography Map Work in Plateau State, Central Nigeria.

*Kim D. Istifanus¹, Dickson S. Dakur (Ph.D)²

^1,2Department of Science and Technology Education, Faculty of Education, University of Jos, Nigeria.

Corresponding Author*

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.806227

Received: 10 June 2024; Accepted: 21 June 2024; Published: 23 July 2024

ABSTRACT

The study investigated effects of forum method of teaching on senior secondary school students’ interest in geography map work in Plateau State, Central Zone of Nigeria. The study answered four research questions and tested five hypotheses. Quasi-Experimental for non-equivalent groups design was employed for the study. The population constituted 22,190 SS II Geography students in the entire study area and a sample of 125 was used for the study. 65 of the students were in the experimental and 60 in the control groups. An adapted Geography Map Work Interest Inventory (GMWII) was used for data collection. The GMWII comprised of 15 items rated on the five-point Likert scale. The instrument was validated by three experts, which included one expert from Educational Psychology, one from Geography Education and one from Educational Test and Measurement. The reliability of the GMWII was computed using Cronback Alpha method and the reliability coefficient was 0.97. Data collected with the instrument was analyzed using mean score and standard deviation to answer the research questions, and Mann-Whitney U Test of independent samples, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the hypotheses. The finding revealed that Forum Method was effective in increasing the interest of students in geography map work and discriminated between males and females in favour of males. The treatment also discriminated between public and private school students in favour of private schools. The results provided a significant evidence of student’s improved interest in geography map work. Recommendations were made to government, policy makers, education stakeholders and teachers considering the findings of the study for policy and application of Forum Method.

Keywords: Forum method, Interest, Geography, Map work, Teaching method.

INTRODUCTION

Geography is one of the disciplines offered in senior secondary schools across Nigeria. The study of Geography focuses on the study of the earth and how people live and use it, with an emphasis on how humans interact with their physical and cultural surroundings (Ugodulunmwa & Wakjissa, 2015). This implies that geography is a field of study that focuses on examining and providing a thorough account of our planet; as a result, it examines locations and the interactions that exist between humans and their surroundings. Therefore, geography is the study of all occurrences on Earth and in its atmosphere in relation to space and time; it aims to comprehend the locations, causes, and processes of many phenomena and their evolution over time. The Nigerian National Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC) develop a thorough senior secondary school geography curriculum in 2007 that includes various geographic themes: Economic and Human Geography; Earth and the Solar System; Environment and its Resources; Nigerian Regional Geography; Map Reading and Interpretation (called map work in this research); and Introduction to Geographic Information Systems (GIS). This robust curriculum of Geography is intended to imbued secondary school students with prerequisite knowledge and skills for later training in specialist professions such as teaching, hydrology, oceanography, biogeography, and surveying, GIS, urban planning, remote sensing, cartography, tourism and geomorphology among others. These professionals would no doubt contribute enormously to the development Nigerians communities in various ways and consequently enhancing our national life.

Significant portion of the Geography curriculum of the senior secondary schools involves map work. Map work provides students the opportunity study about spatial area in relation to both naturally occurring land and man-made elements like the growth of cities or landforms (Dlamini, 2014). Thus, identifying the various depictions of human and physical characteristics on a map and understanding their spatial link to reality are key components of map work. Students gain knowledge of how to portray drainage and relief features, read contours, comprehend and analyze human activity on mapped regions, describe terrain shapes, locate locations, measure distances, and make connections between the information and reality. Maps and map work are essential resources and components in geography in the Senior Secondary Certificate Examination (SSCE) and the West African Senior Secondary Certificate Examination (WASSCE) organized by National Examination Council (NECO) and West African Examination Council (WAEC) respectively.

Map Work is studied at all levels of the senior secondary school in Nigeria (SS 1 – SS 3). It accounts for 10 of the 50 objective test questions in Paper 1, and constitute one of the four mandatory questions in Paper 3 (Elementary, Practical, and Physical Geography) It also constitutes 25 out of 70 marks for paper 3. Map work form sufficient critical mass in SSCE and WASCE examination such that it has a substantial impact on the candidates’ results in geography each year. From these analyses, any candidate who is not sufficiently prepared for map work is not likely pass SSCE and WASCE with good grade and may never be able to pursue a future career in geography, which is necessary for the development of the country.

