GRR - Global Regional Review (2024)

Abstract

Theuneven temperament of the educational scheme has a subterranean impact onstudent’s academics. Experts are determined to conceive alternatives to meet upwith this confront. It necessitates the time that our education system mustchange the itinerary to prepare the new generation fully equipped withknowledge and skills. This is an experimental study and based on theconstructivist approach of learning following 7E’s instructional model. Keyobjectives, to assess the effectiveness of instructions based on 7E’sinstructional model in student’s academic achievements, to compare experimentaland controlled group at both pre and post-test phase. Hypotheses were analyzedusing spss. It was concluded that 7E’s instructional model based instructionsare significantly effective in enhancing student’s academic achievements in thesubject of physical education. The experimental group treated with instructionsbased on 7E’s instructional model made significant improvement as compared tothe controlled group.

Key Words:

Constructivist Approach,7E’s Instructional Model, Academic Achievements, Physical Education,Higher Secondary School Level

Introduction

This study is experimental in nature and based ona constructivist approach. Constructivism means the realization of knowledge insomeone mind. This approach believes that every individual in a learningenvironment already has prior information. On the basis of pre-existingknowledge, an individual in a learning environment could be able to gain newknowledge. define the process of active learning as;it is a process of progressive development that took place continuously.According to , in this process, the teacher tries toassemble the understanding of an individual to the environment by practisingsome specific experiences and interactions with the external environment.According to Rossum and Hammer (2010), the need for an activating nature ofcurriculum step to open the gateway to use the model for conceptual basestudents learning. Similarly, Roblyer (1997) added that the outcomes of anactive process of learning are more productive in nature as compare totraditional learning when it took place in an active learning environment.Dolmans, Wolfhagen, Schmidt & Vander Vleuten (1994) find out that teacherpresentation is closely responsible for the competence of the students in asubject and quality of the educational program. Similarly, the role of theteacher in the teaching and learning paradigm is not neglectable because it isall about the teacher who can flourish or crush the student’s outcomes. So theteacher should be very vigilant in considering the students level of learningand student individual differences. Similarly, Santrock (2001) considers thestudents as a key aspect in the teaching and learning dimension. Santrok (2001)further suggested that the teacher must keep an eye on the gradual assessmentof the student learning outcomes time by time. The study also suggested thatthe teacher should analyze the students learning outcomes with the learningobjectives of the lesson. According to Davidson andMajor (2014), the students learn more in the active learning environment asthey engage themselves in paired discussions, problem-solving, or some type ofrole plays. Berk (2009)also argued the same as Davidson and Major.The author further adds that students assemble facts into understanding underthe guidance of a teacher. It helps in learning practical skills also. Connell(2009) also supports the above authors. Similarly, in line with the abovediscussion, Kudryashova et al., (2016) state that it is the need of today age to give students an opportunityto experience things by manipulating them. Condon et al. (2016) argued that in an active learning process, theteacher assesses the level of understanding of students by both formal andinformal, similarly pre and post, and it is possible only in an active learningenvironment. Through this way, students can fulfil their desire to dothemselves. According to Tanaka (2015) and Cercone (2008) opine that teacher should understand the true nature of the activelearning process and may experience it. It relies on the constructivistapproach to active learning. According to this theory teacher only play hisrole as a facilitator. The teacher facilitates students during the wholeinvestigation. An active learning environment ensures the student's motivation,and this motivation further leads towards curiosity. The student learns wellwhen they are curious about something to learn.

