AN INVESTIGATION INTO STRATEGIES THAT MALAWIAN BIOLOGY TEACHERS 

USE TO ADDRESS TEACHING CHALLENGES IN GENETICS: A CASE STUDY 

 

 

 

By 

 

Thandeka Andreah Nkhonde 

 

     Supervisor 

 

Dr Foster C. Lungu 

 

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Education 

in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Education 

(M.Ed.) in Teacher Education 

 

 

 

Of 

 

Mzuzu University 

 

 

 

 

 

Mzuzu, Malawi 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

April,2015 
 

 

 

 



Page ii of 96 
 

Statement of Originality 

 

The concept, research, organization, writing of this research report is entirely my own and 

has been carried out at Mzuzu University, Malawi, under the supervision of Dr F.C. Lungu. 

All quotations are distinguished and identified by reference. 

 

 

Candidate’s signature: _________________________________________________ 

Thandeka Andreah Nkhonde 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page iii of 96 
 

Dedication 

 

I dedicate this piece of work to my parents Mr Hawkings Samuel Nkhonde and Effie Msachi 

(late) for inspiring me to this academic level. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page iv of 96 
 

Acknowledgements 

 

 

I would like to express my appreciation to my supervisor Dr Foster C. Lungu for his tireless 

effort in shaping this study to be what it is today. His guidance was significant to this project. 

Also, my special gratitude goes to Mrs Margret. Mdolo and Mr Friday.F.F Masumbu for their 

material and moral support rendered to me during this study. 

 

I give special thanks to the four biology teachers and their head teachers for their 

participation in this study. 

 

I am very grateful to my loving wife Mary Nkhonde (Nee Ng’oma) and my daughter Thabo 

Nkhonde for persevering and understanding my limited availability because of this 

programme’s course and research work. 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page v of 96 
 

List of Tables 

 

Table 3.1 Teachers’ profiles ............................................................................................................. 19 

 

Table 3.2 Abbreviations for coding interview data ................................................................. 24 

 

Table 3.3 Abbreviations for coding video recording data ....................................................... 24 

 

Table 4.4 Genotypic appearance of bean pairs ........................................................................ 54 

 

Table 4.5 Phenotypic appearance of bean pairs ....................................................................... 54 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page vi of 96 
 

List of Figures 

 

Figure 4.1: Mary’s first example on drawing crosses for blood groups .................................. 29 

 

Figure 4.2: Mary’s second example on drawing crosses for blood groups ............................. 30 

 

Figure 4.3: Mary’s third example on drawing crosses for blood groups ................................. 30 

 

Figure 4.4: Student genetic crossing  for GG with YY  ........................................................... 39 

 

Figure 4.5: Student genetic crossing for selfing F1 generation for GG with YY .................... 40 

 

Figure 4.6 :Student example on crossing phenotype height for FF with mm .......................... 41 

 

Figure 4.7: Selfing of F1 from FF crossing with mm .............................................................. 41 

 

Figure 4.8: John’s illustration of drawing crosses ................................................................... 43 

 

Figure 4.9 : Group 1 presentation  on drawing crosses for RR with rr .................................... 44 

 

Figure 4.10: Group 3 presentation on drawing  crosses for selfing RR with rr ....................... 45 

 

Fig 4.11: Structure of a chromosome ....................................................................................... 52 

 

Figure 4.12: Angelina’s example on drawing crosses for RR with rr ..................................... 52 

 

Figure 4.13: Student F cross for selfing the F1 with genotype Rr ........................................... 55 

  

Figure 4.14: Student G cross  for genotypes Rr with rr ........................................................... 56 

 

Figure 4.15: Angelina’s cross on Rr with Rr ........................................................................... 56 

 

Figure 4.16: Illustration of genes on the chromosomes ........................................................... 65 

  

 

 

 



Page vii of 96 
 

Table of Contents  

Statement of Originality .......................................................................................................................... ii 

Dedication .............................................................................................................................................. iii 

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ iv 

List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... v 

List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................ vi 

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................. vii 

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... x 

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 

1.0 Background ................................................................................................................................. 1 

1.1 The Research Problem ................................................................................................................ 2 

1.2 Aims of the Study ....................................................................................................................... 2 

1.3 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 3 

1.4 Definition of Operational Terms ................................................................................................. 4 

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................... 5 

2.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 5 

2.1 Rationale for the Teaching of Genetics ....................................................................................... 5 

2.2 Difficulties in Teaching and Learning of Genetics ..................................................................... 6 

2.2.1 Technical Terms .................................................................................................................. 6 

2.2.2 Abstract Nature of Genetic Concepts .................................................................................. 7 

2.2.3 Complex  Nature of Genetic Concepts................................................................................ 8 

2.2.4 Mathematical Problems ....................................................................................................... 9 

2.2.5 Misconceptions in Text Books, Learners and Teachers .................................................... 10 

2.3 Strategies for Teaching Genetics .............................................................................................. 11 

2.3.1 Demonstration ................................................................................................................... 11 

2.3.2 Group Work ...................................................................................................................... 12 

2.3.3 Question and Answer ........................................................................................................ 13 

2.4 Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................................. 14 

2.5 Research Paradigm .................................................................................................................... 16 

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................................ 18 

3.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 18 

3.1 Research design ........................................................................................................................ 18 

3.2 Research Geographical Area ..................................................................................................... 18 

3.4 Data Collection Methods and Instruments ................................................................................ 20 

3.4.1 Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 20 



Page viii of 96 
 

3.4.2 Observation of Lessons ..................................................................................................... 21 

3.5 Issues of Trustworthiness and Credibility ................................................................................. 22 

3.5.1 Pilot Study ......................................................................................................................... 22 

3.5.2 Triangulation ..................................................................................................................... 22 

3.5.3 Confirmability ................................................................................................................... 23 

3.6 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 23 

3.6.1 Interview Data ................................................................................................................... 23 

3.6.2 Video Data ........................................................................................................................ 24 

3.7 Ethical Considerations .............................................................................................................. 25 

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................... 26 

4.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 26 

4.1 Case A ....................................................................................................................................... 26 

4.2 Case B ....................................................................................................................................... 36 

4.3 Case C ....................................................................................................................................... 49 

4.4 Case D ....................................................................................................................................... 62 

CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 69 

5.1 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................ 69 

5.2 Difficult Genetic Concepts........................................................................................................ 69 

• Case A ............................................................................................................................... 69 

• Case B ............................................................................................................................... 69 

• Case C ............................................................................................................................... 70 

• Case D ............................................................................................................................... 70 

5.3 Strategies for Teaching Challenging Genetic Concepts ............................................................ 70 

5.4 Reasons for Using the Described Strategies ............................................................................. 72 

• Case A ............................................................................................................................... 72 

• Case B ............................................................................................................................... 72 

• Case C ............................................................................................................................... 73 

• Case D ............................................................................................................................... 73 

5.5 Research Limitations ................................................................................................................ 73 

5.6 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 74 

5.7 Suggestions for Future Research ............................................................................................... 75 

5.8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 75 

Bibliography ......................................................................................................................................... 76 

Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ 82 

Appendix 1: Interview Schedule ....................................................................................................... 82 



Page ix of 96 
 

Appendix 2: Permission Letter by Education Division Manager (NED).......................................... 83 

Appendix 3:  Consent to Conduct the Study ..................................................................................... 84 

Appendix 4: Head Teacher’s Consent Letter .................................................................................... 85 

Appendix 5: Informed Consent Form for Teachers .......................................................................... 86 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page x of 96 
 

Abstract 

 

Genetics is rated as one of the most difficult topics to teach at MSCE level in Malawi, yet it is   

a fundamental part of biology and is relevant to everyday life. Despite its importance to the 

individual and society at large, genetics teaching and learning at different levels of education 

and in different context is facing significant challenges such as vocabulary and terminologies, 

abstract nature,  complex nature, mathematical problems and misconceptions in textbooks, 

teachers and learners.  In Malawi, very little, if anything has been done to find out how 

biology teachers are addressing the teaching challenges in genetics.  

 

This study investigated how Malawian senior secondary school biology teachers address the 

teaching challenges in genetics by identifying the challenging concepts, describing the 

strategies used to teach the identified concepts and explain the reasons for using the described 

strategy. A case study approach was used and data was collected through structured 

interviews and video observation of lessons. Data was analysed through content analysis in 

order to come up with categories and themes.  

 

This study has revealed that Malawian biology teachers find teaching of some genetics 

concepts, mathematical aspects and drawing of crosses challenging. The study also found that 

teachers use group work, demonstration, question and answer and problem based learning to 

address the challenges. The study recommends that biology teachers should create 

opportunities for learners to construct knowledge individually and socially.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page 1 of 96 
 

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 

1.0  Background  

The Malawi School Certificate of Education (MSCE) biology syllabus contains five major 

topics: plant structure and function, animal structure and function, human and animal 

diseases, genetics and evolution and environment (MoEST, 2001). Genetics contains the 

following sub topics: variations among organisms of the same species, sources of variations, 

Mendelian inheritance patterns (monohybrid crosses), recessive genes, dominant genes, co-

dominance and blood groups, sex determination, sex linked characteristics, mutations, genes , 

chromosomes and DNA, plant and animal breeding (MoEST, 2001).  