Interest being the driving force for paying attention and seeking to know and learn more about something, is an important factor in education which is inextricably linked with effective learning and achievement, the target of education.  Achievement, being the outcome of teaching and learning process, is measured as test scores (Ehiane, 2014). Alzahrani (2017) therefore defines achievement as the scores students receive on achievement tests as the ultimate objective of the educational process. Alzahrani (2017), Kpolovie et al (2014) and Rohana et al (2009) enumerated several variables influencing and serve as correlates of achievement to include (Numerous variables influence academic achievement to include teaching –learning Facilities, housing conditions, teacher/school factors and students’ interest. The authors stressed that these other variables in turn correlates Students’ interest throughout time, and jointly together with interest, correlate academic success in learning. According to Duyilemi and Bola (2014), interest is the zeal or inclination to engage in an activity that brings one some sort of pleasure.  In the perspective of Agu and Samuel (2018), interest is the pull that urge or coerce a student to engage with a specific stimulus. This indicates that the feeling of interest in something special is expressed in activity. Thus, interest is the propensity to become engrossed in and carry on with an event. In a study on interest as a predictor of mathematical academic ability, Tembe et al. (2020) discovered a strong correlation between students’ enthusiasm in learning and achievement. In a similar vein, Goolsby (2013), Arhin and Yanney (2020), and Kpolovie et al. (2014) noted a high correlation between pupils’ achievement and their interest in studying. Methods and strategies teachers use in teaching influence interest in learning (Sutarto et al., 2020). Yunusa et al, (2014) found that the use of cooperative instructional strategy increased students’ interest in learning. This indicates that the teaching method employed in any subject is potent enough to determine the direction of the students’ interest, hence teachers should employ teaching methods that enhance interest. A synthesis of the preceding positions reflects the extent to which students’ interest to learn might impact their academic achievement. Teachers, including geography teachers, need be innovative and aggressive in igniting and maintaining students’ interest in learning because it can be a strong indicator of academic success. This also imply that teachers, including need to study the relationship between method of teaching and the interest of learners in a given subject. Arhin, Yanney and Goolsby (2013) reported that in Nigerian secondary schools, interest of students in geography map work was just 10.71%. This calls for a reflection on our educational practices and thus the motivation for this study.

The broad hypothesis of the study is that forum methods would raise the interest of students in the study of geography map work in line with the proposition of Hamzeh and Jacobs (2010). Hamzeh and Jacobs asserted that forum method enables students to interactively share ideas and actively learn from class discussions with the consequence of raising interest in the learner. Forum is an engaging verbal activity whereby students share their knowledge and experience directly to deliver ideas and thoughts in a clear, creative, objective and rational manner (Wan Hassan et al., 2015). It is a student-centered teaching approach designed to be easy, engaging, and challenging at the same time to fit the abilities, accomplishments, and ages of the students. The class is divided into discussion panel using the forum technique, where participants share their thoughts, hear those of others, and gain knowledge from one another, Wan Hassan et al added. The preceding discussions regarding the forum technique makes it abundantly clear that it is a gathering where perspectives and ideas on a certain shared problem can be discussed. This guarantees that everyone who attends the forum leaves with a greater understanding than when they arrived.

The researchers believe that employing forum method to teach geography map work could enhance students’ interest. For instance, Schukajlow (2015) asserts that teaching methods which ensure students’ active involvement such as forum stimulate interest and ultimately improve achievement in a given subject. Forum method is an active student-centred approach as it involves discussions, cooperative learning, questions/answer sessions and hands-on (experiential) learning. Forum methods are categorized into two broad groups as: (a) Physical forum (also referred to as open forum, open discussion forum, and forum method) (Hamzeh & Jacobs, 2010; Pai, 2012). (b) Online discussion forum (also referred to as massive online discussion forum) (Callaghan & Lazard, 2012; Edeh et al, 2019; Khlaif et al, 2017). The physical forum was adapted in this study.

