Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

This chapter presents the study overview and the general statement of the

problem which includes the main problem, researches' objectives, scope, delimitation,

paradigm and terminologies defined in the study.

Introduction

Mathematics is required in life. Part of human existence lies the need to measure

the nature of things to which anything cannot be defined without describing it in the

accurate and exact form. We use Mathematics in counting, calculating the budget,

measuring area and volume and many more (Valdez, 2016). Hence, it is an important

part of everyone's daily life. The need to enhance students’ mathematical skills is a

crucial academic need (Salandanan, 2000).

This puts Mathematics education in the Philippines as one of the priority concerns

of the Department of Education (DepEd) while the dismal state of mathematics

achievement of high school students is evident in the results of international, national

and regional mathematics tests (Abas-Mastura, Imam & Jamil, 2013).

Unfortunately, there are many students who are not honed of Mathematics while

they are overcome with usual circumstances in Mathematics. Solving word problems

which require long solutions, mathematical jargons, and statistics are some of what
1
students have been ignored. In such a world in competition, those who are skilled with

mathematics have opportunities that others have not. Mathematical competence opens

doors to productive future. Lack of mathematical competence closes those doors.

Students have different abilities, needs, and interests. Yet everyone needs to be able to

use mathematics in his or her personal life, in the workplace, and in further study. The

curriculum provides the fundamental math in which General Mathematics is one of the

core learning subjects in Senior High School that eventually builds up the establishment

of mathematic skills in the years of learning the fundamental math.

Looking particularly to the problem, there are determined reasons that are solved

with upgraded curriculum and programs implemented yet schools take this as dire in the

last phase of phase of curriculum. In this way, the study attempts to determine those

factors and formulate an analysis from the views of students with low performance in

the subject of General Mathematics, in which their perception will give more importance

to the issue.

Background of the Study

General Mathematics is one of the core learning areas that is taught for all of the

courses offered in Senior High School (Orale & Sarmiento, 2016). The K-12 program

offered the SHS with the basic and fundamental knowledge of the Mathematics that is

to be applied and necessary in any of the fields.

Southville 5-A National High School is an integrated school of junior high and

senior high school departments, where a population of 395 students is enrolled in

2
Senior High for A.Y. 2017–2018 as of August 2017. There has been limited number of

teachers employed in government and that has been declining the teacher-students

ratio, as well as demands in the areas. This concerns the adjustment of the school for

attainable education of the students while there are other circumstances to be

considered by the school, particularly facilities, in which classes of both departments

have to shift.

Results of periodical examinations and assessments when compared reveal that

Mathematics subject frequently gets the lowest passers. International rating agencies

evaluated the national academic performance of students in Mathematics that is low.

This is the result of various factors relating to students: the study habits, personality

traits, behavior and their background, for example. Instructions related factors include

teaching methods which specify the skills, curricular materials and behavior of the

teacher while environmental factors are also regarded.

The researchers seek to determine the defining reason from analyzing what

students arrived with the General Mathematics, wherein the researchers enlist the most

possible and examine senior high students in the final phase of Mathematics in present

curriculum.

Statement of the Problem

3
 This study aims to determine the factors affecting the performance of Grade-11

students of Southville 5-A Integrated National High School in the Middle Term on

General Mathematics in the A.Y. 2017–2018

The study seeks to answer these following questions:

1. What factors related to individual capacity of student that affects the performance in

General Mathematics in terms of: a.) study habits, b.) personality traits, c.) behaviour,

and d.) student background?

2. What instructional factors have been affecting achievement in General Math in the

way of: a.) teaching strategy and b.) instructional materials?

3. What other factors besides individual and instructional factors and that have

significantly been affecting the student in learning mathematics on General Mathematics?

4. Is there a significant relationship between students' mathematics performance and

the student-related factors?

5. Is there a significant relationship between the student's mathematics performance

and the instruction-related factors?

Research Paradigm

4
 Figure 1

Conceptual Framework of the Study

Input Process Output

1. Classification of I. Qualitative The significant

Factors research
relationship between
 Student-related method
factors II. Descriptive- student-related,
 Instruction- correlation instruction-related and
related factors research design environmental factors
 Environmental III. Statistical and the low achievement
factors treatment
of Grade-11 students in
2. Instrument used IV. Data gathering
 Survey  Survey General Mathematics
questionnaires V. Analysis of Data

Scope and Delimitation

The study is limited to senior high school students on Grade 11 of Southville 5-A

Integrated National High School (SV5-AINHS) during the academic year 2017-2018.

Determining various factors affecting low student performance in General

Mathematics is the focus of the study. The data needed will be gathered from students,

who only entered among the lowest P in allocation of sample size n=143 for each of four

sections of three different courses, composing 243 Grade-11 students. The population

5
however excludes the transferees, students with "incomplete" and without grade in the

middle term of their General Mathematics. The sample were almost students that fell in

"Fairly Satisfactory" and "Did not meet expectation" with 75 and below grades but a few

were remarked with "Satisfactory" of 80–84 grades and below considering that each

section was proportionally allocated. Any drawn conclusion and generalization from this

study were obtained only to this group of students.

Significance of the Study

The result of this study will merit the following:

Student. This study will provide helpful information to improve mathematics self-

concept and interest. It will also serve as guide of what to do and what limitations should

have as responsible learning student.

School Administrator. The result of this study could serve as a baseline data to

improve programs for school advancement particularly related to teaching mathematics.

Teacher. This study can help open opportunities to find solution for and to deal

with basic student problems in active participation and interest in the area of

mathematics and more especially in General Mathematics

Department of Education. Any recommendation and conclusion drawn in this

study may help local government office of the education department in providing

solutions for low academic achievement of students in mathematics and explore new

ideas. More particularly, implementing remedies in senior high which has significant
6
relation to labor, literacy and other civic relations while the national government takes

well-developed plans concerned with these.

Future Researchers. The basis of the study could serve as basis for further

researches in examining the learning instructions as well as with regards to student

performance and the development of mathematics, Senior High and the Philippine

education.

Definition of Terms

Indicated are the following terms used in the study clarified in conceptual and

operational definitions.

Differentiation of Instruction. This is generally referred as an approach to

teaching and planning that can address the needs of diverse learners in an inclusive

classroom.

Instructional Materials. Motivating techniques that teaching materials or

equipment used. It can high technology or simple materials that can use in learning

preference.

Interest. Refers to the amount of how students dislike or like particular things.

Mathematics Performance. This refers to the degree or capacity of students’

knowledge in Mathematics.

7
 Mathematics Self-concept. This refers to the student ability to learn

mathematics in his own way of understanding.

Rote memorization. A study habit that keeps the lesson in memory by

repeatedly memorizing it.

Study Habits. This refers to usual form or way of a person in studying.

Teaching Skills. This refers to the skills of teachers who are qualified in

mathematics in terms of methods he used and strategic teaching.

