You are on page 1of 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
TITLE PAGE . . . . . . . . . i

APPROVAL SHEET. . . . . . . . ii

DEDICATION . . . . . . . . iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . . . . . . . iv

THESIS ABSTRACT . . . . . . . vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . x

LIST OF FIGURE AND TABLES . . . . . . xii

Chapter

I INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study . . . . . . 1


Statement of the Problem . . . . . . 4
Statement of Hypothesis . . . . . . 4
Significance of the Study . . . . . . 5
Scope and Limitation . . . . . . 6
Definition of Terms. . . . . . . 7

II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE


AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Definition, Advantages and Uses of CALL in Research . . 9


Teachers’ Role in CALL . . . . . . 12
English Language Skills . . . . . . 14
Quipper School . . . . . . . 16
Related Studies . . . . . . . 17
Theoretical Framework . . . . . . 19
Conceptual Paradigm . . . . . . 20

x
III METHODOLOGY

Research Design . . . . . . . 22
Locale of the Study . . . . . . . 22
Respondents of the Study . . . . . . 23
Research Instruments . . . . . . 24
Data Gathering Procedures. . . . . . 25
Statistical Treatment of Data . . . . . 26

IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION


OF DATA

English Language Proficiency Levels of the Students


Before the Intervention. . . . . . 29
English Language Proficiency Levels of the Students
After the Intervention . . . . . . 34
Comparison of the English Language Proficiency Levels
of the Students Before and After the Intervention . . 37
Experiences of the Students in English Language Learning
Through Quipper School . . . . . 39

V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Restatement of the Problem and Methodology . . . 49


Summary of Findings. . . . . . . 51
Conclusion . . . . . . . . 52
Recommendations . . . . . . . 52

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . 54

APPENDICES
English Proficiency Test/ FGD Questions . . . 62
Verbatim Transcription of the Focus Group Discussion . 68
Letter of Request to the Principal . . . . . 77

CURRICULUM VITAE . . . . . . . 79

xi
LIST OF FIGURE AND TABLES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE


1 The Conceptual Paradigm . . . . . 20

TABLES

1 English Language Proficiency Levels of the Students


Before the Intervention. . . . . . 29

2 English Language Proficiency Levels of the Students


After the Intervention . . . . . 32

3 Comparison of the English Language Proficiency Levels


of the Students Before and After the Intervention . 37

xii

You might also like