1

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

We live in a mathematical world. Whenever we decide on a purchase, choose an

insurance or health plan, or use a spreadsheet, we rely on mathematical understanding. The

World Wide Web, CD-ROMs, and other media disseminate vast quantities of quantitative

information. The level of mathematical thinking and problem solving needed in the workplace

has increased dramatically. In such a world, those who understand and can do mathematics will

have opportunities that others do not. Mathematical competence opens doors to productive

futures. A 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. All students deserve an opportunity to understand the

power and beauty of mathematics. Students need to learn a new set of mathematics basics that

enable them to compute accurately and to solve problems creatively and resourcefully.

It has taken such a long time to discover the importance of Mathematics in our world the

discoveries lead us to more technological or what was called Industrial Era, wherein the different

usage of technological devices occurred. In this era, application of Mathematics helps to develop

and invent such technological devices. Through these applications our life became easier.

Nowadays, Mathematics is the key to all Sciences.

Despite explaining more about mathematics and the proof that it is really important, the

students today do not like this subject. They think that the Mathematics is a boring subject, and

it’s hard to understand formulas, they always say “Why should we study Mathematics, only four

major operations are enough and the rest no longer needed. We do use graphs and formulas in

our daily living.” Only if they understand the logic behind this subject and the principles applied

in different problems, if they get what Mathematics really meant to be, they will find that it is not

a boring subject, but rather an interesting one. Mathematics becomes part of our life, not only in

our academic subjects, but in all parts of our integral life. We don’t see that even in simple

2

conversation mathematics takes place. In our transportation it also occurs, and in our daily living

it is definitely applied.

Background of the Study

According to Schereiber (2000) those who have positive attitudes toward mathematics

have a better performance in this subject.

Mathematics achievement has shown that the students from each major level of

Education in Asia seemed to outperform their counterparts. Many studies have examined

students’ thinking about school and their attitude toward Mathematics. Mathematics performance

involves a complex interaction of factors on school outcome. Although the relationship between

mathematics performance and students factor has been studied widely, it is important to explore

the factors that contribute to students’ mathematics performance.

Wendy Hansen (2008) stated that boys are more likely than girls to be math geniuses.

The researcher found that neither gender consistently outpaced the other in any state or at any

grade level. Even on test questions from the National Assessment of Education Progress that

were designed to measure complex reasoning skills, the gender differences were minuscule,

according to the study.

Student engagement in mathematics refers to students’ motivation to learn mathematics,

their confidence in their ability to succeed in mathematics and their emotional feelings about

mathematics. Student engagement in mathematics plays a key role in the acquisition of math

skills and knowledge – students who are engaged in the learning process will tend to learn more

and be more receptive to further learning. Student engagement also has an impact upon course

selection, educational pathways and later career choices.

Mathematics performance has improved, again, through expecting students to achieve,

providing instruction based on individual student needs and using a variety of methods to reach

3

all learners. One factor has been aligning the math curriculum to ensure that the delivery of

instruction is consistent with the assessment frequency.

This particular study attempts to determine the factors affecting mathematics

performance of Laboratory High School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University

Academic Year 2009-2010

Theoretical Framework

Inzlicht (2003) stated that entity and incremental theories of ability were assessed

separately so that their separate influences could be examined; mathematics performance was

examined by controlling for prior math performance. Entity theory was expected to be a negative

predictor of performance, whereas incremental theory was expected to be a positive predictor.

Guohua Peng (2002) stated that simple traditional methods gradually make the students

feel that mathematics is pointless and has little value to them in real life. It becomes a subject

they are forced to study, but one that is useless to them in real life.

Dweck, C. S. (1999) stated that students believe that their ability is fixed, probably at

birth, and there is very little if anything they can do to improve it is called fixed IQ theorists.

