Differences And Benefits Between Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies And Traditional Instructional Strategies In Education

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION.. 12

Background of The Problem.. 12

Responsible Learning. 12

Statement of The Problem.. 14

Purpose of The Study. 16

Research Questions. 18

Question 1. 18

Question 2. 18

Data Analysis. 18

Definition of Terms. 19

Instructional Strategies: 19

Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies: 19

Traditional Instructional Strategies: 20

Teaching and Learning Strategy: 20

Teacher Profession Development: 20

Responsible Learning: 21

Classroom Instructional Strategies: 21

Learner-Centered Approach: 21

Teacher-Centered Approach: 21

Activity-Based Learning: 22

Effectiveness: 22

Meta-Analysis: 22

Teaching Process: 22

Assumptions. 22

Limitations. 23

Delimitations. 24

Significance of The Study. 24

Contribution to Instructional Practices. 24

Contribution to Future Research. 25

Contribution to Educational Policies. 25

Study outline. 25

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW… 27

Teaching-Learning instructional strategies. 27

Theoretical Framework. 29

Equity theory in education. 29

Review Of Research variables. 31

Research variable hypothesis. 32

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY.. 34

Research Design. 34

Setting and data collection. 35

Perception On Evidence-Based And Traditional Instructional Strategies. 36

Data interpretation. 38

Conclusion. 39

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS. 41

Results. 41

Differences between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies. 41

Benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies. 43

Implications of the findings. 45

Conclusion. 46

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION, AND FUTURE CONSIDERATION.. 47

Summary Of Findings Organized By Research Questions. 47

Research question 1: 47

Research question 2: 48

Effective teaching and learning. 50

Suggestion & Recommendation for further research. 51

Recommendations. 51

Implications and educational significance of the study. 52

Conclusion. 53

REFERENCES. 55

ABSTRACT

The relationship between instructional strategies and teacher-learner educational development has led to a rigorous debate. The debate questions the interplay (differences and benefits) between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies. For decades powers of an effective have been acknowledged. The instructional strategies used by the teacher in the classroom pose a more considerable influence on students learning development and achievement. How each of the two approaches is beneficial to the learner raises an educational debate. Their differences set a basic premise to the discussion because learning is tied to how each instructional strategy is beneficial to educational achievement. Poor student’s performance raises queries on the teaching and instructional strategy used by the teacher.

This study purposefully aims at analyzing the differences and benefits of evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies. Analysis of teacher and learner involvement in the development and achievement of educational goals majors on the proposed curriculum. The analysis will be conducted through meta-analysis. The study examines all student achievement variables to teaching practices in development and instruction to assess the two instructional strategies. The study examined the Kuwaitis Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math) during 2007. The Educ Stud Math Test scores were statistically analyzed to determine the interplay between the evidence-based and traditional learning strategies on student achievement.

The two instructional strategies were used to examine their accomplishments on student achievement and analysis formulated statistically. The review was significant to evaluate the differences and benefits of the applied instructional approaches. The results revealed that the two instructional strategies had different student enrichments, and each requires a different goal setting for effective learning. Both had positive effects on student achievements and scores in the Educ Stud Math’s Test, though differently.

The variable of teachers’ profession in knowledge delivery was analyzed in both instructional strategies. The professional development variable showed a significant impact on the instructional strategies on student achievements in education. The teacher’s professional variable statistically and significantly showed that student needs were dependent on the instructional approach used by the teacher. And so, evidence-based strategy and traditional strategy are different but beneficial to the student when used in an ideal subject to draw coherence of knowledge.

This study seeks to examine a careful evaluation of the two educational strategies and how each is implemented differs for the other noting their benefits to learning development. Alongside recording the difference and benefits, this study suggests how successful implementation of different instructional strategies can help boost and impact knowledge to learners. The study aims at unveiling/suggesting how professional development has got remarkable learning success. But with appropriate implementation and close supervision of instructional strategies to the new learning concepts. Successful adherence to each instructional strategy rewards the learner with amicable benefits based on the skill set.

KEYWORDS: Instructional Strategies, Learning Modes/Process, Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies, Traditional Instructional Strategies

Dedication

I, (XXX) hereby assert and declare that the work presented therein in this dissertation has not been submitted in any other higher institution of learning or our University. The work is original and has not been submitted for partial fulfillment of a Master’s degree expect from the cited and referenced authors’ work. Some of the work in this study has from authors stimulated the research ideas, experiment, coherence, and formulation but not submitted as coursework. I wish to dedicate the entire work to Almighty God for granting me help and support during my study; without Him, it couldn’t be possible. Special dedication to my family, who sacrificed for support during my study and research and also the tremendous help in all mannerisms. Thank you.

Acknowledgments

Firstly, let me appreciate and acknowledge all those who have helped me bring my ideas into a concrete dissertation. I would wish to thank Prof. (XXX) and the supporting team whom were always be on my side. They both intervened in helping me reach this dissertation day by day. It is their support, encouragement, the confidence they vested in me, and time that eased and made this dissertation successful, achieving the targeted results.

I also extended my gratitude to all other committee members who took role in this dissertation either directly or indirectly. Without forgetting those who asked, “why this?” I salute you for giving me a definite challenge. Also, I am sending a thank you note to my supervisor (XXX) from the Education department for permitting me to undertake this study; your permission was so implicit that I am thankful for the offer. Our administration panel, colleagues, I appreciate you for your support in making this happen, you championed for my success as you shared insights and pride in my work; your partake in this dissertation cannot go unappreciated- Thank you.

Imperatively I am thankful to my family, My fiancé, and children who paid much of their time keeping me nourished as I do the work. My success is their success since they spent most of their time prodding and encouraging me; they never nagged me as I do the coursework, and I must say thank you, my lovely family. All their encouragement got me done as they could give me study breaks.

Finally, I must thank all who put up with me during the entire study for my course, particularly this project, that a smart track I will never forget. To wrap-up, I must say I am a prosperous lady at the face of this project accomplishment and be permitted to count it as a blessing in my life.

List of Tables

Table 1: Teachers Views On The Implementation Of Evidence-Based And Traditional Strategies.

Table 2: Teachers’ View On Active Learning And Resource Requirement To Passive Learning.

Table 3: Teacher’s Perception On Curricular Material Situation (Passive Learning; Student Textbooks & Teachers Guide) To Evidence-Based (Active Learning).

Table 4: Teacher Response About Active And Passive Learning.

List of Figures

Figure 1: Overall Results For Traditional Vs. Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies.

Figure 2a: Traditional-Based Class Vs. Evidence-Based Class, Immediate Test.

Figure 2b: Traditional Vs. Activity-Based Class, Post Test.

Figure 3: How instructional strategies vary based on the type of knowledge.

Figure 4: A Model For Selecting Instructional Strategies In Secondary School Education Programs.

List of Abbreviations

1. Educ Stud Math Educational Studies in Mathematics Test
2. n Number
3. SPREE State Policy and Research for Early Education
4. BYOD Bring Your Own Device

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

According to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, “learning about teaching,” 2010, teachers’ mode of knowledge transmission plays a crucial role in imparting new skills and concepts. The instructional strategies that the teacher opts to use are responsible for student learning and achievement. Selection of leaning mode that optimizes student learning is what forms the basic premise to educational debate about the difference and benefits of the strategies a teacher uses in teaching. The discussion has examined evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies tied to how each is helpful in teaching and learning. The result of the debate is to evaluate a responsible learning. Poor student’s performance results from an irresponsible selection of instructional strategy, and the teacher should be responsible for failure (Wright et al., 1997; Collins et., al 1992; Faulkner & cook. 2006; Ding & Sherman, 2006). This chapter focus on engaged learning tied to instructional strategies used in education.

1.1 Background of The Problem

1.1.0 Responsible Learning

Active learning takes place when the teacher opts for the right instructional strategy. For years, teachers’ powers in responsible education have been recognized. However, the implementation of different instructional strategies pulls the teacher’s efforts back. This results from a lack of perseverance in improving their teaching strategies to reach each learner and set the classroom goals. Inappropriate instructional strategy imparts no knowledge to students, thus causing disappointment to students. Marva Collins, an early innovator of education, established a school in 1975 intending to help students achieve the most exceptional levels of education. Marva Collins was motivated to open the school due to the disappointments of the knowledge imparted to learners by then. In many educational debates and discussions, the benefits of the instructional strategies used by the teacher are the core topics (Marva C, 1992). The same problem with differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional fits this study.

Fix the instructional strategy first before the students. A useful instructional mode will make a weak learner good, and the excellent student becomes more superior. When students fail, the teacher fails, too, because his/her teaching strategy was not beneficial.

Some teachers may opt for traditional strategy since it is the norm. In their teaching, they focus on a teacher-centered approach inhabited by lectures and less student participation. The teacher presents notes the learner as they note take. To grasp the content and skills students are entitled to memorize what they learned afterward. The controversy arises when the traditional learning strategy is viewed as student-centered, depending on how the teacher implements it. The approach is considered to be activity-based because the instructor has control of the classroom giving choices to students (Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, 2011).

The activity-based strategy is perceived to be more enjoyable, whether applied as a traditional or evidence-based instructional norm. This calls for a daily challenge of discovering the difference and benefits of the two instructional strategies. This study is intended to find out the interplay between evidence-based and traditional educational strategies based engaged learning. The interaction is tied to how the teaching and learning strategies successfully impart knowledge, understanding, recall, and application of the concept or skills learned. The study is not interested in course evaluation or the tutor or whether the students likes the class but to impart responsible learning. The study’s background examines the benefits and differences between traditional and evidence-based instructional strategies in achieving a responsible teaching and learning process (Klein, 2012). Information presented in this study confirms the needs of an effective instructional strategy for effective teaching and learning.

1.2 Statement of The Problem

The differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies are vital scholarly works in determining which approach is useful and beneficial to knowledge development. A Meta-analysis has significantly examined how critical thinking is helpful in interpreting, analyzing, inferencing, explaining, and evaluating judgment based on learned skills. Numerous empirical shreds of evidence have been put forth to illustrate the differences and benefits of the learning modes. Thus, this study strives to form a literature review and evaluation of the shreds of evidence presented to draw a comparative judgment on their benefits and differences.

In the contemporary education system, the policymakers apply several measuring sticks when evaluating student achievements. Once the ranking is done, those who top are praised, while those on bottoms are either to face strict measures or must improve. The ranking does not consider the instructional strategy used during the teaching and learning process. The teacher should be responsible for the acquisition of knowledge and skills, and students’ achievements be measured based on acquires knowledge. An effective educational strategy results in positive student improvements. Are the student’s accomplishments dependent on tests set by the teacher in reference to the instructional strategies? Is the instructional strategy opted by the teacher to determine a successful teaching and learning process during classroom exercise?

How beneficial a teaching model is rated depends on student’s performance in achieving the set classroom and the institution’s educational goals. Moreover, since teachers are evaluated on their effectiveness, logical assertion posts that the teacher can achieve effectiveness by choosing the most benefiting teaching and learning strategy. The teacher can change or modify classroom instructional teaching strategy in order to achieve active and responsible learning. Research-based studies have shown that instruction modification change can turn a slow-learner to a quick learner. Successful implementation of the educational curriculum is dependent on the instructional strategies used in the classroom.

Quality instruction delivery is a complex concept that requires careful consideration of the right teaching and learning strategy. The quality teaching relies on the meant instructional facets applied as either evidence-bases or traditional (Mondale, P. p2016). It is the teaching facets that will distinguish evidence-based strategies form traditional instructional strategies. Teachers’ modification on the teaching instruction can catalyze students’ achievements in the concept taught. This study draws its examination on the attributes of the different facets found in the two instructional strategies in the study to distinguish them. The differential also examines its independent benefits.

Clear and effective teaching strategy benefits both the institutions and society because the teaching mode has helped students achieve positive results. This builds an alignment of effective teaching practice, and students result in maximizing the community or state value. Also, the strategy elevates students’ achievements in test results, thus positively shaping the teaching and learning process. The right teaching mode increases students’ achievements allowing them to acquire quality education or knowledge (John Dewey “Experience and Nature,” 1925. p.437; Marva C, 1992).

Quantitative research made a comparison of how the school and teacher characteristics matters to students’ economic and social characteristics and found no significant effects (Wenglinsky, 2001). However, the magnitude of the impact to be modest to student background. The quantivalence analysis did not study teacher-learner interaction because it not possible to measure teachers’ input to student achievement- the synergy is unmeasurable. To fill this gap, Harold Wenglinsky attempted in his literature by use of quantitative approaches to study teacher classroom practices, student academic accomplishments, and other teaching aspects such as teacher’s professional development in support of their instructional strategies (Wenglinsky, 2001, p2).

This study aims at examining student’s achievement variables as measured during the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math). The achievement variables were dependent on the instructional strategies used during the teaching and learning process. The test is geared at examining the proficiency of evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies, their differences, benefits on student performance levels. This study analyzed the student achievements to teacher’s variable and instructional practices applied during the learning development process.

1.3 Purpose of The Study

Since the beginning of education, educational analysts have been looking for instructional strategies that will benefit students more. It was until the 21st century when evidence-based instructional strategies replaced traditional strategy. Before then, instructions were delivered through traditional approaches. The approach was used for more than two decades. The approach is beneficial though educators strive to look for better ways because students learn effectively when involved in the teacher-guided strategies (Ipatenco, 2010). However, classroom pedagogy has recently changed from traditional strategies to evidence-based strategies leading to a controversy that is most benefiting to students. The controversy has raised a retarded debate allowing this study aims at;

They were exploring the differences and benefits of evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional strategies in education formulation. The study examines the strategies, their effectiveness in student achievements, and how they differ as perceived by educationists (moderators, teachers, and students). This is because educational researchers have agreed that the two have great impacts on the student depended on the education setting (Shavelson, & Stern, 1981; Tillema, 2000). The explorations differentiate evidence-based to traditional instructional strategies.

Another purpose is the focus on evidence-based and traditional strategies in regard to their effectiveness. A secondary objective would be determining the relationship between the variables of the selected instructional strategies. To facilitate this study used highly rated principles of teaching to acknowledge individual differences among the students. The principles used include; Teachers responding to a questioner, Use of variety of evaluation procedure, Importance of feedback and teaching strategy, Grading students based on the learned concepts, use of learner-centered and teacher-centered approaches. The teaching and learning methods and tools used ae supervised experiences, contests, projects, discussion, demonstration, laboratories, realia, etc.