From my experience as a biology teacher and in my capacity as a biology divisional trainer 

for the Strengthening of Mathematics and other Science Subjects in Secondary Education 

(SMASSE) project, I have observed during my participation in SMASSE workshops that 

genetics is one of the difficult topics to teach and learn. This observation was made by 

listening to the workshop participants concerning topics which are deemed difficult and 

where they need help.  

SMASSE is an In-Service Education and Training (INSET) of science teachers. It is aimed at 

equipping Malawian biology, physical science, mathematics and home economics teachers 

with effective teaching strategies and subject matter knowledge. Trainings take place in 

designated centres during school holidays. Teachers in these centres share the knowledge on 

effective instructional techniques of science subjects with guidance from Divisional Trainers 

(DTs). It is through such meetings that teachers discuss the challenging topics at MSCE and 

Junior Certificate of Education (JCE) in their respective subjects as agendas for their next 

INSET. In the SMASSE Baseline Survey of 2009 and the National INSET of April 2011, 

biology teachers nationwide identified genetics as one of the most difficult topics to teach and 

learn at MSCE level. The teachers argued that it is hard to come up with meaningful activities 

and learner-centred lessons. 

Furthermore, reports by biology chief examiners in MSCE theory papers indicate that 

learners have difficulties in answering genetic questions. For example, the chief examiner’s 

report of 2012 states that candidates seemed to have problems  to correctly draw genetic 

diagrams. It was also reported that students had little  understanding for  the identification of 

genotypes to use for drawing genetic diagrams (Malawi National Examinations Board, 2012). 



Page 2 of 96 
 

Another report  states that candidates were failing to apply their genetic knowledge in solving  

problems that demand higher order thinking skills  especially in tracing the inheritance of sex 

linked characteristics in a family tree diagram (Malawi National Examinations Board, 2008). 

My interest in teaching difficulties in genetics grew and prompted me to chat with some of 

the biology teacher educators at Mzuzu University. The aim of chatting with the educators 

was to find out their perception towards the teaching and learning of genetics at higher 

learning institutions. I also wanted to be enlightened if there was any study in the Malawi 

context that dealt with strategies in teaching challenging concepts in genetics. The biology 

teacher educators expressed the same feelings that genetics is difficult to teach and learn. 

They also said that studies on strategies for teaching challenging genetic concepts have never 

been published since the time when the studies were conducted in Malawi 

 My search through Google and Yahoo has revealed that little is known about the effective 

strategies to address the teaching challenges in genetics by Malawian biology teachers in 

secondary school education.  In search of effective strategies, I looked for terms like 

‘strategies used for teaching challenging genetic concepts in Malawi’ and ‘teaching of 

genetics in general in Malawi’ but all provided scanty information. Thus, I wondered as to 

what genetic concepts are difficult to teach; how such difficult concepts are approached by 

biology teachers in classroom situations; and why the teachers choose certain strategies to 

address the challenges.  This study sought to  find out the common strategies that Malawian 

biology teachers use to address teaching challenges in genetics.  

 

1.1  The Research Problem  

As discussed in the background, genetics is rated as one of the most difficult topics to teach at 

MSCE level in Malawi. However, it  is  not known how Malawian biology teachers address 

the teaching challenges in genetics. Thus, this study sought  to find out the strategies that 

Malawian biology teachers use in addressing teaching challenges in genetics. 

1.2  Aims of the Study 

This study aimed at investigating the strategies that Malawian Biology  teachers use in 

teaching difficult genetic concepts. It  had the following objectives: 



Page 3 of 96 
 

• To identify  concepts in genetics that pose teaching challenges to Malawian 

secondary school biology teachers 

• To describe strategies that Malawian biology teachers use in addressing the 

teaching challenges in genetics. 

• To explain why Malawian biology teachers choose the described strategies. 

 

1.3   Significance of the Study 

As pointed out already, there seems to be no study that has investigated the strategies that 

Malawian biology teachers use in teaching difficult genetic concepts. Therefore, it is hoped 

that the findings of this study would be a significant filler of this existing gap. Additionally 

and more significantly, it is expected that the work will spur more in-depth studies in this 

research area. The information will be insightful to teachers, Secondary Education Methods 

Advisors (SEMA), Curriculum Developers and Teacher Educators on improving the teaching 

of genetics in biology education in Malawi in the following ways:  

   

• Biology Teachers can use the findings of this study on concepts, strategies and 

reasons for using a strategy in teaching difficult concepts for planning and 

presentation of effective lessons. 

 

• Secondary Education Methods Advisors (SEMAs) can use the findings of this study 

on difficult concepts and strategies for their advisory role by identifying areas in 

genetics that teachers need assistance for effective delivery of genetic lessons. 

 

• Biology Curriculum developers  can use the findings of this study on concepts and 

strategies for reviewing the biology curriculum to locate from the topic of genetics 

areas that are difficult to teach and suggest teaching strategies that addresses the 

teaching difficulties for student understanding of the topic content. 

 

• Biology Teacher Educators can use the findings of this study on concepts, strategies 

and reasons for using a specific strategy for equipping prospective biology teachers 

with the necessary content and pedagogical knowledge in dealing with the teaching 

difficulties in genetics. 

 



Page 4 of 96 
 

1.4   Definition of Operational Terms 

 

Difficult genetic concepts :  Genetic concepts that a teacher finds challenging to teach    

                                                in such a way that learners can easily understand. 

 

Teaching Challenges  :   Problems that a teacher encounters when teaching certain               

genetic concepts which make it difficult for students to 

understand the concepts. 

 

Teaching Strategy  :   The overall procedure that a teacher employs in delivering  

                                                 the lesson content. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page 5 of 96 
 

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 

2.0   Introduction 

This chapter begins by exploring the rationale for teaching genetics in secondary schools in 

Malawi. It also looks at the possible reasons for the existence of teaching difficulties in 

genetics and the effective teaching strategies for enhancing understanding of genetic 

concepts. It ends with discussion of the theoretical framework and research paradigm that I 

adopted in order to understand difficulties in teaching of genetics. 

 

2.1  Rationale for the Teaching of Genetics 

Haga (2006, p 108) states that “genetics is one of the fundamental parts of biology and is 

relevant to everyday life.” According to MoEST (2001) biology syllabus, it is stipulated that 

genetics should be taught in Malawian secondary schools in order to help students develop 

broad understanding of themselves and the world around them. This understanding would 

help the students develop skills in solving personal and community problems that are related 

to health, population and environment. It would also sensitise students to the application and 

implications of genetics (Knippels, 2005; Haga, 2006).  

 

Dawson and Schibeci (2003) argue that the application of gene technology has been received 

with mixed reactions by the society. It concurrently presents  fears and hopes for the future. 

For example, Malachias et al. (2010) illustrate that in Brazil, the National Congress had 

mixed reactions on application of the gene technology and its ethical consequencies on the 

society. Despite the controvesial effects, Malachias et al. (2010) state that the advent of 

recombinant deoxy-ribonucleic acids (DNA) technology, genetic modified foods, DNA 

screening and cloning has led to improved technological development of many countries 

including Malawi in the field of agriculture, health and industry. In spite of its importance,  

the teaching and learning of genetics is associated with  a lot of challenges (Dougherty, 

2009).  

 

  



Page 6 of 96 
 

2.2  Difficulties in Teaching and Learning of Genetics 

Research done on teaching and learning of genetics has revealed that some of the difficult 

concepts that pose challenges to its teaching are crosses, mathematical calculations, genetic 

terms, mutations, mitosis, meiosis, sex determination, chromosomes, genes, variance and co-

dominance ( Haambokoma, 2007; Topcu & Perkmez 2009; Malachias et al., 2010; Cimer, 

2012; Gericke & Wahlberg, 2013). These challenges emanate from their vocabulary and 

terminologies, abstract nature,  complex nature, mathematical problems and misconceptions 

in textbooks, as well as teachers and learners (Mbajiorgu, 2006; Topcu & Perkmez, 2009; 

Thorne, 2012). Below are the possible reasons from empirical research findings regarding the 

difficulties in teaching of genetics:  

2.2.1 Technical Terms 

Genetics is difficult to teach because of extensive use of technical terms involved in the topic 

(Knippels, 2002; Thorne, 2012). Thornes (2012, p.9) defines technical terms as “words 

connected to a specific subject matter.” Technical terms are a problem in genetics because of 

wrong use of terms, existence of synonyms, terms having different meanings depending on 

context used and disputed meaning of some technical terms (Knippels, 2002; Thorne, 2012). 

For instance, the terms allele and gene cause confusion in teaching and learning of genetics 

because textbooks and teachers use the two words interchangeably (Leech & Woodson, 

2000). The term “gene” is a common synonym misused by teachers and textbooks (Knippels 

2002). A gene is commonly misused in gene for red coloured flowers instead of allele for red 

coloured flowers. Another common mistake is the use of “lethal gene” for “lethal alleles.” 

The gene cannot be lethal but the allele. Actually, it is the allele which expresses itself to 

produce phenotypes. 

Some genetic terms bring confusion because they sound and look similar in their use 

(Knippels et al., 2005). Examples include meiosis, mitosis homologous, homozygote, 

homologous chromosomes, and homologue (Thornes, 2012).  

Some technical terms in genetics convey a very different meaning depending on the context 

of use (Knippels, 2002). Terms like “dominant” are easily misunderstood to mean “frequent.” 

Students misinterpret dominant alleles as being good over recessive alleles and attach 

recessive alleles as responsible for causing mutations (Knippels, 2002). 