They believe ability comes from talent rather than from the slow development of skills through

learning. “It's all in the genes”. Either you can do it with little effort, or you will never be able to

do it, so you might as well give up in the face of difficulty. E.g. “ I can't do math”. And

Untapped Potential theorists, students believe that ability and success are due to learning, and

learning requires time and effort. In the case of difficulty one must try harder, try another

approach, or seek help etc.

Dan Hull (1999) stated that growing numbers of teachers today—especially those

frustrated by repeated lack of student success in demonstrating basic proficiency on standard

tests are discovering that most students’ interest and achievement in math, science, and language

improve dramatically when they are helped to make connections between new information

4

(knowledge) and experiences they have had, or with other knowledge they have already

mastered. Students’ involvement in their schoolwork increases significantly when they are taught

why they are learning the concepts and how those concepts can be used outside the classroom.

And most students learn much more efficiently when they are allowed to work cooperatively

with other students in groups or teams.

Conceptual Framework

The major concept of this study is focused on factors affecting Mathematics Performance

of Laboratory High School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University Academic Year

2009-2010.

Figure 1; shows the relationship of input variables which contain the extent of the

student-related factors and the extent of the teacher-related factors. The process contains the

survey, data gathering, data analysis, and data interpretation while output variables contain the

analysis of student-related factors and teacher-related factors.

FIGURE 1. A conceptual paradigm showing the relationship of students’ mathematics

performance in student-related factors and in teacher-related factors.

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

STUDENT-RELATED

FACTORS

Interest

Study Habits

TEACHER-RELATED

FACTORS

Personality Traits

Teaching Skills

Instructional Materials

Survey

Data Gathering

Data Analysis

Data Interpretation

An Analysis of student-related

factors

An analysis of teacher-related

factors

5

Statement of the Problem

The study attempted to determine the factors affecting mathematics performance of

Laboratory High School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University Academic Year 2009-

2010.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the extent of the student-related factors in terms of:

1.1 Interest

1.2 Study Habits

2. What is the extent of teacher-related factors as evaluated by the students in terms of:

2.1 Personality Traits

2.2 Teaching Skills

2.3 Instructional Materials

3. What is the level of students’ mathematics performance?

4. Is there significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and

students-related factors?

5. Is there significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and teacher-

related factors?

Hypothesis

The following are the null hypotheses of this research:

There is no significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and

student-related factors.

There is no significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and

teacher-related factors.

6

Significance of the Study

The result of the study will merit the following:

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

programs for school advancement.

Curriculum Planner. The result of this study will help them appraise the existing

programs in terms of the student’s needs and abilities and make changes as required.

Guidance Councilor. This study will help develop the guidance program in line with

individual needs and abilities of the students.

Facilitators/Teachers. The results of this study may serve as an eye opener to create and

innovate instructional materials, and to use varied and appropriate teaching strategies.

Students. This study will help the students to develop their interest toward Mathematics

and appreciate the importance of Mathematics in their daily lives.

Parents. Who are directly concerned with the education of their children considering

school performance in different discipline.

Future Researcher. The result of this study can serve as basis for further study on

teaching learning activities and student mathematical performance.

Scope and Limitation

This study was limited only to Laboratory High School Students of Laguna State Polytechnic

University during the Academic Year 2009-2010.

Determining the factors affecting Mathematics Performance of Laboratory High School

Students was the focus of this research. The information needed was gathered using the checklist

style research-made questionnaire. All information and conclusions drawn from this study were

obtained only to this particular group of students.

7

Definition of Terms

For better clarification and understanding of the terms related to this study, the following

terms are defined conceptually and operationally.

Instructional Materials refers to motivating techniques that teaching materials or equipment

used. It can be high technology or simple materials that can be used in learning preference.

Interest refers to the amount of the students’ dislike or like of particular things.

Mathematics Performance refers to the degree or capacity of students’ knowledge in

Mathematics.

Personality Traits refers to the good relationship of the mathematics teachers with the

students.

