You are on page 1of 245

COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING

PROGRAM

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School College of Teacher-Education Saint Louis College City of San Fernando (La Union)

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the DEGREE MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN MATHEMATICS

By FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA

February, 2011

INDORSEMENT This TEACHERS FERNANDO thesis, IN entitled, COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS IN SAN

THE

PRIVATE SECONDARY UNION: BASIS FOR

SCHOOLS A

CITY,

LA

TWO-PRONGED

TRAINING PROGRAM, prepared and submitted by FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN MATHEMATICS, has been examined and is recommended for acceptance and approval for ORAL EXAMINATION. MR.GERARDO L. HOGGANG, MAMT Adviser This is to certify that the thesis entitled, COMPETENCE OF

MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM, prepared and submitted by FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA is recommended for ORAL EXAMINATION. NORA A. OREDINA, Ed.D. Chairperson EDWINA M. MANALANG, MAEd Member Noted by: AURORA R. CARBONELL, Ed.D. Dean, College of Teacher Education Saint Louis College MARILOU R. ALMOJUELA, Ed.D Member

APPROVAL SHEET Approved by the Committee on Oral Examination as PASSED with a grade of 96% on February 18, 2011. NORA A. OREDINA, Ed.D. Chairperson EDWINA M. MANALANG, MAEd Member MARILOU R. ALMOJUELA, Ed.D Member

ENGR. ANGELICA DOLORES, MATE-Math CHED RO I Representative Member Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN

MATHEMATICS. AURORA R. CARBONELL, Ed.D. Dean, College of Teacher Education Saint Louis College This is to certify that FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA has completed all academic requirements and PASSED the Comprehensive Examination with a grade of 94% in May, 2010 for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN MATHEMATICS.

AURORA R. CARBONELL, Ed.D. Dean, College of Teacher Education Saint Louis College

INDORSEMENT This TEACHERS FERNANDO thesis, IN entitled, COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS IN SAN

THE

PRIVATE SECONDARY UNION: BASIS FOR

SCHOOLS A

CITY,

LA

TWO-PRONGED

TRAINING PROGRAM, prepared and submitted by FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN MATHEMATICS, has been examined and is recommended for acceptance and approval for ORAL EXAMINATION. MR.GERARDO L. HOGGANG, MAMT Adviser This is to certify that the thesis entitled, COMPETENCE OF

MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM, prepared and submitted by FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA is recommended for ORAL EXAMINATION. NORA A. OREDINA, Ed.D. Chairperson EDWINA M. MANALANG, MAEd Member Noted by: AURORA R. CARBONELL, Ed.D. Dean, College of Teacher Education Saint Louis College MARILOU R. ALMOJUELA, Ed.D Member

APPROVAL SHEET Approved by the Committee on Oral Examination as PASSED with a grade of 96% on February 18, 2011. NORA A. OREDINA, Ed.D. Chairperson EDWINA M. MANALANG, MAEd Member MARILOU R. ALMOJUELA, Ed.D Member

ENGR. ANGELICA DOLORES, MATE-Math CHED RO I Representative Member Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN

MATHEMATICS. AURORA R. CARBONELL, Ed.D. Dean, College of Teacher Education Saint Louis College This is to certify that FELJONE GALIMA RAGMA has completed all academic requirements and PASSED the Comprehensive Examination with a grade of 94% in May, 2010 for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION MAJOR IN MATHEMATICS.

AURORA R. CARBONELL, Ed.D. Dean, College of Teacher Education Saint Louis College

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The researcher wishes to express his sincerest gratitude and warm appreciation to the following persons who had contributed much in helping him shape and reshape this valuable piece of work. Mr. Gerry Hoggang, thesis adviser, for always giving necessary suggestions to better this study. Dr. Nora A. Oredina, chairwoman of the examiners, for her valuable critique, and most especially, for inspiring the researcher to pursue his Masterate degree. Engineer Angelica Dolores, MATE-Math, CHED representative, for her intellectual comments and recommendations. Dr. Marilou R. Almojuela and Mrs. Edwina Manalang, panelists, for their brilliant thoughts. Dr. Jose P. Almeida, Mrs. Rica A. Perez, Mrs. Rosabel N. Aspiras for validating the two sets of questionnaire. Sr. Teresita A. Lara, Sr. Angelica Cruz, Mrs. Evangeline L. Mangaoang, Mr. Danilo Romero, and Mrs. Loreta Cepriaso for validating the two-pronged training program. Principals, heads, teachers and students of the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union for lending some of their precious time in giving their responses to the questionnaires.