The study aims at analyzing how teacher instructional strategies related to students’ educational achievements on the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math). The study reviewed student dependent variables and that of the two instructional strategies (evidence-based and traditional strategies).

1.4 Research Questions

This study seeks to answer lots of questions raised questioning To recognize the teacher-learner relationship and student achievement: what is the interplay between teacher instructional strategies/practices and student achievement? How beneficial are the two instructional practices (evidence-based and traditional practices)? These questions were answered/ addressed via the below specific research questions;

1.4.0 Question 1.

How are the instructional strategies related to student achievement on the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math)? Their differences.

1.4.1 Question 2.

How did the evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies used to benefit the students during the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math)?

1.5 Data Analysis

Research questions 1 and 2 sought to analyze the test data to draw literature review answers responding to the differences and benefits of evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies. Answers to these questions would be used to justify the relationship between student achievement and the instructional practices used during the teaching and learning process.

The research questions were analyzed using the Meta-analysis and systematic review approaches.

1.6 Definition of Terms

Instructional Strategies:

Learning, A, 2015 defines instructional strategies as the techniques or approaches used by the teacher to help students/learners gain responsible learning and become strategic and independent learners. The strategies turn into a learning approach only when the teacher or learner independently selects and uses the approach effectively to achieve the set goal or accomplish coursework. Instructional approaches are meant to;

• To help learners focus on attention by motivating them.
• Assess and monitor students’ learning and achievements.
• Organize learning information to easy understanding and remembrance.

An appropriate instructional strategy works on all leaning levels and subject areas and is capable of accommodating student differences.

Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies:

Evidence-based instructional strategies refer to a teaching and learning approach whose methods are tied to a set of significant and reliable evidence. The approach strives to use the best available evidence gained from scientific methods to arrive at a concrete educational decision. The approach depends on several essential elements to impart knowledge highly. The elements include;

1. Documented curriculum plan, shared pedagogical strategies, and assessment.
2. Moderation of student assessment tasks.
3. Overt application of evidence-based school improvement approaches and teacher professional practice activities.

Traditional Instructional Strategies:

According to Sunal et al. 1994, traditional instructional refers to a learning method that allows the student to learn new skills and knowledge through memorization of the techniques taught. The approach does not develop or empower critical thinking in students. Students cannot solve a problem or decide on their own.

Teaching and Learning Strategy:

This is a set of planned educational activities aimed at enabling the teacher to teach and impart the right type of content effectively. The teaching and learning process aims to set clear instructional goals and objectives to give the meaning of the subject matter by the use of appropriate skills and knowledge.

Teacher Profession Development:

Learning forward, 2001 defines teacher professional development as an approach geared at improving teacher effectiveness in order to maximize/increase student achievements in the subject. This study denotes the term professional development as the opportunities given to a teacher to improve his/her skills, knowledge, and instruction application in the teaching subject.

Responsible Learning:

The Elementary School Journal, vol. 93, No.1 defines responsible leaning at taking responsibility and performance from the leaned knowledge and skills. It is teaching aiming to help students develop responsibility from their learning. To achieve responsible learning, the teacher or instructor needs to create a learner-centered syllabus approach. Develop an active learning orientation in the class to overcome proactiveness in the teaching and learning process.

Classroom Instructional Strategies:

Classroom instructional strategies are the teaching modes employed by the teacher to engage learners in the teaching and learning process actively. The strategies guide the teacher in setting specific classroom learning goals and objectives.

Learner-Centered Approach:

In this method, the learning focus is on the student, and the teacher is a facilitator of knowledge or guider. The teacher is mandated to specify the learning experiences and making them available for student’s self-exploration. The student is directly and actively involved in the teaching and learning process. E.g., assignments.

Teacher-Centered Approach:

This is a teaching approach whereby though the students are actively involved in the teaching and learning approach, the focus of the learning experience is on the teacher. Students are recipients of the instructions as dictated by the teacher. The teacher is the demonstrator of knowledge. E.g., Lecture method.

Activity-Based Learning:

Activity-based learning refers to teaching and learning strategies that allow learners to learn through and from activities. The teacher plans and incorporates the activities in the topic or area of study. E.g., questioning and answering, critical demonstration thinking, etc.

Effectiveness:

In this study, the term effectiveness is used to refer to the production of desired results of teaching and learning through the selected instructional strategies.

Meta-Analysis:

In an educational setting, the term meta-analysis refers to a quantitative approach of literature review based in a specific area. Furthermore, in this context, it is used to do quantitative research on the instructional strategies variable and use the information to draw a literature review on the difference and benefits of the instructional strategies involved in the study.

Teaching Process:

Refers to the art of organizing, planning, and facilitating the delivery of instructions/knowledge and skills among learners leading to behavioral, attitudes, and abilities change.

1.7 Assumptions

1. Teachers who were selected to participate in the study had the obvious experience in the selection of instructional strategies, teaching techniques, and tools in their teaching.
2. The actual findings from the data reflected the actual perception of the instructional strategies.
3. Learners understood the question presented to them and gave appropriate and true responses based on the instructional strategy used during the teaching and learning process.
4. All teachers were given professional academic freedom to incorporate their selected instructional strategies in classroom teaching.
5. All students were presented with the same instructional materials.
6. All students completed the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math) under identical conditions.
7. All teachers accurately self-reported professional development participation and implementation of instructional strategies.

1.8 Limitations

1. A small number of students can not translate to a large population. The class average may not be impacted by a small n in each classroom, and the mean varies due to extremely low or high student scores.
2. Teachers’ self-define of the meaning of the instructional strategies, topics, formats, and perceptions may not match with the working definitions of this study.
3. Teachers’ self0reporting of implementation of the instructional strategies may not reflect the depth of each practice.
4. The randomly selected number of students in Kuwait may not generalize the possible benefits and the extent to which the instructional strategies relate.
5. Due to random selection, the study findings may not be able to differentiate slow and quick learner to reflect appropriate results.

1.9 Delimitations

1. Individual differences among learners were not considered. The Student’s variables were not considered during this study. The students’ demographics are similar but bot identical and were not considered. The demographic variables are socio-economic status, ethnicity, gender, special education qualifications, and students’ capabilities.
2. Individual teacher variables like level of education, years of experience, and instructions selections criteria and perception were not considered.

1.1. 0 Significance of The Study

Recognition of individual differences among learners is a fundamental concept that the teacher should adhere to when selecting the instructional strategy. It is a crucial assumption of how effective the instructional strategy to choose in the classroom, will the strategy bring coherence, the interaction of instructions variable, contextual factor, and benefits to the learner? With these assumptions, the teacher develops an instructional framework that benefits the student… (Jones, 1987: p. v). Since the primary objective of schools is to impart knowledge, there must be effective instructional strategies and competent teachers (Ritter & shuls, 2012). My dissertation projects potential improvements in instructional methods, future research, and educational policies aimed at increasing student achievement.

Contribution to Instructional Practices

Based on the findings of this study, the education policymakers in Kuwait can revise teacher professional development. The results revealed that students’ achievements depend on the instructional strategies used by the teacher. There should be regular training for all teachers to equip them with instructional strategies selection know-how. Educational boards can further this research to a documented level of new training in instructional practices.