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

Teaching Skills refers to the skills of teachers in mathematics in terms of teaching her/his

lesson.

8

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies of the sub-topics of this

research; interest, study habits, personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials.

Afolabi S. Sunday and Joshua O. Adeleke (2010), find out that instructional resources

and materials are the crucial determinants of methods used in mathematics teaching. Therefore,

should be provided through the following ways: (i) the government, (ii) improvisation by school

teachers and students, (iii) request from lovers of mathematics and (iv) philanthropists, (v)

school P.T.A (vi) setting up a department in NMC to take up the commitment of providing

standard instructional materials for the whole nation. Training and retaining of mathematics

teachers on the use of instructional materials (vii) teacher education programmers should have at

least a course whereby students are taught the construction and improvisation of instructional

materials for all courses and their uses. Teachers should be made to be aware of the importance

instructional materials. (http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr_43_3_12.pdf)

Dr. Bob Kizlik (2010) stated that effective study skills must be practiced in order for you

to improve. It is not enough to simplify “think about” studying; you have to actually do it, and in

the process use information from what you do to get better. All that follows depends on this

single concept. There is a saying that goes like this “Practice doesn’t make perfect; perfect

practice makes perfect.” If you want to be an achiever, take this saying to heart.

(http://www.cccsmurrieta.com/elementary/classfiles/pdfs/5effstudyskills.pdf)

Mark Crilly (2000) as cited by Bagongon and Edpalina (2009) stated that successful

students are able to balance social activities with good study habits. A diversion from studies will

alleviate stress and help prevent from becoming fatigued. He said that a student should make

sure that he must take a break for an hour after studies to meet with friends, to play some cards,

work out at the gym, or to gab with a new acquaintance. For this way, that student will find

concentration when he does study, if he plans a social activity afterwards. He said, “To develop a

9

healthy social life, develop routine study habits. After supper, lug your books and homework to

the library, find a comfortable and quite niche, and study for two or three hours, taking

intermittent 10 minutes breaks every 45 minutes or so.” http://www.scribd.com/The-Effect-Of-

Study-Habits-On-The-Academic-Performance-Of-Freshmen-Education-Students-In-Xavier-

University-Cagayan-De-Oro-City-School-Year-2008-2009

The study of Curioso as cited by Villamor (2008), investigated the correlation of

academic performance of Freshmen College Students of University of Baguio. The study found

out that the students’ factors, teachers’ factors and environment factors were highly associated

with the academic performance of the students.

The study of Villamor (2008), found out that there is a significant functional relationship

between gender, interest toward mathematics, teaching competencies, teaching strategies and

techniques and library setting that there is no significant functional relationship between

classroom setting and the students’ performance in mathematics.

Bustos and Espiritu, as cited by Calderon and Checa (2007), explained that a teacher is

charged with the way he manage learning inside the classroom. The basis of his classroom

management is the theory of the knowledge about the learner and their involvement in the

learning process. This theory should be his basis in the decision making like analyzing and

understanding the important roles of teachers in the classroom, and these are: teachers serve as

the classroom manage, facilitator of the students’ achievement and evaluation of students

learning. This role of the teacher must be observed in every corner of the classroom. There are

times that teacher also serve as the second parents of their students because the behavior and

attitude that they display in and out the room are seen by the students.

MacAfee and Leong, as cited by Checa (2007), wrote that there are many factors that are

responsible for the achievement of the students. These are include the public, parent, funding

groups, governing boards, hole schools, and most of all the teachers. Teachers are expected to

10

explain what they are doing and the results. If the school environment is conducive for students

learning, then the maximum learning can be achieved.

Pressly, as cited by Bagayana (2006), describes how students’ interests and motivation

can be fostered through the teaching strategy used. He explains that when students have a

repertoire of strategies with which to work, they are empowered with the “the will and the skill”

to successfully problem-solve.

