INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2519
Comparative Effects of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed
Instruction on Academic Achievement of Senior Secondary School
Students in Biology
Awobodu Victoria Yetunde (PhD)., Delphonso Bamidele Tokunbo (PhD)., Balogun Sakirat Adenike
Department of Natural Science, Lagos State University of Education, Oto/Ijanikin, Lagos, Nigeria
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120800223
Received: 05 Aug 2025; Accepted: 12 Aug 2025; Published: 24 September 2025
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the comparative effects of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Programmed
Instruction (PI) strategies on the academic achievement of senior secondary school students in Biology. A
quasi-experimental pretest-posttest control group design was employed, involving 225 Senior Secondary ll
students drawn from public schools in Lagos District II (Kosofe,lkorodu & Somolu), Lagos state, South-
western Nigeria. The students were randomly assigned to one of three groups: PBL, PI, and a Control group
taught with the conventional lecture method. The research instrument used for data collection was the Biology
Achievement Test (BAT), developed by the researcher to assess students' understanding of key Biology
concepts such as the respiratory system, tissues, and transport mechanisms in animals. Content and face
validity of the BAT were ensured through expert review by specialists in science education and educational
measurement. The reliability of the instrument was established using test retest, which yielded a coefficient of
0.879, indicating a high level of internal consistency. Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics
and Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). The findings revealed that both PBL and PI significantly enhanced
students' academic achievement in Biology when compared to the conventional lecture method. Among the
three groups, students exposed to PBL achieved the highest mean gain in the post-test, indicating a stronger
impact on conceptual understanding and knowledge retention. The study recommends the integration of PBL
strategies into Biology instruction at the senior secondary level to promote meaningful learning and improve
science achievement.
Keywords: Problem-Based Learning, Programmed Instruction, Biology Achievement, Instructional Strategies,
and Secondary Education.
INTRODUCTION
Biology remains one of the most central and widely offered science subjects in Nigeria’s senior secondary
school curriculum due to its foundational role in preparing students for careers in fields such as medicine,
nursing, agriculture, biotechnology, and environmental science. Its relevance to both individual growth and
national development cannot be overemphasized. Despite the high enrollment in Biology at the secondary
level, the persistent decline in students’ academic performance in national examinations such as the West
African Senior School Certificate Examination (WASSCE) remains a major concern. The West African
Examinations Council (WAEC, 2023) reported that less than 45% of students achieved credit passes (A1–C6)
in Biology in the 2022–2023 cycle, continuing a troubling trend over the last decade. Studies have repeatedly
pointed to the dominance of teacher-centered methods—particularly the conventional lecture method—as one
of the major contributor to students’ underachievement in Biology (Yusuf, Ogunniyi, & Adeyemi, 2021; Eze
& Ugwu, 2023). The conventional lecture method often prioritizes memorization of facts over deep conceptual
understanding and application. It limits student engagement, suppresses curiosity, and provides few
opportunities for collaborative learning or critical thinking. Consequently, many students develop negative
attitudes toward Biology, find it abstract and difficult, and struggle to retain and apply biological concepts. In
addition to ineffective pedagogy, several other factors contribute to poor performance. These include
overcrowded classrooms, inadequate use of teaching aids, low motivation, test anxiety, and learners’ poor
foundational knowledge (Okoye & Adelakun, 2022). These challenges call for innovative and student-centered
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2520
teaching strategies that can promote meaningful learning, active engagement, and improved academic
achievement in Biology. However, in spite of the importance and popularity of the subject among Nigerian
students, studies have shown that students lack interest, competence and the right attitude required to learn the
subject effectively (Delphonso et., al. 2024). In Rwanda, Byusa et al. (2020) observed that teachers still rely
heavily on didactic methods and teach science as a body of knowledge which the students often forget shortly
afterwards.