Contribution to Future Research

For decades there have been countless scholarly researches supporting that the teacher instructional strategies in the classroom have a more considerable influence on students learning and achievement. My dissertation collaborates with other literature reviews to bring the work to individual learner benefits from the practices used. This study supports more on the benefits of the instructional practices and their difference because the interplay bears a controversial debate.

Contribution to Educational Policies

Based on the study outcomes, educational boards in Kuwait can decide to revise, enhance, or alter the current instructional strategies that the teacher trains to use oh the classroom. The administrative regulations could focus on the instructional strategies that are beneficial to the learner, An approach that boosts student achievement. From the outcomes, the rubrics for teacher appraisal in instructional strategies may be revised.

1.1.1 Study outline

The primary purpose of this study is to identify the inherent differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies in an education setting. A secondary purpose would be to determine the relationship between the two strategies and their current use and how they are beneficial to student achievements. The study used all relevant classroom variables to develop a model analyzing the controversy between interplay between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies. Chapter one forms the basic framework of this study by addressing the following objectives;

1. The need for responsible learning.
2. Identification and selection of effective and appropriate instructional strategies to impart knowledge and skills.
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of the selected instructional practices.
4. Developing a moral guide for successful teaching-learning strategies in the secondary education program.

The study’s relevant literature review is presented in chapter 2. The chapter presents a comprehensive perspective about evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies, their benefits, and differences based on students’ achievements. Chapter 3 presents describe the research methodology-its design, procedures used to gather information, and analysis of data used. Chapter 4 presents the study’s results/findings. Chapter 5 provides the study conclusions, discussion, and implication of research results.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

The primary purpose of this study is to identify the differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional practices in education. Literature review to provide the basics and rationale of this study was organized under the following sub-categories: 1) Teaching-Learning Instruction Strategies 2) Effective Teaching 3) Theoretical Framework 4) Review of the Literature.

Teaching-Learning instructional strategies

According to Newcomb et al. 1986, there exist two instructional classified, namely evidence-based(modern) and traditional educational strategies. Current instructional approaches include independent, supervised, and interactive study techniques, whereas the traditional way involves memorization and recitation techniques. Over the years, teaching practices have drastically changed. This has led to tremendous attention to the back-to-basics of the beneficial teaching style. Worsham & Stockton (1986. P. 7) points out that inadequate problem solving and decision-making skills are eminent among students today. This results from the teacher not understanding the learning basics of the appropriate instructional strategies and techniques to use. Knowledge and understanding of the teaching and learning stimulate learning, leading to higher levels of student competence Newcomb et al. 1986, pp. 20-21). Therefore, this calls for understand and knowledge of the teaching principles to foster critical thinking among learners.

Yelon (1996, p.3) introduced 10 powerful teaching principles to aid select the most beneficial instructional strategy. They include:

1. Meaningfulness: Selected teaching strategy should help and motivate students to connect the present concept to previous and future concepts.
2. Prerequisites: Assessment of student should be based on the instructions given so they can be able to link concepts.
3. Open communication: Ensure students get the information/skills they are in search of.
4. Organized essential ideas: Help students focus on the most critical ideas and be able to learn and recall the concepts.
5. Learning aids: Assist students in using the learning devices and tools effectively.
6. Novelty: Modify instructional stimulus to retain students’ attention.
7. Modeling: Help students practice how they can recall, think, act, and solve problems on their own.
8. Active appropriate practice: Help students perfect their learning through remembering, actions, and performance.
9. Pleasant conditions and consequences: Ensure learning is pleasing so that learners can associate comfort with what is taught/learned to make the process satisfying. This help student keeps what’s learned and use what is learned to act reasonably.
10. Consistency: Ensure constituency of objectives, content, explanations, tests, and practices so that students learned the essentials and use the content outside the instructional setting.

Yelon advised that the best way that the instructional principles are by using them rather by imitating other instructors’ teaching styles (Yelon, 1996, pp. 3-4).

Chang, Lee, Ng, and Moon (2003) conducted a study on evidence-based strategy and noted that learners found simulations beneficial in their achievements (critical thinking, decision making, and problem-solving). According to Sclazo & Turner (2014), modification of the instructional strategies is essential to impart knowledge to students. They could use the experience in practical lives. On the other hand, the traditional instructional approach was the bedrock of development when no schools existed. The education was meant for the social and economic development of the learners. Traditional instruction imparted manners, skills, and social practice through oral recitation for leaners’ survival. This draws a common goal of both evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies. The aim of imparting knowledge, the two are said to be related but differing in their instruction.

When no schools existed, traditional strategies were used, but with revolutionized technology, new instructional theories have molded the teaching style. Evidence-based have replaced traditional approaches. This raises controversy on their benefits and how they differ since they are geared at a common goal. This equity theory explains more about effective instructional strategies.

Theoretical Framework

This dissertation conceptual framework seeks equity in the instructional strategies to students’ achievements. To clarify how the instructional should promote responsible knowledge, the differences, and benefits in the selected practices. The study used the equity theory to analyzes more details about traditional and evidence-based instructional strategies.

Equity theory in education

“For a prosperous state, all children should have an equitable place at the starting line” (SPREE 2018). Learning classifies and names individuals, and the result is unavoidable. Some will proceed to universities/colleges and those who wouldn’t. Those who graduate will be graduates, while those who don’t will be named otherwise (Meyer, 1997). Therefore, educational analysts and policymakers do away with inequality in education. Although some educational stakeholders have demonstrated concern with the extent of student achievement as associated with the instructional strategies used, there is still a gap. The gap is questioning the benefits and differences between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies. This theory unveils more on the comparison.

Traditional strategies opted for at times are not meant for all students. There is inequality among children since all learner doesn’t get equal opportunities to learn the same concept. But with evidence-based strategy, every student is involved in the learning process, no discrimination of teaching opportunities. All learners are taught equally because classroom flows the set curriculum, goals, and objectives. To sum-up, equity calls for fairness in opportunities distribution (Edmonds, 1979). A drastic change in the instructional strategies would improve education quality. And because of all children an educatable, it is the teacher’s behavior that influences student’s achievement. The behavior includes teacher effectiveness and selected instructional strategies (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, “Working With Teachers,” 2010). With the intensification of evidence-based instructional strategies, education is enhanced to all students.

Family background and home environment are the critical determinants of education equality. This idea absolves the professional responsibility of the teacher to opt for an effective instructional strategy. The main factor attributed to student’s education equality is student-learning instructional practices and teacher profession in knowledge impartation (Commission On Effective Teachers & Teaching, 2011; Darling-Hammond, 2010; Edmonds,1979). An effective teacher should pay attention to the particular instructional practices for both in the classroom and outside the school to enact learning. Evidence-based strategies promote equity through practical teaching to all students, while traditional approaches do only to those involved in the process.

Though the primary goal of education is to impart knowledge, at times, it can promote inequality to students. The imbalance results from the type of instruction strategy used. Changing teacher roles and the nature of the curriculum can deliberately produce education equity. Evidence-based instructional strategies promote an equitable classroom for all students, while traditional approaches provide equality for an individual to fit in society. Cohen et al. (1999) noted that each student requires equitable education to fit in the teaching environment. The difference evidence-based and traditional strategies based on the impact of each approach. Evidence-based aims at producing general education equity, unlike traditional methods that are individualized. Therefore, the only difference among the selected strategies is on the mass Enlightened (n), which the benefits aren’t limited to.

Review Of Research variables

In traditional instructional strategies, the teachers hold power and responsibility, and he/she is the controller of the learning environment. The process of teaching and learning is teacher-centered since the teacher is the decision-maker. As noted by Novak, 1998, traditional instruction strategies view students have had “Knowledge holes” that need to be filled with information. In traditional practices, there must be an instructor for learning to occur. The strategy posts that lesson content and classroom are essentials that allow students to master content through rote learning (drill and practice). The strategies note that knowledge is competitive and chiefly associated with the classroom. Traditional instructional methods are still used in modern education because each practice has its independent benefit. Some of the used traditional strategies are (1) Teacher-Centered Classrooms; (2) Chalk & Talk Method; (3) Regimented Classrooms; (4) Lack of Collaboration; (5) Group Learning; (6) Teacher as Knowledge Dispenser rather than Facilitator and (7) More Emphasis on Results & and Examinations than Concept Understanding. The strategy also pays more emphasis on results and examination more than concept understanding, effective alignment between assessments, activities, and objectives.

Traditional instruction variables differ with that of evidence-based strategies only due to cultural forces, economic and technological advancement of the 21st century. The alteration has shifted learning from teacher-centered to learner-centered. Evidence-based strategies intend to help instructors figure the best strategies to use to meet student’s needs. The evidence-based practice is more of personalization. Students are focused on attaining the same concepts via the same lesson. The strategy is comparative in students’ progress and learner-centered. Some of the evidence-based instructional strategies include 1) Technology-Driven Classrooms, 2) Cross-Curricular Connection, 3) Inquiry-Based Learning, 4) Collaborative & Differential Learning, 5) Activity-Based Learning, 6) Problem-Based Learning, 7)Flipped Classrooms, 8) More Emphasis Concept Understanding 9) Continuous Comprehensive Evaluation 10)Smart Interactive Board, BYOD, and More.

Research variable hypothesis

The scenario of now and then, the scenario of educational practices has taken another phase, which is beneficial to students’ achievement and how does the two differ. But the finding above found that evidence-based practices are drawn from traditional strategies, and thus the two instructional practices have their benefits. The two strategies are similar but different, and the two should not be given equal importance. The hypothesis is further discussed in chapter 4.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

The primary goal for schools is to impart knowledge (student learning. To achieve this goal. Teachers must employ effective/beneficial instructional methods to ensures students are learning (Ritter & Shuls, 2012; Stronge et al., 2011). Instruction strategy used in the classroom has a greater influence on student achievement, as noted by learning and teaching 2010 and commission on effective teachers and teaching, 2011. The question of which instructional strategy will benefit students has founded a basic premise for educational debate. The debate ties student achievement to instructional strategies used. In this chapter, the study analyzes student opinions, scores, and teacher’s perceptions during the Educ Stud Math Test. The study intends to give a comprehensive report on the benefits and differences between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies.

Research Design

The research was conducted in a public-school setting through educational practices (evidence-based and traditional strategies). Two identical classes were given the same test by the same teacher with the two distinct pedagogies; evidence-based and traditional. The class was based on race, age, and previous academic achievements, learning personalities. Learning personality refers to the interest in learning, as evaluated during the Educ Stud Math Test. Both classes were given identical tests after the class and a week later to check students’ concept retention. The expectation was that evidence-based increased retention and acquisition of knowledge among learners. The student population subjected to the null hypothesis to ascertain two pedagogies were the same but different. And that evidence-based was no better than traditional methods. this statement was supported by data collected from student scores from the Educ Stud Math Test and opinions obtained from the teacher questionnaire. Purposive data sampling was used to determine student achievements based on the respective class strategy. The comprehensive sampling aimed at differentiating between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies and the benefits statistically.

Setting and data collection

Sampling involved 40 students and two teachers as supervisors and facilitators of knowledge, and the other 15 teachers took part in the questioner for opinions. The students were divided into two classes (class A & class B) every 10 students. Class A was taught using traditional instructional strategy, while class B was taught through an evidence-based instructional strategy. Both classes employed the same teaching and learning content and teaching instruction but distinct approaches. After a week, the 20 students sat for a test, and the teacher had to give their opinions on corresponding questioners.

CLASS A (Traditional Instructional Approach)

During the test, traditional instructional strategies were perceived as the norm. the process was teacher-centered and consisted of minimal student-teacher participation. The teacher presented notes to the student via the lecture method. Students were allowed to takes notes and go back to their rooms and memorize.

CLASS B (Evidence-Based Instructional Approach)

This class was perceived as activity-based learning. The process emphasized in teacher-learner interaction by use of varieties of multi-media tools to make learning more appealing. Although the teacher was the classroom controller, more learning choices were given to the learners. Evidence-based teaching is perceived to increase student retention, but this study seeks to differentiate the two pedagogies and hoe each is beneficial to the learner. The study is not concerned about students’ evaluations or teacher’s professional development or whether the students find the class enjoyable but how the two strategies relate to educational development.

Perception On Evidence-Based And Traditional Instructional Strategies

Understanding the quality of education

There is much less to agree on what instructional practice calls for when determining the quality of education. The set of teachers involved I the questioner favored repetition rates as a proxy measure of education quality. Others favored evidence-based as a key prerequisite of what the society needs, how to prepare for it, and choosing effective instruction to meet the social improvement of the nation (Spathis, 2004). Evidence-based opts for critical thinking to understand the quality of education.

Active learning as an appropriate educational strategy

Other opinions differentiated evidence-based and traditional instruction strategies on the basis of active learning. Those who supported traditional instructional approaches pointed out that they may not be suitable because it is passive. The strategy allows the student to be recipients of knowledge than contributors. The method as its independent merits to the ever-changing educational strategies. On the other hand, evidence-based was termed as learning by doing, meaning it is active learning. Students are presented with real-life problems requiring their attention to solve them as stressed by John Dewey. Therefore, evidence-based instructional strategies call for active learning contrary to traditional instructional strategies that aim at passive learning.

During the study, several Kuwaitis Secondary school teachers were asked to share the view to differentiate the two instructional practices. Their views were gathered through a short-opinionated questionnaire. The teacher’s responses are valuable to the Kuwait department board as a planning tool to emphasize the instructional strategy that will boost student achievement. The teacher questionnaire was organized into four parts, as shown in tables 1 to 4.

Tables

Table 1. Teachers Views On The Implementation Of Evidence-Based And Traditional Strategies.

Table 2. Teachers’ View On Active Learning And Resource Requirement To Passive Learning.

Table 3. Teacher’s Perception On Curricular Material Situation (Passive Learning; Student Textbooks & Teachers Guide) To Evidence-Based (Active Learning).

Table 4. Teacher Response About Active And Passive Learning.

The opinions noted that the challenge rests upon choosing the right instructional strategies because the two are one but different. They both aim at imparting knowledge, stimulate and motivate those involved in the learning process. The approaches have varied sets of orientations towards learning, so emphasis should be placed on the one that will impart knowledge effectively (Dewey 1966; Piaget & Inhelder 1969; Kolb 1984; Silcock & Brundert 2001).

