Quasi-experimental approach improved science process skills in Ethiopian secondary biology students, suggesting effective instructional models.
Science process skills (SPS) encompass a range of abilities that enable learners to engage effectively in scientific inquiry and investigation. In Ethiopia, secondary school biology instruction remains predominantly teacher-centered, limiting student engagement and SPS development. This study examined the effect of the 5E Guided Inquiry-Based Learning (5E-GIBL) model on Grade 10 students’ SPS in biology compared with conventional instructional method. A concurrent embedded mixed-methods design was employed, integrating a quasi-experimental approach with semi-structured interviews. The sample comprised 105 students from two government secondary schools, with 52 assigned to the experimental group and 53 to the control group. Independent-samples t-test results showed that the experimental group achieved significantly higher post-test SPS scores than the control group, t(103) = − 5.07, p < .001. This result was confirmed by an ANCOVA controlling for pre-test scores, which revealed a significant effect of instructional approach, F(1, 102) = 250.72, p < .001. Gender-based analyses indicated that the effectiveness of the 5E-GIL model was comparable for male and female students. Factorial ANOVA showed a significant main effect of instructional group (F = 35.20, p < .001), whereas neither the main effect of gender nor the group × gender interaction was statistically significant (p > .05). Qualitative findings support the quantitative results, showing increased motivation, active participation, hands-on experimentation, collaboration, and meaningful application of SPS in real-life contexts. The findings of this study provide important implications for curriculum designers and teachers, emphasizing the integration of the 5E-GIBL model in biology education, a structured, student-centered approach that fosters engagement, cultivates SPS, and supports an equitable learning environment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Negerie et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: