S, Dalal. (2003). Effect of Inductive Thinking Strategy on English Language Development and Concept Formation. Unpublished. Ph.D., Education. Kurukshetra University, Haryana.
The objectives of the study were: (1) To study the effect of inductive thinking on concept formation with respect to three strategies: (a) Concept Formation, (b) Interpretation of Data and (c) Application of Principles. (2) To study the effect of inductive thinking on language development with respect to three strategies: (a) Concept Formation, (b) Interpretation of Data and (c) Application of Principles. (3) To analyse the thinking strategies used by the learners with respect to three strategies: (a) Concept Formation, (b) Interpretation of Data and (c) Application of Principles. (4) To evaluate the thinking strategies used in terms of achievement of language development and language concept with respect to three strategies: (a) Concept Formation, (b) Interpretation of Data and (c) Application of Principles. (5) To study the effect of ITM on retention with respect to three strategies: (a) Concept Formation, (b) Interpretation of Data and (c) Application of Principles.
The hypothesis of the study were: (1.1) In the previous knowledge, there will be no difference between mean scores of concept formation. (1.2) In the previous knowledge, there will be no difference between mean scores of language development. (2.1) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on concept formation with respect of Concept Formation Strategy (CFS) of both the groups. (2.2) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on concept formation with respect of Interpretation of Data Strategy (IDS) of both the groups. (2.3) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on concept formation with respect to Application of Principle (APS) of both the groups. (2.4) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on concept formation with respect to overall achievement of both the groups. (3.1) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on language development with respect to CFS of both the groups. (3.2) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on language development with respect to IDS of both the groups. (3.3) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on language development with respect to APS of both the groups. (3.4) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on language development with respect to overall achievement of both the groups. (4.1) There will be no difference between the thinking strategies used by the learners in achieving language development and concept formation with respect to CFS of experimental group. (4.2) There will be no difference between the thinking strategies used by the learners in achieving language development and concept formation with respect to IDS of experimental group. (4.3) There will be no difference between the thinking strategies used by the learners in achieving language development and concept formation with respect to APS of experimental group. (5.1) There will be no difference between the evaluation of thinking strategies used in terms of achievement of language development and language concept with respect to CFS of experimental group. (5.2) There will be no difference between the evaluation of thinking strategies used in terms of achievement of language development and language concept with respect to IDS of experimental group. (5.3) There will be no difference between the evaluation of thinking strategies used in terms of achievement of language development and language concept with respect to APS of experimental group. (6.1) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on retention of concept formation with respect to overall achievement of both the groups. (6.2) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on retention of concept formation with respect to CSF of both the groups. (6.3) There will be no difference between scores of effect of inductive thinking on retention of concept formation with respect to IDS of both the groups. (6.4) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on retention of concept formation with respect to APS of both the groups. (6.5) There will be no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on retention of language development with respect to overall achievement, IDS and APS of both the groups. (6.6) There will no difference between mean scores of effect of inductive thinking on retention of language development with respect to CFS of both the groups.
Sample was comprised of 587 students. Out of 587, 293 were in Experimental Group and 294 in Control Group.
The “tool for teaching" was standardized by Hilda Taba and other tools used were self developed. The treatment was applied to classes IV to VIII students in the form of experimental group and control group.
The study was conducted in three stages- Pilot study, main study and retention study. Different sets of students were used for developing the measuring tools and treatment. The second stage, namely, main study employed another set of samples. The third stage of the study, namely, retention study employed same set of samples as of main study.
In I stage of pilot study quantitative and qualitative analysis was done and simple percentage and mean statistical technique was applied. In II stage of main study, quantitative and qualitative analysis was done and statistical technique applied was simple percentage. In III stage retention on study, quantitative analysis was done and statistical technique applied was simple percentage.
The findings of the study were: (1) The mean scores of concept formation, when the previous knowledge of the students related with particular concept was tested were same. (2) The mean scores of language development, when the previous knowledge of the students related with particular concept was tested were same. (3) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in terms of overall concept formation achievement test scores of the students when ELATPoT was tested. (4) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in concept formation in terms of CFS achievement test scores of the students when ELATCFS (English Language Teaching Concept Formation Strategy) and ELATPoT were tested. (5) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in concept formation in terms of IDS achievement test scores of the students when ELATIDS(English Language Teaching Interpretation of Data) and ELATPoT were tested. (6) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in concept formation in terms of APS achievement test scores of the students when ELATAPS and ELATPoT were tested. (7) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in terms of overall language development achievement test scores of the students when ELAPToT was tested. (8) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in language development in terms of CFS achievement test scores of the students when ELATCFS and ELATPoT were tested. (9) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in language development in terms of IDS achievement test scores of the students when ELATIDS and ELATPoT were tested. (10) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in language development in terms of APS achievement test scores of the students when ELATAPS and ELATPoT were tested. (11) The thinking strategies used by the learners in CFS were the same as described in the ITM i.e. listing, grouping, categorization, analyzing, labeling, discussing, explaining, reasoning etc. (12) The thinking strategies used by the learners in IDS were the same as described in the ITM i.e. comparing, analyzing, explaining, reasoning, identifying critical relationships, exploring relationships, making inferences, generalizing, labeling etc. (13) The thinking strategies used by the learners in APS were the same as described in the ITM i.e. predicting consequences, explaining unfamiliar phenomena, hypothesizing, explaining predictions, explaining hypotheses, supporting predictions, supporting hypotheses, verifying the prediction labeling etc. (14) The thinking strategies used by the learners in CFS were listing, grouping, categorizing, analyzing and these were used by all the learners by their own thinking but the strategies like labeling, discussing, explaining, reasoning were used by some learners in the starting and followed by other learners. (15) The thinking strategies used by the learners in IDS were the same as described in the ITM i.e. comparing, analyzing, explaining, reasoning were used by all the students by their own thinking but the strategies like identifying critical relationships, exploring relationships, making inferences, generalizing, labeling were used by some learners by their own thinking and followed by other learners. (16) The thinking strategies used by the learners in APS were the same as described in the ITM i.e. predicting consequences and explaining unfamiliar phenomena by all the students using their own thinking but the strategies like hypothesizing, explaining predictions, explaining hypotheses, supporting prediction, supporting hypotheses, verifying the prediction, labeling etc. were used by some learners by their own thinking and followed by other learners. (17) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in retention of the subject matter in terms of over-all concept formation achievement test scores of the students when ELATDPT was tested. (18) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in retention of the subject matter of concept formation in terms of CFS achievement test scores of the students when ELATDPT was tested. (19) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in retention of the subject matter of concept formation in terms of IDS achievement test scores of the students when ELATDPT was tested. (20) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in retention of the subject matter of concept formation in terms of IDS achievement test scores of the students when ELATDPT was tested. (21) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in retention of the subject matter of language development in terms of overall, IDS, and APS achievement test scores of the students when ELATDPT was tested. (22) The experimental group was found to be superior to control group in retention of the subject matter of language development in terms of CFS achievement test scores of the study when ELATDPT was tested.
Keyword(s): Inductive Thinking Strategy, English Language Development, Concept Formation, Teaching Strategy