Page 7 of 96 
 

Definitions for some genetic terms are wrongly presented in most textbooks and teachers. 

Knippels (2002, p.28) illustrates “mutation” which is commonly referred to as “rare, harmful 

and recessive event.” Mutation is the change in chemical structure of a single gene or 

physical make up of chromosomes (Fullick, 2000). Mutations bring variation in most 

organisms and can be harmful or advantageous. Most of them are rare and recessive 

depending on the environment in which the organism lives at a given period. Another 

common term which has a disputed meaning is gene (Thorne, 2012). This contributes to 

inconsistence in learning of genetics which makes it difficult for learners to comprehend. 

2.2.2 Abstract Nature of Genetic Concepts 

Abstract nature of the biological concepts increases the difficulties in teaching and learning 

of genetics. Abstractness in this context means lack of students’ mental representation of 

concepts due to lack of connection between interrelated concepts for understanding genetic 

concepts (Knippels et al.,2005).  

One factor for the abstract nature of genetic concepts is lack of connection between concepts 

(Chattopadhyay, 2005; Knippels, 2005; Cimer, 2012).  Students relate better concepts that 

fall within the same cluster than in different clusters (Mbajiorgu, 2006; Gericke & Wahlberg 

2013). According to Gericke and Wahlberg (2013) a cluster is “a representation of the 

students’ knowledge structures” (p. 73). Teaching of biology requires teachers to focus on 

students’ existing concepts from various clusters in order to make connections with the 

concepts and processes from different levels. For example; in teaching of genetics, students 

should form a physical link with reproduction, genes, chromosomes, DNA and fertilisation 

which all belong to different levels of organisation. Leach and Wood-Robinson (2000) argue 

that abstractness is formed in learners’ mind when they fail to  form a link between basic 

ideas and the relationship of these ideas in teaching separate concepts like variation, cell 

division and inheritance. This creates gaps in learners’ mind as they try to understand and 

make connections between the terms. In the end, difficulties in learning of genetics are 

encountered. 

Abstractness of genetic concepts in the curricula is created if related topics that provide basic 

knowledge to each other are not logically presented (Chattopadhyay, 2005; Haambokoma, 

2007; Cimer, 2012; Gericke & Wahlberg, 2013). Students fail to form a link between 

concepts due to time and gap for teaching different concepts that provide foundational 

knowledge in learning of genetics. Chattopadhyay (2005) and Haambokoma (2007) admit 



Page 8 of 96 
 

that sequencing of topics that are related assists in students developing conceptual 

understanding of genetic concepts. For instance; structuring  meiosis separately to heredity 

creates abstractness because genetics form a rich interaction with the topic of reproduction 

(Tsui & Treagust, 2004; Knippels, 2005). For example; the MSCE biology syllabus  

recommends teaching meiosis in reproduction at form three and heredity at form four. 

Although it is the teachers who make  instructional decisions about the choice of instructional 

content or topic (Abimbola, 1998), the delay and separation of teaching reproduction and 

genetics for  some months or a year makes learners fail to relate the concepts (Knippels, 

2002). If the gap is long, students will have difficulties in relating meiosis to heredity. The 

sequencing of the two related topics by teachers in the MSCE biology syllabus can have 

serious consequences on  learning of genetics if they  are taught in disjunction.  

In teaching and learning of genetics, lack of connection between genes, proteins and  

phenotypes presents abstractness in students’ mind (Eklund, Rogat, Alozie, & Klajcik, 2007). 

Failure to show the importance of proteins in coming up with phenotypes creates inaccurate 

mental models in students when learning genetics (Eklund et al.,2007). For example, the 

MSCE Biology syllabus focuses much on genes and phenotypes without making explicit 

explanation on how phenotype comes about.This can be observed in teaching of sickle cell 

anaemia. Students  fail to connect sickle cell anaemia  to genes responsible for  shape of 

blood cells and their functions in circulatory system. From the example given, abstractness is 

created because learners cannot see the importance of proteins in determining sickle cell 

anaemia. Learners think genes are directly responsible for different characteristics in 

organism without making the conceptual link of genes – proteins – phenotypes which  

ultimately  creates abstractness in  learning of genetics. 

2.2.3 Complex  Nature of Genetic Concepts 

Genetic concepts and processes are complex because they involve different levels of 

organisation. Complexity in this context refers to conceptual problems created in learners’ 

mind because of back and forth thinking between different levels of biological organisation 

of concepts. According to Knippels et al. (2005), genetics involves the following levels of 

organisation: molecular, cellular, organism, population and ecosystem. Knippels et al. (2005) 

argue that “when concepts and processes of a subject belong to different levels of 

organisation, students have difficulties in learning the subject” (p.35). The difficulties arise 

when students fail to explain and draw connections between numerous concepts. The 



Page 9 of 96 
 

complexity is attributed to the demand for learners to think at three levels of thought: macro, 

micro and symbolic level (Bahar, Johnstone & Hansel, 1999; Johnstone, 2006). Concepts at 

the macro level are tangible and therefore easily perceived by human senses without the aid 

of instruments. For example; the ability of an indivdual to roll ones tongue can be easily 

observed. Concepts at the micro level are difficult to understand and perceive by the senses 

(e.g recessive genes for controlling tongue rolling). At the symbolic  level, the concepts are 

represented and manipulated by symbols and mathematical calculations. For example, the 

genes for tongue rolling can be presented symbolically as rr and use mathematical 

calculations to find the ratios and probabilities from the separation of gametes from the 

parents.  

Students face problems in reasoning across these levels as they think backward or forward in 

trying to understand the concepts. They can see and experience events at the molecular level 

unlike the cellular level. At cellular level, they can use the instruments to see some of the 

abstract concepts like chromosomes, genes and DNA but the processes involved in them may 

still be invisible to the them. Failure to relate the processes at the molecular and cellular 

levels to relevant biological phenomena causes complexity in teaching and learning of 

genetics. Marbach- Ad and Stavy (2000) add that students may know the definition of these 

concepts but have no clear understanding about their mechanisms and the processes involved.  

Knippels (2002) in her study on coping with abstract and complex nature of genetics in 

biology education found that in teaching of genetics, teachers do not realise the presence of 

these levels of thought and teach by moving across all levels simultaneously resulting into 

complex problems in understanding of genetic concepts. Thorne (2012) asserts that teachers 

may be able to graduate from one level of thought to the other but learners fail to think 

between these levels.  Teachers’ lack of understanding of different levels of biological 

organisation of concepts and thought contributes to learners finding the teaching and learning 

of genetics difficult. 

2.2.4  Mathematical Problems 

Genetics incorporates the use of mathematics in calculating probabilities for the phenotypic 

and genotypic ratios. Bahar et al. (1999) and Berlingeri & Burrowes (2011) report that studies 

done on integration of biology and mathematics indicate that students fail to apply 

mathematical knowledge in solving  ratios and probability in genetics. Learners and some 



Page 10 of 96 
 

teachers find it difficult to apply the mathematical concept of probability to calculation of 

probability in segregation of gamates into phenotypes and genotypes. 

Knippels (2002) argues that the use of symbols and mathematical calculations in genetics 

does not connect with real biological phenomena like heterozygotes, genes or homozygote. 

Robeva, Davies, Hodge & Enyedi (2010) opine that the root cause of mathematical problems 

in solving genetic problems is that most Biology curricula do not emphasize the role of 

mathematical knowledge. Berlingeri & Burrowes (2011) affirms that the literature on the 

effect of integrating or using mathematics in teaching and learning of biology is scanty as few 

research has been done on the topic area. Despite less research being done on the integration 

of mathematics and biology, Ŝorgo (2010) urges for the need of scientists to intergrate 

mathematics and biology and introduce suitable pedagogical models that can fuse 

mathematical and biological content knowledge to produce expert biology teachers who can 

teach mathematics integrated into biology. Berlingeti & Burrowes (2010) argue that 

mathematics integrated into biology can be useful in research for analyzing biological data 

that assists in predicting models and biological processes at various levels of organization.   

2.2.5 Misconceptions in Text Books, Learners and Teachers 

Teaching of genetics is associated with numerous misconceptions in textbooks, teachers and 

learners which contribute to difficulties in teaching and learning of the topic (Thorne, 2012). 

Misconceptions, according to Karagoz & Cakir (2011) are conceptual patterns that learners 

have and use for understadning of scientifc concepts which are contradictory to meanings 

widely accepted by the scientifc community.  

Learners have inconsistent  ideas acquired through experience when interacting with their 

environment through physical activities, conversations, media and formal education (Driver, 

Guesne, & Tiberglien.,1985a; Karagoz & Cakir, 2011). These inconsistent ideas require that 

instruction should strike a dissonance in learners’ mind  and eliminate them (Smith, diSessa 

& Roschelle, 1993). 

For instructional process to be effecive, teachers need to identify these misconceptions in 

learners and eliminate them because they interefere with understanding of genetic concepts. 

Andrews, Leornad, Colgrove & Kalinowski (2011) admit that science teaching can constantly 

maintanin misconceptions in learners if  classroom instruction is not aimed at eliciting  

misconceptions and prior knowledge of the learners. Tanner & Allen (2005) warn that 



Page 11 of 96 
 

misconceptions can adhere in learners’ mind and impede effective learning of genetics even 

after being presented with expert knowledge. It is these established misconceptions in 

learners which impede learning of genetics if teachers are not aware of their existence. 