Eisenkraft(2003)stated that the 7E’s model for instructions is composed of seven differentphases. Elicit, engage, explore, explain, elaboration, evaluation and extend.According to Settlage, 2000; ,an instructional model is a complex of different phases. It has differentactivities based on the principle of discovery through the inquiry nature oflearning. It leads towards the accomplishment of the leaning process in itstrue sense, which helps the learners to broaden and polish their calibre ofknowledge. Advancement in every field, especially in education, is the ultimategoal of every society. In line with the statement, Safdar (2007) stated that a welldeveloped and organized education system is the most logical and reliable toolin the progress of every developed nation. Similarly, Arends (2004) added thata developed education system depends on the skill of teaching, learning and thedeveloped attitude of students towards the subject. School is a setup wherestudents are highly affected by the teacher’s encouragement regarding interestand talent development. Vighnarajah et al. (2008) claim that in theteaching and learning paradigm, the teacher plays a key role in both aspects.First, the teacher may nurture the students by his quality of givinginstructions in the class room and second, the teacher may crush the student bycrushing his abilities during the learning atmosphere. In this regard, manyauthors conducted different studies like Akaar in 2005; ;Ceylan & Geban, in 2008; Gang, in 1995; Kaynar et al., in 2009; Kleindienst, in 1993; ; Lord, in 1997; Marek et al., in 1994; Mecit, in 2006; ;;Shadburn, in 1990; , in order to assess the effectiveness of the differentinstructional model in student achievements. The above authors highlighted thatinstructional model base teaching, help the learners to generate the sense ofscientific approach, enable the students to perk up their logical reasoningabilities, develops attitude towards the subject, strengthen studentsengagement in the classroom and overcome on the student's misconceptions aboutthe subject and practice to learn rather than to obtain. According to Corbin(2001),school children should be engaged in physical activities in order to keep themphysically fit in their age of adulthood. Similarly, Rink (2006) claims thathealth and physical education and participation in physical activities is oneof the prime goals of the school physical education program. Corbinet al., (2004)pointed out that even though admitting the importance of physical activity, theschool administration shows negligence towards the promotion of physicalactivity culture in school. It has been observed that as students promote to ahigher class, the level of physical activity decreases. Similarly, Salliset al. (2000)also identify and considers all these discussed factors, which are brackettogether with children participating in physical activity seems critical topromote. Richardson (2003) reports that In this new framework of education,emphasis will be on the environment of learning in which students will be ableto understand things with a new approach by linking it with pre-existingknowledge. Gross (2002) further added that in this new reform in the teachingand learning process teacher plays a key role as the designer by providingstrategies to the student to learn and think critically. In line with thediscussed statement, numerous researchers Postner, Resnik, and Strike(1982)and (1983), also claim that different students in the class come to theclassroom having a different view. Settlage (2000) and ,an instructional model is a complex of different phases having differentactivities based on the principle of inquiry through the discovery nature oflearning. It leads towards the accomplishment of the leaning process in itstrue sense, which helps the learners to broaden and polish their calibre ofknowledge skillfully.

KeyObjectives

Following arethe key objectives of the study.

1. To assess theeffectiveness of instructions based on 7E’s instructional model in student’sachievements in Physical Education subject.

2.Tocompare the mean difference of the experimental group and controlled group atboth pre-test and post-test level to assess the effectiveness of 7E’sinstructional model in student’s achievements in Physical Education subject.

Hypothesesof the Study

In line with theobjectives of the study following hypotheses were formulated

H₀1: There is no significant mean difference inpre-test student’s academic achievements, between the experimental group andcontrol group, with reference to physical education subject.

H_A2: There is a significant mean difference inpost-test student’s academic achievements between the experimental and controlgroup, with reference to physical education subject.

H_A3: There is significant mean the differencein student’s achievement between pre-test and post-test in the experimentalgroup, with reference to physical education subject.

H₀4: There is no significant mean difference instudent’s academic achievements between pre-test and post-test in thecontrolled group, with reference to physical education subject.

Presentationof Literature

Academic Achievement

The main pedagogic goal of theinstruction method in the education system is academic achievement. For thepurpose of harmonious and overall development of an individual, academicachievement is considered a significant ingredient. Through academicachievements, it becomes easy to measure the learning outcomes of the students.It is a common practice observed in society that a student’s efficiency ordeficiency is assessed with his/her academic achievements level. In the presentscenario, as we are observing, a rapid change that occurs day by day in oursystem produce different kinds of challenges for educationists. Soeducationists are striving their best to complete these challenges. They aretrying to find that kind of variables which are challenging our educationsystem. Due to the rapid change nature of the world, parents are always tryingto educate their children with high educational goals, and it further leadstowards the need and importance of academic achievements. That is why theresearchers are trying to find such ways which can contribute to enhancingstudent’s academic achievement. In the same context, Ganyaupfu (2013) opine thatfor the purpose to bring change in the learner is the primary aim of teaching.The author further argued that the teacher has a deep impact on studentslearning behavior. The teacher is the main source in the transmission ofknowledge in students. So the teacher should apply appropriate instructionalmethods to facilitate the process of information transmission. Likewise,Echophyt, (2014) claim that besides the many factors which can cause pooracademic achievement level, teachers are mostly responsible for this loss.Because teaching method is very important in students academic achievement andit is related to the teachers teaching method. The use of non-effectiveinstructions methodologies directly affects the student’s level of achievement intheir academic.