Valenzuela, as cited by Bagayana (2006), studied the correlates of achievement in

Mathematics. One of the construct she looked at was the interest in Mathematics. She found out

that the students have high level of interest in Mathematics. The research’s results conclude that

the students like Mathematics. Majority of the students find the subject interesting and useful. No

significant relationship was found between the interest of the students in Mathematics and

achievement in the subject.

Salandanan (2005), the teacher is an integral part of an instructional activity. Her skills

employing a variety of teaching methodologies in paramount if every classroom encounter is to

result in creating beneficial interaction of positive response.

Tolentino (2002), as cited by Almario (2004), emphasized the importance and

effectiveness of instructional materials in the teaching process. In view of the findings and

conclusion drawn, she recommends the following: 1) the proposed instructional materials will

serve as an effective vehicle in the teaching and learning, 2) the researcher proposes the adoption

of the instructional materials will further enhance the learning skills in terms of concepts

application of the different concept and principles in the study of the subjects.

Fraenkel, as cited by Gordula (2004), stated that teaching strategies represent

combination of certain specific procedures or operations, grouped and order in a definite

sequences, that teachers can use in the classroom to implement both cognitive and affective

11

objectives. If the teacher uses the best practices in teaching mathematics, then he can create a

positive interaction between them.

Almario (2004), teachers who understand the situation inside the classroom should be

equipped with the necessary skills, strategies and materials and should be skilled in motivation

students to exert knowledge to meet the needs of the students and ensure the academic success.

Aquino (2003) pointed out that study skills can be taught effectively only after

identifying students’ areas of weakness and levels of achievement by means of appropriate tests.

Those whose level of achievement is appropriate to their grade level can be provided with

development (or enrichment) exercises, which will enable them to become more proficient in the

skills they have already acquired or which will help them learn new skills.

The study of Digals, as cited by Sarmiento (2002), sought to assess the instructional

competencies of master teachers, associated with their performance and selected personal

variables. He found out that master teacher respondents possess very satisfactorily in knowledge

of the subject matter and lesson planning , proficiency in language, effective use of teaching

strategies, instructional aids and materials, evaluation techniques, classroom management and

discipline, and age, educational attainment, length of service and performance rating of master

teachers are determining factors of the level of their instructional competencies. Older master

teachers and those with higher educational attainment, longer years of service and higher

performance rating tend to be more instructionally competent.

Gorhan and Christophel (1990), as cited by Sarmiento (2002), stated that humor can be

an indispensable tool in promoting a positive relationship with the students.

Grows and Cebulla (2000), state that teaching mathematics with focus on number sense

encourages students to become a problem-solver in a wide variety of situation to view

mathematics as a discipline is important.

12

Gonzales (2000), teaching is a responsibility and every teacher has no choices but to face

them. Teachers must start working, thinking why the quality of education is declining

continuously, and do our part as a mentors.

Bustos and Espiritu, as cited by Tulio (2000), any teacher who is charge with the

management of classroom learning hold particular things of teaching based on his knowledge

about the learners and learning process. Such theory of teaching becomes the basic of his

decision on how to go about his various significant roles in the classroom, namely as classroom

manager, as facilitator of students’ learning and as evaluator of students’ learning.

Rohwes W.Jr.et al. as cited by Sainz (2000) further discussed the teachers need to find

ways of determining whether or not her instruction have been successful. The procedure and

method of determining such success can take the form of test of various kinds to determine

whether the students have reached the objectives they have set for them.

13

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design, research procedure, the subject of the study,

determination of sample, research instrument and statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

This study determined the factors affecting mathematics performance of Laboratory High

School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University. The descriptive – correlation method

was used in this study.

In descriptive method, Calmorin (1994) as cited by Bagayana (2006), wrote the study

focuses on the present condition. The purpose is to find new truth, which may come in different

forms such as increased quantity of knowledge, a new generalization, or increased insights into

factors, which are operating, the discovery of a new causal relationship, a more accurate

formulation of the problem to be solved and many others.

