Day 1 pm 2 e-apcore2019157-parro (2)

APCoRE
ASIA-PACIFIC CONSORTIUM OF RESEARCHERS AND EDUCATORS
Utilizing Competition-based Learning
(CnBL) Method in a Biology Class Setting
Parro, Maria Fatima L.
College of Graduate Studies and Teacher Education Research, Philippine Normal
University, 104, Taft Ave, Ermita, Manila, 1000 Metro Manila, Philippines.
Basic Education- Senior High School Department, University of the East, 2219 CM
Recto Avenue, Manila City, 1008 Metro Manila, Philippines.
2 0 1 9 A P C O R E C O N V E N T I O N A N D I N T E R N A T I O N A L
C O N F E R E N C E

Your Date Here Your Footer Here 3
“Filipinos love to
compete in different
competitions whether
local or international.”

Your Date Here Your Footer Here 4
Why not focus on
bringing competition
inside the classroom?

C O N F E R E N C E
•Competition
•Gamification of Learning
•Motivation
•Academic Achievement
•Competition-based Learning
Key Concepts

C O N F E R E N C E
• Competition-based Learning (CnBL) has
been supported by various studies into
having positive effects in student’s
motivation (Williams & Clippinger, 2002;
Greene, et al., 2004; Tüzün, et al., 2009;
Burguillo, 2010; Boyle et al., 2015; Chen &
Law, 2016).
Introduction

C O N F E R E N C E
• Cagiltay & Ozcelik (2015) examined whether a
game-based learning (GBL) environment that
allowed players to see each other’s scores, ranking
and nicknames was able to influence their
academic performance and motivation as
compared to those who were not able to access
their scores, ranking and nicknames. They found
that competition in games was able to enhance
learning and motivation.
Introduction

C O N F E R E N C E
• Vandercruysse, et al. (2013) presented that
competition had no significant effect on the
learning outcomes and motivation of the
students because this game- based environment
deeply relied on competition against a virtual
opponent rather than against human
opponents.
Introduction

C O N F E R E N C E
• Competing with other students, rather than a
virtual opponent could be a factor affecting the
students’ motivation, accuracy and learning in
games (Williams & Clippinger, 2002; Tüzün, et
al., 2009; Burguillo, 2010; Boyle et al., 2015;
& Law, 2016).
Introduction

C O N F E R E N C E
• There were only few CnBL researches which
were conducted in Asian countries (Burguillo,
2010; Chen, et al., 2017). The preference to
direct instruction in eastern schools is very high
and students are more accustomed to being
taught rather than constructing and being
strategic in the teaching and learning process.
Introduction

C O N F E R E N C E
• According to the study of Ku, et al., (2004)
students focus mostly on their grades in
norm-referenced tests, which tend to
measure their performance relatively to
each other, and thus competition is
often very intense among peers.
Introduction

C O N F E R E N C E
This research aims to identify the following:
1-The effect of Competition- based learning
(CnBL) in enhancing students’ academic
achievement (SAA) in learning about the
concept of cellular structures and its functions.
Research Objectives

C O N F E R E N C E
2- The significant difference between the pre-
test and the post-test scores among students
after utilizing the CnBL method.
Research Objectives

C O N F E R E N C E
3- The Students’ Motivation (SM) level per facet
after utilizing the CnBL method.
4- The significant relationship between the SAA
and SM in learning Biology concepts after
utilizing the CnBL method.
5- The students’ perceptions (SP) in CnBL?
Research Objectives

C O N F E R E N C E
Framework
Figure 1. The Competition- Based Learning (CnBL) method was utilized as the
intervention in the study. It intends to enhance students’academic achievement (SAA)
as well as promote students’ motivation (SM) in learning Biology concepts. Also,
students’perceptions (SP) were acquired in the study
CnBL
SP
SAA
SM

C O N F E R E N C E
Methodology

C O N F E R E N C E
1 Selection of Participants
• A total of 42 Grade 12 students
who were part of the STEM
program were selected from the
Technological University of the
Philippines, Manila through
multistage probability sampling
technique.

C O N F E R E N C E
2 Administration of Pre-test
• A pre- test was administered to
test the knowledge of the
participants prior to the group
competition. The test includes
important concepts in Biology
specifically the structure and
function of cells.