It is common knowledge in the academic community that there is a strong linear relationship between students’ interest and their achievement. For instance, Tembe et al., (2020) and Arhin and Yanney (2020) submitted in their separate studies that there is a strong relationship between learners’ interest and their achievement. This implies that students’ poor or low achievement in geography external examinations (WASSCE and SSCE) could have resulted from their lack of interest in the subject and vice versa. As much as 71.9% of applicants who took the WASSCE in the study area of geography between 2015 and 2020 received grades below the credit level (≤ D7) (Report of Educational Resource Center, Jos 2023). The ERC report further indicated that in 2020, just 20.1% of candidates passed geography at the credit level, compared to 71.9% in 2017. The WAEC Chief Examiner frequently cited the weakness of the students to include extremely bad map work, incorrect map work, and incorrect answers to map work questions. The WAEC Chief Examiner emphasized that answering questions about map work was a challenge for geography students. Students’ poor achievement on map work questions was probably the reason they receive low results in geography exams. The chief examiner’s report for the years 2015-2020 thus indicated that students don’t optimize their achievement in geography, despite the fact that map work is essential to students’ success in the WASSCE and SSCE. The low achievement in geography map work and geography as a subject in the WASSCE and SSCE could be explained by students’ lack of interest in the subject because improved interest always increased achievement (Tembe et al., 2020; Arhin & Yanney, 2020; Goolsby, 2013; Kpolovie et al., 2014). These serve as the motivation of the study.

Objectives:

The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of forum method on senior secondary school students’ interest in geography map work in the study area. Specific objectives of the study included finding out the:

1. Pre-test interest mean scores of the experimental and control groups.
2. Post-test interest mean scores of the experimental and control groups.
3. Post-test interest mean scores of male and female students in the experimental group.
4. Post-test interest mean scores of public and private school students in the experimental group.
5. Interaction effect of gender and treatment on post-test map work interest scores.

Research Questions:

The following research questions were answered during the study:

1. What is the pre-test interest mean scores of the experimental and control groups?
2. What is the post-test interest mean scores of the experimental and control groups?
3. What is the post-test interest mean scores of male and female students in the experimental group?
4. What is the post-test interest mean scores of public and private school students in the experimental group?

Hypotheses:

The following research hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance:

1. There is no significant difference between the experimental and control groups on pre-test interest scores.
2. There is no significant difference between the experimental and control groups on post-test interest mean scores.
3. There is no significant difference between male and female students in the experimental group on post-test interest mean scores.
4. There is no significant difference between public and private school students in the experimental group on post-test interest mean scores.
5. There is no significant interaction effect of gender and treatment on Students post-test map work interest scores.

METHOD

Research Design

The research design was quasi-experimental, non-equivalent pre-test, post-test control group design. The researcher could not randomly assign students to the experimental and control groups without upsetting the arrangement of the participating schools, so quasi-experimental design was deemed appropriate. Thus, intact classes were used.

Sample and Procedure

The population of interest for the study was the senior secondary Two (SS II) students that offer geography in Plateau State, Central Nigeria. SS II students were used because they had learned sufficient content of secondary school geography curriculum and were not in examination class. 22,190 geography students from schools in the study area made up the study population. The study employed multistage and stratified sampling techniques. Jos South local government area emerged as the area (LGA) in which the study was be conducted, and this was done at random using multi-stage sampling. Two strata, consisting of 25 public schools and 67 private schools, totaling 92 schools were involved in the stratified sampling process. Two schools from each strata were chosen and used for the study. The names of all the 92 schools were written serially, starting with publics, followed by the privates. Then a table of random numbers was used to select two school each from each group. Since all the schools in the study area had only one arm of SSII Geography students, the four intact classes of the chosen schools were used for the study. Thus, a combination of one class of public schools and one class of private schools were used as experimental group, and likewise for the control group. The assignment of the intact classes to the experimental and control groups was randomly done. This process gave rise to 65 students for the experimental group and 60 for the control group, and a total 125 students, consisting 47 females and 78 males.

Instruments

Data was collected using Geography Map Work Interest Inventory (GMWII). The GMWII was made up of 15 items adapted from Onah (2017) The instrument was calibrated on the five-point Likert scale of strongly agree (SA), agree (A), Undecided (UD), disagree (D) and strongly disagree (SD), where SA and SD represent the highest and lowest levels of interest respectively. The instrument was validated by three experts of the University of Jos, Nigeria. One each from Educational Psychology, Geography Education and Educational Test and Measurement. Cronbach Alpha method was used to determine the reliability of the GMWII. The reliability coefficient determined using SPSS was 0.97, indicating that the GMWII was reliable. Thus, a pilot study was conducted on SSII Geography students in four secondary schools different from the ones used for the main study and GMWII was used collect data which was used to compute the reliability coefficient. Factor analysis of the GMWII was carried out using SPSS to determine it construct validity. The result of the construct validity analysis showed that all the items had values ranging from 0.777 – 0.903, indicating that all items loaded highly on the same construct (Interest). This assured that items in the GMWII all fell in one construct and elicit the right responses to achieve the objectives of the study.

Statistical Analysis

Data was analyzed on SPSS (20) using mean score (x̄) and standard deviation (SD), t-test of independent samples, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical techniques. Mean score and standard deviation were used to answer the research questions while Mann-Whitney U Test, ANCOVA and ANOVA were used to test the hypotheses.

Data Collection Procedure

The process of data collection for both the pilot and main studies involved administration of pretest, followed by treatment, then posttest. The experimental group was taught geography map work using Forum Method for six weeks, during which period, the control group was being taught the same content with other method usually used by their class teacher. The experimental and control groups were taught by the research assistants under close supervision of the researchers. In the experimental group’s activities included an introduction, formation of panel, panel discussion, engagement activities, discussions, questioning, cooperation, hands-on engagement, feedback, and resource sharing. At the end of the six weeks, GMWII was administered (post-test) to both the experimental and control groups. Data collected in the pre-test and post-test were used to answer the research questions and test hypotheses formulated for the study.

Forum Method Implementation

Forum method of teaching is typically a face-to-face gathering or meeting where individuals including teachers and students come together to exchange ideas, share information, and engage in discussions on specific premeditated topics. It is a situation where students interactively share ideas and actively learn from class discussions, case studies, and required readings on planned and communicated topics. It involves a verbal engagement whereby students share their knowledge and experiences directly to deliver ideas and thoughts in a clear, creative, objective and rational manner. Forum teaching-learning setting is dominated by students and to be successful, the chosen topic of the forum ought to be expressed simply, interestingly and yet challenging to match the targeted skills, achievements and age level of the students. In implementing the forum method, the class is organized into a discussion panel that has studied and shares on an issue of interest while an audience of other students listens, forms ideas and learns collectively. The goal is to ensure all participants leave the forum with more understanding than they brought to the table of the subjection of the day. The instructor’s role is to facilitate discussions and intervene when questions are not fully answered by the panel and audience. The success behind this pedagogical approach largely depends on student engagement and commentary. Forum method features activities such as discussion, questions/answers, cooperation and hands-on engagement (experience). Careful preparations must also be made before, during and after the activity for maximum outcome. Preparation to use Forum Method of teaching by educators should necessarily be classified in three phases viz: before the forum, during the forum and after the forum.

Before the Forum: The teacher (Facilitator in the Forum) decides a content area in the curriculum to be covered in the forum and gives such information to all students from among which the panel would be constituted. The panelists are decided by the teacher based on his/her discretion in the light of set goals and equipped with all learning resources required to prepare for their presentations during the forum. The panelists develop and master the content under the guidance of the teacher in line with objectives for the forum. The formation of the panel can be rotational for subsequent forums to encourage all students to engage. The venue for the forum which is a physical, real-world setting in the school such as a spacious classroom, conference room, auditorium or any designated space is decided upon. Provision for sitting should be made at the venue beforehand for the panelists, other students and the facilitator(s). Projector and screen or any other means of quick and simultaneous sharing of information to an audience are provided for any need to display any information for all participants to see. A comprehensive material containing all vital discussion issues should be provided for all participating students.