Textbooks are important educational source of knowledge in biology, although they present 

an obstacle to learning of genetics. Critical studies on genetics (Knippels, 2002; Dougherty, 

2009) show that textbooks contain many misconceptions in definitions of technical terms. 

One of the genetic terms commonly misrepresented in different textbooks is the gene 

(Thorne, 2012). Gericke & Wahlberg (2013) express worry over lack of clarification or 

reaching a consensus over the meaning of gene by most textbooks. Varied meanings in 

genetic terms increase the confusion in understanding of genetic terms. 

Misconceptions manifest in science teachers who then pass them to their learners. Tanner & 

Allen (2005) in their study about approaches to biology teaching and learning reported that 

misconceptions are widespread in most professionals in teaching of science. Similar findings 

were reported by  Bowling et al. (2008) in their study on determining effects of introductory 

biology and genetic courses on students’ genetic knowledge that high school students and 

undergraduate students possess a lot of misconceptions in genetics.The findings by Tanner & 

Allen (2005) and Bowling et al. (2008) reveal that some Biology teachers subscribe to 

misconceptions and pass them to students they teach. Liang & Gabel (2012) claim that 

teaching of science remains a critical concern to many education systems because science 

teachers feel incompetent to teach science as their content knowledge is full of 

misconceptions. 

 

2.3  Strategies for Teaching Genetics  

2.3.1 Demonstration 

Demonstration method involves using few students to show to the whole class how certain 

phenomena work (Hackathorn et al., 2011). Crouch et al. (2004) contend that if students are 

actively engaged in a demonstration, it yields more positive results than making them watch 

the teacher doing the demonstration. Hackathorn et al. (2011) concede that demonstration is a 

good method that makes learners have first hand information on how certain phenomena 

work. It also arouses the interest or motivation of learners as they gain experience in working 

with certain concepts in genetics. Adekoya & Olatoye (2011) add that demonstration should 



Page 12 of 96 
 

cater for active participation of learners, sensory involvement and help learners to see, hear 

and experience the phenomena. 

In teaching of genetics, demonstration method can be used in teaching challenging concepts 

by demonstrating how they work through use of charts or simulations (Hackathorn et al. 

2011). For example, if learners have problems in understanding the separation of gametes in 

drawing of crosses, as a biology teacher, I can use demonstration to show how gametes 

separate using beans as teaching aids. In a demonstration activtiy like this one, one may give 

learners say twenty beans of two different colours and ask those learners to pair them by 

taking them from the bag without looking at them. Later, students can observe the pairs and 

categorise them as either homozygous or heterozygous. Basing on the colour outcome, 

concepts like phenotypes and genotypes can be defined using the outcome. Such type of 

demonstration can be useful in enhancing understanding of concepts like  homozygous, 

heterozygous, phenotypes, segregation of gametes and the laws of independet assortment. 

Such  involvement of learners  will motivate students to learn, encourage group cooperation, 

increase retention of the knowledge and make learners discover concepts on their own. 

This method guided this study by observing how learners were involved in demonstrations to 

develop understanding and higher order thinking skills on how certain phenomena works.   

2.3.2 Group Work 

In group work, the teacher engages students by giving them activities to discuss in their 

groups and report to the whole class (Adekoya & Olatoye, 2011). This method of teaching by 

focusing on social interaction has proved to yield meaningful learning (Liang& Gabel, 2012). 

The strategy depends on the social interaction between learner to learner through the teacher 

as the facilitator of learning. Lord (2001) agrees that dividing learners into small groups 

where they socially interact assists in comprehension of concepts for longer period of time. In 

these small groups, learners are free to ask questions and speak freely as they feel to be part 

of the group. Their active involvement makes them feel their in-puts are valued and 

respected. 

In teaching of difficult genetic concepts, group work can help the learners to attain higher 

reasoning skills, motivation, develop positive attitude, increases self-esteem, collaborative 

skills and increased conceptual understanding which can lead to reduction of misconceptions 

(Liang & Gabel, 2012; Erdogan & Campbell, 2008). Attainment of higher reasoning skills 



Page 13 of 96 
 

and deeper understanding of concepts will equip the learners with skills for dealing with 

some difficult genetic concepts like application of mathematical skills in solving percentages 

and ratios in monohybrid crosses. The method also has the advantage of providing room for 

learners to explore issues of interest, ideas and opinions on their own ( Hackthorn at al., 

2011). In the end, learners are motivated and feel that their ideas and voices are valued in the 

learning of genetics. 

Using group work in the Malawian setting would be important to the learners as it would 

increase their motivation towards learning of genetics, attainment of higher reasoning skills 

and collaborative skills which can be useful in solving genetic problems at community level. 

This is possible because the biology MSCE syllabus is based on constructivist approaches in 

its goals, content, strategies and assessment (MoEST, 2001). For example, if students have 

difficulties in understanding how certain traits such as haemophilia are passed from 

generation to generation, as a biology teacher, I can form smaller groups and give them a tree 

diagram illustrating the inheritance of haemophilia and ask them to discuss how it was passed 

from generation to generation. Such small group discussions for solving a challenging task, 

according to Lord (2001), make learners to develop deeper understanding of the concepts 

besides reducing misconceptions as learners test the fitness of their knowledge. It also helps 

learners to socially construct their own understanding which makes them feel valued and 

engaged in the teaching and learning process.   

Such an approach and use of strategy guided this study in the understanding of how observed 

teachers used group work in solving difficult genetic concepts to help learners attain higher 

levels of thinking, elimination of misconceptions and construction of knowledge through 

social milieu. 

2.3.3 Question and Answer 

The question and answer method is a two way process. It involves  the teacher asking 

questions to the learners for the purpose of checking their understanding on the concepts 

taught and the learners asking question to fill the knowledge gap (Chin & Osborne, 2008). 

Questions stimulate students’ thinking and also help in arousing pupils’ interest and curiosity. 

Good questions help learners develop the ability to speak very fluently. Cimer (2007) asks for 

teachers to ask open ended questions compared to closed questions because it caters for 

independent thinking and makes the learners to be actively involved in the lesson. Dickson 

(2005) adds that open ended questions encourage meaningful discussion and lead to real 



Page 14 of 96 
 

problem solving approach. Open ended questions give room for learners to explore various 

possible answers to a question in solving problems than encouraging them to memorise a 

single answer to a problem.  Mudau (2013) urges teachers to refrain from using test questions 

that make the teacher to be dismissive of alternative answers to the question instilling in 

learners that there is only one answer to the question put.  

In the teaching of genetics, question and answer method can be used to teach challenging 

concepts by stimulating learners’ interest and curiosity through the asking of questions which 

directly relate to their life. This will help in addressing learners misconceptions which will 

lead to new knowledge if properly used. For example, the following question may be posed:  

if a father belongs to blood group A and a mother belongs to blood AB. The offspring is 

blood group O. Using crosses; verify if the man is the real father of the offspring. Learners 

will be expected to draw various crosses involving the expected genotype of A and AB. This 

type of question would capture learners’ interest because it would additionally help them in 

trying to sort out issues of pregnancies which are prevalent among the youth. In solving the 

problem, they will develop interest in seeing how they can resolve such problems, eliminate 

misconceptions on drawing of crosses and develop their own thinking in drawing crosses to 

verify such cases happening in the community. 

The question and answer model guided this study in assessing how the observed teachers 

used the question and answer technique in developing interest in learners and how learners 

applied the concepts in solving personal or community problems. It also guided on observing 

how teachers probed deeper after students’ responses to enhance explanation of concepts, 

structuring of questions to provoke higher order thinking skills and how they summarize 

complicated or unclear answers to questions posed.  

 

2.4  Theoretical Framework  

This study was guided by pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) theory. The pioneer of 

PCK, Shulman (1986), defined it “as teachers’ interpretation and transformation of subject 

matter knowledge in the context of facilitating student learning” (p.9). In Shulman’s 

understanding, PCK includes the recognition of what makes specific topics difficult to learn, 

the potential student learning difficulties and student prior knowledge of specific concepts as 

well as the most effective strategies for facilitating student learning. For this study, the PCK 



Page 15 of 96 
 

model by Magnusson, Crajcik & Borko (1999), which has its foundation to earlier PCK 

models by Shulman (1986) and Grossman (1990) was chosen. It was chosen because it is 

useful in studying topic specific teaching difficulties and it is widely used in science research 

on teaching specific topics in education like genetics (Wongsopawiro, 2012; Mudau 2013). 

The Magnusson et al.(1999) PCK model has five components: knowledge and beliefs about 

orientations to science teaching, student understanding of specific science topics, 

representation, instructional strategies and assessment and curriculum.  

 

Magnusson et al. (1999; p. 97) defines orientation to teaching science (OTS) “as teachers’ 

knowledge and beliefs about purposes and goals for teaching the topic at a particular grade 

level.” In this study, the orientation towards genetics teaching are general  teachers’ views 

towards teaching of genetics at MSCE level developed through background experience, 

teacher preparation programs and teaching experience (Lankford, 2010). It includes nine 

orientations: activity-driven, didactic, discovery, conceptual change, academic rigor, process, 

project-based, inquiry, and guided inquiry (Magnusson et al., 1999). OTS guides teachers’ 

thinking in making instructional decisions and practice. In the study, it helped the researcher 

in assessing how the teachers made instructional decisions on selecting strategies and 

purposes for using it in teaching difficult genetic concepts.  