Mr. Amado I. Dumaguin, his former Mathematics Coordinator, for always giving him inspiration and push; and for believing in the researchers capabilities. Mr. & Mrs. Felipe and Norma Ragma, researchers parents, for always being there when the researcher needed some push. And lastly, to God Almighty for giving the needed strength in the pursuit of this endeavor. F. G. R.

DEDICATION

To my Parents Mr. & Mrs Felipe and Norma Ragma and To my siblings Darwin, Felinor and Nailyn This humble work is a sign of my love to you!
F.G.R.

THESIS ABSTRACT

TITLE: COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM Total Number of Pages: 230 AUTHOR: FELJONE G. RAGMA ADVISER: MR. GERARDO L. HOGGANG, MAMT TYPE OF DOCUMENT: Thesis TYPE OF PUBLICATION: Unpublished ACCREDITING INSTITUTION: Saint Louis College City of San Fernando, La Union CHED, Region I Abstract: The

study

aimed

at

determining

the

competence

level

of

mathematics teachers in the private secondary schools in San Fernando City, La Union with the end goal of designing a validated two-pronged training program. Specifically, it looked into the profile of the mathematics teachers along highest educational attainment, number of years in teaching mathematics and number of mathematics trainings and seminars attended; the level of competence of mathematics teachers along content and instruction; the relationship between teachers profile and content

competence, teachers profile and instructional competence and content and instructional competence; the major strengths and weaknesses of the mathematics teachers along content and instruction and; the type and validity of the training program. The study is descriptive with two sets of questionnaire as the primary data gathering instruments. It covered thirteen (13) private secondary schools in San Fernando City, La Union with heads, faculty, and students as respondents. The study found out that all the mathematics teachers are licensed and majority of them are pursuing graduate studies and had 0-5 years of teaching experience; 84.62% had very inadequate and 15.39% had slightly adequate attendance in seminars. It also found out that the teachers level of content competence was average with a mean rating of 16. They scored highest in conceptual and computational skills but lowest in problem-solving skills. On the other hand, their level of instructional competence was very good with a mean rating of 4.24. They were rated highest in management skills but lowest in teaching skills. Moreover, the study found that there is no significant difference in the perceptions between students and teachers and between teachers and heads but there is a significant difference in the perceptions between students and heads. Also, there is no significant relationship between profile and content competence and between content and instructional

competence. On the other hand, there is a significant relationship between highest educational attainment and instructional competence; but there is no significant relationship between number of years of teaching and number of seminars attended to instructional competence. The teachers conceptual and computational skills are considered as strengths. On the other hand, reasoning and problem-solving skills are considered as weaknesses. All the other skills under teaching, guidance, management and evaluation were considered strengths. The weakness of Mathematics teachers along instructional competence was on the quality of utilization of information and communication

technology. In connection to the output of the study, the two-pronged training program enhances the weaknesses and the sustainability of the strengths. Its face and content validity was found high. Based on the findings, the researcher concluded that the mathematics teachers are all qualified in the teaching profession; they are very young in the service and are exposed minimally to trainings and seminars but they still perform well in their teaching; the teachers had only average competence in terms of their content competence but were perceived very skillful in teaching Mathematics. Further, the heads rated instructional competence higher than the students; but all the respondents considered the teachers very skillful in teaching. Teachers who have higher educational attainment, number of