During the Forum: All participants take their seats as earlier arranged in the venue. The facilitator guides the forum, ensuring that the discussions stay on track, participants have equal opportunities to contribute, and time is managed effectively. The forum typically follows a predetermined set of objectives and schedule of activities. The topics for discussion, presentations, and activities are outlined in advance by the facilitator as everyone is seated. The panelists are first given the chance to discuss the content developed for the forum based on teacher-guided research. The panelists harmonize discussions on the subject of the day during direct and immediate interaction with one another. Often, this includes panel discussions where the specially prepared students share their perspectives, followed by questions and discussions from the audience. Speakers or presenters may deliver live presentations, incorporating visual aids, demonstrations, and other forms of media to enhance understanding. The other students are allowed opportunity for actively engaging in discussions, ask questions, share insights, and contribute to the overall conversation. The facilitator ensures this section of the forum is built on the discussions of the panelists and any other relevant aspects. The non-verbal communication, including body language, facial expressions, and gestures, of the participants can give the facilitator hints on the progress of the forum which can be used to enhance the richness of the interaction. Beyond formal discussions, provide opportunities for all the students including the panelists to cooperatively interact on the content in an informal networking and socializing. Participants can connect with one another and build learning relationships. For a content that require hands-on engagement such as geography map work topics, allow the participants enough time to practice their discussions and demonstrate the degree of their leaning of the content. It is imperative to immediately get responses from the participants as feedback on their learning at this point. This feedback can be in the form of questions or responsive conversations. This will enable the facilitator further gauge the level of learning of the content. It is essential to share handouts, materials resources or any privileged information the panelists may have relied on in physical or electronic forms, allowing participants to have tangible takeaways from the forum.

After the Forum: After every forum, ensure students are provided with additional resources to enforce and buttress their learning, especially on perceived areas of weakness during the forum. Prepare the students for the upcoming forum by giving the study areas and resources. The facilitator should also determine the next panel and direct them on their preparations for the next forum. The facilitator also takes necessary steps to mitigate prevailing challenges from the previous forums to make the future forum more effective.

RESULTS

The four research questions and five hypotheses were answered and tested respectively as follows:

Research Question One: This sought to measure the pre-test interest mean scores of the experimental and control groups.

Table 1: Summary of Results of Pre-test Interest Mean Scores of the Experimental and Control Groups

The data in Table 1 reveals that the control group had a pre-test interest mean score of 23.33 and standard deviation of 7.52. While the experimental group had an interest mean score of 23.08 and standard deviation of 7.27. The mean difference between the experimental and control groups was 0.25. This clearly shows that the two groups had nearly equal interest mean scores in pre-test.

Research Question Two: This measured the post-test interest mean scores of the experimental and control groups.

Table 2: Summary of Results of Post-test Interest Mean Scores of the Experimental and Control Groups

The data in Table 2 shows that the control group had a post-test interest mean score of 32.33 and standard deviation of 17.69, while the experimental group had an interest mean score of 72.31 and standard deviation of 22.55. The mean difference of 39.98 was obtained in favour of the experimental group. This shows that Forum method improved students’ interest in Geography.

Research Question Three: This evaluated the post-test interest mean scores of male and female students in the experimental group.

Table 3: Summary of Results of Post-test Interest Mean Scores of Male and Female Students in the Experimental Group

Data in Table 3 shows that male students had a post-test interest mean score of 81.95 with standard deviation 16.00, while 24 female students had an interest mean score of 55.83 with 22.82 standard deviation. The mean difference of 26.12 was obtained in favour of males. This means that Forum method had differential positive impact on students’ interest on the basis of their gender, thus, impacting more on male more than female.

Research Question Four: This sought to determine the post-test interest mean scores of public and private school students in the experimental group.