 

The second component is knowledge of areas of student difficulties and requirements for 

learning. Magnusson et.al. (1999) state that teachers’ knowledge of student difficulty 

encampasses teachers’ understanding of the likely difficulties, preconceptions and 

misconceptions in learning specific content. Learning requirements are skills and prior 

knowledge necessary for learning genetics. This component contributed in the analysis of 

data by understanding how teachers prepare for difficulties likely to be faced by learners, 

identify learners’ misconceptions and use of prior knowledge in teaching a challenging 

concepts.  

 

The third component is teachers’ knowledge of instructional strategies. Freidrich et.al.  

(2005) define instructional strategy “as approaches and activities teachers choose to support 

student learning; where activities are instructional events the teacher uses in the class to teach 

specific lessons”(p.25) The choice of instructional strategy depends on the teachers’ 

experience on teaching the concept to determine its effetiveness on learners understanding 

(Magnusson et.al., 1999). This includes teachers’ belief about the function of the strategy and 



Page 16 of 96 
 

its impact on learners’ acquisition of concepts. This component was used in analysing how 

the four teachers used instructional strategies to teach difficult concepts that make it 

comprehensible to learners. In selection of participants for the study, the concept of 

experience was used as one of the judgemental factors in identifying participants for the 

study. 

Knowledge of the content area to be assessed, ways and tools used is the fourth component of 

the model. In this study, it included attempts by the teacher to assess learners’ progress to 

determine the effectiveness of the strategy.  During data analysis, this component contributed 

in analysing how teachers evaluated the effectiveness of the strategies on teaching a 

challenging concept for learners’ understanding. 

The last component is the teachers’ subject matter knowledge (SMK).  SMK informs the 

selection of appropriate goals, teaching and learning materials, identification of difficult 

concepts, strategies for teaching difficult concepts and the scope of the content to be covered 

(Magnusson et al.,1999; Friedrichsen et al., 2007). The component was useful in analysing 

the PCK of the teacher in his or her selection of content area, teaching and learning materials, 

and strategy. It was also used in selecting participants for the study.  

2.5  Research Paradigm 

A paradigm consists of  the basic set of beliefs or assumptions that guide the approach to an 

investigation (Guba & Lincoln 1994; Frankel & Norman 2000).  My study was situated in an 

interpretive (constructivist) paradigm. Interpretive paradigm is based on the belief that 

multiple realities exist due to attachment of different meaning by individuals to one 

phenomenon under study or observation (Henning, 2004). 

In this study, an assumption was made  that biology teachers attach multiple understandings 

to strategies for teaching difficult genetic concepts based on their understanding of the 

teaching strategy or difficult genetic concepts. To understand those varied meanings to 

teaching difficult genetic concepts, I visited the teaching environment and interacted with the 

biology teachers.This was done to obtain data through observation and description of the 

subjects’ belief, values, intentions and self understanding attached to the teaching of genetics. 

 



Page 17 of 96 
 

Data was collected through naturalistic methods like observation and interviews. 

Methodology is the overall approach to research linked to the paradigm or theoretical 

framework (Punch, 2009). Methodology influence the whole research by revealing what 

constitutes the nature of reality under study, the knowledge of reality and eventually guiding 

the researcher on the methodology of synthesizing knowledge of that reality (Henning, 2004). 

In order to construct meaningful reality about the strategies for teaching challenging genetic 

concepts, obseravtion of the strategies for teaching difficult genetic concepts was done in 

their natural environment. This also helped the researcher to hear from the teachers about the  

genetic concepts that are difficult to teach and why they use certain strategies in teaching the 

difficult genetic concepts.  

The Interpretive paradigm was chosen because it made it possible to have direct contact with 

the participants in their natural settings and hear from them about the strategies for teaching 

challenging genetic concepts. Cohen, Mario and Mourisson (2007) say   that “the central 

endeavour in the interpretive paradigm is to understand the subjective world of human 

experience”( p.225). This study aimed at making an effort to get inside the biology teachers 

and understand from within the person and place of practice on strategies used for teaching 

challenging genetic concepts. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page 18 of 96 
 

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 

3.0  Introduction 

The aim of the study was to investigate strategies that Malawian biology teachers use to teach 

difficult genetics concepts. In this chapter, I describe the methodology used, instruments for 

data collection, research geographical area, population sample, data analysis technique, 

trustworthiness of the study and ethical consideration.  

3.1  Research design 

The research used a case study approach in understanding the strategies for teaching difficult 

genetic concepts. Yin (2003) defines a case study as a program, an event or activity bounded 

in time and place. It employs multiple sources of data collection in the real environment of 

the study like interviews, document analysis and observation. Tayie (2005) asserts that a case 

study is useful in understanding a single phenomenon like strategies for teaching difficult 

genetic concepts. This was a case study of four teachers expressing their views on difficult 

genetic concepts, strategies for teaching difficult genetic concepts and rationale for using the 

described strategy in teaching difficult genetic concepts. 

 

Case study was adopted because it provided rich information on strategies for teaching 

difficult genetic concepts through numerous sources of data collection. In addition, I heard 

and evaluated a variety of case teachers’ perspectives in their natural setting. This helped me 

to gain deeper understanding on the difficulties biology teachers face in teaching difficult 

genetic concepts.  Yin (2003) and Tayie (2005) assert that such approach makes the 

researcher gain a complete picture of the problem under study. 

 

3.2  Research Geographical Area 

This research was conducted in Mzimba district in the northern region of Malawi. The study 

was conducted in four secondary schools south of the district. I chose Mzimba South because 

of its proximity to the researcher and had secondary schools with qualified and experienced 

teachers. 

 



Page 19 of 96 
 

3.3  Sample 

This study used a sample of four teachers from government secondary schools in Mzimba 

South District as shown in Table 3.1. Government secondary school teachers were chosen 

because it was easy to access them and they possessed the required qualifications.  

Table 3.1: Teachers’ profile 

 Pseudonym Qualification Experience  Case Name 

Mary  Degree in Ed. 3 Case A 

John  Diploma in Ed 7 Case B 

Angelina  Diploma in Ed. 10 Case C 

Samuel  Degree in Ed. 8 Case D 

 

To select the four teachers who participated in this study, I used convenience and purposive 

sampling. Cohen et al. (2007) states that convenience sampling involves choosing the nearest 

participants that are willing to provide the information. The schools chosen were easy to 

reach because of their proximity to the researcher’s base and had teachers who were more 

than willing to take part in the study.  

 

Purposive sampling, according to Cohen et al. (2007), involves selecting participants based 

on the researcher’s judgement about certain characteristics being sought to meet the 

objectives of the study. In this study, purposive sampling was used in selecting teachers with 

experience and the required qualification within school settings. I chose those biology 

teachers who had more than three years of teaching experience and in possession of a 

diploma or degree in education at the time of data collection. The choice of both qualified 

and experienced teacher was because of the knowledge and experience of teaching 

accumulated within the teaching practice in classroom situations. Loughran, Mulhall & Berry 

(2008) assert that “so much of the knowledge of teaching is implicit in experienced teacher’s 

teaching” (p.1302). The three years of teaching for the case teachers was deemed enough for 

one to develop experience and PCK for teaching a challenging topic like genetics.  

 



Page 20 of 96 
 

The choice of diploma or degree in education or basic degree with a certificate in education 

was based on the assumption that the courses equipped the sampled teachers with the 

necessary subject matter knowledge (SMK) for teaching genetics at secondary school level. 

Also, the entry qualification for a government secondary school teacher in Malawi is diploma 

or degree in education (Government Teaching Service Commission, 2001). 

3.4  Data Collection Methods and Instruments 

3.4.1 Interviews 

Structured interviews were used for collection of data on difficult concepts, reasons for using 

a described strategy and strategies for teaching a difficult concept. Structured interview 

involves the researcher asking a set of pre-arranged questions using the same wording and 

order as illustrated in the interview schedule (Kumar 1999). In this study, each case teacher 

was interviewed using an interview schedule (see Appendix 1) as an instrument for data 

collection. It contained open-ended questions which made the participants to open up on the 

challenges they face in teaching genetics 

The interview process was divided into two: first, teachers were interviewed before observing 

them teaching two of the genetic concepts identified. The initial interview focused on 

identifying difficult genetic concepts and the strategies used in teaching those concepts 

identified as challenging to teach. The second interview was done after the last lesson 

observation to seek clarification for using a certain stratergy for teaching a challenging 

genetic concept. The order was pre-interview - lesson observation - post interview.  

The interviews were recorded verbatim using a blackberry phone. The phone was first piloted 

on two teachers to learn the basic operation of the machine. The phone had the advantage of 

recording the whole interview and provided complete data for analysis. Furthermore, it was 

possible to concentrate on asking and listening without disturbing the interviewee through 

writing short notes. 

The interview technique was chosen because provided rich information about difficult 

concepts, reasons why the identified concepts were difficult, strategies for teaching the 

identified concepts and rationale for using a described strategy. Structured interviews enabled 

the interviewee to reveal their opinions, values, motivations, recollections and experience 

about strategies for teaching genetics and interpreted it according to their own point of view. 