Since this study measured data that already exist and the number of respondents is not

large, the descriptive – correlation method of studies is best suited. As mentioned, the student-

related factors in terms of interest and study habits, and the teacher-related factors in terms of

personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials were generated using researcher –

made questionnaire.

Subject of the Study

The respondents in this study were the one hundred twenty six (126) Laboratory High

School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University Academic Year 2009-2010.

Research Instrument

The main tool used in this study was a researcher – made questionnaire – checklist. A set

of questionnaire-checklist was constructed for the student respondents. The questionnaire –

14

checklist consisted of the students’ level of interest in Mathematics, their study habits and their

teachers’ personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials used in teaching as

perceived by the students.

Part 1 on the questionnaire – checklist obtained the students’ level of interest in

Mathematics presented five(5) statements and the students’ study habits presented ten(10)

situations. These were given one set of five checkboxes each. The five checkboxes were ranked

as:

5 – Always

4 – Often

3 – Sometimes

2 – Rarely

1 – Never

Part 2 obtained teacher’s personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials

used in teaching as rated by the students. Each statement was given one set of five checkboxes.

Again, the five checkboxes were ranked as:

5 – Always

4 – Often

3 – Sometimes

2 – Rarely

1 – Never

The questionnaire – checklist was presented to the adviser and expert on Mathematics for

comments, corrections, and suggestions on the content.

Research Procedure

The original title proposed by the researcher was checked, revised and rechecked by the

researcher’s adviser to maintain conformity to the subject of research. The questionnaire-

checklist that aims to draw out proper responses on the objectives of this study was constructed.

15

This questionnaire – checklist made by the researcher was presented, analyzed and checked by

the research adviser, Mrs. Delia F. Mercado, to ensure the validity of responses it would elicit.

The permit to conduct research and study was secured through a letter request for

permission from the principal of Laboratory High School at Laguna State Polytechnic

University.

Data gathered from answered questionnaires were checked, classified, tabulated and

analyzed according to the research design described in this chapter using Microsoft Excel and

prepared for final presentation to the experts of different fields of specialization.

Statistical Treatment of Data

Analysis Statistical Tools

1. The extent of student-related factors

in terms of:

1.1 Interest

1.2 Study habits

2. The extent of teacher-related factors

in terms of:

2.1 Personality Traits

2.2 Teaching Skills

2.3 Instructional Materials

3. The level of students’ mathematics

performance.

4. Significant relationship between

students’ mathematics performance

and student-related factors.

5. Significant relationship between

students’ mathematics performance

and teacher-related factors.

Weighted Mean

Weighted Mean

Mean, median, mode, skewness and

kurtosis.

Pearson R, Spearman Rho, Regression

Pearson R, Spearman Rho, Regression

16

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents, analyzes and interprets the data gathered from the students of

Laboratory High School at Laguna State Polytechnic University in determining factors affecting

Performance in Mathematics.

Extent of Interest of the students in Mathematics

Table 1 shows the weighted mean of students’ interest in Mathematics. Students’ level of

interest in Mathematics was rated based on the students’ self-perceived level of preparation for

the Mathematics subject, attention given to teacher’s lectures, active participation in class, their

desire to get good grades and their desire to listen to discussions or attention class.

The students gave a unifying perception on their level of interest in Mathematics. The

item “I want to get good grades on tests, quizzes, assignments and projects.” ranked first with an

average weighted mean of 4.77. The item “I get frustrated when the discussion is interrupted or

the teacher is absent.” got the lowest rating with an average weighted mean of 2.88.