Personality Traits. This refers to the good relationship of the mathematics

teachers with the student

8
 Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter includes literature and studies related to identifying factors of getting

failed grades in secondary Mathematics, which are student-related, instruction-related

and environmental factors.

Kalhorta (2013) studied the causes of failure in Mathematics at Indian high

school stage and found out that students were older in stage and likely had poor

economic status. Cited in a recent study of Laguna State Polytechnic University, Gouha

Peng (2002) states that simple traditional methods make feel the students that

mathematics is pointless and has little value. It is the students' interest to be engaged in

learning Mathematics and from teaching to the instructions used is affecting the student

in adapting the subject. Dan Hull (1999) claims it had improved dramatically because of

effective connection between information and their experiences had helped the students

to boost interest and achievement.

Richardson, et al. (2014) suggests that students might believe it’s the lack of

inability or level of intelligence is related to their failures. The curriculum may be thought

to be more advanced and cannot be followed thinking it is too far to what was taught in

previous school. They added too few life experiences can make Math irrelevant for

students. Gap exists not only in the curriculum, according to them, but also between the

student and perceived importance of the subject.

9
 While these approach a widening range of factors, Geary (2013) took the

student's inability to analyze logical representation of numerosity as a major cause of

the problem which results of his psychological study revealed that has 'fundamental

deficit'.

1. Student-related Factors

1.1. Study Habits

LSPU study reveals cooperation had helped significantly to learn much more

efficiently especially in group works. Richardson, et al. suggested that who work in pairs

can help them, too. The usual practice of students who do not get attached to the

lesson are said to be unlikely to get it next several times it is thought in the social

manner. Because as they also added, these students may be frequently absent in

classes that undoubtedly affecting their performance other than Math.

Kalhorta (2013) later found out in her study, students avoided written practice to

solve the problem. Simmons (2002) clarifies that the fundamental "good writing" greatly

results an interactive analysis and fluency in reading where inadequate writing directly

causes to inadequate reading and studying. LSPU study notes that it is essential for

postgraduates to be critical in writing as it qualifies them as professionals, having the

responsibility and integrity which are vital to the study habits of postgraduate students.

Likewise, senior high school is much like postgraduate period before career. Students in

this level can adopt similarly how college students are learned and performed efficiently

particularly in Math.
10
1.2. Personality Traits

Aquino (2013) states that study skills can be taught effectively "only after

identifying students' area of weakness and levels of achievements is appropriate to their

grade level" which can help provide development that will enable them to be more

proficient in their skills or which can help learn them to new ideas.

This corresponds to what Richardson and his fellow researchers point out that

the students' ability to organize their thinking affect their achievement throughout the

curriculum of Math. Some students face major problem in the most basic Math exercise

which is no other than how to solve a Math problem. They add that students may be

"mentally distracted" and as a cause, lack of understanding of mathematical terms

seriously hampers them to focus on. While most students may have lack of well-

developed mental strategies to complete algorithmic procedures or simply solve

problems with combinations of basic Math facts, unclearly understanding the terms

used in multi-step procedures will initially obstruct the student to learn.

Gurgonus (2007) notes that language development is critically integrated with

mathematics development. As a child develops cognitively from lingual and pre-

symbolic stages to the use of language and symbols to manipulate concepts, he points

out that abilities in learning Mathematics will likely to develop. He categorized these

'cognitive abilities' for mathematics learning which are memory, language skills and the

"ability to mental representation of number and space."

11
 Geary explains that it is possible for a child to appreciate numbers and yet not

understand the logical relationship among the numbers "to appreciate the structure as a

whole." Meanwhile, Kolharta (2013) also explains, "syllabus of mathematics is not

according to the mental level of the students."

Ittel & Lazarides (2012) mention self-interest as an attitudinal and affective

variable to student's achievement in mathematics. LSPU study conforms to it that

interest in mathematics could be regarded as a "predictor" for mathematics

achievement. It is viewed by students who enjoy mathematics that the subject is

important for their development.

1.3. Student Background

Possible problems with real-life connections are affecting student achievement

(Alacaci & Karakoç, 2015). Narota (1998) found out that failure in mathematics has a

strong correlation with whether how the student is comfortable with his life or how it's

not. Lubiensky's findings showed that students who came from upper socio-economic

status were comfortable in solving problems and were able to make generalizations. On

the other hand, students who came from low socio-economic backgrounds were not

able to relate intended mathematical ideas and focused on real world constraints in the

problems. She added that, although, real world context could help them as their

motivators, students "could have difficult time to learn mathematics in context."

12
2. Instruction-related Factors

There is a large part of students’ learning ability that comes from teaching

strategies. Ittel & Lazarides (2012) later point out the influence to both self-concept and

interest in mathematics brought by educational setting and, significantly, teaching styles.

Tomlinson (1999) states that teachers could differentiate the content process and

product for the students. LSPU study defines 'differentiation of content' that refers to the

change in the material being learned by students. For example, if a classroom objective

for all of students is to subtract using renaming, some of the students may learn from

subtracting two-digit numbers, while others may learn to subtract large numbers with

word problems. 'Differentiation of process' refers to the way a student accesses the

material. One student can explore a learning center, while many students collect

information from the web. 'Differentiation of product' refers to the application of what he

or she has learned. For example, to demonstrate a geometric concept, one student may

solve a problem set, while another may build a model.

According to Miyan (1982), cited by Kalhorta, teaching methods affect the

achievement of the students in mathematics. He found out on his study that:

1. guided discovery method was the most effective in developing the originality in

subject mathematics;

2. pure discovery method is not so effective;

3. low achievement in mathematics varies from defective textbooks to some

personal needs;
13
 4. imparting of limited knowledge and 'blind use' of articles cause the problems in

failure is mathematics.

Richardson et al. (2009) found out in their study that students who are taught in a

way that relies too heavily on "rote memorization" isolated from meaning have difficulty

recognizing math concepts and generalizations. They suggest that while it is critical for

repeatedly teaching the same content year after year in an almost the same manner of

delivery, effective teachers should use attractive, attention-getter drawings or learning

aids that are catching enough students' mind in the class.

Heinze and Aiso (2008) state that development of the student's achievement

depends in the achievement level of classroom. The teachers actually have to design

and to execute the differentiated instruction (Ittel & Lazarides, 2012).

Richardson et al. (2014) state that student are almost confused by works when

there is also a special mathematical meaning. They suggest that mathematics must

provide many opportunities to concept-building, relevant challenging questions,

problem-solving, reasoning and 'connections' within the curriculum and the real-world

situations.

Das (2010) argues that the financial and managerial statuses of the school are

the major factors influencing the academic performance particularly in math. However,

the study only covers the correlation of school's performance to academic performance

in mathematics.

Differentiated instruction is emphasized to be adapted by teachers to the

students accordingly to who they are, considering the student diversity that teachers
14
should expect different knowledge, skills and experiences in a classroom. Therefore,

the instruction need to be adjusted accordingly (Smit & Humpert, 2012). Tomlinson et al.

(2003) claim that every teacher should be able to create instruction and it has to be

effective. Yet most of the teachers are still struggling in providing differentiated

instructions.

Goddard et al. (2010) and Watts-Taffe et al. (2012) claim that in order to have an

effective differentiated instruction is to throw it on a discussion with other teachers and

explain why it should be implemented or what would be the students' case after the

instruction is applied. Chambert and Powers (2010) and Goodnough (2010) claim that

differentiated instruction is no recipe and it is guided by a theory. It can be practiced in

any ways. Chambert and Powers (2010) and Smith & Humpert (2012) claim that

teachers have to start small. If teachers have discussed various aspects of the

differentiated instruction and have decided to implement differentiated instructions in

any subjects, teachers first have to recognize the difference among the students

because teachers have to understand, but also appreciate the unique needs of students.

3. Environmental Factors

There are particular aspects of instructional quality in mathematics class such as

classroom management, classroom climate and cognitive activation related to students'

abilities (Ittel & Lazarides, 2012).

Other researchers similarly contend, but also they claim that school

characteristics have greater effect than what would be expected upon the students'
15
background (Wenglinsky, 2001). Most of the recent related studies focused to economic

characteristics or school resources, and these studies are referred as production

function. One of the earliest of these studies was the Equality for Educational

Opportunity Study, which was commonly referred to as the Coleman Report (1966), that

took a sample of elementary and high school students to relate school resources, such

as per-pupil or per-student expenditure, with student achievement. It only found out that

there was no connection between student performance and school resources. Nearly

400 additional production function studies have since been conducted by the end of the

century (Wenglinsky, 2001). Some concluded that these studies only showed no

consistent relationship between school resources and the student achievement,

whereas some claimed that these showed that there was a consistent, significant and

positive relationship (Greenwald, Hudges & Laine, 1996).

16
 Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the formulation of research design and methodology

adopted to achieve the objective of the study. After realizing the objective of the study,

the reasons behind low performance of Grade 11 students in General Mathematics, the

researchers consider the factors into three types, those student-related, instruction-

related or from the side of teaching and curricular, and environmental factors. While

there are several ways of the three types indicated among students on a limited length

of academic learning time, however, no interviews are made rather the researchers

used a survey method, a questionnaire as instrument in gathering data. Questions are

listed to which students probably agree or disagree with. This reveals that qualitative

data gathering technique is used since questions are well structured that the

researchers believe it supports enough the unbiased.

Research Design

Research design essentially refers to the plan or strategy used to shape the

study ((Henn, Weinstein and Foard, 2006 that might include the entire process from

conceptualizing a problems to formulating the questions and on to data collection,

analysis, interpretation and report writing (Creswell, 2007, as cited by).

17
 For the purpose of the research, after the main problem and also writing the

questions were examined, a quantitative descriptive research had been used because it

would conclusively describe the quality of education that is observed in a core subject of

Senior High, in different points; (a.) teaching and also administration of Mathematics

department; (b.) curriculum used; (c.) students' achievement in various related subjects;

(d.) status of Senior High School in this considered as 'last phase' of K-12 Curriculum.

A descriptive research is the attempt to determine, describe, or identify what is

(Ethridge, 2004). This is aimed at putting the issue or the problem in the center through

a process of data collection that enables the researcher to describe the situation more

completely than was possible without employing the method (Fox & Bayat, 2007).

In its essence, descriptive studies are used to describe various aspects of the

phenomenon (Dudovskiy 2017). In its popular use, descriptive research is used to

describe characteristics and/or behavior of sample population. Dudovskiy states in his

blog in Research Methodology, this method is always associated with observational

studies but descriptive researches are not limited with observation data and case

studies, surveys can also be specified as popular data collection method used in

descriptive studies.

Population Frame and Sampling Scheme

By definition, population is the group to which the research would like the results

is generalized. The researchers basically identify the respondents from students of

18
Grade-11, supposing they are taking the General Mathematics in their first semester.

There are 240 students listed as "enrolled" in the first term for 2017-2018. However,

while the researcher needs to identify students with low grades in the subject, a list of

grades provided in ascending order excluded students that were identified and

confirmed to the subject-teacher as "incomplete", such as the case of ICT-A having

three from 58 students removed. This resulted the population to reduce into 234 (N =

234). Meanwhile, no other transferee are also included in the list, supposing that their

grades, if they'd already taken the subject, did not resonate the culture and teaching

strategies being practiced in SV5-AINHS, particularly for which are indicated in the

questions regarding instructions related factors, might as well environmental.

A sampling method determined the allocation of sample size in respective sections,

Makatao (HUMSS), Maka-Diyos (EIM), Makakalikasan (ICT-A) and Makabansa (ICT-

B). The probability sampling technique adopted is similar to step-by-step simple random

sampling method. But for the purpose of this research, the sample size percentage

allocated is the figure to be identified as the lowest among students in the list.

Table 1

Sampling Scheme of the Student-respondents

SECTIONS TOTAL POPULATION* SAMPLE

11 - MAKATAO 60 38

19
 11 - MAKA-DIYOS 60 38

11 - MAKAKALIKASAN 59 37

11 - MAKABANSA 55 35

TOTAL 234 148

*Note: Excluding transferees/incomplete students.

The student-respondents had a total of 234 populations, with the Slovin’s formula,

having 5% as a margin error; the population was reduced into 63% of the total

population. Thus, the sample is 148 (n=148).

Instrument Used

Since the quantitative data gathering method is used a survey questionnaire is

applicable instead of structured interviews or open-ended questionnaires. It is by belief

of the researchers that the more the data are controlled, the easier it will be generalized.

Composing a total of 59 questions, the questionnaire is supposed to be divided for three

factors, student-related, instruction-related and environmental wherein the student-

related factors are divided into Study Habits, Personality Traits, Behavior and Student

Background as the researchers give more various perspective, while it is close-ended,

for the student-respondents to agree or disagree with using the scale of 1-5.

Questions are properly structured specific that consider the capacity of students

over the ideal, recommendations from the facilitator herself, suggestions from concern
20
people, and the observance of the researchers of both the teacher and the curriculum

which the researchers have already passed in the past school year. The set of

questions has been reviewed in an open forum of student-researchers, and is also

analyzed and evaluated by a judge and the research adviser so several revisions are

made for it would be more effective and specific, with which the students respondents

correlate to, such as many common instances and stereotypes of failed students or

those who have no interest in Math.

The background of students, other influential factors, and the premise where they

are grown in to learn could be hardly noticed by previous related studies so it is not

ignored to be asked.

Data Gathering Procedure

1. Identification of Respondents

After having permitted to conduct the study, the researchers get the total

population of the student-respondents through determining the lowest among students

of each section of grade 11 by means of non-probability sampling technique, wherein

sample members are selected using formulae in order to get the percentage of who

have the lowest grades. A master list of Gen. Math of 1st quarter was gathered from the

subject teacher who is also the research adviser herself, Mrs. Vivian C. Laolao.

The following table is the distribution of sample members in each of the section.

21
2. Construction of Questionnaire

The researcher constructed questionnaires for the student-respondents. After

several revisions, the researchers came up to a close-ended, checklist-type

questionnaire with 59 questions being divided for three classified factors: student-

related, instruction-related and environmental factors. The questionnaire also requires

the necessary information regarding the language most commonly used or spoken at

home and gender. The researchers thought that it could be a comparable factor to the

three that may be either extraneous or mediating variable.

3. Distribution and Retrieval of Questionnaires

In a week, three sections, namely Makatao, Makakalikasan and Makabansa were

first given whereas Maka-Diyos was only given by the following week. This is due to

distances of classrooms. All of the Senior High school students have almost daily

regular classes outside the actual school proper of SV5-ANHS, in a Timbao stand-alone

SHS, except only the classes of Grade 11-Maka-Diyos which is supposed to stay in

their own laboratory in the building where, while room ratio is considered, the SHS

temporarily replaced from.

In the actual data gathering, there were absences of supposed respondents

arrived by distribution of the questionnaires. The researchers have to choose the next

students in the upper list of identified students, such is the case in Grade 11–

Makakalikasan (ICT-A) with 5 absences were solved by 5 students with 85 and above,

22
that were listed outside the 38 allocated size. No section was complete in identified

student-respondents but the supposed number of students per section was still followed.

In addition of gathering the data, questionnaires were limited only to 40, enough

for each section, but the sample size should be 148. So the researchers initially

instructed the student-respondents to use pencil instead for it could be re-used after

tabulating the data.

Almost of the student-respondents answered without reaction, compliance, or

any question asked regarding the questionnaire.

Statistical Treatment

The following are instruments used in statistical treatment.

1. Slovin's formula – this formula was used to determine the total number of the

student-respondents needed in the study.

𝑁
𝑛=
1 + 𝑒2

Where:

n = Sample size

N = Total number of population

e = 5% sampling error

23
2. Proportional Allocation – this was used to divide the total number of respondents to

the four sections of grade 11 students in Southville 5-A National High School.

𝑛
𝑃= × 𝑆
𝑁

Where:

P = Proportional allocation

n = Number of students in a section

N = Total number of population

S = Sample size

3. Percentage – this tool was used to have proportion of the sample in the student-

respondents to the total population.

𝑆
%= × 100
𝑃

Where:

% = Percentage

S = Sample

P = Population
24
4. Arbitrary Scale – the researchers resulted in identifying the degree of agreement as

the scale to be used in the survey questionnaires. Below are the corresponding verbal

interpretations of the numerical scales as in the degree of agreement.

Scale Descriptive Rating

5 Strongly Agree
4 Agree
3 Slightly Agree
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree

5. Class Interval – this tool was used to determine the scale used in the study.

𝑅
𝐶𝐼 =
𝑁𝐶

Where:

CI = Class interval

R = Range

NC = Number class

𝑅
𝐶𝐼 =
𝑁𝐶

(5−1)
𝐶𝐼 =
5

25
 4
𝐶𝐼 =
5

𝐶𝐼 = 0.08

The class interval is 8.

Point Interval Descriptive Rating

4.21 – 5.00 Strongly Agree

3.41 – 4.20 Agree

2.61 – 3.40 Slightly Agree

1.81 – 2.60 Disagree

1.00 – 1.80 Strongly Disagree

6. Weighted Mean – This was used to get the mean scores of the respondents on their

responses to each of the items in the questionnaire.

∑ 𝑓𝑥
𝑊𝑥 =
𝑁

Where:

W x = Weighted mean

∑ = Summation (sigma)

f = frequency of the responses

x = weight of each option

26
n = total number of the respondents

Chapter 4

INTERPRETATION, PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

The following present the data being collected then interpreted and analyzed

toward the objective of the study which is, and, which it is entitled as "Factors Affecting

Low Performances of Grade 11 Students Of Southville 5-A Integrated National

High School in Middle Term on General Mathematics in the A.Y. 2017-2018."

Student-respondents have distinction with regards of having their General

Mathematics performance "low". The following table presents the distribution of

academic performance level according to the grading scale remarks provided by DepEd.

Table 2

Student-respondents' Grades in General Mathematics for the 1st Quarter

GRADES MALE FEMALE REMARKS TOTAL

90-100 0 0 Outstanding 0
85-89 0 0 Very Satisfactory 0
80-84
13 24 Satisfactory 37

75-79
47 38 Fairly Satisfactory 85

Did not meet

74 - below 21 5 26
expectation
TOTAL 81 67 148

27
 Table 2 shows the grades of student-respondents remarked with the grading scale

of "Outstanding", "Very Satisfactory", "Satisfactory", " Fairly Satisfactory " and "Did not

meet expectations" for the General Mathematics in the first quarter. Males composed 21

out of 148 respondents with the lowest remark, "Did not meet expectations" within 74

and below grades, whereas Females have the highest remark "Very Satisfactory" under

80-84 grades.

Looking particularly the figures, there is significant relationship between Male and

Female respondents. While Females got more respondents with the highest remark

than Males, which is "Satisfactory", Males outnumbered Females with 47 out of 148 in

the remark "Fairly Satisfactory" against 38. Females composed the lowest to receive the

remark of "Did not meet expectations". This reveals that performance of Male student-

respondents in General Mathematics is generally poor.

In gathering of data, the demographics of the student-respondents also considers

which language he is proficient to and language being frequently used at home, and, or

language mostly practiced in school. This is gathered in questions provided before the

formulated questions in the survey-questionnaire.

Table 3

Language Used by Student-respondents at Home and School

LANGUAGE MALE FEMALE TOTAL

FILIPINO 81 67 148 100%
ENGLISH 12 26 38 26%

28
 OTHER FILIPINO
3 2 5 3%
LANGUAGES
Table 3 shows which languages are used by student-respondents at home and

school. The respondents are proficient in Filipino whereas only one-fourth of the

respondents admit that they frequently used English at home and school. 65% among

Female students admit they are not proficient in English whereas there is 85% in Male

students who told that they do not frequently use English at home and school. This

means that Females are more proficient in English than the Males.

The following are analyzed, interpreted and tabulated data being gathered from a

set of questions that is divided into three classifications of factors. These are specified

questions that are concerned to:

1. Factors related to individual capacity of student that affect low performance in

General Subjects in terms of:

1. Study habits

Table 4.1

Study Habit as Student-related Factor in Achieving Low Performance in

General Mathematics

SCALE W.
QUESTIONS V.I.
5 4 3 2 1 M.
I still remember some of Mathematics 4 43 79 14 5 3.12 Slightly

29
principles or rules in your previous Agree
terms that are useful in General Math.
I am able to identify which
Slightly
Mathematical terms in formulas in 10 34 74 25 4 3.12
Agree
exams.
I am able to apply rules in which
Slightly
Mathematical concepts used in 5 31 86 23 2 3.07
Agree
exams
I often forgot the terms, formulas and 15 40 73 19 0 Slightly
3.32
process of solving the concepts. Agree
I follow how the teacher shows the
exact process of solving with the 35 53 49 8 1 3.72 Agree
formulas
I actively participate in group solving. 17 61 53 11 2 3.46 Agree
Slightly
I study the solutions by myself. 16 48 50 20 3 3.14
Agree
I am more learned with a partner or 21 60 44 15 4 3.45 Agree
with pairs.
I learn General Math more easily with 12 27 50 39 20 Slightly
2.81
other classmates than the teacher. Agree
I take down notes just on the time 39 46 48 6 4 3.64 Agree
while the teacher discusses the topic.
I review the problem I have not Slightly
21 49 53 20 2 3.39
clearly understood. Agree
I often leave some questions Slightly
12 33 69 21 8 3.03
unanswered. Agree
I ask when the right answer is not 22 54 51 16 2 3.47 Agree
clear for me.
I write correction or checking remarks Slightly
18 54 47 21 6 3.34
on my own wrong answers. Agree
Slightly
I always finish individual outputs. 22 41 57 15 1 3.22
Agree
I usually review the problems or
Slightly
examples of certain topics to 9 54 69 9 2 3.30
Agree
understand Math.
I practice the lesson on free time or
Slightly
review it to understand it more 11 29 71 29 7 3.03
Agree
clearly.
I always review all of the topics 25 50 52 16 4 3.49 Agree
discussed before periodical exams.
Slightly
I can study Math by myself. 7 31 69 18 14 2.81
Agree
Slightly
AVERAGE 3.25
Agree

30
 Table 4.1 shows study habits as student-related factors that affected the low

performance in General Mathematics. Among the 19 questions, most of the

respondents agree that they "follow how the teacher shows the exact process of solving

with the formulae" (wm=3.72), that they "actively participate in group activities"

(wm=3.46) and more surprisingly, that they are "more learned with a partner or by pairs"

(wm=3.45) which most of them also slightly agree with the statement that they "more

easily learn General Math with other classmates than the teacher, gaining a wm=2.81.

They also believe that they are "taking down notes..." (wm=3.64) and are "asking when

the right answer is not clear" (wm=3.47), and "reviewing the topics before the periodical

exam" (wm=3.49). Almost of them also slightly agree with the statement that they

"review the problems they have not clearly understood," (wm=3.39) "usually reviewing

problems, samples of certain topics," (wm=3.30) and "practicing it on free time,"

(wm=3.03)

Moreover, they slightly agree with "finishing individual outputs" (wm=3.22) and

"writing corrections or check remarks on their own wrong answers" (wm=3.34).

However, many of the student-respondents encounter problems in memorizing

"formulas, process of solving..." "self-studying" the solutions of sampled problems,

"memorizing Mathematical rules or principles..." "identifying formulas," "applying

Mathematical rules in exams," and "self-studying the subject" with weighted mean of

3.32, 3.14, 3.12, 3.12, 3.07 and 2.81, respectively. They also tend to "leave some

questions unanswered" (wm=3.03)

31
 Overall, among student-respondents slightly agree with the statements with based

on the average weighted mean of 3.25, regarding the possibilities of factors concerning

each different way of study habit.

1.2. Personality traits

Table 4.2

Personality Traits as Student-related Factor in Achieving Low Performance in

General Mathematics

SCALE W.
QUESTIONS V.I.
5 4 3 2 1 M.
I am actively participating in Slightly
1 25 112 36 10 2.80
recitations especially for Math. Agree
I like tricky problems. Slightly
2 55 96 37 9 2.82
Agree
I am afraid when the teacher asks the Slightly
3 60 120 30 4 3.03
class for the right answer. Agree
I often forgot the terms, formulas and 4 40 80 38 6 2.60 Disagree
process of solving the concepts.
I am always sure of my answers. Slightly
5 30 132 43 18 2.87
Agree
I am able to mentally solve with 6 15 76 28 15 Slightly
2.64
fundamental operations… Agree
I am able to mentally solve with the Slightly
7 60 220 19 0 3.30
formulas given in General Math… Agree
I often use calculator in solving. Slightly
8 55 148 37 2 3.14
Agree
I mostly understand the problem in Slightly
9 40 124 27 3 3.01
numbers Agree
My English comprehension affects 10 30 80 46 16 2.55 Disagree
my understanding of General Math...
Slightly
AVERAGE 2.88
Agree

32
 Table 4.2 shows personality traits as student-related factors in achieving low

performance in General Mathematics. There has been general slight agreement of the

student-respondents regarding or which possibility/-ies of their personal traits that

has/have been affecting their achievement in mathematics. Many of them slightly agree

with the statements that "they are able to mentally solve with the formulas given in

General Mathematics" (wm=3.30); that they "mostly understand the problem in

numbers" (wm=3.01); that they are "always sure of their answers" (wm=2.87); that they

"like tricky problems" (wm=2.82); and, that they are "actively participating in recitations

especially for Math" (wm=2.80).

In addition to positive attitude toward the subject, the student-respondents slightly

agree with their ability to "mentally solve with fundamental operations" with a wm=2.64,

and at the same time, many of them depends on using the calculator "often", indicated

on a high wm=3.14.

However, while many are "active", many of the student-respondents are bothered

by fear on participating in recitations, as many slightly agree with the statement that

they are "afraid when the teacher asks for the right answer" (wm=3.03). In relation to

this, they disagree that they "often forgot the terms, formulas and process of solving the

concepts" (wm=2.60). Finally, an average weighted mean of 2.88 reveals that there is

significant relationship between their personality traits and their low achievement in

General Mathematics.

33
1.3. Behavior

Table 4.3

Behavior as Student-related Factor in Achieving Low Performance

in General Mathematics

SCALE W.
QUESTIONS V.I.
5 4 3 2 1 M.
I am interested in solving Math Slightly
17 37 64 27 6 3.28
problems. Agree
I often cheat answers. 5 12 55 46 25 2.40 Disagree
I think General Math is boring. 5 16 48 45 25 2.34 Disagree
Slightly
I like Math. 13 28 62 20 21 2.86
Agree
I am absent during Gen. Math class Strongly
6 9 17 36 74 1.78
most of the times. Disagree
I feel comfortable of my teacher for 35 46 39 12 8 3.43 Agree
General Mathematics.
Slightly
AVERAGE 2.68
Agree

Table 4.3 shows the behavioral aspect of students as student-related factor in

achieving low performance in General Mathematics. On one hand, there has been a

positive attitude toward the teacher in which majority of student-respondents agree with

the statement that "they feel comfortable of their teacher for General Mathematics" with

a wm=3.43. On the other hand, they slightly agree toward the subject that "they like it"

with a wm=2.86, as well as "interested" in solving Mathematical problems with a

wm=3.28.

34
 Surprisingly, the results show that they strongly disagree with "absences during the

time of General Mathematics" (wm=1.78). They also disagree with both statements that

"they often cheat answers" and that they think General Mathematics is "boring" with

weighted means of 2.40 and 2.34, respectively. Finally, there is significant relationship

between the behavior of students and their low achievement in General Mathematics

with an average weighted mean of 2.68.

1.4. Student background

Table 4.4

Student Background as Student-related Factor in Achieving Low Performance

in General Mathematics

SCALE W.
QUESTIONS V.I.
5 4 3 2 1 M.
I have been failed in Math subject/s Slightly
7 31 54 28 16 2.66
before. Agree
Something before happened to me
7 25 43 37 20 2.42 Disagree
discouraged me to be active in Math.

AVERAGE 2.54 Disagree

Table 4.4 shows the student background as student-related factor in achieving low

performance in General Mathematics. Shown are the possibilities of some traumatic or

unlikely past events that have eventually affected him to be inactive in particular to Math.

35
 Majority of the student-respondents disagree with the statement that "something

before happened to them, discouraged them to be active in Math" with a slipping

wm=2.42, whereas many slightly agree with the statement that they "have been failed in

Math subject/s before" with a wm=2.66.

An average weighted mean of 2.54 is gained, indicating that student-respondents

disagree with the student background as one of the factors or that there is no significant

relationship between these possibilities of their background and their low achievement

in General Mathematics.

2. What instructional factors have been affecting achievement in General Math in

the way of: a.) teaching strategy and b.) instructional materials?

Table 5

Instruction-related Factors in Achieving Low Performance

in General Mathematics

SCALE W.
QUESTIONS V.I.
5 4 3 2 1 M.
Mathematics offered in senior high is Slightly
8 24 66 31 16 2.78
too much. Agree
The teacher has always been absent 3 15 19 37 71 Slightly
1.87
on class. Agree
The teacher sometimes gives
assignments to be studied at home Slightly
3 16 26 39 57 1.97
but she would not teach it in the Agree
following day.
The teacher calls me most of the Slightly
2 21 41 58 25 2.42
recitation. Agree
The teacher repeats the solution 40 46 43 13 2 3.66 Agree
36
when others and I do not clearly
understand the problems in General
Math.
The examples from the module are 13 28 77 25 1 3.10 Agree
very hard to solve.
The examples provided by the
Slightly
teacher are clear for me in discussing 24 36 66 14 5 3.34
Agree
for a concept.
In the first term of General Math, I 11 36 73 19 5 Slightly
3.11
find the subject difficult... Agree
I think the curriculum is advanced for 20 32 67 36 5 3.42 Agree
me.
Problems given in learning materials Slightly
6 32 77 22 4 2.95
are always tricky. Agree
These problems from the learning
15 25 60 36 9 Slightly
materials are only for the smarter and 2.95
Agree
more critical thinker than me. .
Some of the teacher's examples are
exclusive to those who are good in 21 50 54 19 1 3.42 Agree
Math.
The teacher's language (English as
Slightly
the primary medium used) is easy to 18 37 66 16 4 3.19
Agree
follow.
The teacher does not consider the
level of my understanding that the
Slightly
class may also have in giving 17 34 59 29 6 3.12
Agree
problems as well as in giving
examples.
The teacher has strategies for 32 48 48 16 3 3.59 Agree
teaching that are effective for me.
The teacher clearly discusses the
terms and concepts some of us in the 30 44 55 13 4 3.52 Agree
class are not familiar with.
General Math is the prerequisite of
higher Mathematics subjects,
particularly for college, which means
Slightly
students are supposed to be taught of 18 54 56 8 3 3.33
Agree
the principles and concepts that will
be applied in General Math. Some of
those were taught before.
Slightly
AVERAGE 3.04
Agree

37
 Table 5 shows the instructional factors as factor in achieving low performance in

General Mathematics. Generally, there is a positive feedback both toward the teacher

and the curriculum. Majority of the student-respondents agree with the statements that

the "teacher repeats the solution when others and them do not clearly understand the

problems in General Mathematics" (wm=3.66); that the "teacher has strategies"

"effective" for them (wm=3.59); that the "teacher clearly discusses the terms and

concepts some of them in the class are not familiar with" (wm=3.52); and, that the

examples provided by the teacher are "clear for them in discussing a concept"

(wm=3.34). They slightly agree that the teacher "sometimes give assignments to be

studied at home but she would not teach it in the following day" in a wm=1.97, as well

as that "she calls them most of the recitations" (wm=2.42).

However, many student-respondents agree that "some of the teacher's examples

are exclusive to those who are good in Math" (wm=3.42). Many of them slightly agree

that the "teacher does not consider the level of my understanding that the class may

also have in giving problems as well as in giving examples." (wm=3.12) and that "the

teacher has always been absent on class" (wm=1.87).

Meanwhile, curricular material or the instructional materials used by teacher has

been a major problem among student-respondents as they agree that "the curriculum is

advanced" for them (wm=3.42). While they slightly agree that some of the concepts in

General Mathematics were already taught before, in their first quarter, they also slightly

agree that they found the subject "difficult" (wm=3.11). Also, problems from the learning

materials are slightly agreed that these are "only for the smarter and more critical

thinker" than them (wm=2.95), as well as same impression these are "tricky" (wm=2.95).
38
They also believe by agreeing that examples of problem in the module are "hard to

solve" (wm=3.10)

The student-respondents slightly agree that the fact that Mathematics is taught in

Senior High has been "too much to be offered in SHS" (wm=2.78). The

language/medium used by the teacher doesn't bother much the student-respondents as

they slightly agree, it is "easy to follow" (wm=3.19).

Conclusively, an average weighted mean of 3.04 indicates that student-

respondents, overall, slightly agree that instructional factors have been affecting their

low performance in General Mathematics, which ultimately means that there is

significant relationship between the instructional factors and their achievement in the

subject.

3. What other influential factors besides individual and instructional factors that

have significantly been affecting the student in learning mathematics on General

Mathematics?

Table 6

Other Influential Factors as Student-related Factors in Achieving Low

Performance in General Mathematics

W.
SCALE V.I.
QUESTIONS M.
5 4 3 2 1
I am usually busy with some works
from other subjects so I do not focus Slightly
5 30 64 31 12 2.78
on what is discussed on General Agree
Mathematics.
39
I am influenced by some of friends
9 24 42 34 16 2.37 Disagree
with similarly low Math performance.
My parents look forward to my
25 54 37 23 6 3.41 Agree
grades.
Math is one of the subjects my Slightly
33 58 22 10 3.07
parents consult me 19 Agree
There is anyone has something to do Slightly
9 29 58 29 17 2.77
with or caused my low performance. Agree
Slightly
AVERAGE 2.88
Agree

Table 6 shows other influential factors as student-related factors in achieving low

performance in General Mathematics. Many student-respondents agree with the

statement that "their parents are looking forward to their grades" with a wm=3.41 and at

the same time they almost slightly agree that "Mathematics is one of the subjects that

their parents consult the" with a wm=3.07. Most of them slightly agree with the

statements that they are "usually busy with some works with other subjects so they do

not focus what is being discussed," (wm=2.78)

Meanwhile, majority of the student-respondents disagree that having low

performance in the subject has something with the "influence of others with similarly low

achievement in Mathematics" (wm=2.37) but additionally, most of them slightly agree

that "there is anyone has something to do with or caused my low performance"

(wm=2.77). Conclusively, there is nothing in the statements that could have strongly

prove that there is significant relationship between the student's low achievement in

Math and other influential factors, gaining a wm=2.88 or that they slightly agree with the

environmental factors as one of the factors.

40
41
 Chapter 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter deals with the summary of the findings and conclusions based on

gathered data. It also presents the recommendations needed for the solutions of the

problem.

The aim of this study is to formulate an analysis of the perceptions of Grade 11

students from Southville 5-A Integrated National High School regarding of "Factors

Affecting the Low Performance in Middle Term on General Mathematics" during

their take in first semester of academic year 2017–2018. Factors categorized as (a.)

student-related (study habits, personality traits, behavior, and student background), (b.)

instruction-related and (c.) environmental factors.

Descriptive research was used by the researchers since it describes various

aspects of the phenomenon (Dudovskiy 2017). With regards to the instrument, the

researchers used a survey-questionnaire to gather the data needed for this research.

The data are analyzed in which the researchers have found out the following findings.

42
Findings

1. Student-related Factors

1.1. Study Habits

It has been found out that the students agreed that they

"follow how the teacher shows the exact process of solving with the

formulae", "actively participate in group activities", and "more

learned with a partner or by pairs".

Moreover, students slightly agreed that they are "more easily

learn General Math with other classmates than the teacher," “taking

down notes,” "asking when the right answer is not clear,", and

“reviewing the topics before the periodical exam." They also slightly

agreed that they "review the problems that they have not clearly

understood," "usually reviewing the problems, samples of certain

topics," and "practicing it on free time."

In addition to that, they slightly agreed that they are "finishing

individual outputs" and "writing corrections or check remarks on

their own wrong answers."

However, memorizing "formulas, process of solving..." and

"Mathematical rules or principles...", and “ self-studying ” the

solutions of sampled problems are some of the difficulties

encountered by the students. “ Identifying formulas," "applying

43
 Mathematical rules in exams “and” self-studying the subject" are

also students’ difficulties. They also tend to "leave some questions

unanswered".

Based on the overall computation of the weighted mean of

3.25, most of the students’ answers slightly agreed and it shows

that students may have any other ways of studying.

1.2. Personality Traits

It has been found out that many students slightly agreed that

"they are able to mentally solve with the formulas given in General

Mathematics"; that they "mostly understand the problem in

numbers," and "always sure of their answers,” that they "like tricky

problems" and, that they are "actively participating in recitations

especially for Math".

Furthermore, the students slightly agreed with the statement

that they can "mentally solve with fundamental operations" while

many of them use calculator “often.”

Meanwhile, many of the students feared the recitation that’is

why many respond slightly agreed that they are "afraid when the

teacher asks for the right answer." They also "often forgot the terms,

formulas and process of solving the concepts." As a general result,

see to it that students mostly respond slightly agree with the

44
 average mean of 2.88 and shows that their personality traits and

low performance on General Mathematics has significant

relationship.

1.3. Behavior

It has been found out that majority of student-respondents

agreed with the statement that "they feel comfortable of their

teacher for General Mathematics." Meanwhile, students responded

slightly agree toward the subject that "they like it" and “interested”

with it.

On the other hand, students strongly disagreed toward the

teacher that she is "often absent during the time of General

Mathematics." They also disagreed with both statements that "they

often cheat answers" and that they think General Mathematics is

"boring." With a general weighted mean of 2.68, there is a

significant relationship between their behavior and low performance

in General Mathematics.

1.4. Student background

It has been found out that mostly of the students responded

disagree on "something before happened to them, discouraged

them to be active in Math," while many slightly agree that they

"have been failed in Math subject/s before."

45
 It goes to show that with the general weighted mean of 2.54,

there is no significant relationship between the student background

and their low performance in General Mathematics.

2. Instruction-related Factors

It has been found out that majority of the student-respondents

agreed with the statements that the "teacher repeats the solution when

others and them do not clearly understand the problems in General

Mathematics," "teacher ’ s strategies are effective," "teacher clearly

discusses the terms and concepts some of them in the class are not

familiar with," and, that the examples provided by the teacher are "clear

for them in discussing a concept"

In addition, students slightly agreed that the teacher "sometimes

give assignments to be studied at home but she would not teach it in the

following day" as well as that "she calls them most of the recitations."

3. Environmental Factors

It has been found out that many student-respondents agreed with

the statement that "their parents are looking forward to their grades" and

at the same time they almost slightly agree that "Mathematics is one of the

subjects that their parents consult them." Most of them slightly agree with

the statement that they are "usually busy with some works with other

subjects so they do not focus what is being discussed."

46
 Meanwhile, majority of the student-respondents disagree that

having low performance in the subject has something with the "influence

of others with similarly low achievement in Mathematics" but, additionally,

most of them slightly agree that "there is anyone has something to do with

or caused my low performance." Conclusively, there is nothing on the

statements that could have proven that there is strong significance in the

relationship between the student's low achievement in Math and other

influential factors, gaining a wm=2.88 or that they slightly agree with the

environmental factors as one of the factors.

Conclusion

The researchers found out that among the student-related factors, study habits

affected most the performance in General Mathematics. There are findings that show,

there is the learning preference of the students, for the subject that gives them the

hardest and critical problems that they would have to apply the concept in its

appropriate solution. It is the common notion to math that it is to critically solve problems,

which become the general concept of all that are believed to be math. This is common

perception for the student-respondents.

There have been issue for the student to apply the concepts of General

Mathematics that are related with their personality, which includes word comprehension,

memory, application of knowledge, and level of understanding.

Problems are best understood by figures and students have their problematic

English comprehension (as the primary medium of language) too much late for their age

47
of transiting to the field of work and profession. This proves what Geary (2013) says that

it's easy to appreciate the numbers and yet not the logical relationship among the

numbers. Math is strictly taught in English on Senior High School students, and the fact

that they are not proficient enough opens the problem of the student in language that is

critical in their development (Gurgonus, 2007)

The researchers agree with Richardson, et al (2014) in "rote memorization" that

can affect their achievement. However, the study is limited only to the formulas, terms,

rules and principles and identifying the concept and this does not extend to the teaching

strategy. There has been problem in student's mental capacity in understanding the

logical meaning behind the structure of numbers, and students also were found out that

this is strong factor.