Impact ofInstructional Method Upon Students Achievements

There are many variables that canimpact successful student achievement, but the most critical is classroominstruction and method of teaching. It is important to remember that allstudents do not learn the same way or at the same rate. Students are likeleaves on a tree; there are no two exactly the same. Just as a leaf comes inunique colors, shapes and sizes, each student has their own unique learningstyle (Trendowski, 2014). Classroominstruction or teaching method is the most important factor that impactsstudent achievement. Teaching is a Continuous process that involves bringingabout desirable changes in learners through the use of appropriate methods. Gyamtso and Maxwell (2012) and Reyes et al. (2012) also claim the sameresults that student’s academic achievements are closely linked with theteacher method of instructions. Singh and Jha, (2013), Benfer and Shanahan (2013) and Farrington et al. (2012) also support the above concept and state that different instructionalmethods are needed to different grades students, so educator is required to useappropriate teaching method. The authors further added that quality andappropriateness would surely increase the level of a student’s academicachievement level. Following studies Osborne,et al., (2013), Balcıkanlı, (2010), Murphy andWolfenden (2013), Hallinger and Lu (2013) Borko, Jacobs and Koellner (2010), Ezenwafor and Molokwu, (2015), Garrett (2008), Farrington et al. (2012), Rosaen etal., (2008) and Ganyaupfu (2013) strongly claim that instructional method is the keysource of enhancement in academic achievement.

The 7E’sInstructional Model and its Distinguishing Phases

7E’sinstructional model was constructed under the guidance of Piaget‘s mentalfunctioning model. Accordingto Eisenkraft(2003),many research studies has been done in the discipline of education, especiallyon the process of learning mechanism that how it take place. The integration ofthese studies into the purpose of lesson plane and link of these studies withresearches in how a way the individual becomes able to learn, understand andincorporation these studies for preparing and assembling lesson plans.Therefore the requirement of development during curriculum development stressesthe expansion of 5E’s model into a 7E’s model of instruction. According to Karplus & Their (1969), the first editionof the model integrated three phases at the beginning called primaryexploration, invention and discovery but later on revised to exploration,concept introduction and concept application for the purpose to increase the levelof expressiveness.

Inthe 7E’s model of instruction, the “engage” phase of 5E’s model isfurther divided into two phases “elicit” and “engage”. Likewise,the “evaluate” phase is further expanded to “evaluate” and “extend”.The objective behind the changes does not means to bring complexity to themodel, but it was intended that it will be easy for the instructor to do notskip the critical phases during planning lesson accordingly to the model forteaching.

ElicitingPhase

In elicit phase the teacher first try to makeunderstanding of the concept for the purpose to make the concept familiar forthe students. According to Eisenkraft (2003) it helps to grasp thestudent’s attention towards the lesson and prove helpful for the teacher toengage the students in class. The pre existing knowledge of the students playsan important role as background information. Through this way students becomeable to assimilate the new information. According to Bransford, Brownand co*cking (2000)in cognitive science the prior understanding of the topic is very compulsory.So the elicit phase is too much necessary to make an understanding of the topicduring teaching. The “elicit” phase of 7E’s instructional model hub thelearners to re call the pre existing knowledge that is associated with newlesson information. According to Balci, Cakiroglu, and Tekkaya (2006) theteacher must ask some critical thinking based questions from the learners in orderto recall their prior knowledge about the topic. Huang, Liu, supported the observations of Balci, Cakiroglu, and Tekkaya. Furthermore,Bentley, Ebert, and Ebert (2007) elaborated that it is simply assessingpre-existing information means asking students what do you know about?. According to Hansen and Sanders (2010), student’s pre-existing knowledge is very important to benoticed. It may be possible that students have some misconceptions that needto be corrected or to be provided with alternative concepts. Similarly, Wang and Degol (2016) added that it isnecessary for a teacher to find the ideas, beliefs and opinion which studentbrings in the class room. It is a type of investigation. This is also a type offormative evaluation of the students. It helps instructors in assessing thepre-existing information of the students. It also helps the teacher to decidewhat and how to teach before initiating the process of instruction.Furthermore, Bhattacharyya, Volk and Lumpe(2009) argued that eliciting before engaging enablesthe teachers to identify the misconceptions of the students. It is right to saythat it is a time taking activity be has a positive impact on students learningoutcomes. Hodges (2015) and Treagust (2012) opines the same.