Data interpretation

Research questions 1 and 2 sought to analyze the test data to draw literature review answers responding to the differences and benefits of evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies. Answers to these questions would be used to justify the relationship between student achievement and the instructional practices used during the teaching and learning process.

Student test score results were analyzed as follows:

Figures

Figure 1. overall results for traditional vs. evidence-based instructional strategies

Figure 1. shows that Performance in evidence-based class is better than that of traditional classes in both learning and retention. Bu, the “better” of the evidence-based class, is not far “better” because of both class hag average score. Notably, it can be worth said that evidenced-based instructional classes could have a higher passing score/average than traditional-based instructional classes. Both practices are beneficial to the learner.

Evidence-based instructional strategies are characterized by superiority among students. This results from variance high GPA results. The significantly higher value resulted from some of the high GPA student’s poor performance in an unfamiliar classroom setting, while others adapted quickly. This is a troubling result on how to select the appropriate instructional approach for better student achievement. After a comparison of the two classes, there is an apparent superiority among students who were taught using an evidence-based strategy. The results are shown in Figures 2a and 2b.

Figure 2a Traditional-Based Class Vs. Evidence-Based Class, Immediate Test.

Figure 2b: Traditional Vs. Activity-Based Class, Post Test.

The results above are troubling since they don’t show differing benefits to student achievements. Class B, which was hoped to show more deserving results, revealed no significant improvement. The results reveal that the group that does well will continue to do well even with a change in instructional strategy. The significant improvement on the immediate test for the low-GPA might have resulted from small variance; all students in both classes scored almost the same.

From the above study, it is daunting to draw a solid conclusion of which strategy is more beneficial than the other. The test sample was small and produced almost the same results. However, the evidence-based class seems to produce statistically significant improvements in both retention and learning compared to traditional strategy-based class. But the results are not far much different, all are desirable. The tentative conclusion from the Educ Stud Math Test is that a change in the instructional strategy is vital to impart knowledge. There are those who learn best via traditional strategies than through evidence-based and vice versa. The results set a basic premise for the next chapter for Meta-analysis for the study findings.

Conclusion

In response to question two, most teachers preferred traditional to evidence-based because of the traditional strategies reinforce the evidence-based. They believe the two are intertwined and can be differentiated in their mode of delivery. Data collected from the teacher’s perception and student scores were matched with codes for a comprehensive meta-analysis. The data revealed significant differences in the benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies during the Educ Stud Math Test. A review of the literature was ideal for converting the statistical data to a solid conclusion about the differences and benefits of the evidence-based strategies and traditional instructional strategies. The meta-analysis was able to identify the benefits and differences of evidence-based and traditional educational strategies, as discussed in chapter 4.

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS

The primary purpose of this dissertation was to do a literature review on the differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies in education. The study employed a Meta-analysis on students’ scores from the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test and teachers’ questioner for validity. The study was addressed in two research questions form Class A & Class B., and the following study results were noted and discussed.

Results

Instructional teaching strategies have drastically changed based on the type of content conveyed. The traditional instructional strategies can be replaced by evidence-based instructional strategies, vis a vis. Research, responsible education, and emphasis on critical thinking are the mainstream that has changed the scenario. The strategies either focus on student-centered or learner-centered in the process of teaching and learning. The traditional strategies involve situations whereby leaning materials are presented to the students via lecture, while evidence-based strategies view learning as constructivism. This sub-section of the chapter explores the different approaches in reference to study purposes.

Differences between evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies

Evidence-based instructional strategies differ with traditional instructional strategies in the following ways;

1. These strategies are supported by hard research rather than anecdotal case studies or untested theories. They have a higher impact on student achievements (figure 1). The achievements are higher than traditional instructional strategies.
2. These strategies can be used in a wide range of subjects’ concepts.
3. The strategies involve show and tell. Showing involves demonstration of how to do the concept in the study while telling involves knowledge and information sharing.
4. Evidence-based strategies involve questioning to asses students’ understanding. The questioning is done randomly and to all students.
5. At the end of the lesson, the summarization of learning is done to help students understand the interrelationships between the aspects taught.
6. The strategies provide students with feedback.

Traditional instructional strategies differ with evidence-based instructional strategies in the following ways;

1. Traditional instructional strategies use repletion and memorization techniques to educate students so they don’t develop critical thing in learners. Evidence-based does.
2. Unlike in evidence-based instructional strategies, information obtained through traditional strategies is not retained for long in student memories.
3. Traditional instructional strategies consider learning as conventional(passive), unlike in evidence-based, whereby learning is considered active through student participation.
4. Traditional instructional strategies are teacher-centered, unlike evidence-based, which are learner-centered.
5. Unlike in evidence-based instructional strategies, traditional strategies are lesser in keeping up student needs. Critical thinking and problem-solving skills are not developed in learners.
6. Traditional instructional strategies don’t provide students with feedback because they are only recipients.
7. At times traditional instructional strategies use assumptions or anecdotal case studies or untested theories.

In conclusion, evidence-based instructional strategies involve the following unlike traditional instructional strategies;

1. Setting classroom goals and objectives
2. Structuring lessons
3. Explicit teaching
4. Worked examples
5. Collaborative learning
6. Multiple exposures
7. Questioning
8. Feedback
9. Metacognitive strategies
10. Differentiated teaching

Benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies

Evidence-Based Instructional Strategies benefits

1. Hattie, 2009, points out setting goals enhances student performance with an effect size of 0.56.
2. Lesson structuring means breaking down subject content into sections, and specific objectives set, which are pursued until achieved. Learners work subsequently to the steps and must demonstrate content mastery before proceeding to nest study. This shows that weak students will be identified and provided with extra support until they master the concepts (Kulik et al., 1990).
3. Mastery learning enhances student achievement in high schools and in upper elementary institutions. Also, the student will develop a positive attitude towards the coursework. (Kulik et al., 1990).
4. Evidence-based instructional strategies have much stronger achievement on students during their adolescent achievements than when younger (Nunnery et al., 2013). This is attributed to the development of critical thinking.
5. Evidence-based strategies equip the learner with the capability of solving different types of problems.
6. When evidence-based is used in teaching, struggling learns can improve through comprehension if the ideas taught (Edmonds et al., 2009).
7. Students’ achievements are maximizing by the use of a structured lesson. The lesson maximizes students learning through; (a) starting lesson with overviews and/or objectives review; (b) outline of the content to be covered and signaling transitions between lesson sections; (c) attention of main ideas; (d) review of main ideas at the end (Kyriakides et al., 2013)

Traditional Instructional Strategies benefits

1. The instructor condenses the vast study materials and delivers them to students in an organized manner. This significantly helps not burden students with loads of content.
2. The traditional instructional strategies meet the specific needs of the student at large.
3. There are equality and uniformity in the presentation of knowledge, skills, and education in general.
4. Traditional instructional strategies are appealing to learners who through listening.
5. Condensed information can be presented to masses and help maximize students’ achievements by allowing them to grasp concepts without the strain of sourcing information.
6. Subjects and skills are taught in a specific and cohesive order.
7. School evaluations by the educational department and boards are easily performed.
8. Teacher assessment is straightforward and from the content taught.