Table 4: Summary of Results of Post-test Interest Mean Scores of Public and Private School Students in the Experimental Group

Table 4 shows that public school students in the experimental group obtained post-test interest mean score of 52.17 (SD = 23.15) and private school students had an interest mean score of 83.33 (SD = 12.43). The mean difference of 31.16 in favour of Private schools means the private schools obtained higher interest scores on the post-test than public schools. This means that private school students responded more positively to Forum method than their public school counterparts on the basis of interest.

Hypothesis One: This hypothesis tested significant difference between the experimental and control groups on pre-test interest scores. Table 5 contains the test results for this hypothesis.

Table 5: Summary of Results of Mann Whitney U Test Analysis of Significant Difference between Experimental and Control Groups on Pre-test Interest scores.

Table 5 shows the results of Mann-Whitney U Test of significant difference between the experimental and control groups on pre-test interest scores. The results show that U = 1925.000, Z = -0.11 and ρ-value = .846. Since the ρ-value (.846) is greater than .05, we had no sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis was therefore accepted, and thus concluded that there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups on the pre-test interest score.

Hypothesis Two: This hypothesis tested significant difference between the experimental and control groups on post-test interest mean score. Table 6 contains the test results for this hypothesis.

Table 6: Summary of Results of Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Significant Different between the Experimental and Control Groups on the Post-test Interest Mean Scores

R Squared = .526 (Adjusted R Squared = .519)

Data in Table 6 is the results of ANCOVA test of significant difference between the experimental and control groups on post-test interest mean scores using SPSS (20). The results show that F(1, 122) = 128.40 and ρ-value (ρ = .00). Since the ρ-value is less than .05, there is sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis. This means there was a significant difference between the experimental and control groups on post-test interest in favour of the experimental group and therefore concluded that the treatment increased students’ interest in Geography map work.

Hypothesis Three: This hypothesis tested significant difference between male and female students in the experimental group on post-test interest mean scores. Table 7 contains the test results for this hypothesis.

Table 7: Summary of Results of Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Significant Difference between Male and Female Students on the Post-test Interest Mean Scores

a. R Squared = .326 (Adjusted R Squared = .304)

Table 7 shows the results of the test of significant difference between male and female students’ post-test interest mean score in experimental group using SPSS (20). The results revealed that F(1, 62)=25.37 and ρ = .00. Since ρ = .00 < .05, the null hypothesis was rejected. This shows a statistically significant difference between gender groups in interest. This means that the difference confirmed between male and female students in fafour of the males in the answer to research questions, is significant.

Hypothesis Four: This hypothesis tested significant difference between public and private school students in the experimental group on post-test interest mean score. Table 8 contains the test results for this hypothesis.

Table 8: Summary of Results of Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Significant Difference between Public and Private School Students on the Post-test Interest Mean Scores.

R Squared = .480 (Adjusted R Squared = .463)

Data in Table 8 presents results of ANCOVA test of significant difference between public and private school students in the experimental group on post-test interest using SPSS (20). The results showed that F (1, 62) = 51.26 and ρ-value = .00. Since ρ < .05, there was sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis, hence it was rejected. This means there was a statistically significant difference between public and private schools on the post-test interest mean scores, and can thus concluded that the treatment discriminated between public and private schools in favour of private schools.

Hypothesis Five: This hypothesis tested significant interaction effect of gender and treatment on post-test map work interest scores. Table 9 contains the test results for this hypothesis.

Table 9: Summary of Results of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of Significant Interaction Effect of Gender and Treatment on Post-test Interest Scores.

R Squared = .618 (Adjusted R Squared = .609)

Table 9 present results of ANOVA test of interaction effect of gender and treatment (Group * Gender) on post-test interest using SPSS. The table shows that F (1, 121) = 18.69 while ρ -value (ρ=.00). The hypothesis of no significant interaction effect of gender and treatment on post-test map work interest scores was therefore rejected on the ground that ρ < .05. This clearly showed that there is a statistically significant interaction effect of treatment (Forum method) and gender (male and female) on students’ interest mean score in geography map work. The decision means that the post-test interest score of a student after being taught using Forum method differ between male and female students.