C O N F E R E N C E
3 Execution of Plan Intervention
• The competition- based learning
(CnBL) technique was used as an
intervention. The twelfth-grade
students from TUP-Manila were
asked to group themselves into
seven.

C O N F E R E N C E
• Each group was given a concrete
model or a picture of a eukaryotic
cell and papers consisting of
words that were used to label the
cell. The teacher explained further
to the group of students the
competition mechanics.

C O N F E R E N C E
• The said competition
consisted of three parts.
On the first part of the
game, each group of
students were asked to
identify the three main
parts of the cell and paste
it on the cell diagram.

C O N F E R E N C E
• On the second part of
the game, the group
of students were asked
to identify the
organelles of the cell
and paste it on the cell
diagram.

C O N F E R E N C E
• The last part of
the competition
was centered on
allowing the
students to paste
on the cell
diagram the
functions of each
part of the
organelle.

C O N F E R E N C E
• At the end of each round of
the competition, the scores
were obtained based on the
number of correct answers
which were pasted on the
cell diagram of each group.
The winner was announced
after tallying the score.

C O N F E R E N C E
4 Administration and Analysis of the
Post- test
• After the intervention
process, the post-test was
administered to the students
in the form of the MC 2 tier
test to gauge if the CnBL
technique enabled the
students perform better in
Biology. The SAA results
were analyzed and
interpreted using t-test.

C O N F E R E N C E
5 Administration and Analysis of the
BMQ
• To identify how motivated students were
towards learning Biology concepts, students
were given the BMQ. The BMQ covers a set of
questions. The students were asked to check the
boxes which corresponds to their answers. The
Likert-type questionnaire consisted of numerical
values which designated a specific response- 4,
always done, 3, often done, 2, sometimes, and 1,
never. Pearson r correlation was utilized to test
the significant relationship that existed between
SAA and SM.

C O N F E R E N C E
6 Interpretation of Results
• The SP through the reflective
journal was interpreted
thematically and presented
based from the actual
responses of the students.

C O N F E R E N C E
1. What is the effect of CnBL in enhancing students’ academic achievement (SAA) in
learning about the concept of cellular structures and its functions?
Results and Discussion
Figure 4. Comparison between Pre-test and Post-test scores.

C O N F E R E N C E
2. Is there a significant difference between the pre-test and the post test
scores among students after utilizing the CnBL method?
The data presented in Table shows
that there is a significant difference
between the pre-test and post-test scores.
The mean score of the pre-test is 8.18 while
the mean score of post-test is 11.03. On
average, scores improved by 2.85 after the
intervention. Competition Based Learning
has a positive effect on the SAA, t(39) =-
8.507, p= “0.000”.
Remarks: Extremely Significant
Table 1.T Test (Paired means) Comparison of Pre-test and Post Test

C O N F E R E N C E
3. What is the Students’ Motivation (SM) level per facet after utilizing the
CnBL method?
In Figure 5, it shows student’s Level
of Motivation per facet. Question
number four, which asks if “Getting
a good biology grade is important
to me” has the highest frequency
(16) of Always and a highest mean
score of 3.275. Hence, question
number 18 which states that “I
believe I can get a perfect score in
my biology test” has the highest
frequency (10) of Never with a
lowest facet mean score of 2.275.
Facets
Figure 5.Student’s Level of Motivation per facet

C O N F E R E N C E
4. Is there a significant relationship between the SAA and SM in learning Biology
concepts after utilizing the CnBL method?
Table 2 shows that there is
a low rectilinear relationship
(R=0.17) between Post Test
Score (Achievement) and
motivation as specified in
Biology Motivation
Questionnaire (BMQ). It
suggests that students’
motivation has an indirect
association with their test
results.
Table 2. Pearson R Correlation of Motivation and
Academic Achievement

C O N F E R E N C E
5. What are the students’ perceptions (SP) in Competition Based Learning (CnBL)?
Based on the things written on the students’ reflective
journal, the following SPs were identified:
 Learning through competition is fun. As quoted from student
15, “I felt like everyone was really anxious about their
scores and become uncomfortable with it. Although I
everyone’s enthusiasm to learn because of all the
competition, I still managed to see that it is fun!”