To improve learning outcomes, researchers and educators have advocated for the use of more interactive,
student-centered instructional strategies such as Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Programmed Instruction
(PI) (Olorunfemi & Adeoye, 2022; Abubakar & Emeka, 2024). Both strategies represent a shift from passive
knowledge transmission to active knowledge construction, offering the potential to enhance students’
understanding of scientific concepts and improve their academic performance. PBL is a pedagogical approach
that engages students in investigating and solving real-world problems in collaborative settings. It promotes
inquiry, critical thinking, and self-directed learning while fostering deeper understanding and long-term
retention of knowledge. In the context of science education, PBL has been shown to improve students’
performance, attitude, and conceptual grasp of difficult topics (Ogunleye & Ogunbiyi, 2021).According to
Putra and Dewi (2018), PBL enhances students’ ability to analyze the material by challenging them to learn,
work together in groups and find solutions to real problems curiosity and analytical skills.
Sari, Utomo, and Astna (2021) define problem-based learning as a learning approach based on authentic
issues. Students gain knowledge through active participation in real-world problem-solving activities, thus
developing their understanding. This teaching style requires students to actively engage in acquiring
information and exploring potential answers, while the teacher acts as a facilitator. He asserted that problem-
based learning offers students a genuine problem that frequently arises in their everyday lives.
A study by Nwankwo et., al. (2022) revealed that students taught using PBL in Biology significantly
outperformed those taught with conventional methods, especially in complex topics like respiration, cell and
transport.
Shamdas et.al (2023) study on PBL models showed that Biology learning by applying STEM - based PBL had
a significant effect on communication skills of high school students in Indonesia compared to direct STEM
based learning. A study by Orozco and Yangco ( 2016 ) also showed that PBL had higher posttest means score
in the critical thinking skills test and creative thinking skills of Biology students in Philippines than those
without PBL. Kusaga et al (2022) on their study observed that the use of PBL showed an increased in students
achievement test compared to the traditional teaching method. Traditional teaching method they say have the
ability to retain achievement at a low level of cognitive ability compared to PBL. The study recommends a
continuous use of learner - centred approaches such as PBL in the teaching and learning of science subjects
including biology in Tanzania.
Furthermore, PBL aligns with constructivist learning theory, which emphasizes that knowledge is best
acquired when learners are actively involved in constructing meaning from experiences. This approach makes
learning more relevant and applicable to real-life situations, helping students develop transferable problem-
solving skills. As a result, PBL has been recommended for wide implementation in secondary school science
education (Hub, 2023). Research indicates a positive correlation between problem-based learning and
academic achievement in science education. Students engaged in PBL showed higher levels of understanding
and retention of scientific concepts (Bara & Xhomara.2020). Programmed Instruction (PI) on the other hand is
a self-paced, step-by-step instructional strategy that allows learners to progress through content in small,
logically sequenced units. It often includes immediate feedback to reinforce learning and correct
misconceptions. PI has been shown to enhance individualized learning, mastery of concepts, and retention,
especially among learners with diverse academic abilities (Omolafe et al., 2023). Although PI is less common
in Nigerian classrooms, its advantages in promoting autonomy, reducing cognitive overload, and supporting
differentiated instruction have been widely documented. In an experimental study in Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria, PI
was found to significantly improve science students’ achievement and interest compared to conventional
instruction (Adediran & Oladele, 2022). The structure and reinforcement built into PI are especially useful in
large classes where individualized attention may be difficult to achieve. Its compatibility with digital and low-
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2521
tech learning tools also makes it a potentially scalable solution in resource-limited settings. While both PBL
and PI have independently demonstrated positive outcomes in science education, there is limited research
directly comparing their relative effectiveness—particularly within the Nigerian secondary school context and
specifically in Biology. Furthermore, most studies focus either on urban schools or on isolated instructional
strategies, without evaluating their comparative benefits against the conventional method. This study,
therefore, seeks to fill this gap by examining the comparative effects of PBL and PI on students’ academic
achievement in Biology, using a quasi-experimental design in selected secondary schools in Lagos State.
The purpose of this study
The purpose of this study is to investigate the comparative effects of Problem-Based Learning and
Programmed Instruction on the academic achievement of senior secondary school students in Biology.
