| dc.description.abstract | The study reported here was conducted in two environmental settings, one urban the other rural. Thirty nine rural and thirty urban pupils, all males aged from, eight to ten years were given familiar and unfamiliar materials to classify. The objective of the study was to find out whether or not familiarity with test materials Influenced children’s classificatory abilities. Various sets of test materials were selected from rural and urban surroundings. Attempts were made to ensure that materials familiar to rural children were unfamiliar to urban children and vice versa. However, on the basis of familiarity test some materials which were found to be unfamiliar or familiar to both groups were also included for use in the tests. The number of subjects (frequency) who Identified a Particular attribute in their classificatory tasks was Determined for each of the attributes used in sorting the given 2 Test materials. A x2 test of significance between the two samples was performed since the two samples were Independent A further test to find out If the number of criteria I shifts Per set of test materials depended on materials familiarity was 2 Also performed using the x test. Two main hypotheses were advanced in the study. One hypothesis predicted that there would be no significant difference in classification between rural and urban subjects regardless of material familiarity but if a difference was noted, It would be In favor of the subjects for whom the materials were familiar. The second prediction was that in making classificatory shifts per given set of test materials, no difference would be noted regardless of materials familiarity but If however a difference was observed, then the subjects for whom the materials are familiar would make significantly more shifts than the other group. The study found that there was no significant difference In sorting abilities between rural and urban subjects whore the three 'common' attributes of size, shape and color were used. However, there were significant differences where the 'rare' attributes like 'transparency', softness “6f 'the mat'eNal and pattern were involved In classifying materials. Coconbly, was no significant difference In the criteria shifts made, out those tasks for which such differences were noted favored the urban subjects In one case and rural subjects In another case. This study has one important implication for the classroom teacher of science In the primary school. If in the learning of science, the child's environment and the materials available within the environment are utilized then both groups of children (rural or urban) are likely to perform equally In one cognitive task Investigated, namely classification.
With further studies In other areas of cognitive functioning It may be brought to light that despite environmental differences childrens' acquisition of scientific skills at least at the elementary stage Is not dependent of on being exposed alien science to sophisticated materials but on the full utilization of their environment. | |