years in teaching and seminars do not have higher subject matter competence and teachers who have higher educational attainment have higher instructional competence; but, teachers who are more experienced in teaching and have more seminars do not mean that they have higher instructional competence than those who are younger and those who have lesser seminars. It does not also mean that when a teacher has high content competence, he has high instructional competence as well and vice versa. Further, teachers are not so skilled at analysis and problemsolving and they do not use ICT and other innovative instructional technology much in their daily teachings but still have very good teaching performance. The validated two-pronged training program is timely for the new and tenured teachers to update and upgrade their content and instructional competence. Moreover, it is a helpful tool for them to understand more their subject and know more about the ways on how to present a subject matter, especially on the use of ICT. Based on the conclusions, the researcher recommends that the teachers should be encouraged to enroll in their graduate studies; incentive scheme for outstanding performance should be devised by administrators; teachers should always be sent to seminars and workshops where their participation is necessary; teachers should use

ICT in their teaching and that the school has to provide such ICT materials; a closer monitoring system has to be applied by the heads; the proposed two-pronged training program for the Mathematics teachers should be implemented in the private secondary schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union; a study to determine the efficiency or efficacy of the two-pronged training program should be undertaken; and lastly, a parallel study should be undertaken in other subject areas such as English and Science.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page TITLE PAGE INDORSEMENT . APPROVAL SHEET ... ACKNOWLEDGMENT .. DEDICATION .. THESIS ABSTRACT .. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .. FIGURE Chapter 1 The Problem Rationale . Theoretical Framework .. Conceptual Framework . Statement of the Problem . Hypotheses Scope and Delimitation Importance of the Study .. Definition of Terms .. 2 Review of Related Literature Profile of High School Mathematics Teachers .. 1 1-7 7-14 15-17 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-26 27 27 i ii iii iv-v vi vii-xi xii-xvii xviii xix xx

Highest Educational Attainment . Number of Years in Teaching Mathematics . Number of Seminars Attended .. Level of Content and Instructional Competence .. Subject Matter/Content . Teaching Skills . Guidance Skills Management Skills .. Evaluation Skills .. Comparison in Perceived Instructional Competence Among Respondent Groups Relationship of Profile and Content Competence Relationship of Profile and Instructional Competence . Relationship between Content and Instructional Competence .. Strengths and Weaknesses in Teachers Competence . Training Programs .. 3 Research Methodology .. Research Design .

27-28 29-30 30-31 31 32-33 33-37 37-39 39-40 40-42

42-43

43-46

46-48

48-50

50-52 52-53 54 54

Sources of Data .. Instrumentation and Data Collection . Validity and Reliability of the Instrument . Tools for Data Analysis Data Categorization .. Proposed Training Program Validity of the Training Program .. 4 Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data Profile of Mathematics Instructors Highest Educational Attainment . Number of Years in Teaching Mathematics Number of Seminars Attended ..

54-55 56-58 58-60 60-64 64-66 66 66-67 68 68 68-70 70-71 71-72

Summary of the Profile of Mathematics Teachers.. 73-74 Level of Content Competence .. 74 Conceptual Skills . Analytical Skills 74-76 76-78

Computational Skills 78-79 Problem-Solving Skills . 79-81 Summary of Level of Content Competence.. 81-83 Level of Instructional Competence . 83 Teaching Skills . Substantiality of Teaching . 83-86 86-87

Quality of Teachers Explanation Receptivity to Students Ideas And Contributions . Quality of Questioning Procedure Selection of Teaching Methods . Quality of Information and Communication Technology Used .. Guidance Skills . Quality of Interaction with Students . Quality of Student Activity Management Skills .. Atmosphere in the Classroom .. Conduct and Return of Evaluation Materials Evaluation Skills .. Quality of Appraisal Questions. Quality of Assignment/Enrichment Activities . Quality of Appraising Students Performance Comparison in the Perceived Instructional Competence of the Groups of Respondents

87

87-88 88 88

89 89-90 90-91 91 91 91-93

93-94 94 94-96

96

97

Students and Teachers Students and Heads. Heads and Teachers. Summary of Level of Instructional Competence Relationship between Profile and Content Competence . Relationship between Profile and Instructional Competence Relationship between Content and Instructional Competencies .. Summary of Relationship.