Moreover, students would tend to perceive the subject as too difficult and advanced.

They often forgot the basic concepts and some are still suffering to apply the

fundamental math. The curricular materials that could provide the strategic teaching

method is not viewed as how it is supposed to use for understanding the general math

used above all kind in the secondary. It is the student's attitude toward the subject that

is problematic Any teaching strategies that are fixed to be easy will only become from

what supposed to be learnable to an unlearnable.

Students learn more with the help of other person, specifically their classmates.

The researchers agree with Richardson, et al (2014) that students work best with pairs.

There could be strategic learning techniques from the teacher that are not effective for

individual differences like the behavior and their attitude toward the subject and perhaps

48
also toward the teacher. It also corresponds to Aquino (2013) that study skills are

"effective," only after identifying students' area of weakness and levels of achievements.

There is a large part of students’ learning ability that comes from teaching strategies

(Ittel & Lazarides, 2012).

Ironically, students were found out "interested" in solving Math problems but they

fear of presenting their solutions in discussions, and for some reasons, the teacher calls

the student most in the class which could have given him the pressure. While this would

disregards the theory of Ittel & Lazarides (2012), the "interest" meant in the study is

limited to solving tricky problems that the students encountered in General Math.

"Interest" has been also found out that has significant relationship with the achievement

of student. Therefore, the researchers conclude that interest that is referred to positive

attitude toward General Mathematics reasonably causes the student whether to be

active or to stay silent and be inactive.

Findings do not agree with Narota (1998) in which the researchers have found out

that the significant relationship of student's background with the achievement in

Mathematics is not sufficient. Students disagreed with the statement that corresponds

with Alacaci & Karakoç (2015) which possible problems with real-life connections affect

the student achievement. However, other influences have not affected their

achievement, hence it ignores Heinze and Aiso (2008) that the development of student's

achievement is dependent to the achievement level that the classroom has. This is

perhaps due to limited possibility of factors asked in the survey-questionnaire, only

focusing to two questions. The influence being referred here is only limited to those

49
person/s that might have affected the achievement of the student, and also referred to

some notable distractions.

There has been a major problem in the student's learning strategy to cope with the

curriculum for the subject, especially in terms of notable behaviors that are usual for

those who achieved low performance. General Mathematics is the ultimate session for

students where they are supposed to apply the basic knowledge and fundamental math

that have already taught. The institution and author behind the curriculum might as well

have not considered the attitude of the first batch of K-12. Furthermore, the teacher may

have not effectively engaged them in peer-based learning strategy that could have

helped in teaching even the most advanced and critical concepts for them.

The researchers also believe that more learnable and engaging strategies were not

achieved in the class.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following are recommendations drawn by the researchers.

Students have to acquire the level of understanding that the curriculum requires

them and this is by focusing in effective study habits.

The teacher should find more effective strategies in teaching the concepts in

General Math that could be too difficult for them to apply or identify. Differentiation of

instruction is always required wherein the teacher should consider the differences of

students in their skills, level of understanding or their capacity. The teacher should not
50
too much depend the strategy in memorizations, since students have problem in

comprehension toward the interpretation or identifying which formula, rule or any

fundamental math would be used (Richardson, et al, 2009).

English medium shall be practiced by the students and the teacher has to adjust its

vocabulary. It must be noted that instructional materials are interpreted as it is with clear

and explicit explanations to them, so the materials will be regarded as "learnable."

Peer-studying could be very beneficial and is highly recommended as the students

have to enhance their confidence in coping with the aimed level of understanding. This

may remove the fear of learners in participating without being hindered by doubt of

which is wrong or which is correct. Self-study is still recommended for the learners, for

them to apply themselves the lessons, where, in reviewing, they have additional time for

enhancing them to cope with the subject.

The researchers also recommend to use a larger sample size to make the research

more reliable and more accurate in the findings and supporting evidences.

This study can be used by other researchers for further improvements of

researchers with the same problem. Factors may be expanded with many possible

factors to be considered in writing the survey-questionnaire, or even in other instrument

used to gather the data. Future researchers must also consider the honesty,

truthfulness, and credibility of the respondents while interviews, for instance, are

indefinite and not specific for the data required.

51
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abas-Mastura, M, Jamil, H. & Imam, O. (2013). Correlation between Reading

Comprehension Skills and Students’ Performance in Mathematics,

InternationalJournal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 2(1),

1~8. Retrieved from http://iaesjournal.com/online/index.php/IJERE.

Saritas, T. & Akdemir, O. (2009). Identifying Factors Affecting the Mathematics

Achievement of Students for Better Instructional Design. Retrieved from

http://www.itdl.org/journal/dec_09/article03.htm

Andaya, O.J.F. (2013) Factors That Affect Mathematics Achievements Of Students Of

Philippine Normal University – Isabela Campus. International Refereed

Research Journal, 5(4). Retrieved from Researchers World.

Balbalosa, J. (2010). Factors Affecting Mathematics Performance of Laboratory High

School Students in Laguna State Polytechnic University, Academic Year

2009–2010. Siniloan, Laguna: Laguna State Polytechnic University.

Ballado-Tan, J. (2014). Academic Performance, Aspirations, Attitudes And Study

52
 Habits As Determinants Of The Performance In Licensure Examination Of

Accountancy Graduates. International Journal of Education and Research,

2(12), 61–70.

Capate, R. A. & Lapinid, PhD, M. R. C. (2015), Assessing the mathematics performance

of grade 8 students as basis for enhancing instruction and aligning with k to

12 curriculum. Manila: De La Salle University–Manila.

Carballo, A.K.G. (2009, September 22). Education: Analyzing the status of math &

science education. Growth Revolution Magazine.

Kalhotra, S. K. (2013). A Study Of Causes Of Failure In Mathematics At High School

Stage. Academic Research International, 4(5).

Launio, R. M. (2015). Instructional Medium and its Effect on Students’ Mathematics

Achievement. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current

Mata, M.L., Monteiro, V. & Peixoto, F. (2012). Attitudes towards Mathematics: Effects

of Individual, Motivational, and Social Support Factors, Child Development

Research, 2012(2012). Retrieved from Hindawi.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/876028.

SEI-DOST & MATHTED, (2011). Mathematics framework for philippine basic education.
53
 Manila: SEI-DOST & MATHTED.

Torio, M.Z.C., (2015), Development of Instructional Material Using Algebra as a Tool in

Problem Solving. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(1).

Orale, R. L..& Sarmiento, D. H. (2016). Senior High School Curriculum in the

Philippines, USA, and Japan. Journal of Academic Research, 1(3), 12-23.

Valdez, E. A. (2016), Predictors Of Mathematics Performance Of The Grade Vi Pupils

Of Cauayan Northeast District: Basis For Intervention Program. The Online

Journal of New Horizons in Education, 6(4), 151–154.

54