Therefore, the specific objectives of this research are to:
(i) determine the difference in academic achievement between students taught using Problem-Based Learning
and Programmed Instruction strategies and those taught using the conventional lecture method;
(ii) compare the effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on students’
academic achievement in Biology;
Research Hypotheses
In the context of the above objectives the following research hypotheses will be tested:
(i) There is no significant difference in academic achievement between students taught using Problem-Based
Learning and Programmed Instruction strategies and those taught using the conventional lecture method.
(ii) There is no significant effect of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on students’
academic achievement in Biology
Scope of the study
This study examined the comparative effects of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on the
academic achievement of senior secondary school students in Biology. The geographical coverage of the study
was restricted to Senior Secondary ll students drawn from public schools in Lagos District ll ( Kosofe,lkorodu
& Somolu), Lagos state, South-western Nigeria.
METHODOLOGY
This study adopted the non-equivalent pre-test, post-test control group design. There were three groups in the
study, two experimental groups and one control group.
The design for the study can be represented as:
Experimental Group I O
1
X
1
O
2
O
3
Experimental Group II O
4
X
2
O
5
O
6
Control Group O
7
X
3
O
8
O
9
Population, Sample and Sampling Technique
The study population comprised Senior Secondary ll students drawn from public schools in Lagos District ll (
Kosofe,lkorodu & Somolu), Lagos state, South-western Nigeria. A total of 225 male and female Biology
students in their intact classes in three randomly selected secondary schools constituted the sample for the
study. The schools were randomly assigned to experimental and the control groups.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2522
Instrument
The instrument used in this study is the Biology Achievement Test (BAT) which was used for pretest and post-
test Biology Achievement Test (BAT) which comprises of 60 items of objectives questions. The face validity
was undertaken by the researcher’s colleagues in the department of test and measurement and two experienced
Integrated Science lecturers in colleges of Education University respectively who are seasoned examiners of
West Africa Examination Council (WAEC) and National Examinations Council (NECO) for comments on the
validity and correctness of the questions and the options attached to them. Based on the comments of the
assessors, some few questions were modified. The instruments were pilot-tested on a sample of 25 students
selected from a SS II in Epe local government area of Lagos state using test-retest method. The scores on the
administration of BAT (i.e. test re-test method) were subjected to correlation analysis using Pearson Product
Moment Correlation Analysis (PPMCA). Subjects responded to each of the items in BAT. The responses were
scored +2, +1, -1, -2 for positive items and -2, -1, +1, +2 for negative items , depending on the nature of each
item. The Kuder-Richardson formula 21 method for determining the reliability of research instrument was
utilized. The method is based on the consistency of an individual’s performance from the item and the standard
deviation of the test such that the estimate or the test reliability coefficient obtained denotes the internal
consistency of the test. The internal consistency is the degree to which the items of the test measure a common
attribute of the testee. The reliability coefficient (r) for the instrument was 0.84 (i.e.: r ꞊ 0.84) which is
suitable and reliable for this study. Data collected were analysed using descriptive statistic and analysis of
covariance.
Instructional Package
The instructional package consisted of topics that require identification of individual misconception and belief
in Biology towards evolution. The content in this study was based on the evolution concepts viz ; concept of
evolution, evidence of evolution, the geological timetable, trends and theories of evolution including pre-
Darwinism and Neo Darwinism Theories, Darwinism Theories, Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection,
Competition with particular emphasis on Competition for Food, Space and other resources among human
population, Competition, Variation and Survival of the Fittest, Mutational Changes as causes of Evolution,
Adaptive Radiation, Isolating Mechanisms, The Origin of life, Fossils and Human Evolution. The treatment
package consisted of three (3) curriculum materials that contained the topics, and various pedagogical
strategies that will facilitate meaningful learning. The schools used for the study officially endorsed the
instructional package before administration the instrument.
The treatment curriculum packages included;
(a) Problem –Based Learning (PBL);
(b) Programme Instruction (PI) and
(c) Teacher Expository Method (TEM).
PBL is a pedagogical approach that engages students in investigating and solving real-world problems in
collaborative settings. It promotes inquiry, critical thinking, and self-directed learning while fostering deeper
understanding and long-term retention of knowledge. In the context of science education, PBL has been shown
to improve students’ performance, attitude, and conceptual grasp of difficult topics (Ogunleye & Ogunbiyi).
PBL is an educational learning approach that involves learning through real-world problem. The purpose is to
encourage students to tackle authentic issues and solve practical concerns. These issues provide opportunities
for significant activities that involve students in solving challenges and engaging in higher-level thinking in
real-life situations (Schmid, 2004; Bolaji, 2014). In problem-based learning, learners gradually assume greater
responsibility for their learning and grow more self-reliant, reducing their dependence on the teacher. Students
expressed the value of having their voice and autonomy after scenarios were implemented, as well as the value
of learning from self-reflection (Carrió & Llerena, 2023).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2523
The second treatment, Programme Instruction (PI) was utilized as a package for experimental group B. The
content materials were extracted from the Biology curriculum of West Africa Examination Council (WAEC).
Programme Instruction (PI) has been shown to enhance individualized learning, mastery of concepts, and
retention, especially among learners with diverse academic abilities (Omolafe et al., 2023). Although PI is less
common in Nigerian classrooms, its advantages in promoting autonomy, reducing cognitive overload, and
supporting differentiated instruction have been widely documented. In an experimental study in Ado-Ekiti,
Nigeria, PI was found to significantly improve science students’ achievement and interest compared to
conventional instruction (Adediran & Oladele, 2022).
Teacher Expository Method (TEM) utilized a package for Control group C. The content materials were
extracted from the Biology curriculum of West Africa Examination Council (WAEC). .
Teacher Expository Method (TEM) involves verbal presentation of ideas, concepts, generalizations of facts by
the teacher where the pupils are either passive listener or slightly involved. Hence this lead to rote learning
whereby pupils memorize what they have learnt and regurgitate the facts, this method is one of the methods of
teaching Science because it is popularly used in our schools for its instructional advantages in terms of quick
and easy coverage of the school syllabus and dissemination of scientific information or principles to a large
class (Delphonso 2015).This method of science instruction often fails to address or to change misconceptions
about physical phenomena that students bring with them to the classroom (Eaton et al., 1984;Jones,1988) This
traditional teacher-centered learning approach often favours passive reception of knowledge, where the
teachers acting as repertoire of knowledge and students the dormant recipients (Delphonso et al.,2023).
Data Collection
Permission from the principals and teachers of the selected schools for the study were sought. Teachers and
students were subjected to training of the two strategies. In the process, the purpose of the study and the
procedural steps involved in the study were discussed with them.
The procedure for collection of data was in three main phases and it lasted for eight weeks.
The phases were:
Pre- test for the first one week
Prior to the commencement of the treatment, all participants were administered a pre-test using the Biology
Achievement Test (BAT) to determine their baseline knowledge in Biology.
Treatment for next six weeks
Thereafter, the students were assigned to three groups based on their intact classes: one group was taught using
the Problem-Based Learning (PBL) strategy; the second group was exposed to Programmed Instruction (PI),
while the third group received instruction through the conventional teaching method. Each instructional
method was implemented in line with a standardized lesson plan tailored to the respective strategies. All
groups were taught the same Biology topic (Evolution) during the period of study to ensure uniformity of
content across the treatments. Trained Biology teachers served as instructors and were properly briefed on the
instructional procedures to ensure fidelity in implementation.
Post-test for the last one week of the eight weeks.
The post-test, which was the same as the pre-test (BAT), was administered to all the participants. The scores
from the pre- and post-tests were subsequently used to assess the academic achievement of the students under
each instructional strategy.
Data Analysis
Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) and the
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2524
Scheffe Post-hoc test was used to determine the direction of the significance and also to account for the
possible difference among the groups, the pre-test. All hypotheses were tested at P < 0.05 level of
significance.
RESULTS
Hypothesis One: There is no significant difference in academic achievement between students taught using
Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction strategies and those taught using the conventional
lecture method.