97-98 99-100 100-101 102-105

105-108

108-111

111-113 113-114

Strengths and Weaknesses along Content Competence 115-116 Strengths and Weaknesses along Instructional Competence. Teaching Skills Guidance Skills . Management Skills Evaluation Skills Proposed Two-Pronged Training Program Level of Validity of the Proposed .. Two-Pronged Training Program . 116-121 121-122 122 122 122-123 123-129 129-13) 131-140

Sample Flyer of the Two-Pronged Training Program. 141

Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations . 142 Summary Findings Conclusions. Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY. APPENDICES . CURRICULUM VITAE. 142-144 144-145 146-147 147-149 150-161 162-219 210-213

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table 20 Table 21

56 69 71 72 73 75 77 79 80 82 84-86 90 92-93 94-96 98 99 101 103-104 106 109 112

Table 22 Table 23 Table 24 Table 25 ..

114 116 117-121 129-130

FIGURE

Figure 1 The Research Paradigm ..

Page 18

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM Rationale The tremendous task of education today, under the enormous influx of technological advances and innovations, is still the development of a learner into a whole person, a complete human being capable of understanding his own complexity and his intricate society. The teacher, who is in charge of this global task, needs to cope with the challenges of the modern times. He has to be equipped with the resources vital in arousing and sustaining students interest, in facilitating the learning process, and in evaluating the learning outcomes. He should be a master of his craft and is genuinely concerned with the total growth and development of his students (Clemente-Reyes 2002). Quality education is first and foremost a function of instruction. Thus, for education to attain and sustain its quality, it should be coupled with the best preparation for excellent instruction. It is then emphasized that to be an excellent high school teacher, one should both have full command of the subject and full knowledge of the teaching-learning process including course structure and examination system. The teacher, therefore, should not only have mastery of the subject matter but also an in-depth understanding of the mind set and standards of students within the class (http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/discussion/whatqualities-make-an-excellent-teacher/1039890/).

It is irrefutable that secondary education plays an essential part in every nations educational system (Darling-Hammond 2008). One high school subject highly supportive of this is Mathematics. No one can question the role being played by Mathematics in education. In fact, Mathematics is one of the basic tool subjects in secondary education. As such, mathematics teachers contend that the place of mathematics in the basic education is indispensable It has

(http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_Mathematics_Indispensable).

been felt that mathematics has both utilitarian and disciplinary uses necessary for everyone. By the very nature of the discipline, its application to both science and technology and to the human sciences is easily recognized by the layman. The bricklayer, the carpenter, and the nuclear scientist use mathematics of varied complexities

(www.eric.edu/practicalities_mathed). Thus, the role of mathematics in the holistic formation of every learner is vital (Sumagaysay 2001). It can be gleaned, therefore, that it is important for students to develop their potentials and capacities in mathematics to the fullest in all possible means. In doing this, a sound mathematics curriculum that would provide each learner the necessary skills and competence in mathematics is hence necessary. The 2010 Secondary Mathematics Education Curriculum Guide explicitly presents the Mathematics Curriculum framework:

The goal of basic education is functional literacy for all. In line with this, the learner in Mathematics should demonstrate core competencies such as problem solving, communicating mathematically, reasoning mathematically and making connections and representations. These competencies are expected to be developed using approaches as practical work/ outdoor activities, mathematical investigations/games and puzzles, and the use of ICT and integration with other disciplines. With these contents in the Secondary Mathematics Framework, quality secondary mathematics education, reflective in the best practices in instruction, would also entail the use of effective approaches and techniques of teaching, which would equip each learner the needed skills and competencies. On top of it all, a competent mathematics teacher who empowers learners to achieve the goals of mathematics education, and who is efficient and effective in providing quality mathematics instruction is imperative (Gonzalez 2000). The countrys vision for quality education with focus on