EngagePhase

The phase of engagementof 7E’s instructional model means to imprison the attention of the studentstowards the activity going on in the class. Capturing students attentiontowards the class is very important, and it takes diversion in eliciting phase.Engage phase is completely about taking advantages of the student’s attentionand curiosity being raised in eliciting phase. Accordingto Eisenkraft (2003), this phraseworks as an assessing phase for pre-existing knowledge and in the generation ofenthusiastic behavior among the students. In this phase, the teacher can usedifferent methods to engage students, likewise offering some objects to workwith, offering a short clip of cartoon related to the concept and offeringpaper pencil for the purpose to write down information about the topicaccording to their concept. Furthermore, Bentley, Ebert, and Ebert (2007)elaborated that it is simply arousing and capturing student interest.

ExplorationPhase

The phase ofexploration in 7E’s instructional model intends to provide an opportunity forthe students to explore things by observing the phenomenon. Different types ofmaterial can be provided to complete this phase, like designs and graphs etc.According to Eisenkraft (2003)teacher needsto frame some types of questions, and by asking these questions, the teachermust try to take suggestions to assess their approach towards the lesson.During this process, the teacher must provide the necessary feedback to thestudent. Furthermore, Bentley, Ebert, and Ebert (2007) elaborated that it isthe time when students participate actively. Similarly, students working withdifferent models are asked to make observations and investigate the questionsthat arise in their minds. So in this way, students work and make predictions.

ExplainPhase

According to Eisenkraft(2003), the founder of the 7E’s instructional model debated as in thisphase, the students will bring the information they collected and will show itto their teacher. The teacher will briefly study the outcomes which studentsreported and then will judge the scenario as students are on the right path orthey are diverted from the exact line. After making assessments of the studentsprovided results, the teacher will notice the concept of students and also thecorrections to be made. In line with students results, if it is necessary tomake changes, then the teacher, with the help of student’s reports, willclarify the concepts and may add something more if necessary. Furthermore,Bentley, Ebert, and Ebert (2007) elaborated that in explaining phase theteacher will collect the findings reported by the students and discoveries theymade.

ElaborationPhase

Eisenkraft(2003) states this phase as the phase of linking the gathered knowledgewith other same problems having the same nature. In this phase, the studentstry to implement their obtained knowledge of different new items. In thisprocess, the student may face a new problem or difficulty and which may lead tonew questions. So to bring an answer to the raised question is now a new task.Student search again and try to find a suitable answer, and when they getsuccess in this regard, it means that they obtained more new information. Thatvary phase also can be called transfer of learning, and it belongs to thepsychological base of knowledge, and that is the true example of lifelonglearning. Hilard & Bower (1975) and co*king (2000) supported the concept.

EvaluationPhase

Eisenkraft(2003) states that according to this concept of model-based teachingteacher role is also very important

as it is afact that the teacher is the best evaluator of the students. That a student isobtaining something or not, what is the level of understanding of the students,like summative evaluation or formative evolution. According to eisenkraft, theteacher will evaluate the student’s position in each and every stage and at theend of this cycle. Evaluation is very necessary, and it is the only evaluationthat enables us to identify the position of an individual. Furthermore,Bentley, Ebert, and Ebert (2007) elaborated that in this phase, the formativeevaluation is done at the elicit phase, now a point to measure the improvementmade. Similarly, at the end of the lesson by evaluating the student’s knowledgelevel will give a clear indication of the student’s level. This phase ofevaluation enables the teacher to measure the student’s level of understandingabout the concept as what it was in the beginning and what it is at the end.