This was possible by asking them open ended questions and follow up questions to probe 



Page 21 of 96 
 

more explanation on the concepts discussed. For example, one of the open-ended questions 

was as follows, “Apart from using question- and- answer for involving learners, what was the 

other reason for using it?”  Tayie (2005) and Cohen et al.(2007) add that structured interview 

makes interviewee to provide for their actions in words while Creswell (2003) argues that it 

helps in obtaining specific data in a very short space of time 

Ethical considerations were followed in conducting the interview and audio taping. 

Permission was granted by the head teachers and the participating teachers to be interviewed 

and audio-taped. Each participating teacher signed a consent form to accept his/her 

participation in the study. All four teachers consulted agreed to take part in the study. The 

participating teachers were also given a chance at the end of the interview to listen to the 

taped interview so that they could make any changes that they thought were not supposed to 

have been said.  

3.4.2 Observation of Lessons 

Lesson observation was another method used for collecting data. Observation method 

according to Kumar (1999) is “a purposeful, systematic and selective way of watching and 

listening to an interaction or phenomenon as it takes place” (p.105). In the study, lesson 

observation was done by video-recording of genetics lessons and taking of field notes to 

supplement the video recording. Two lessons per teacher were observed to triangulate the 

strategies used to teach challenging genetic concepts. The researcher was a complete or 

passive observer in that he did not take part in the activities of the group being observed 

(Kumar,1999). By adopting complete observation, I was able to observe the classroom events 

as they unfolded, including the unusual practices in the teaching and learning of biology 

(Creswell, 2003).  

Video recording was chosen because it enabled me to view the recordings several times 

before making a final conclusion on the analysed data. In addition, it gave room for fairness 

on the conclusion made as you can invite other professionals to view the tape before making 

the conclusion (Kumar, 1999). Creswell (2003) adds that it helps in observing the 

information as presented and gives the researcher access to first-hand information in their 

natural settings. 

However, the observation method has its own shortfalls. One shortfall is that participants may 

opt to change their behaviour if they realise that they are being observed (Creswell, 2003). 



Page 22 of 96 
 

This can lead to the data collected not to represent the true picture of the phenomena under 

study. The purpose of the research may also not be met if the researcher lacks observation 

skills. To improve on skills of observation, I piloted the video recording machine by 

practicing to focus on necessary information in the lesson. 

Ethical procedures were followed in collecting video data by getting consent to conduct the 

study in the four schools from the Educational Divisional Manager (EDM) and the 

coordinator for Masters of Education in Teacher Education program. Permission was also 

sought from the head teachers and participating teachers to allow the lessons to be video 

recorded.  Each participating teacher signed a consent form to be videotaped in two lessons 

that the teacher identified as challenging to teach. Learners were informed about the intent of 

the video recording by their biology teacher and were assured of their safety in the pictures 

taken at all stages of the research process. 

3.5   Issues of Trustworthiness and Credibility 

Credibility and trustworthiness of this study was attained through a pilot study, triangulation 

and confirmability. 

3.5.1 Pilot Study 

A pilot study was conducted to establish the effectiveness of the instruments in collection of 

data for the research. The pilot study was done in one of the secondary schools in Mzimba 

south district. The video tape recorder and blackberry phone were piloted to gain experience 

in operating them. Another reason for piloting the machines and the interview schedule guide 

was to check its effectiveness in achieving the objectives of the research. The pilot study 

revealed that the questions on post-observation interview were not directing the respondents 

to give reasons for using a strategy in their observed lesson. Modifications were made by 

recasting the questions to identify the strategies observed in the lesson for the interviewee to 

give reasons for using them.   

3.5.2 Triangulation 

Golafshani (2003) defines triangulation as evaluating the findings of the study from two or 

more sources of data. This study employed more than one source of data collection to attain 

the credibility of the study. Data from interview was triangulated with data from the 



Page 23 of 96 
 

classroom observation to check the credibility of the information provided by the teachers on 

the strategies used in teaching challenging genetic concepts.  

3.5.3 Confirmability 

Confirmability in qualitative research ensures that the data collected is not affected by the 

researchers’ biasness and preferences but a true reflection of the experiences and ideas of the 

informants (Shenton, 2004). It involves the researcher justifying the selection of one 

approach to the other and explaining all cases of biasness. In this study, all cases of negative 

impact on the research outcome were explained. For instance, justification for choosing one 

approach over the other and weakness of the approach were thoroughly explained.  

This research paper was constantly given to biology experts at Mzuzu University and 

Department for Teacher Education (DTED) in the Ministry of Education Science and 

Technology (MoEST) to check the content on genetics and the research process. This enabled 

the researcher to produce a research paper that is credible and trustworthy by improving the 

study with the input provided.  

The debriefing sessions opened room for me to consider other people’s experience and 

perceptions into the study which helped to gather credible data. To enhance trustworthiness 

of this study, peers and academics scrutinised the proposal for this report and made their own 

critiques. The critiques were capitalised as a tool for scrutiny of the work towards originality 

because my proximity to the study could have easily inhibited critical analysis of the study. 

Procedures for the research methodology and analysis were all thoroughly explained and 

discussions on the findings of the study were supported with evidence. The researcher 

separated his own interpretation of the data from that of the four teachers. This was done by 

using direct quotes from the relevant section of the data so as to emphasize a point that was 

considered necessary. 

3.6  Data Analysis 

3.6.1 Interview Data 

The data from interviews was transcribed verbatim following the order of the interview 

schedule. The transcription was done by replaying the audio interview several times in order 

to transcribe the right information and maintain accuracy of the information transcribed.  Key 



Page 24 of 96 
 

points were identified from the transcribed data through repeated reading. The key points 

were coded by assigning an abbreviation to each and encircled using a red ballpoint pen. The 

abbreviations, meanings and their examples are shown in the Table 3.2 below; 

Table 3.2 Abbreviations for coding interview data 

Abbreviation Meaning Examples 

DC difficult concept Homologous, meiosis 

St Strategy Group work  

RT Rationale Involvement, assessment 

HCD How is the concept difficult Abstractness, terminology 

 

The codes from interview data were grouped and categories were formed. The categories 

were later developed into themes for the research study. 

3.6.2 Video Data 

Video recordings were also transcribed verbatim by playing the video repeatedly in order to 

transcribe with accuracy. Key strategies were coded from the transcript by assigning an 

abbreviation to the strategy and encircling it using red ballpoint pen. The video recording was 

done to triangulate the results from the pre-interview on the strategies for teaching difficult 

genetic concepts. Excerpts from the transcribed data were presented in the research report. 

Table 3.3 shows the abbreviations that were used in coding video data. 

Table 3.3 Abbreviations for coding video recording data  

 

Abbreviations Meaning Category 

GP Group work Strategy for teaching a difficult 

Q&A Question and answer  

PBS Problem Solving   

LC Lecture  

EX Experiment  

 

The analysed data from both interview and video recording was presented as a case each 

following the order of the research objectives. The codes from both sources of data were 

grouped and categories were formed. The categories were later developed into themes for the 



Page 25 of 96 
 

research study. Three themes from the objectives of the study were pre –determined as 

follows: difficult genetic concepts, strategies for teaching difficult genetic concepts and 

reasons for using the described strategies in teaching difficult genetic concepts. This was 

done to save time on categorising of the data. In reporting the findings, all teachers’ real 

names were replaced by pseudonyms for ethical purposes.  

3.7  Ethical Considerations 

All information provided by the four teachers in this study was treated with complete secrecy 

and restricted to the purpose of this study alone. Participants were also assured that they were 

free to stop participating in this study anytime they felt necessary. The right to privacy of the 

four teachers and their schools was upheld as all subjects of the study were kept anonymous 

throughout the study. Pseudonyms were used instead of real names for teachers and schools 

in the report. Lastly, consent and permission to conduct the study in the selected secondary 

schools was granted by Northern Education Division. Participating teachers were assured of 

their confidentiality by signing a consent form (see Appendix 5) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page 26 of 96 
 

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

 

4.0  Introduction 

This section presents the results and discussion of the findings. The results are presented and 

discussed on a case-by-case basis because it was assumed that each teacher understands the 

strategies for teaching difficult genetic concepts differently. The presentation is guided by the 

research objectives which were:  

1. To identify  concepts in genetics that pose teaching challenges to Malawian biology 

teachers 

2. To describe strategies that Malawian biology teachers use in addressing teaching 

challenges in genetics 

3. To explain why Malawian biology teachers choose the described strategy.  

4.1  Case A 

4.1.0 Introduction 

Mary was interviewed before lesson observation to identify the concepts she finds 

challenging to teach in MSCE genetics and strategies that she uses for teaching the 

challenging concepts. Later, I observed Mary teaching two of the genetic concepts identified 

as difficult. The first lesson observed was on co-dominance and the second lesson was on 

incomplete dominance. After the two lesson observations, I met Mary for a post- interview 

observation to seek clarification on why she used the strategies observed in her lessons. 

 

4.1.1 Difficult Genetic Concepts 

In the pre-observation interview, Mary was asked about challenging concepts that pose 

teaching difficulties in genetics. The excerpt below shows how Mary responded to the 

question:  

Researcher: Are there any concepts in MSCE genetics that you find challenging to 

teach? 

Mary: Very much. Terms like homozygous, heterozygous, genotype, phenotype, 

gene, allele, dominance, co- dominance and incomplete dominance bring confusion in 

learners and teachers. It is very hard for learners to understand them from the first day 



Page 27 of 96 
 

of the lesson as indicated from the syllabus. It is challenging for me as a teacher and 

students to clearly demarcate the meaning and apply them in real life situations 

because they sound and look alike. Even their meanings are confusing because they 

relate much to each other. Apart from the terminology part, it is also challenging to 

explain co-dominance and in-complete dominance where you have inheritance of 

anaemia, sickle cell anaemia which gives hard times for teachers to explain, therefore 

hard for learners to comprehend. 