Mathematics Proficiency is undoubted. But, our country, of course, is not relieved from the crises. In fact, Dr. Milagros Ibe of the University of the Philippines said that the result of a survey on the competence of Science and Mathematics teachers showed that majority of the teachers are not qualified to teach the subjects. With this issue at hand, Ibe remarked that it is easy to understand why the achievement of Filipino Students in Science and Mathematics was dismally low (Lobo 2000). In

the 2000 issue of the Philippine Journal of Education as cited by Aspiras (2004), Ibe supports her contention of the connection of teachers competence and students achievement. She stressed that Filipino students suffer from poor thinking skills; they are only able to recall concepts but for questions beyond that or which require multiple-step problem solving, our students appeared to have been stumped. As a result, math and science skills of students from 42 countries showed that Filipino students are biting the dust of their global counterparts. These ideas prompted former President and now Congresswoman Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (Educators Journal, 2003). She stressed that in order for Filipino students to be globally competitive, the national aims to improve the countrys educational standards and to upgrade teachers competence have to be pushed (Educators Journal, 2003). Despite these aims, recent LET results revealed that majority of the secondary teacherexaminees are not qualified to teach. In April, 2010 the passing rate for secondary teachers was only 23.32% and in September, 2010 the passing rate was 25.86%. These rates reveal that teachers, though possess the needed degree/s are not yet qualified to teach; thus, they are not competent. However, Lee (2010) clarified that passing the test does not guarantee content competence. This is because majority of the passers have rates of 75-79%. He highlighted that rates such as these reflect fair or if not, poor competence.

On

the

light

of

mathematics

teachers

qualification

and

competence, issues arise, too. First, Lobo (2000), as cited by Oredina (2006) reveals in his article that only 71% of the Mathematics Teachers claim to have formal preparation in Mathematics. This means that 29%, who are unqualified to teach mathematics, still teach the subject. In addition, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) has ruled that the Department of Education (DepEd) may hire and retain teachers even if they had not yet registered with Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) as mandated by Republic Act No.7836 (Educators Journal 2003). This further implies that a non-registered math teacher or a non-major is teaching math. Another, teacher handling the same subjects or in the same year level develops the idea and practice to be stagnant-an ordinary lecturer in a classroom (Farol 2000). Furthermore, many graduates of teacher-education institutions, though received formal education, are not prepared to handle a class of learners (Adams 2002). Further, the UP

Institute of Science and Mathematics Education also revealed that many teachers at all levels do not have the content background required to teach the subjects they are teaching. The survey revealed that only 41% of mathematics teachers are qualified to teach the subject (Cayabyab 2010). With this reality, it is not surprising why students performed poorly in Mathematics Achievement Test. This is stressed by Roldan (2004) in her assertion that students mathematics low performance is

reflective of the weak mathematics teachers influence. Roldan (2004) revealed that secondary teachers in Region I were proficient only in concepts and computations but they were deficient in their skills in problem-solving and the use of teaching strategies. Thus, mathematics teachers frequently find themselves focusing on mechanics, the answerresulting procedures-without really teaching what mathematics is all about-where it came from, how it was labored on, how ideals were perceived, refined, and developed into useful theories-in brief, its social and human relevance (Cayabyab,2010). It was also disclosed by Bambico (2002) in her dissertation that that majority of the mathematics teachers in Region I scored 17 out of 35 simple mathematics problems; and their instructional competence ranged from 54.71% to 78.03% only. These ratings were emphasized to be weaknesses and the major reasons why the passing rate of the region in the NAT has not even reached 80% and up. In the City Division of San Fernando, particularly in the Private secondary schools, quality mathematics teaching had been given much emphasis. Several seminars and training-workshops had been organized to update and upgrade teachers competence. One most recent Mathematics Seminar was organized by the Association of the Private Schools last July, 2010. The seminar-workshop on Trends in Teaching High School Mathematics was an aim to improve the students