ExtendPhase

Similarly, Eisenkraft(2003), according to that model, try to explain how much it is necessaryto extend the topic to the next one. This will help the student to understandthe next topic easily. Because linking the lecture with coming one provide thestudent with a base and act like pre-existing knowledge for the next one.Similarly, it helps the students to understand the next ideas easily.

Method andMaterials

ResearchDesign

Pre-test,post-test and control group design was used for the study, and this is a typeof experimental designs. The scheme of the design is as under.

R O T O

R O _ O (Creswell, 2009; Gay,1996)

“R” stands for random assignmentof subjects to groups, “O” stands for Pre-test, Post-test. “T” stands for“treatment”. Instructions were designed according to 7E’s instructional modeland administer to the experimental group. The researcher himself provided theinstructions for the purpose to ensure clarity in the experiment. The study wasconducted over eight weeks, and the teaching session was comprised of 45minutes. At the start of the experiment and before the treatment process, inorder to check the equality in the achievements level of the students, thephysical education achievement test (PEAT) was administered to the students.The same tests were also taken after the completion of the experiment.

Proposed Workplace

This particular research study was conducted inIslamabad Model College for boys Bhara Kahu federal area Islamabad, in thevicinity of Islamabad capital territory of Pakistan.

Populationand Sample

The target population for this research studycomprised all the XI class students having Physical Education subject in theirsyllabus. That enrolled in different colleges in the vicinity of Islamabadcapital territory, under the administrative unit of Federal Directorate ofEducation (FDE) Islamabad. Accessible population for this particularresearch study comprised all (50) students and randomly distributed into twogroups. Each group comprised 25 participants, experimental group (25) andcontrolled group (25) having Physical education in their syllabus in IslamabadModel College for boys Bhara Kahu federal area Islamabad, Located in thepremises of Islamabad Capital Territory. Further, it is also necessary toexplain that the result obtained from this study are generalized to thedistinct target population.

Instrumentand Instrumentation

The physical educationachievement test (PEAT) was prepared by the researcher himself as theresearcher is

himself a physicaleducation teacher and presently teaching physical education subject at a highersecondary level.

The researcher put greatattention to prepare the instrument for vivid and free of ambiguity. For thepurpose of face validity, content validity and construct validity of the test,it was discussed with fifteen experienced physical education teachers and tenexpert professors from the sports sciences and physical education discipline.The items which were accepted by the panellists were considered as it was.Similarly, the items which were accepted with minor changes were changed inline with suggested changes by the panellists. The items which were rejected byThe panellist were expelled from the draft. Furthermore, content validity ratioof each item included in the scale was then calculated by using Lawshe (1975)method. The validation process of the test was entirely carried out under thekind consideration and value able guidance of the research supervisor. Forreliability, Cronbach’s Alpha, correlation and reliability coefficients werechecked. The Cronbach’s Alpha obtained was 0.84, which shows moderatereliability and in an acceptable range. The final version was administered toboth groups (experimental group and controlled group) separately at thePre-test phase. The test was about to subject knowledge having multiple choicequestions aiming to gauge the level of student’s knowledge in physicaleducation subject and to select the participants of the same capacity keepingin view the normality threats for the study. The Pre-PEAT results of bothexperimental group and controlled group were kept as a record. Similarlyprocedure was adopted at Post-PEAT phase and the results were kept in record.Furthermore the obtained results were used for statistical analysis.

Analysis

DescriptiveStatistics

Table1. DescriptiveStatistics Related to Physical Education Achievement test (PEAT), ExperimentalGroup at Pre-test Phase.

The above table showingPre-test results of physical education achievements tests (PEAT) scores ofstudents in experimental group. The scores showed ranging from 13.75% to37.50%, with a mean of 27.184. The said table further represented that skewnessof the test score was found -.095, and also Kurtosis of the test score was-.495. This indicated that the data was normally distributed.

Histogram indicates thatpre-test scores in physical education academic achievements (PEAT) ofexperimental group which depicted that data rested on the normal curve.

Table2. Descriptivestatistics related to physical education achievement test (PEAT), controlledgroup at pre-test level.