Table 1. Extent of Interest in Mathematics as Perceived by the Students

InterestWeighted

MeanRank

Verbal

Interpretation

1. I make myself prepared for the math subject 3.79 4 Often

2. I listen attentively to the lecture of my math teacher. 4.10 2 Often

3. I actively participate in the discussion, answering exercises

and/or clarifying things I did not understand.3.93 3 Often

4. I want to get good grades on tests, quizzes, assignments and

projects.4.77 1 Always

5. I get frustrated when the discussion is interrupted or the

teacher is absent.2.88 5 Sometimes

Average Weighted Mean 3.90   Often

17

The overall weighted mean of interest in Mathematics is 3.90. This means students are

“often” interested in this subject. Among questionnaire items, the desire to get good grades is the

most interesting to students but the desire to attend discussion received the lowest extent of

interest.

Extent of Study Habits

Table 2 shows the lists of ten (10) items about situational/action statements used in the

data gathering and the corresponding weighted means of the students’ responses ranked from the

highest to lowest weighted mean together with the verbal interpretation. The criteria in obtaining

students’ level of study habits were based on their personal tendency or pattern of action in

studying when they are in school days.

Table 2. Extent of Study Habits as Perceived by the Students

Study HabitsWeighted

MeanRank

Verbal

Interpretation

1. I do my assignments regularly. 4.09 2 Often

2. I exert more effort when I do difficult assignments. 3.88 4 Often

3. I spend my vacant time in doing assignments or studying my

lessons.3.08 9 Sometimes

4. I study the lessons I missed if I was absent from the class 3.65 5 Often

5. I study and prepared for quizzes and tests. 4.07 3 Often

6. I study harder to improve my performance when I get low

grades.4.34 1 Often

7. I spend less time with my friends during school days to

concentrate more on my studies.2.97 10 Sometimes

8. I prefer finishing my studying and my assignments first before

watching any television program.3.10 8 Sometimes

9. I see to it that extracurricular activities do not hamper my

studies.3.37 7 Sometimes

10. I have a specific place of study at home which I keep clean and

orderly.3.45 6 Often

Average Weighted Mean 3.60   Often

18

Overall, the extent of study habits as perceived by the students themselves gained an

“often” result with an overall weighted mean of 3.60. Among each situational/action statements or

items given, the item “I study harder to improve my performance when I get low grades.” ranked

first with an average weighted mean of 4.34 but the item “I spend less time with my friends

during school days to concentrate more on my studies.” got the lowest extent of study habits in

Mathematics.

Extent of Teachers’ Personality Traits

. Table 3 shows the data on the extent of personality traits of the teachers with the

computed weighted mean, rank and interpretation. Extent of teachers’ personality traits were

ranked based on their relationship with the students, their smartness, confidence and firmness in

making decisions, their imposing proper discipline and not lenient in following the prescribed

rules, their personality with good sense of humor and their appreciation to suggestions and

opinions and their worthy of praise

Personality TraitsWeighted

Mean Rank

Verbal

Interpretation

1. Has a good relationship with the students and teachers. 4.60 1 always

2. Shows smartness, confidence and firmness in making

decisions.4.58 2 always

3. Imposes proper discipline and is not lenient in following the

prescribed rules.4.43 4 often

4. Has an appealing personality with good sense of humor. 4.41 5 often

5. Is open to suggestions and opinions and is worthy of praise. 4.48 3 often

Average Weighted Mean 4.50   always

Table 3. Extent of Teachers’ Personality Traits as Perceived by the Students

The table reveals that item number 1 ranked first with an average weighted mean of 4.60

and interpreted as “always” which means that the teacher always has a good relationship with the

students. The item number 2 ranked second with an average weighted mean of 4.58 also

interpreted as “always” which means that the teacher always shows their smartness, confidence

19

and firmness in making decisions. Items 3, 4, and 5 interpreted as “often” with the weighted

means of 4.48, 4.43, and 4.41 for ranks 3, 4, and 5, respectively.

Extent of Teaching Skills

Table 4 presents the extent of teaching skills acquired by the teachers in Mathematics as

perceived by the students. The overall weighted mean of the teachers in terms of teaching skills

is 4.41 which is interpreted as “often”.

Table 4. Extent of Teaching Skills as Perceived by the Students

Teaching SkillsWeighted

Mean Rank

Verbal

Interpretation

1. Explains the objectives of the lesson clearly at the start

of each period.4.51 2 always

2. Has mastery of the subject matter. 4.70 1 always

3. Is organized in presenting subject matters by

systematically following course outline.4.40 4 often

4. Is updated with present trends, relevant to the subject

matter.4.46 3 often

5. Uses various strategies, teaching aids/devices and

techniques in presenting the lessons.3.96 5 often

Average Weighted Mean 4.41   often

Looking closely at the table item per item, it was observed that the “The teacher has

mastery of the subject matter” has the highest average weighted mean among the five items and

interpreted as “always” followed by the item “The teacher explains the objectives of the lesson

clearly at the start of each period” also interpreted as “always”. Items “The teacher is updated

with present trends, relevant to the subject matter” , “The teacher is organized in presenting

subject matter by systematically following course outline”, and “The teacher uses various

strategies, teaching aids/devices and techniques in presenting the lessons” interpreted as “often”

with the average weighted means of 4.46, 4.40 and 3.96 for ranks 3, 4 and 5, respectively.

20

Extent of Instructional Materials used by the Mathematics Teachers

Table 5 presents the extent of instructional materials used by the teachers in Mathematics.

It shows that the teachers “always” used chalk and blackboard in explaining the lessons with an

average weighted mean of 4.93. The teachers used workbooks/textbooks and materials for

project development interpreted as “sometimes” with the average weighted means of 3.45 and

2.55 for ranks 2 and 3. The teachers used articles interpreted as “rarely” with an average

weighted mean of 2.48. Lastly, used of power point presentation got the lowest extent of

instructional materials with an average weighted mean of 1.49 interpreted as “sometimes”.

Table 5. Extent of Instructional Materials used by the Mathematics Teachers

Instructional Materials Weighted Mean Rank Verbal Interpretation

1. Chalk and blackboard in explaining the

lessons.4.93 1 always

2. workbooks/textbooks 3.45 2 sometimes

3. PowerPoint presentations (visual aids) 1.49 5 never

4. articles 2.48 4 rarely

5. materials for project development 2.55 3 sometimes

Average Weighted Mean 2.98   sometimes

The overall extent of instructional materials used by the Math teachers as perceived by

the students gained “sometimes” result with an overall average weighted mean of 2.98. This

means that the teacher in Mathematics sometimes uses instructional materials.

Level of Performance of Students in Mathematics

Table 6 presents the level of performance of Laboratory high school students in

Mathematics in terms of some measure as mean, median, mode, standard deviation, skewness

and kurtosis. The grades presented are the means of the grades of students-respondents in third

grading period obtained through documentary analysis of Form 138 provided by the adviser.

21

Table 6. Level of Performance of Students in Mathematics

Statistics  Value Verbal Interpretation

Mean 88.23 Satisfactory

Median 89.00 Satisfactory

Mode 91.00 Very Satisfactory

Standard Deviation 4.84

Kurtosis 2.10 Relatively Steep/leptokurtic

Skewness -1.13 Skewed to the left/negatively skewed

Table reveals that the mean performance of students in Mathematics was “satisfactory”

with an average of 88.23 median of 89 mode of 91 and standard deviation of 4.84. The skewness

of the level of students is -1.13 which, which skewed to the left/negatively skewed while kurtosis

is 2.10, which is leptokurtic or has a relatively peaked distribution.

It reveals that several of the students really wanted the subject of Mathematics. Only few

of the students got low and the rest got the high grades.

Significant Relationship of the Mathematics Performance of the Students in Student-

related factors and Teacher-related factors

Table 7 presents the significant relationship of the factors affecting Mathematics

Performance of Laboratory High School. As seen on the table, the Pearson r of the five (5)

factors such as Interest, Study Habits, Personality Traits, Teaching Skills and Instructional

Materials have high degree of correlation but the t revealed the lesser value of 2.01. It means that

there is no significant relationship to Mathematics performance of the students.