mathematics performance in the 2009 National Achievement Test (NAT) (Eligio 2010). The seminar was attended by mathematics teachers in the Private Schools in La Union where the researcher served as the resource speaker. This brought out that majority of the teachers could not fully analyze problems in higher Mathematics such as Geometry and Trigonometry despite the fact they have graduated with a Mathematics degree. They were also found to be very young in the service and that they tend to teach mathematics word problems using one approach. Even though seminars and trainings were conducted, these only lasted for few hours and had no follow-ups. Another, only a few are sent by the participating schools to attend such endeavor. It is then with these predicaments that the researcher embarked on the idea to appraise and evaluate the competence of mathematics teachers along content and instruction. The results, in turn, will be the foundations of proposing a validated two-pronged training program for the Mathematics teachers in the Private Secondary Schools of the City Division of San Fernando for the academic year 2010-2011. Theoretical Framework To put this study in its theoretical framework, a discussion on the competence theories, theories of teaching and learning, the best practices and approaches of an effective teacher, and the concept of training are presented. Several theories on learning are also included since teachers

are learners, too. They need to learn first the fundamentals, the strategies and techniques before they can actually impart knowledge to their students. Mathematics involves learning simple skills, calculations, facts and procedures where memory, most especially practice are the most essential. It requires a high level of creative and analytic thinking. Thus, mathematics teachers should know when and what concepts to teach, when and why students are having difficulties, how to make concepts meaningful, when and how to improve skills and how to stimulate productive and creative thinking in order to fully analyze what they are doing (Subala 2006). Piaget (1964) opined that as a child acquires knowledge of the environment, he or she develops mental structures called concepts. Concepts are rules that describe properties of environment events and their relations with other concepts. As applied to teachers, when teachers get familiar with certain concepts and routines, they are able to master the skills. Deweys (1896) notion of knowledge for teaching is one that features inquiry with, and practice as the basis for professional judgment grounded in both theoretical and practical knowledge. If teachers investigate the effects of their teaching on student learning and if they study what others have learned, they come to understand teaching to be

an interesting endeavor. They become sensitive to variation and more aware of the different purposes and situations. They are assessed on contingent knowledge to become more thoughtful decision-makers. According to Thorndike (1926), learning becomes more effective when one is ready for the activity, practices what he has learned and enjoys the learning experience. As applied to teachers, they cannot teach effectively if they have not learned sufficiently. Thorndikes law of exercise states that the more frequently a stimulus response connection occurs, the stronger association and hence, the stronger learning. Practice without knowledge of results is not nearly effective as when the consequences become known to the learner. Further, concepts are the substance of mathematical knowledge. Students can make sense of mathematcs only if they understand its concepts and their meanings or interpretations. An understanding of mathematical concepts involves around more than mere recall of definitions and recognition of common examples. The assessment of students understanding of concepts should be sensitive to the development nature of concept acquisition. (Arellano 2004) Bruners (1968) most famous statement is that, any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development. He insisted that the final goal of teaching is to promote the general understanding of the structure of a subject matter.

To learn and use mathematics requires a substantial mastery of computation. To master a skill of computation requires constant practice, repetition and drill. Computational skills are essential in order to facilitate the learning of new math concepts, to promote productive thinking in problem solving, research and other creative thinking activities. Mathematics teachers have always viewed problem solving as a preferential objective of mathematics instruction (Subala 2006). It was not until the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) published its position paper that problem solving truly came of age. As its very first recommendation, the council proposed that problem solving be the focus of school mathematics and performance in problem solving be the measure of the effectiveness of the personal and national position of mathematical competence (Taback, 1998). Bruner (1968) believed that intellectual development is innately sequential, moving from inactive through iconic to symbolic

representation. He felt it is highly probable that this is also the best sequence for any subject to take. The extent to which an individual finds it difficult to master a given subject depends largely on the sequence in which the material is presented. Further, Bruner also asserted that learning needs reinforcement. He explained that in order for an individual to achieve mastery of a problem, feedback must be reviewed as

to how they are doing. The results must be learned at the very time an individual is evaluating his/her performance. The above theories suggest that problems and applications should be used to introduce new mathematical content to help students develop both their understanding of concepts and facility with procedures, and to apply and review processes they have learned. Besides his abilities and competence, a teacher who is tasked to facilitate the teaching-learning process, also needs a set of teaching theories. These theories, which are based on the teachers understanding of the learner and the educative process, become the bases of his ways on how to influence his students to learn. The 2010 Secondary Mathematics Curriculum provide the three most important theories. These are Experiential Learning by David Kolb and Rogers,