DISCUSSION

The results clearly showed that the experimental group’s interest mean score was higher than that of the control group, indicating that students who were taught geography map work using the Forum Method became more interested than those who were taught using traditional techniques. Previous researches have also demonstrated that using effective teaching techniques and strategies to engage students can greatly boost their interest in learning (Onah, 2017; Arhin & Yanney, 2020; Kpolovie et al, 2014). Given this result and support from additional past researches, it is reasonable to conclude that using the Forum Method to increase students’ interest in geography map work is effective. In a descending finding, Achor, Imoko and Ajai (2010) found that teaching techniques did not have a significant effect on the interest of students.

The outcomes additionally demonstrated that the treatment had a discriminatory effect on gender groups, favouring male students. This indicates that male students were more interested in map work than female students were after the treatment. It also revealed a substantial interaction impact between gender and treatment on interest scores in geography map work in the study area, implying that a student’s degree of interest in map work would vary depending on whether they were male or female receiving the treatment. Studies by Asikhia (2014) and Onah (2017), which discovered a strong interaction impact between gender and treatment on interest, reinforce gender discrimination in interest. Contrarily, Achor, Imoko and Ajai (2010) found that male and female students taught using games, and simulations did not differ significantly in interest. This shows that interest levels will vary depending on a student’s gender and discriminates against female students in favor of male student.

Students’ interests in private schools were favoured by the treatment, which divided them into public and private schools. This indicates that students in private schools who received instruction through the Forum Method reported higher interest levels than their public school peers. The results of the study by Inngam and Eamoraphan (2014), which showed that students’ interests in public and private schools differed greatly in favour of private school students, are similar to this one. This demonstrates that students attending private schools are more likely than those attending public schools to be engaged in studying. There is enough data, then, to state that when the Forum Method is used in the study region, students in private schools show greater interest in the geography map work than students in public schools.

CONCLUSION

The study in line with the findings concluded that when students are taught geography map work using Forum Method, their interest will significantly become higher than those students not taught with Forum Method. This also discriminates between gender and school type in favour of males and private schools as compared to female and public school students.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations were made based on the outcome of the study:

1. All tiers of government should allocate the funds necessary to properly build up forum learning environments. This can entail having enough projectors, maps, computers, tracing paper, and text books available.
2. Policy makers and other education major role players should sponsor a policy seeking the inclusion of Forum Method as one of the teaching methods for the implementation of the senior secondary geography curriculum in the coming curriculum review.
3. To help teachers better understand and apply the Forum Method in triggering and maintaining students’ interest in the teaching and learning environment, workshops and seminars on its use should be held.
4. Since the Forum Method has been shown to be successful in raising students’ interest in geography, geography teachers should be encouraged to adopt it when teaching geography map work.