Table 1: Summary of Analysis of Covariance of SS II Students’ Achievement, Scores by Strategies.
Source of Variation
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig. of F
Main Effects
3,583.372
1
3,583.372
156.295
.000
Covariates (pre-test)
1,848.755
1
1,848.755
80.637
.000
Treatment (PBL, PI, CM)
8,121.535
2
4,060.767
177.118
.000*
*indicate significant F at 0.05 level
R
2
= .727 (adjusted R
2
= .712)
Table 1 revealed the result of the main effect of instructional strategy on the SS students’ achievement in
Biology. The result revealed significant outcome (F
(2, 212)
= 177.118, P < 0.05), implying that the post-test
mean achievement scores of the students after exposure to the different instructional strategies are significantly
different. As a result, the null hypothesis 1 which states there is no significant main effect of instructional
strategies on students’ achievement in Biology is rejected.
Hypothesis 2: There is no significant effect of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on
students’ academic achievement in Biology.
Table 2: Students’ Pre- and Post-Test Achievement Scores by Instructional Strategy
Instructional Strategy
Test Type
N
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
Experimental Group 1 (PBL)
Pre-test
75
22.88
5.55
10
34
Post-test
75
39.81
6.58
28
52
Experimental Group 2 (PI)
Pre-test
78
25.32
4.26
12
33
Post-test
78
39.38
6.04
25
51
Control Group (CM)
Pre-test
72
24.39
4.88
14
39
Post-test
72
25.07
4.52
14
34
Total
Pre-test
225
24.21
5.11
10
39
Post-test
225
34.95
8.91
14
52
Note: PBL = Problem-Based Learning; PI = Programmed Instruction; CM = Conventional Method.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2525
Table 2 revealed the students’ mean achievement scores in Biology before and after exposure to the
instructional strategies used in the study. The table showed that the 75 students exposed to problem-based
learning strategy (PBL) recorded post-test achievement score of 39.81 (S.D. = 6.58); followed by the 78
students exposed to programmed instruction strategy (PI) whose post-test mean achievement score was 39.38
(S.D. = 6.04), while the 72 students exposed to conventional method recorded the least post-test mean
achievement score of 25.07 (S.D. = 4.52). Table 2 further revealed that the highest post-test achievement score
of 52 was scored by a student exposed to PBL strategy while a student exposed to CM recorded the least post-
test achievement score of 14. Table 2 further revealed positive mean gains across the three groups when the
pre-test and post-test scores are compared, with the PBL strategy recording the highest mean achievement gain
of +16.93. This outcome thus revealed that there was significant effect of PBL and PI on student’s academic
achievement in Biology. The hypothesis is therefore rejected.
To explain which of the strategies recorded higher mean achievement scores than the other, the magnitudes of
the post-test mean achievement scores of the students exposed to the strategies in the study was computed and
presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Multiple Classification Analysis of Students’ Achievement Scores by Instructional Strategies
Grand Mean = 34.340
Variable + Category Presentation
Media
N
Unadjusted
Deviation
Eta
Adjusted for Independent
+ Covariates
Beta
1. Exp. Grp. 1 (PBL)
2. Exp. Grp. 2 (PI)
3. Control Group (CM)
75
78
72
6.33
3.05
-9.38
.675
5.47
5.04
-9.27
.456
Table 3 revealed the magnitudes of the adjusted post-test mean achievement scores of the students exposed to
the three strategies. The MCA in Table 3 revealed a grand mean of 34.340, but the students exposed to PBL
strategy recorded the highest post-test mean achievement score of 39.81. Those exposed to PI strategy
recorded the next higher post-test mean achievement score of 39.38 while the students exposed to conventional
method recorded the least post-test mean achievement score of 25.07. This outcome thus revealed that the
problem-based learning strategy with the highest post-test term achievement score could enhance students’
achievement in Biology than programmed instruction strategy and conventional method.
Table 3 further revealed that while instructional strategy alone contributed 67.5% of the variance in the
students’ achievement scores, the independent and moderator variables jointly accounted for 72.7% of the
variance in the learners’ achievement in Biology.