Constructivism and Cooperative Learning. Experiential Learning by Kolb and Rogers presents that significant learning takes place when the subject matter is relevant to students experience and is purposeful to their personal interest. This further connotes that human beings have the natural tendencies to learn; as such, the task of the teacher is just to facilitate learning. Facilitating learning revolves around (1) setting a positive climate, (2) clarifying the purpose of the learner, (3) organizing and making available learning resources, (4) balancing intellectual and emotional components of

learning and (5) sharing feelings and thoughts with learners but not dominating. Thus, Experiential learning substantiates the Principle of Learning by doing (http://oprf.com/Rogers). On the other hand, constructivism roots from the idea that one only knows something if one can explain it. This idea was formalized by Immanuel Kant, who asserted that students are not passive recepients of information; rather, they are active learners

(www.wikipedia.com/ImmanuelKant). A basic theoretical proposition of constructivism is that the students are eager participant in the acquisition of knowledge. So, in the constructivist room, the teacher serves not as the authority, but the pathfinder of knowledge. Cooperative Learning Theory by Johnson and Johnson, in addition, holds that learning is significant when students work together to accomplish a task. The cooperative tasks are designed to elicit positive interactions, provide students with different opportunities, and make students engage in learning. This theory suppports the MultipleIntelligence Theory by Gardner (Montealegre 2003). The Mathematical Framework also necessitates integration. As such, the Reflective Teaching Theory is vital. This theory is based on the Ignatian Pedagogy asserting that teaching experience should include interaction from the students, which calls the plan to implement

reflections that give birth to new insights, knowledge and enlightenment regarding ones self based upon the content of teaching (Crudo 2005). In addition, in her dissertation on Mathematics Education, Cayabyab (2010) theorized a mathematics stepping-stone theory. She stressed that in teaching mathematics, students should be taught that every mistake, every fault, every difficulty encountered becomes a stepping-stone to better and higher things. She added that in teaching and learning mathematics,skills on patience and accuracy are developed. When a teacher has finished teaching, he therefore administers strategies for assessment and evaluation to gauge learning. The theory of Evaluation by Burden and Byrd, as mentioned by Oredina (2006), pointed out that frequent, continuous and impartial evaluation of academic performance is vital not only for the growth of institution but also for the growth of the individual. Evaluation would tell whether improvement is necessary. If a teacher wants to be the best teacher for her students, he should not fail to upgrade and update himself. The concept of training enters the scene. Training is the process of acquiring specific skills to perform a better job. It helps people to become qualified and proficient in doing some jobs (Fianza,2009). Usually, an organization facilitates the employees learning through training so that their modified behavior

contributes to the attainment of the organizations goals and objectives (Oredina 2006). Further, training is a complex activity and must be clearly planned. Design and preparation of training course usually consume more time than delivery of the material. Successful training requires careful planning by the trainer. Planning helps the trainer/s determine that the appropriate participants have been invited to the training course and that the training is designed to meet their needs in an effective way. Thus steps in planning for effective training program are a requisite. According to the PDF article accessed from the internet, the parts of a training program include objectives, content , materials or resources, methods or procedures, and evaluation strategy

(www.jifsan.umd.edu/pdf/gaps-en/VI-Effective-Training-Com.pdf). The abovementioned instructional competency dimensions find its essence in the general areas cited in the questionnare.These serve as the building blocks in structuring this research. Moreover, the theories in teaching and learning, practices and approaches, and the principles in teaching mathematics show

parallelism in each of the content of the instructional dimensions. These may also serve in the formulation of the recommendations of the study. The concept of training serves as the core idea in designing the output of this pursuit.