Implications of the findings

As evident from Figures 1, 2a & 2b, initial student knowledge is limited. To help the student remember the content taught previously, the use of both traditional and evidence-based educational strategies would be more helpful. Traditional instructional strategies reinforce evidence-backed strategies, thus equipping the learner with responsible education. A combination of both in instruction delivery would maximize student achievements not only in education but in other social traits. The student would be able to use alternatives to be able to grasp the content as curriculum goals and objectives direct.

The intention of an instructional strategy is to increase students understanding of the concepts used in the curriculum. Though different in their mode of presentation, evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies elevate students undertraining. The two instructional strategies in the manner of content delivery but are geared towards achievements.

Conclusion

These findings demonstrate that though evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies differ, there is a link between them. Therefore, these results reveal that further issues to be analyzed to determine the differences and benefits of the core subject matter in the instructional strategies. Further research could help validate their interplay further. It will also be more interesting to find other variables in the two instructional strategies that will help in educational accomplishments. There is no doubt application of either of the strategy will benefit the student. But a combination of both would help commit to the attainment of responsible knowledge and equity in education.

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION, AND FUTURE CONSIDERATION

The main purpose of this study was to identify the differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies in education. The meta-analysis (literature review) was conducted to facilitate the study. This chapter presents a summary, implications, and conclusion. All are drawn from the study from the major findings obtained from the Teachers Questionnaire and student score during Educ Stud Math Test.

Summary Of Findings Organized By Research Questions

The following conclusions were drawn from the two-research question about the differences and benefits of evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies.

Research question 1:

How are the instructional strategies related to student achievement on the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math)? Their differences.

As noted by ESEA, 2002, evidence-based instructional strategies that are supported with evidence and research. The strategies boost critical thinking among learners. The study also supports students learning achievements of CCRS. The evidence-based strategies allow the teacher to use formative assessments (Sacket et al., 1996) to monitor how effective is their teaching and asses if modification is necessary. The evidence used in Evidence-based instructional aims at 1) establishing where learners are in their learning; 2) deciding appropriate teaching strategies; 3) monitor student progress and teaching effectiveness (ACER, “Research Conference,” 2018). To sum up, evidence-based instructional strategies aim at recognizing the role and importance of education, research, and skills in an educational setting.

On the other hand, traditional instructional strategies are that are teacher-centered, where learners learn in a manner that allows them to sit and listen (Harrington, D. 1999). It is the philosophies of traditional strategies that often allow the teacher to use lecture-based models. The models have inherent useful results, as evident from students and curriculum accomplishments. This cannot be disputed as much from evidence-based strategies. However, some education analysts argue that traditional strategies may not offer viable critical thinking skills. And other valuable skills. Some poses that students don’t retain knowledge after exams or have little to of the content knowledge to remember at the end of the term (Abdous, M.H. & Yen, C.J. 2010) To them traditional instructional strategies impart knowledge but don’t develop or enhance rediscovery of knowledge through critical thinking.

That said, it is unjustifiable which strategies are better between traditional and evidence-based. This is because the evidence-based strategies are the up-gradation of traditional strategies. Both are the same but different in their mode of application; evidence-based is learner-centered (Active) while traditional strategies are teacher-centered (passive). Both are beneficial to the learner with traditional strategies reinforcing the evidence-based strategies.

Research question 2:

How did the evidence-based and traditional instructional strategies used to benefit the students during the Educational Studies in Mathematics Test (Educ Stud Math)?

• Traditional instructional strategies create interest in the subject matter by transmitting enthusiasm in the discipline.
• Traditional strategies offer up-to-date from many sources in a wide volume of knowledge. It achieves a comprehensive study.
• Traditional approaches give all necessary overview, a framework for subsequent learning.
• The traditional strategies offer efficient and economical methods of delivering substantial amounts of knowledge, skills, and competence to a large audience when not personalized.
• Besides the pursuit of knowledge, evidence-based strategies are linked to problem-solving, as noted by John Armstrong (professional education research).
• Evidence-based instructional strategies through self-exploration help clarify complicated facts and figures. When the students face any misunderstanding, he/she seeks more evidence in detail to get proper understanding.
• With the use of evidence-based, the student is provided with a proper understanding of the subject in depth. The student and teacher will analyze the content more during the teaching and learning process.
• Evidence-based enhances proper reading by finding ways to link the current content with previous content. The learner and the teacher learn the know-how of the methods, issues, and outcomes of the study.

Both evidence-based strategies and traditional instructional strategies enhance students’ competencies. The knowledge, attitude, and skills expose the learners to opportunities that encourage them to convert them into life achievements (Oh et al. 2016).

Effective teaching and learning

The key to improving the quality of knowledge and skills given to learners is through the use of effective teachers. An effective teacher is the one who uses the most benefiting instructional strategies to measure students’ accomplishments and how effective is the knowledge (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, working with teachers, 2010). In their teaching, the teachers need to modify the classroom instructional strategies to impart effective knowledge to aid them in solving problems alongside survival. In response to effective teaching Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) led by Bran Goodwin, 2010, I made a research publication to distinguish effective teachers based on instructional approaches used. In relation to the publication this study draws the following acts of teaching as a holistic endeavor;

1. Effective education should challenge students as a way of critical thinking as they find solutions to the problem. However, the challenge should be positive. Teachers giving challenges to students by providing instructions helps them develop higher-order thinking skills.
2. Through effective teaching, the instructional approaches create a positive classroom environment for students to learn. One of the highest correlates of effective instructional strategy is the strength of the relationship between the teacher and the learner in developing them(students).
3. The effective instructional strategy should be intentional in its instructions/teaching delivery. The strategy should employ clear teaching and learning targets to have the students have a wide repertoire of knowledge to use.

An effective teacher knows what to teach, when, and how to do it through the appropriate teaching strategy to maximize students’ benefits (Goodwin, 2010, p.8). teachers don’t influence students’ achievements but the instructional strategies used in teaching. No difference between ineffective and effective teachers concerning educational accomplishment (Stronge et al. 2011). This shows than both traditional and evidence-based are the most beneficial approaches that education should emphasize more. The two help impart knowledge, enhancing higher order of skills, improve critical thinking, foster respect, and understanding of other and more benefits.

Suggestion & Recommendation for further research

1. A similar study should employ other research methodologies other than meta-analysis to identify/evaluate the benefits and differences between evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies.
2. Conduct a similar study to determine the teacher’s perception of benefits and differences between evidence-based instructional strategies and traditional instructional strategies.

Recommendations

Based on the study findings and discussion, the following recommendations were made

1. Teacher education should emphasize the use of a variety of instructional strategies, and student teaching is focused on using a variety of approaches. A combination of evidence-based and traditional strategies can help boost student achievements in education.
2. Teaching and learning should aim at constructing responsible learning by the use of technology; therefore, student-based instructional approaches should be emphasized more in secondary schools.
3. Teachers’ roles in the classroom should be changed from facilitating to helper for student learning and aim at active learning other than passive learning.
4. The study findings should be shared with education moderators and teachers to help them make an informed decision on the instructional strategies that will benefit the student most.
5. In an educational setting, there should be educational equality among learners. This will help in imparting similar knowledge and concept.
6. Models used in secondary school education should help teachers select the most beneficial instructional strategy to maximize students’ achievements.
7. Often study replications should be conducted to evaluate which instructional strategy is more effective in terms of responsible learning, and equity promotion is education and more student benefits.
8. The teaching principles and related learning theories should be address during teacher education and in teacher service because education quality is dependent on the selected instructional programs.