Table 4: Scheffe Pair-wise Comparisons of Achievement Scores on Instructional Strategies
Mean
Instructional Strategies
PBL
PI
CM
39.81
Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
*
*
39.38
Programme instruction (PI)
*
*
25.07
Conventional Method (CM)
*
*
*denotes pairs of groups that are significantly different at P < 0.05.
Table 4 revealed that the obtained significant difference in instructional strategies used was as a result of the
significant difference in the post-test mean achievement scores of students exposed to the pairs of PBL and PI
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2526
strategies, PBL strategy and conventional method, as well as PI strategy and conventional method. That is, the
obtained difference in the post-test mean achievement scores of the students exposed to pairs of strategies
mentioned are statistically significant at the 0.05 level of significance.
DISCUSSION
Academic Achievement between students taught using PBL and PI and those taught using the CLM.
There were positive mean gains across the three groups when the pre-test score and post-test scores were
compared. The Problem-Based Learning (PBL) recorded the highest mean achievement gain. The outcome
thus revealed that when students are exposed to Problem-Based Learning (PBL) strategy, they record higher
achievement gains in Biology than Programmed Instruction (PI) or conventional method. These findings
provide support to earlier findings which indicated positive effects of metacognitive instructional strategies
over conventional method, had positive effect on students’ cognitive achievement and also promote students’
scientific creativity (Bara & Xhomara.2020).This findings corroborate Nwankwo et al. (2022) whose study
revealed that students taught using PBL in Biology significantly outperformed those taught with conventional
methods, especially in complex topics like respiration and cell transport. This study is in agreement with
Delphonso et., al. (2024) which opined that role of active learning strategies in the teaching and learning of
basic science assisted the students to perform better than their counterparts in Lecture method. This implies
that student learn by doing things themselves and through interaction with one another.
Effect of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on students’ Academic Achievement in
Biology.
The focus of this analysis was to seek evidence for significant difference in the cognitive achievement of
students in Biology after being exposed to instructional strategies of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and
Programmed Instruction (PI). The results provide evidence which indicate levels of differences through series
of mean and standard deviation as recorded in Table 2. This Table reveals that instructional strategies of
Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Programmed Instruction (PI) were found to be effective in enhancing
outcomes. There was a general increase in post-test scores over pre-test scores for learning outcomes in the
two experimental groups. These findings also support the assertion that both strategies improves students
performance and conceptual grasp of difficult topics and investigative nature of science as earlier indicated by
Ogunleye & Ogunbiyi( 2021). Olorufemi &Adeoye 2022;Emeka &Abubaka 2024 supported that indeed both
strategies is a shift from passive knowledge transmission to active knowledge construction. Lisette Wijnia et
tal (2024) meta-analysis study, it revealed nuanced insights- A small to moderate, positive, effect of problem-
based (PBL), project-based (PjBL), and case-based learning (CBL).on students’ motivation (compared to
teacher-centered learning). This effect is more pronounced for students’ competence beliefs, perceptions of
value, and attitudes toward school subjects, such as science. Concerning students’ reasons for studying, it was
also discovered that a trivial, positive effect. The latter effect conflicts with the popular belief that methods
such as PBL can increase students’ intrinsic motivation for studying
The strategies aligned with the theory of constructivist which emphasise active involvement of students in the
construction of their learning. PBL fosters collaboration, critical thinking, and application of prior knowledge
and PI improves self-paced mastery but less effective than PBL in engagement.
CONCLUSION
The study investigated the comparative effects of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on the
academic achievement of senior secondary school students in Biology and two hypotheses were generated and
tested.
H
01
states that there was no significant difference in academic achievement between students taught using
Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction strategies and those taught using the conventional
lecture method. The outcome thus revealed that when students are exposed to Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2527
strategy, they record higher achievement gains in Biology than Programmed Instruction (PI) or conventional
method. The hypothesis was rejected.