REFERENCES

1. Achor, E. E., Imoko, B. I. & Ajai, J. T. (2010). Sex Differentials in Students’ Achievement and Interest in Geometry Using Games and Simulations Technique. Necatibery Faculty of Education International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(1), 1-10.
2. Agu, P.A. & Samuel, I.R. (2018). Effects of Reversed Jigsaw, TAI Cooperative and Guided Discoverty Instruction Strategies on Basic Science and Technology Students’ Interest and Achievement. International Journal of Onnovative Education Research, 6(2), 19-26.
3. Alzahrani, M. (2017). The effect of using online discussion forums on students’ learning. The Turkish Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 164-176.
4. Arhin, D. & Yanney, E. G. (2020). Relationship between students’ interest and academic performance in mathematics: A cacse study of Agogo State College. Global Scientific Journal, 8(6), 389-396.
5. Asikhia, O. A. (2014). Effect of cognitive restructuring on the reduction of mathematics anxiety among senior secondary school students in Ogun State, Nigeria. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(2), 1-20.
6. Callaghan, J. E. M. & Lazard, L. (2012). Please don’t put the whole dang thing out there!: A discursive analysis of internet discussions around infant feeding. Psychol Health, 27(8), 938-955.
7. Dlamini, R. (2014). Teachers’ perception ofs of dynamic software to teach geographical mapwork skills in classroom. Ines: De Almeida.
8. Duyilemi, A. &. Bola, B. (2014). Effects of constructivists’ learning strategies on senior secondary school students achievement and retention in Biology. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(27), 627-633.
9. Edeh, M.O., Edeh, C.D., Alhuseen, O.A. & Naveed, S.S. (2019). Online discussion forum as a tool for interactive learning and communication. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(4), 4852-4859.
10. Educational Resource Centre (ERC). (2023). WAEC and NECO results analysis. Jos: ERC.
11. Ehiane, O. S. (2014). Discipline and Academic Performance (A Case Study of Selected Secondary
12. Schools in Lagos, Nigeria). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development , 3(1), 181-194.
13. Goolsby, L. (2013). School Interest. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
14. Hamzeh, F.R. & Jacobs, F. (2010). Open forum as an active learning method for. Proceeding of the Lean Advancement Initiative 5th LAI/EdNet Lean Educator Conference (pp. 5-8). Florida: Colorado State University, Colorado.
15. Inngam, P. & Eamoraphan, S. (2014). A comparative study of students’ motivation for learning english language in selected public and private schools in Bangkok. Scholar: Human Sciences, 6(1), 15-19.
16. Khlaif, Z. (2017). Types of interaction in online discussion forums: A case study. Journal of Educational Issues, 3(1), 155-169.
17. Kpolovie, P.J., Joe, A. I. & Okoto, T. (2014). Academic achievement prediction: Role of interest in learning and attitude towards school. International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE), 1(11), 73-100.
18. Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC). (2007). Geography curriculum SS 1 – SS 3. Abuja: NERDC.
19. Onah, G. (2017). Effects of field trip and laboratory activities on students’ interest in poultry production in senior secondary schools in Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria. Nsukka: Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, university of Nigeria, Nsukka.
20. Pai, B. (2012). Using Online Quizzes and Discussion Forum to Enhance LEarning Numerical Methods. Proceeding of the 119th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 7-11). San Antonio, Texas: ASEE.
21. Rohana, K., Nor, R. Z. & Zaidi, M. A. (2009). The Quality of Learning Environment and Academic Performance From a Student’s Perception. International Journal of Business Management, 4(4), 171-175.
22. Schukajlow, S. (2015). Effects of enjoyment and boredom on students’ interest in mathematics and vice versa. Proceedings of 39th Psychology of Mathematics Education Conference.4, pp. 137-144. Hobart, Australia: PME.
23. Sutarto, S., Sari, D. P. & Fathurrochman, I. (2020), Teacher strategies in online learning to increasestudents’ interest in learning during COVID-19 pandemic.Jurnal Konseling dan Pendidikan (JKP), 8(3), 129-137.
24. Tembe, N., Anyagh, P. I. & Abakpa, B. O. (2020). Students’ mathematics interest as correlate of achievement in mathematics: Evidence from a Sub-Saharan student sample. ScienceOpen Preprints, 2-15. https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-.PPLYPGG.v1
25. Ugodulunwa, C. & Wakjissa, S. (2015). Use of portfolio assessment technique in teaching map sketching and location in secondary school geography in Jos, Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(17), 23-30.
26. Wan Hassan, W.Z., Jamsari, E.A., Taha, M., Basir, A., Alias, J & Muslim, N. (2015). Effectiveness of the forum method for the self development course in UKM and its link with student interest. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 88-101.
27. WestAfrican Examination Council. (2019, June 28). e-Learning. West African Examination Council:https://waeconline.org.ng/elearning/Geography/Geo218nq9.html
28. West African Examination Council (2015-2020). West African Senior School Certificate Examination: Chief Examiners’ Reports. Ilupeju Lagos: West African Publishers Limited.
29. Yunusa, U., Abdulwahid, U & Abdullahi, M. I. (2014). Effect of cooperative instructional strategy on interest, and achievement in Biology among low–achieving senior secondary school students in Niger State, Nigeria. European Journal of Educational Sciences, 1(2), 398-409.