Implications and educational significance of the study

This significance of this study is related to both present and future students’ achievement in secondary schools and to teachers in understanding the selected instructional strategies. The result of this study can enable secondary school teachers to have an insight into the instructional strategy to use in their teaching methodologies to enhance student achievement. Enhancement of student achievement will enable the achievement of the set educational goals and learning objectives. Delivering the subject matter through the appropriate instructional channel is one of the cores and essential activities of the teacher. This study has as well offered another opportunity to focus the attention of the instructional learning process and how selection can benefit students.

Yelon (1996, p. 279) noted the benefit of the instructional strategy that is more beneficial to educational settings depends on the type of knowledge depicted from the content. The figure below explains more about how instructional strategy varies in relation to knowledge.

Figure 3. How instructional strategies vary based on the type of knowledge

Conclusion

That, said which strategies are beneficial than the other? From this study’s opinions, both types of instructional strategies have their own place and benefits. It is not worth declaring any of the approaches as good or bad. The traditional strategies are good at the place of use as well as the evidence-based instructional strategies. Notably, it depends on the type of learner being taught. It depends on the content that needs to be covered. The lesson objective dictates the instructional strategy that will maximize students’ benefits. If a student learns best when he/she uses traditional strategies, he will definitely opt for them, and vice versa. Therefore, it is overwhelming to infer that which is better. Both instructional strategies have their own benefits. Both are also similar to each other but different from each other. And so, both should be given equal consideration in student benefits.

According to Yelon, 1996, after the subject matter is broken down into various classroom learning steps for progressive acquisition of skills and knowledge. The teacher/instructor should/or must consider the available resources and needs of students and opt for the most benefiting instructional strategy.

Figure 4. A model for selecting instructional strategies in secondary school education programs.

Bloom’s Taxonomy,1956, points out that instructional units used should fir the teacher-student activities in the classroom. And the units can vary depending on the subject matter but should aim at identifying what the learner learns and what the teacher will deliver. This will ensure the instructional strategies opted for are effective in terms of knowledge impartation, application, comprehension, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation progress in educational achievement.

REFERENCES

Abdous, M.H. and Yen, C.J., 2010. A predictive study of learner satisfaction and outcomes in face-to-face, satellite broadcast, and live video-streaming learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), pp.248-257. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.04.005 accessed on April 28, 2020

Adams, D., 1993. Defining educational quality. Improving Educational Quality Project Publication# 1: Biennial Report. Arlington, VA: Institute for International Research.

Alajmi, A. and Reys, R., 2007. Reasonable and reasonableness of answers: Kuwaiti middle school teachers’ perspectives. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(1), pp.77-94.

Anderson Lorin, W. and Sosniak Lauren, A., 1994. Bloom’s taxonomy; forty-years retrospective. Ninety-third yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt. 2.

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2010). Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the measures of effective teaching project. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED528382.pdf accessed on April 28, 2020

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2010). Working with teachers to develop fair and reliable measures of effective teaching. MET Project. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED528385.pdf accessed on April 28, 2020

Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationship between reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(4), 239-258. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/749740 accessed on April 28, 2020

Boumova, V., 2008. Traditional vs. modern teaching methods: Advantages and disadvantages of each. Master’s Diploma Thesis. Brno: Masaryk University, Check Republic.

Boumová, V., 2008. Traditional vs. modern teaching methods: Advantages and disadvantages of each. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Masaryk university, Czech Republic.

Christiansen, B., 1969. Induction and deduction in the learning of mathematics and in mathematical instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 2(2-3), pp.139-159.

Cohen, D.K. and Ball, D.L., 2001. Making change: Instruction and its improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(1), pp.73-77.

Colace, F., De Santo, M. and Greco, L., 2014. E-learning and personalized learning path: A proposal based on the adaptive educational hypermedia system. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 9(2).

Darling-Hammond, L., 2010. Evaluating teacher effectiveness: How teacher performance assessments can measure and improve teaching. Center for American Progress.

Dewey, J. and Garforth, F.W., 1966. Selected educational writings. Heinemann.

Dewey, J., 1938. Experience and Education. new York: touchstone. Original work published, 1997.

Edmonds, R., 1979. Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational leadership, 37(1), pp.15-24.

Harrington, D., 1999. Teaching statistics: A comparison of traditional classroom and programmed instruction/distance learning approaches. Journal of social work education, 35(3), pp.343-352.

Kane, T.J., Taylor, E.S., Tyler, J.H. and Wooten, A.L., 2011. Identifying effective classroom practices using student achievement data. Journal of human Resources, 46(3), pp.587-613.

Learning, A., 2015. Health and life skills guide to implementation (K–9): Instructional Strategies.

McCombs, B., 2012. Developing responsible and autonomous learners: A key to motivating students. Retrieved from American Psychological Association: http://www. apa. org/education/k12/learners. aspx.

McDonald, M., Tyson, K., Brayko, K., Bowman, M., Delport, J. and Shimomura, F., 2011. Innovation and impact in teacher education: Community-based organizations as field placements for preservice teachers. Teachers College Record, 113(8), pp.1668-1700.

Mondale, P., 7. Important factors that may affect the learning process. Retrieved February, 6, p.2016.

National Education Association, 2011. Transforming teaching: Connecting professional responsibility with student learning. Washington, DC: NEA. Retrieved, 8, p.13.

Oh, E.G., Kim, S., Kim, S.S., Kim, S., Cho, E.Y., Yoo, J.S., Kim, H.S., Lee, J.H., You, M.A. and Lee, H., 2010. Integrating evidence-based practice into RN-to-BSN clinical nursing education. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(7), pp.387-392.

Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B., 2008. The psychology of the child. Basic books.

Preston, W., Herman, E.S. and Schiller, H.I., 1989. Hope & Folly: The United States and Unesco, 1945-1985 (Vol. 3). U of Minnesota Press.

Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M., Gray, J.M., Haynes, R.B. and Richardson, W.S., 1996. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t.

Shinn, Y.H., 1997. Teaching strategies, their use and effectiveness as perceived by teachers of agriculture: A national study.

Silcock, P. and Brundrett, M., 2001. The management consequences of different models of teaching and learning. Managing the curriculum, pp.35-51.

Singh, A., Patel, J. and Desai, R., 2013. Attitude of student teachers towards Continuous Comprehensive Evaluation with reference to gender, caste and habitat. Educationia Confab, 2(1), pp.65-80.

Spathis, C., 2004, September. Use of Information Technologies and Communication by Business Studies Students. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference in UTIC, Athens’ University. Athens. Greece 29Sept.–03Oct. (in Greek).

Tyler, R.W., 1969. Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction (Paperback ed.).

Weeks, H.P., 1988. Perceptions of selected educators of the quality of instruction in secondary vocational agriculture programs.

Wenglinsky, H., 2001. Teacher classroom practices and student performance: How schools can make a difference. ETS Research Report Series, 2001(2), pp. i-37. Retrieved from Retrieved from Educational Testing 101 Service, Statistics & Research Division website: http://www.ets.org/research/policy_research_reports/publications/report/2001/hsfj

Yelon, S.L., 1996. Powerful principles of instruction. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers USA.