The above table showingPre-test results of physical education achievements tests (PEAT) scores ofstudents in controlled group. The scores showed ranging from 18.00% to 37.50%,with a mean of 28.359. The said table Further represented that skewness of thetest score was found .187, and also Kurtosis of the test score was -.765. Thisindicated that the data was normally distributed.

Histogram indicated thepre-test scores in physical education academic achievements (PEAT) of thecontrolled group, which depicted that data rested on the normal curve.

Table3. DescriptiveStatistics Related to Physical Education Achievement Test (PEAT), taken by ExperimentalGroup at Post-test Phase.

The above table isshowing Post-test results of physical education achievements tests (PEAT)scores of students in the experimental group. The scores showed ranging from53.25% to 94.25%, with a mean of 78.256. The said table further represented theskewness of the test score, and it was found -.454, and also Kurtosis of thetest score was 2.011. This indicated that the data were normally distributed.

Histogram indicatedpost-test scores in physical education academic achievements (PEAT) ofexperimental group, which depicted that data rested on the normal curve.

Table4. DescriptiveStatistics Related to Physical Education Achievement test (PEAT), taken by ControlledGroup at Post-test Level.

The above table showingPost-test results of physical education achievements tests (PEAT) scores ofstudents in controlled group. The scores showed ranging from 36% to 51.25%,with a mean of 44.674, the said table further represented that skewness of thetest score was found -.658, and also Kurtosis of the test score was -.425, Thisindicated that the data was normally distributed.

Histogram indicatedpre-test scores in physical education academic achievements (PEAT) ofcontrolled group which depicted that data rested on the normal curve.

Section C:Inferential Statistics (Testing of Hypotheses)

H₀1; There is no significant meandifference in pre-test student’s achievements, between experimental group andcontrol group, with reference to physical education subject.

Table 5. T-test Showing Pre-testmean Differences in Academic Achievement’s Between Experimental Group and ControlledGroup.

α=.05, n=respondents, S. D=StandardDeviation, df=Degree of freedom, T=Calculated , Sig=Significant value.

Theabove table and figure show the pre-test mean the difference in achievementsbetween the experimental group and the controlled group. Here t(48)= -.672,P(.505)>.05. It indicates that there is no significant difference in theattitude of both groups participant’s (experimental and controlled). Theexperimental group (M=27.184, SD=6.850) is statistically less but notsignificantly than the Controlled group (M=28.359, SD=5.445). The resultindicates that the null hypothesis is accepted.

H_A2: There isa significant mean difference in post-test student’s achievements between theexperimental and control group, with reference to physical education subject.

Table 6. T-test showing thepost-test mean difference in achievement’s between experimental and controlled group.

α=.05, n=respondents, S. D=StandardDeviation, df=Degree of freedom, T=Calculated , Sig=Significant value

The abovetable and figure shows the post-test mean difference in student’s academic achievementsbetween experimental group participants and controlled group participants. Heret(48)=17.368, P(.000)<.05. It indicates that there is a significantdifference in the attitude of both groups participant’s (experimental group andcontrolled one). The experimental group (M=78.256, SD=8.714) is statisticallyand significantly greater than then Controlled group (M=44.674, SD=4.186). Theabove figures also indicate the effectiveness of instructional model-basedteaching. The result indicates that the hypothesis is accepted.

H_A3: There is a significantmean difference in student’s achievement between experimental group pre-testand experimental group post-test, with reference to physical education subject.

Table 7. Paired t-test ShowingPre-test and Post-test Achievement’s Mean Difference of Experimental Group.

α=.05, n=respondents,S. D=Standard Deviation, df=Degree of freedom, r=Relation, T=Calculated,Sig=Significantvalue

The above table andfigure show that t(24)= -21.790, P(.000)<.05, which indicates that there isa significant difference in the achievements of the experimental group betweenpre-test and post-test in the physical education achievements test. The post-test(M=78.256, SD=8.714) is statistically and significantly greater than pre-test(M=27.184, SD=6.850), (r= -.121). The result shows that the experimental groupmade greater achievements in the post-test as compared to the pre-test. Therefore,the hypothesis is accepted.

H₀4; There isno significant mean difference in student’s achievements between controlledgroup pre-test and controlled group post-test, with reference to physicaleducation subject.