C O N F E R E N C E
 Competition- based Learning (CnBL) is an effective strategy
in reviewing basic concepts that are needed to understand
new topics. Since the respondents are STEM students, topics
are in spiral progression, which makes CnBL an efficient
strategy. According to student 9 “Some of it are new to me
but overall, I already know the topic. Because of this
I was able to be refreshed with everything about the
functions of organelles.”

C O N F E R E N C E
Most students share the same positive response. Student 14 stated that,
“Yes, I think I will be able to perform better in Biology because I prefer
having games or activities regarding a particular topic or lesson.”
However, some students have a different preference.
For example, Student 13 said “No, because I prefer reading or watching
videos online of the topic.”
Student 16 also says “No… there are many paper cuts and so; however,
this is better than ordinary activities.”

C O N F E R E N C E
Based on the findings, the following conclusions were drawn:
1- There is a significant effect of CnBL on the SAA
2- There is an extremely significant difference between the
Pre-test and Post- test scores indicating improved
SAA
3- There is an evidence of varied level of SM based
from the BMQ interpretation per facet
Conclusions

C O N F E R E N C E
Based on the findings, the following conclusions were drawn:
4- There is a low rectilinear relationship between SAA
and SM
5- SP indicates that learning through competition is fun
*CnBL is an effective strategy in allowing better learning and
comprehension of Biology terms among students though it may
not be suitable for some students having different learning styles
and/or preferences.
Conclusions

C O N F E R E N C E
Based on the results of this study, the researcher would like to
recommend the following:
1- conduct a similar study on a longer period of time to monitor
the effect of CnBL among students
2- utilize another variables or factors that might affect the results
of the study
3- measure the students’ learning styles prior to the execution of
the plan intervention
4- develop new activities that are aligned to the CnBL strategy
Recommendations

Being globally competitive starts
in the classroom…
“All students — regardless of where they live or their socioeconomic status and cultural backgrounds — are
equally deserving of educational experiences that prepare them to be globally competent. ”
C O N F E R E N C E

C O N F E R E N C E
• Boyle, E. A., Hainey, T., Connolly, T. M., Gray, G., Earp, J., Ott, M., Riberio, C. (2015).An update to the systematic literature review of empirical evidence of the
impacts and outcomes of computer games and serious games.Computers & Education.doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.003
• Burguillo, J. C. (2010). Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance.Computers & Education, 55,
566e575.
• Cagiltay, N.E., Ozcelik, E., &Ozcelik, N.S. (2015).The effect of competition on learning in games.Computers & Education 87, 35e41.
• Chen, C.-H., & Law, V. (2016). Scaffolding individual and collaborative game-based learning in learning performance and intrinsic motivation. Computers in
Human Behavior, 55, 1201–1212.
• Chen, C.-H., Law, V. & Chen, W-Y. (2017). The effects of peer competition-based science learning game on secondary students’ performance, achievement goals,
and perceived ability. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-10.
• Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., &Akey, K. L. (2004).Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement:
Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462–482.
• Ku, O., Chen, S., Wu, D., Lao, A., Chan, T-W. (2014). The effects of game- based learning on mathematical confidence and performance: high ability vs. low ability.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17 (3), 65-78.
• Hong, J. C., Hwang, M. Y., Lu, C. H., Cheng, C. L., Lee, Y. C., & Lin, C. L. (2009). Playfulness-based design in educational games: a perspective on an evolutionary
contest game. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(1), 15e35.
• Tüzün, H., Yilmaz-Soylu, M., Karakus, T., Inal, Y., &KizIlkaya, G. (2009).The effects of computer games on primary school students’ achievement and motivation in
geography learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 68–77. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2008.06.008
• Vandercruysse, S., Vandewaetere, M., Cornillie, F., & Clarebout, G. (2013).Competition and students' perceptions in a game-based language learning
environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(6), 927-950.
• Williams R. & Clippinger C. (2002). Agression, competition and computer games: computer and human opponents. Computers in Human Behavior, 18 (5), 495-
506.
Bibliography entries

2019 APCORE CONVENTION AND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
C O N F E R E N C E

Day 1 pm 2 e-apcore2019157-parro (2)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (12)

Similar to Day 1 pm 2 e-apcore2019157-parro (2)

Similar to Day 1 pm 2 e-apcore2019157-parro (2) (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Day 1 pm 2 e-apcore2019157-parro (2)

Editor's Notes