H
02
state that there was no significant effect of Problem-Based Learning and Programmed Instruction on
students’ academic achievement in Biology. The results provide evidence which indicate levels of differences
through series of mean and standard deviation that revealed that instructional strategies of Problem-Based
Learning (PBL) and Programmed Instruction (PI) were found to be effective in enhancing outcomes. There
was a general increase in post-test scores over pre-test scores for learning outcomes in the two experimental
groups. Therefore, the hypothesis was rejected. The Scheffe post-hoc test was then carried out on the group
means for the significant comparison of the mean values of the three groups. The Scheffe analysis showed
that there was a significant difference among the three groups.
In view of the above results, it implied that students that were exposed to Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
strategy, recorded higher achievement gains in Biology than Programmed Instruction (PI) or conventional
method. Indicating that this strategy is the best suitable and it enhances a shift from passive knowledge
transmission to active knowledge construction of the students. The present research developed initiative from
Science Education literature that highlighted the need for instructional strategies that could reduce students’
dependence on teachers with the aim of contributing towards meeting this need. Far more than the
conventional method, instructional strategies that were employed in this study emphasized the participation
and active intellectual involvement of students. Finding from this study suggest the effectiveness of the
learner-centred instructional strategies of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Programmed Instruction (PI) in
promoting conceptual understanding in Biology. This study has highlighted the potential value of teaching
cognitive strategies in addition to presenting instructional content. These metacognitive strategies are
alternative to conventional method which is in vogue in our secondary schools.
Furthermore, these strategies could serve as effective tools that will assist learners to process information in a
meaningful way and become independent learners. This, no doubt, will engender learning outcomes in science.
PBL, PI and other innovative strategies are most effective for improving academic achievement in Biology
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Teachers are encouraged to utilize PBL, PI in the teaching and learning of Biology for better
comprehension. Biology is a subject that study life, students should not be discouraged with the
teachers normal method.
2. Teachers should be trained on the use of different methods that allows active participation or
involvement in the teaching and learning process.
3. Curriculum developers should integrate PBL, PI and other metacognitive strategies into the curriculum
and enforce the use.
4. Policy makers should fund the development and implementation of innovative strategies in schools.
5. Government should sponsor Biology teachers to conferences, workshops, and seminars to enable them
update their knowledge on new methods of teaching Biology.
Suggestion for further studies
This study documents the effectiveness of using Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Programmed Instruction
(PI) for presenting Biology to students in the experimental groups. There is a need, however, to use these
strategies on a larger sample in other educational settings with different student’s cultural and educational
backgrounds. The result of the findings also suggests that cognitive strategies could assist learners in
expressing ideas and communicating experiences in science lessons. This will assist the learners after formal
schooling system. Further research is therefore, needed to better understand the process of making learners
achieve metacognitive sophistication in other subject areas. This will make one determine effectiveness of
learning cognitive strategies in these areas in order to ascertain generalisation of the findings.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2528
In Science Education, a very important area of concern is provision of appropriate instructional strategies that
can enhance learner’s performance. Since this study suggests that metacognitive instructional strategies of
Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Programmed Instruction (PI) are viable alternatives to conventional
method, there is need to look at its effectiveness in our teacher education programme. This is because no
education can rise above the quality of its teachers .A possible replication of this study can be undertaken with
attention on the effect of other variables like socio-economic background of learners and geographical location
of schools.
REFERENCES
1. Abubakar, I. M., & Emeka, S. C. (2024). Programmed instruction and student academic performance in
Nigerian senior secondary schools. Journal of Education and Practice, 15(2), 35–44.
2. Adediran, T. A., & Oladele, K. T. (2022). Comparative effects of programmed instruction and
traditional teaching on science students’ achievement in Ekiti State, Nigeria. African Journal of
Educational Research, 26(1), 67–76.
3. Bara, G., & Xhomara, N. (2020). The effect of student-centred teaching and problem-based learning on
academic achievement in science. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(2), 180–199.
4. Bolaji, B., (2014). Effects of Lecture and Activity Based Methods on the Attitudes of Junior
Secondary School Students to Essay Writing in French, European Journal of Educational
Studies, 6(1),2014, 43–49.
5. Byusa, E., Kampire, E., & Mwesigye, A. R. (2020). Analysis of teaching techniques and scheme of
work in teaching chemistry in Rwandan secondary schools. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science
and Technology Education, 16(6). https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/7833
6. Delphonso, B.T, Olalekan, A. A. & Olasele, I.A. (2023). Effectiveness of self- regulatory learning
approach in improving learning outcomes of senior secondary school students in biology. Port
Harcourt Journal of Educational Studies. PHAJOES. 8(3),14-24.
7. Delphonso, B.T, Osunloye,O.A., Abolaji, T.J., Ajose O. O., Jaiyesimi, O.O. & Adigun,(2024).
Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning Method on Students’ Academic Performance in Pride of
Barbados Flowering Plant. Benue Journal of Research in Science Education (BJRSSE) 1(1), 18-26.
8. Delphonso, B.T. (2015): Effectiveness of Cooperative learning and Conceptual Change Strategies in
improving learning outcomes of College of Education Biology Students in Southwestern Nigeria. A
Ph.D's Thesis of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Osun State (April. 2015).
9. Eze, M. C., & Ugwu, C. C. (2023). Teacher-centered methods and their influence on students’ learning
outcomes in Nigerian secondary schools. International Journal of Education and Development, 19(4),
91–102.
10. Hub, B. R. (2023). Active learning in STEM education: A meta-analysis of recent studies. International
Review of Education, 69(2), 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-023-09920-2
11. Kasuga, W., Maro, W., & Pangani, I. (2022). Effect of problem-based learning approach on developing
students’ science process skills on the topic of safety in our environment. Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 19(3), 872-886. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.154
12. Nwankwo, F. C., Ibrahim, A. A., & Okoli, U. I. (2022). Enhancing biology achievement through
problem-based learning and laboratory inquiry in senior secondary schools. Nigerian Journal of Science
Education, 40(3), 112–128.
13. Okoye, J. I., & Adelakun, A. A. (2022). Persistent failure in biology: A call for innovative teaching
practices in Nigerian classrooms. Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Research, 11(2), 14–23.
14. Ogunleye, A. O., & Ogunbiyi, T. R. (2021). The effect of problem-based learning on students’
academic performance in biology in Lagos. Journal of Science and Educational Research, 5(1), 44–56.
15. Olorunfemi, A. B., & Adeoye, A. M. (2022). Advancing STEM learning through problem-based
pedagogies: A study of Lagos State public schools. West African Journal of Science Education, 18(2),
77–91.
16. Omolafe, J. O., Musa, A., & Nwachukwu, F. (2023). Exploring low-tech programmed instruction
models for biology in Nigerian rural schools. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education, 19(1), 56–
70.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2529
17. Orozco.J.A & Yangco, R.T(2016):Problem -based learning: Effect on critical and creative thinking
skills in Biology. Asian Journal of Biology Education. 9,2-10
18. Putra, Z.A., & Dewi, M. (2018). The application of problem-based learning in Mechanical
Engineering. IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. doi:10.1088/1757899X/306/1/012140.
19. Sari, Y. I., Utomo, D. H., & Astina, I. K. (2021). The Effect of Problem-Based Learning on
Problem Solving and Scientific Writing Skills. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 11-26.
20. Schmidt, H. 2004. The current state of problem-based learning: keynote paper presented at the
problem-based learning, a quality experience. University of Salford, 15th-17th September, 2004.
21. Shamdas, G., Bialangi, M., Buntu, A., & Ihwan.( 2023). Application of Problem-based learning model
STEM-based on biology lessons for high school students communication skills. Journal Pendidikan
Sains Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Science Education), 11(2):345-359.
22. WAEC. (2023). Chief examiners’ report for the May/June WASSCE biology. West African
Examinations Council.
23. Yusuf, A., Ogunniyi, T., & Adeyemi, S. (2021). Instructional challenges and solutions in teaching
biology: Teachers’ perspectives. Nigerian Journal of Educational Leadership, 23(4), 89–102.