From the interview, Mary seems to face challenges in teaching concepts like homozygous, 

heterozygous, genotype, phenotype, gene, allele, co-dominance and incomplete dominance. 

The problem lay in explaining the terms apparently because learners were confusing the 

terms as they sounded and looked alike. These findings correlate with what Thornes (2012) 

and Knippels et al. (2005) reported that some genetics terms like meiosis, mitosis, 

homologous, homozygote, and homologue bring confusion because they sound and look 

similar in their use. The teacher also found it hard to thoroughly explain co-dominance and 

incomplete dominance because of the nature of the two concepts making it hard for the 

learners to understand and apply them in real life situations.  

4.1.2 Strategies for Teaching  Challenging Concepts in Genetics 

After Mary identified the concepts that posed challenges for teaching genetics, I asked her 

about the strategies she uses to addresses those challenges. Below is an excerpt on the 

strategies Mary would use in teaching challenging concepts:  

Researcher:  Tell me about the strategies that you use to teach challenging concepts  

                      in MSCE genetics? 

Mary: I try to relate what happens in everyday life to the concepts of genetics. Apart 

from that I make use of problem solving approach by giving learners much 

work on the concepts learnt to make them have an idea of what happens in real 

life situations. 

From the excerpt above, Mary’s strategies attempted to make learners transfer knowledge 

from the classroom to the outside world for solving problems. One method she said would 

use was problem solving. Mary’s goal for teaching genetics was to assist learners to relate 

what is taught in class to the outside world.  She emphasised that her lessons were student-

centred and used problem solving approach in teaching genetic challenging concepts. 



Page 28 of 96 
 

 

After the pre-observation interview, I asked Mary to observe her teaching two of the 

challenging concepts identified. Mary accepted to the request. The first lesson was on co-

dominance and the second on in-complete dominance. Below is an excerpt on her first lesson 

on co-dominance:  

Teacher: What did we learn in our last lesson? 

Student M: Test cross  

Teacher: What did I say is a test cross? 

Student F: It is when the genotype of one organism is known while the genotype of         

                  the other organism is not known. 

Teacher: I said when you have an organism with known genotype such as recessive  

organism, you cross it with an organism of unknown genotype. For 

example, you can do a test cross using horns in cattle. Presence of horns is 

represented as a dominant character in cattle. It can be represented in two 

forms: Hh and HH. The recessive character can be represented by hh. You 

can cross an organism of unknown genotype with a recessive genotype to 

identify its genotype using a test cross. After class, go to the library and 

read about test cross. Today, our lesson will be on co-dominance.  

Teacher:  What is co-dominance? 

Student J: It is a condition when both genes have an effect on the phenotype of an  

       organism. 

Teacher: Yes. It is when both genes have an effect on the phenotype of an  

      individual. What can be examples of co-dominance in plants? 

Student M: Variegated leaf. 

Teacher: Yes, in variegated leaf we have whitish and greenish patches. It meant  

     both genes had equal effects on the phenotype of the leaf. 

Teacher: In our lesson today, we are going to look at co-dominance by working with   

inheritance of blood groups in human beings as an example. Blood group is 

determined by presence of antigens on the surface of the red blood cells. A 

person with A antigen on the red blood cells belong to blood group A, 

while B antigens belong to blood group B. Absence of both antigens A and 



Page 29 of 96 
 

B belongs to blood group O. We inherited blood groups from parents based 

on the gene combinations of A, B or O. 

          Teacher: Genotypes for blood groups can be written as follows: 

          Blood group A can be presented as AA or AO or IAIA or IAi. 

          Blood group B can be presented as BB or BO or IBIB or IBi 

          Blood group O can be written as OO or ii 

          Blood group AB can be written as AB or IAIB 

Teacher: A woman with blood group A is married to a man with blood group AB. A  

               child born from them is blood group O. Find out if the man is a legitimate    

               father of the child?  

Teacher: The person with blood group A can have the following genotypes; AA or  

               AO while AB can have AB and a child with O blood group can have OO.   

               Use these genotypes to solve the problem given by using the cross in    

               Figure 4.1. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.1: Mary’s first example on drawing crosses for blood groups 

Teacher: From the crossing, the woman’s claim is not true that the man with AB 

blood group was the father of the child. Explain why the man is not the 

father of the child? 

Learners: Because there is no child with blood group O born from the crossing. 

Teacher: The other possibilities can be crossing the genotype of a man with blood    

group B married to the woman with blood group AA to have a child with           

blood group O. This time, let’s cross genotypes of a father with blood group 

B as shown in Figure 4.2 

AA AB 

A A A B 

AA AB AB AA 

× 

    Man Woman 

Meiosis 

Parents’ genotype 

Gametes 

F1generation 

Fertilisation 



Page 30 of 96 
 

 Teacher:  What is the genotypic combination of the father with blood group B?  

 Learners: BO or BB 

 Teacher:  Drawing a cross for AA   × BB as shown in Figure 4.2 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.2:  Mary’s second example on drawing crosses for blood  

       Groups 

 

Teacher: What is the outcome of the off-springs?  

Student K:  it is not possible for the child to be born with blood group O.  

Teacher: Let’s try drawing the cross of AA × BO as shown in Figure 4.3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

                    Figure 4.3: Mary’s third example on drawing crosses for blood    

                   groups  

Teacher:  Can the combination produce a child with blood group O? 

AA

AA 
BB 

B B A A 

AB AB AB AB 

Man Woman 

Parents’ genotype 

Gametes 

Meiosis 

Fertilisation 

F1 generation 

× 

AA BO 

O B A A 

AB AO AB AO 

Man Woman 

Parents’ genotype 

Gametes 

Meiosis 

Fertilisation 

F1 generation 

× 



Page 31 of 96 
 

Student Y:  The man with heterozygote genotype BO was supposed to be the father        

          of the child. 

The lesson ended by giving the students homework assignment as a form of problem solving 

approach. 

Teacher: What are the possible blood groups likely to be inherited from parents of       

                blood group A and B father? Explain your reasons. 

 

From the excerpt above, the lesson observation shows that Mary used question and answer, 

demonstration, teacher explanation and problem solving approach to teach the concept of co-

dominance. Demonstration method dominated the lesson. In demonstration, the teacher used 

three similar examples to show to learners how crosses involving blood groups are drawn. 

The demonstrations did not give some students a chance to draw the crosses to show to the 

whole class. She did most of the work in the classroom with students periodically involved. 

The implementation of the methods was not in line with how demonstration method should 

be implemented. Hackathorn et al. (2011) advices that demonstration should involve few 

students showing to the whole class how a phenomenon works. From the excerpts of the 

lesson above, Mary is doing most of the talking and demonstration on how to draw crosses. 

Cimer (2012) in his study on what makes biology difficult and effective reported similar 

findings that most biology teachers just talk and transfer theoretical knowledge that lacks 

proper application to daily lives of learners. The implementation of the strategy was 

incongruity with the goals she had of helping learners transfer the knowledge to other 

context. Cimer (2012) argues that traditional methods of teaching science where the teacher 

talks and transfers knowledge does not help learners to transfer knowledge to new context. 

Therefore, the method used by Mary did not assist the learners in transferring the knowledge 

to other context because she dominated in the lesson. Modell, Michael & Wendereth (2005) 

request teachers to create conducive learning environments where learners will be able to test 

and reshape their mental models without necessarily providing them with theoretical 

knowledge. In effective implementation of demonstration, the teacher was supposed to give 

students opportunities to work with the problems given by solving them on their own with the 

teacher as a facilitator. 

 

Question and answer method accompanied the demonstration method in teaching the 

concepts of co-dominance and in-complete dominance. Mary used question and answer to 

assess if students were following what she was teaching. Students were also asking questions 



Page 32 of 96 
 

to seek further explanations from the teacher. Most of the questions asked by Mary were test 

questions that demanded obvious answers to her questions. Mudau (2013) asserts that test 

questions make the teacher to be dismissive of alternative answers to the question, instilling 

in learners that there is only one answer to the question put. Test questions encourage 

memorisation of concepts which does not activate cognitive and skills development in 

learners. Dickson (2005) advises that teachers should be encouraged to use open ended 

questions that encourage meaningful discussion and lead to real problem solving approach.  

Mary also used problem solving approach in her lessons. Problem solving is a teaching 

technique where learners are left on their own solving a problem with minimum guidance 

from the teacher (Warnich & Meyer, 2013). The problem solving approach observed in 

Mary’s lessons was full of practicing, making the learners to learn by experience which 

encouraged memorisation of concepts. Freitas, Jiménez, & Mellado (2004) call such type of 

problem solving as traditional problem solving approach. It does not encourage learners to 

apply the concepts because learners are denied the opportunity to discuss the concepts on 

their own. Eventually, it discourages cognitive development of learners. In her lessons, 

learners were denied the opportnuity to solve the given problem on their own in their groups. 

They were taught to emulate the problem solving approach which gives an impression that  

the teacher might have faced the problem many times in her profession and had answers to it. 

