English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of the study was to compare two teaching methodologies for an integrated agricultural biotechnology course at the postsecondary level. The two teaching methods tested were the explanation of the scientific basis for content (comparison treatment) versus the application of content to a real–world agricultural context (experimental treatment). The study was implemented with two different classes over two semesters. The comparison treatment was administered to 22 students during the spring semester of 2009, and the experimental treatment was administered to 16 students during the fall semester of 2009. The research design used was a quasi–experimental non–equivalent control–group design with an identical pre/posttest given to each group as a means of assessing content achievement. The experimental treatment, based on the principles of contextual teaching and learning, was not statistically significant (p >.05), so the study’s null hypothesis was not rejected. Based on these results, compared with traditional methods, a curriculum of contextualized teaching and learning can be implemented while maintaining a comparable level of student mastery of scientific concepts related to agricultural biotechnology.

Scientific Basis vs. Contextualized Teaching and Learning: The Effect on the Achievement of Postsecondary Students