22

Table 7. Significant Relationship of the Mathematics Performance of the Students in Student-

related factors and Teacher-related factors

Variables df T-Computed T- value Interpretation

Interest

113

0.544326 2.10 not significant

Study Habits -0.465262108 -2.10 not significant

Personality Traits -0.095499 -2.10 not significant

Teaching Skills 0.984864987 2.10 not significant

Instructional

Materials -1.043867038-2.10

not significant

The table reveals that the interest, study habits, personality traits, teaching skills and

instructional materials do not affect the Mathematics performance of the Students of Laguna

State Polytechnic University.

23

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the summary of findings; the conclusions made and the

recommendations offered.

Summary of Findings

The summary of findings is made according to the sequence outline of the statement of

the problem presented in chapter 1.

Based on the data gathered, the overall weighted mean of interest in Mathematics is 3.90.

This means students are “often” interested in this subject. Among questionnaire items, item #4 is

the most interesting to students but item #2 received the lowest extent of interest.

Study habits had an average weighted mean of 3.60 and also interpreted as “often”.

Among each situational/action statements or items given, the item #6 ranked first with an average

weighted mean of 4.34 but the item # 7 got the lowest extent of study habits in Mathematics.

Personality traits had an average weighted mean of 4.50 and interpreted as “always”. It

reveals that item number 1 ranked first with an average weighted mean of 4.60 and interpreted as

“always” which means that the teacher always has a good relationship with the students. The

item number 2 ranked second with an average weighted mean of 4.58 also interpreted as

“always” which means that the teacher always shows their smartness, confidence and firmness in

making decisions.

Teaching skills had an average weighted mean of 4.41 and interpreted as “often”. It

reveals that item #2 got the highest average weighted mean and item #5 got the lowest average

weighted mean.

24

Instructional materials had an average weighted mean of 2.98 and interpreted as

“sometimes”. This means that the teacher in Mathematics sometimes uses instructional materials.

In terms of level of performance of the students in mathematics, the students obtained the

mean grade of 88.23 with verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory” and standard deviation of 4.84.

It reveals that several of the students really wanted the subject of Mathematics. Only few of the

students got low and the rest got the high grades.

Through the test of significance, the researcher came up with the following conclusion;

there is no significant correlation between student interest in mathematics and their performance

in mathematics. Their computed z-value is 0.54 which is less than the tabular z-value of 2.10 at α

= .05. There is no significant correlation between study habits and their performance in

mathematics. The computed z-value is -0.47 which is less than the tabular z-value of -2.10 at α

=0.05. This means that the performance of the students in mathematics was not affected by the

student-related factors in terms of interest and study habits.

There is no significant relationship between teacher-related factors such as personality

traits, teaching skills and instructional materials and the performance of the students in

mathematics. Their computed z-values are -0.10, 0.98 and -1.04 which are less than the tabular z-

value of -2.10, 2.10 and -2.10 respectively. Thus, teacher-related factors do not affect the

performance of the students in mathematics.

Conclusions

The results of this study showed that in terms of students’ interest and study habits,

teachers’ personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials had no significant bearing

on students’ mathematics performance.

25

Therefore, it is concluded that student-related factors and teacher-related factors do not

affect the students’ mathematics performance of laboratory high school students at Laguna State

Polytechnic University Academic Year 2009-2010.

Recommendations

Based on the conclusions made, the following recommendations are given: that a more

comprehensive research on relationship to Mathematics be made by the future researchers to

determine a more focused result on the relationship; that teachers shall use more interactive

teaching techniques that would boost interest in mathematics; that a more thorough research on

study habits be made by future researchers to determine its effect on student performance; and it

is further recommended that the same study be conducted in a National High School wherein the

respondents will be composed of heterogeneous learners.