Table 8. Paired T-test Showing Pre-testand Post-test Achievement’s mean Difference of Controlled Group.

α=.05, n=respondents, S. D=StandardDeviation, df=Degree of freedom, r=Relation, T=Calculated ,Sig=Significantvalue

The above table andfigure show that t(24)= -17.004, P(.000)<.05, which indicates that there isa significant difference in the achievements of the controlled group betweenpre-test and post-test in the physical education achievements test. The post-test(M=44.674, SD=4.186) is statistically and significantly greater than thepre-test (M=28.359, SD=5.445), (r=.530). The result shows that the controlledgroup made reasonable achievements in the post-test as compared to thepre-test. Therefore, the hypothesis is rejected.

Discussion

7E’s model of instructionwas designed to fulfil the true sense of education. It not only yields qualityeducation but also improves the level of achievements among the students. Inthis research study, it was found out that 7E’s instructional model-basedteaching has a deep impact upon student’s achievements and cause significantacquisition in the subject of physical education as compare to traditional orold lecture method because experimental group, which was given instructionaccording to 7E’s instructional model significantly improved achievement ascompare to the controlled group. It means that instructional model-basedinstruction provides an active learning environment for the students, In whichstudents like to participate and learns more. The results of this study weresupported by many research studies. Like Roblyer et al. (1997), an activelearning atmosphere is a key ingredient of quality education. It contributesmore to the production of fruitful results as compare to any other traditionalmethod of instruction. Similarly, Santrock (2001) concluded that knowledgecould be gained best when a learner actively constructs it. It means that it isnecessary for a learner to attend the teaching and learning session actively.Furthermore, an active learning nature will help him to discover new knowledgeand ability to understand its reflections. Similarly, it will also mould theattention of students towards critical thinking. Other studies were done bySunal & Sunal (2003), Yenilmez & Ersoy (2008), Bybee et al., (2006), Perrier &Nsengiyunva (2003), and Sasmaz & Tezcan (2009) also support the samephenomenon as discussed above. Comparable findings were found in a studyconducted by Shaheen & Kayani (2015). Turgut et al.(2016) found very goodresults in students achievements after the application of 7E’s instructionalmodel based instructions. The author further claim that if the method ofinstructions followed accordingly and the material assembled accordingly, thenit gives more fruitful results in achieving expected educational goals likehigh achievements and a positive attitude. In line with the findings of thecurrent study, few more parallel outcomes are seen from many other researchdissertations like Acisli (2010), Erugul (2008), Ernass (2008),Ersahaan (2007), Gurbuoz (2012), Hirsa (2008), Kanli (2007), Kilavuaz (2005), Kurtt(2002), Ozsevegec (2007), Saka (2006), Sengul (2006), Turgut and Gurbuz, (2011),Akerson et al. (2009), Bayrakceken et al.,(2009) Boddy et al.(2003) Bozdoganand Altuncekic, (2007). In these studies, the authors suggested that there is apositive contribution of the constructivist approach on which 7E’s model isconstructed, towards improvement in strong communication skill, strong handskills, strong self-confidence, strong thinking skills, and it gives fruitfuloutcomes in students achievements if constructivist approach followed. Further,Bailey et al. (2009) also added that the attitude of students at higher secondaryschool level towards physical education is mainly determined by a few things,which are outline or curriculum, class atmosphere, teacher’s behavior, andself-perception.

Conclusion

It was concluded that instructions based on 7E’sinstructional model have significant positive effects in enhancing student’sacademic achievements in physical education subject. At the post-test level, apositive and significant mean difference was observed between the experimentalgroup and the controlled group, as for as concerned to students achievements inphysical education subject. Likewise, in light of post-test results, it wasalso noted that the mean score of the experimental group was significantly andpositively greater as compared to the controlled group physical educationacademic achievement test result, and that ensures the effectiveness of 7E’sinstructional model. Furthermore, as for as concerned to data normality, it isnoted that the pre-test physical education academic achievement test resultswere found the same. That indicates both, experimental group and the controlledgroup were of the same ability. Hence it proves that the data were distributednormally. The researcher noted that the instructions based on 7E’sinstructional model are equally effective for all the students.