 The lesson presented shows that Mary did not include   many activities for the learners in 

teaching the concepts of co-dominance and incomplete dominance to illustrate the concept in 

understandable forms to the learners. Mary failed to extract from the experience of teaching 

genetics to transform the content knowledge into understandable forms to the learners. In 

general, Mary had good command of content knowledge as observed from the two lessons, 

but the difficulties lay in transforming the content into forms that could make sense to the 

learners independently with the teacher as a facilitator. 

 

4.1.3 Reasons for Using a Described Strategy  

After observing the two lessons, a post-observation interview was arranged for Mary to 

explain why she used the observed strategies (question and answer, demonstration, teacher 

explanations and problem solving) in teaching the identified challenging genetic concepts. 

The excerpt below shows Mary’s reasons for using one strategy over the other: 

Researcher:   From the lessons observed, you have used question and answer,  



Page 33 of 96 
 

demonstration and problem solving approach in teaching challenging 

concepts in MSCE genetics. Do you have any reasons for choosing the 

strategies?  

Mary: Having realised that my students have problems right from the beginning of  

the topic, I thought it wise that they needed to be involved in the teaching and 

learning process than the teacher doing the work. This would make them 

understand the concepts more than the teacher doing the work for them. By 

involving them, it would make them easily remember and follow what is 

happening in the topic. Apart from that, the strategies also helped in 

identification of prior knowledge and assessment of the lessons to check 

learners’ understanding. 

Mary used question and answer, demonstration and problem solving approach to make 

learners attain independent learning through active involvement. Lord (2001) and Liang and 

Gabel (2012) assert that  genetics teaching should encourage student participation through 

active teaching techniques (demonstration, question and answer and problem solving 

approach) which have positive learning outcomes in biology. From the exerpts presented 

from her first  lesson, it show that  she dominated the lessons and provided little room for 

learners to interact and share ideas on their own. Most of the times, learners were not given 

opportunities to solve the problems individually. Hence, failure by the teacher to involve all 

learners in the discussion made those who were shy and with special educational needs to be 

left out in the teaching process but could have benefited through social interactions within the 

class such as group work. Smith, Wood, Krauter, & Knight ( 2011) agree that peer interaction 

enhances conceptual understanding of concepts when sharing ideas through expression and 

discussion which effectively promotes understanding. The implementation of these strategies 

by Mary did not assist learners to be aware of their abilities and develop self confidence in 

learning genetics by reflecting on what they were doing and how their understanding was 

changing..  

 Mary used question and answer for formative assessment to check on the progress of the 

learners. She asked questions in all the three phases of the lesson: introduction, development 

and conclusion. In the introduction of the lesson, she asked questions to identify the entry 

levels of the learners. Questions were further asked in the development of the lesson to assess 

learners’ understanding of the lesson. In the conclusion, she also asked questions to check the 

attainment of the objectives.  



Page 34 of 96 
 

Similarly, question and answer was used in the identification of prior knowledge of the 

learners on the concept taught. This according to Magnusson et al. (1999) indicates that the 

teacher was aware of the potential learning difficulties, prior knowledge and conceptions 

learners bring to classroom situation in teaching co-dominance and incomplete dominance. 

The excerpt below shows how Mary elicited prior knowledge of the learners in her second 

lesson on incomplete dominance; 

Teacher:    What is in-complete dominance?   

Student A:  This is a condition where some genes do not express themselves  

                    completely on the effects of the individual. 

Student U: A case where recessive genes is not completely masked by a dominant  

                  gene. 

Teacher:  In-complete dominance is a case that applies to homozygous recessive   

                 gene not being completely masked by the dominant gene in an individual.        

     Examples of incomplete dominance are sickle cell anaemia and flower     

     colour in Bassalm plants. 

During the lesson, students too were so inquisitive about the concept of in-complete 

dominance. They asked so many questions on the two concepts of complete and in-complete 

dominance. The excerpt below shows some of the questions learners asked in the second 

lesson on sickle cell anaemia: 

Student M: Is it true that a person suffering from anaemia has blood flowing in the  

                   same tube downwards and the other upwards in the arteries? 

Teacher: The blood system is the same. Human beings have double circulatory  

                system. 

 

One reason for students’ curiosity was that the examples used affected them directly from 

their real life situations. Chin & Osborne (2008) assert that students ask question to fill the 

knowledge gap existing in their mind. The questions raised by learners showed they were 

eager to know what happens with their life when someone suffers for example sickle cell 

anaemia.  

 

The teacher discussed multiple instructional strategies in the interview with the goal of 

making learners attain independent learning which she believed would help them own the 

knowledge. Despite the teacher describing the knowledge and beliefs she had about the 



Page 35 of 96 
 

teaching of genetics, her lessons were teacher-centred. The excerpts show the teacher doing 

most of the work than learners. Mary dominated the lessons making it difficult for learners to 

attain independent learning as claimed in the pre-observation interview.  According to Brown 

et al. (2013), teachers who use teacher centred approaches to teaching give less effort to 

difficulties learners meet in learning of science concepts. If Mary had used the problem 

solving approach effectively in teaching in-complete dominance and co-dominance, the 

purpose of helping learners to transfer knowledge to new situations could have been met. 

Students could have developed concrete knowledge and understanding on sickle cell anaemia 

and blood groups in co-dominance. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Page 36 of 96 
 

4.2  Case B 

4.2.0 Introduction: 

An interview with John was conducted before the lesson observation to identify the concepts 

he finds challenging to teach in MSCE genetics. Later, I observed John teaching two of the 

genetic concepts he identified as difficult. The first lesson was on calculation of percentages 

in variation and the second lesson on calculation of probabilities in crosses when teaching 

Mendelian genetics. After the observation of the lesson, I met John for post- interview 

observation to seek clarification on the use of the strategies observed in her lessons. 

4.2.1 Difficult Genetic Concepts 

John was asked during a pre-interview session about concepts in MSCE genetics that he finds 

challenging to teach. The excerpt below shows how John responded to the question; 

Researcher: Are there any concepts in MSCE genetics that you find challenging to  

                     teach? 

John: Very much. One is on calculations in variation using mathematical skills, but 

also on Mendelian genetics by calculating ratios in monohybrid crosses. 

Researcher: In what ways are the concepts you have mentioned challenging to teach? 

John: To begin with, calculations of ratios and percentages in variation demands 

application of mathematical skills. So learners with poor mathematical skills 

and negative attitude find the concept challenging to learn. For the teacher, it is 

all about the background and experience in teaching the concept. If the 

experience and background are poor and insufficient, you will have problems 

in teaching the concept.  

In Mendelian Genetics, problems arise when trying to illustrate crosses to 

symbolise what happens inside the body. Crossing brings confusion to both 

learners and teachers to relate what really happens inside the human bodies. 

Students learn by memorisation because it is abstract to present to the learners’ 

real life situations on how crossing takes place inside the human body.  

From the excerpt above, the teacher said he had challenges in teaching calculations involving 

application of mathematical skills in solving percentages and ratios in variation and 

monohybrid crosses. The teacher also faced challenges in teaching crosses in Mendelian 



Page 37 of 96 
 

genetics. The problem lay in linking the concept of crossing with what happens in the human 

body. The drawing of crosses and use of symbols in calculating  ratios and percentages made 

the concept of crossing abstract in learners’ mind as it does not form any vivid connection 

with the real biological phenomena happening in the human bodies. This made it tough for 

learners to understand the concept evidently. Crosses were also reported to cause problems 

because learners were failling to utilise their mathematical skills in solving genetic ratios and 

percentages. This is the case mostly because a good number of learners have  negative 

attitude towards mathematics or the syllabus does not  emphasise the importance of 

mathematical knowledge in solving biological problems (Robeva et al., 2010). 

In John’s explanation on variation, he found it difficult to teach variation because it 

demanded application of both mathematical and biological skills. The difficulty is further 

driven if learners have negative attitude towards probabilities. 

The findings are similar to those of Berlingeri & Burrowes (2011) which reveal that studies 

done on  integration of biology and mathematics indicate that students fail to apply 

mathematical knowledge in solving  ratios and probability in genetics. Learners and some 

teachers find it difficult to calculate probabilities in segregation of gametes into phenotypes 

and genotypes. Bahar et al. (1999) found similar results that solving ratios for phenotypes and 

genotypes in crosses does not show the real mechanism happening in the human body. The 

complexity comes because learners are supposed to think at three levels of thought: the 

macro, micro and symbolic levels. Consequently,  learners are compelled to think forth and 

back to make connections between concepts (Bahar et al.1999).  

4.2.2 Strategies for Teaching Challenging Concepts in Genetics 

After John identified the concepts that posed challenges for teaching genetics, I asked him 

about the strategies he would use to addresses those challenges. Below is an excerpt from that 

interview: 

Researcher: Tell me about the strategies that you use to teach challenging concepts  

                      in MSCE genetics? 

John:  I usually use participatory methods that engage learners mentally,          

physically and emotionally. For example; field trips by taking students to the 

field to appreciate variation….  Apart from field trips, experiments are also 

done but not fully utilised because genetics comes in November and the 



Page 38 of 96 
 

scheming and school calendar does not tally because at that time crops are not 

yet grown in the fields. I have to be honest; experiments in genetics are 

difficult to do. 

From the excerpt above, John explained that he would use participatory methods in teaching 

concepts that were difficult to teach in genetics. Examples of such methods were field trips 

and experiments. John would use the participatory methods to allow greater participation of 

the learners to help them understan