Conceptual Framework The task of a teacher is complex and many-sided and demands a variety of human abilities and competencies. The abilities and

competencies of a teacher, according to Nava (1999), as cited by Clemente (2002), are subject matter mastery of content-specific knowledge for the effective instruction, classroom management

creation of an environment conducive to learning, facilitation of learning implicit and explicit knowledge of various teaching strategies and methods to attain instructional objectives, and diagnostic knowledge of class needs and goals, abilities and achievement levels, motives, emotions, which influence instruction and learning. These competence dimensions were also mentioned by Lardizabal (2001). According to her, the four dimensions are teaching skills, guidance skills, management skills, and evaluation skills. Effective high school mathematics teaching, therefore, involves mastery of the subject matter on the part of the teacher, understanding students differences, interest and background, skills in the use of appropriate methods and techniques, appropriate assessment strategies and flexibility and sensitivity to adopt to the needs of students. Thus, the nature of the task of a teacher is not easy. This then implies that the teacher has to improve if his vision of influencing students to learn is of prime concern.

One of the most time-tested ways for continuing development of the professional teachers is the training and in-service educational program. Its rationale is to help teachers carry out their job better. The outcome of a well-planned training program is manifested in an environment of learning suited to the needs of the children

(www.britannicaonlineencyclopedia/training). This then connotes that when teachers improve for the better, students improve for the better, too. Boiser (2000) extends his idea that if one aspires to continue teaching effectively, he needs to continue upgrading himself. He opines that to upgrade necessitates reading professional references, enrolling in advanced courses and attending trainings, conferences and workshops. Additionally, Lapuz (2007),as cited by Bello (2009), stresses the need for training and retraining if teachers really wanted to be competent. It is in this light that the study is thought of, formulated and set up. This conceptualization is logically designed in the research paradigm in Figure 1. The paradigm made use of the Input-Throughput-Output model. The input is composed of the profile of mathematics teachers along highest educational attainment, number of years in teaching, and number of trainings and seminars attended. Further, it also contains the variables on the level of competence along content and instruction. These variables are indeed necessary to determine how competent the

mathematics teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union are. The throughput incorporated the processes of analyzing and interpreting the variables in the input- profile (highest educational attainment, number of years in teaching, number of seminars attended); level of competence along content and instruction; the comparison in the perceived instructional competence among the three respondent groups; the culled-out strengths and weaknesses,and tests of correlation between profile and the levels of competence along content and instruction; and the relationship between the levels of competence along content and instruction. It also holds the process of conceptualizing and validating the output of the study. The output of the study, therefore, is a validated two-pronged training program for mathematics teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union for academic year 2010-2011.

Input

Throughput

Output

A. Profile of mathematics teachers along: 1. Highest educational attainment; 2. Number of years in teaching math; and 3. Number of seminars and trainings B. Level of competence of mathematics teachers along: 1. Content a. conceptual skills b. reasoning/analytical skills c. computational skills d. problem-solving skills; and 2. Instruction a. Teaching/ Facilitating Skills; b. Guidance Skills; c. Management Skills; and d. Evaluation Skills

A. Analysis and interpretation of: 1. Teachers profile 2. Level of competence along content and instruction 2.1 Comparison in the perceived instructional competence among the respondent groups 3. Relationship between a. teachers profile and level of competence along content; b. teachers profile and level of competence along instruction; and c. teachers competencies along content and instruction 4. Strengths and weaknesses on the level of competence B. Development of a Proposed Two-Pronged Training Program for Mathematics Teachers C. Validation of the TwoPronged Training Program 1. face 2. content

A Validated TwoPronged Training Program for Mathematics Teachers

Fig. 1 Research Paradigm

Statement of the Problem This study aims primarily to determine the level of competence of
mathematics teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in San Fernando for the academic year 2010-2011 as basis for a validated two-pronged training

program. Specifically, it aims to answer the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the mathematics teachers along: a. highest educational qualification; b. number of years in teaching mathematics; and c. number attended? 2. What is the level of competence of mathematics teachers along: a. Content a.1. Conceptual Skills a.2. Reasoning/ Analytical Skills a.3. Computational Skills a.4. Problem-Solving Skills ; and
b. Instruction

of

mathematics

trainings

and

seminars

b.1.Teaching Facilitating Skills b.2. Guidance Skills b.3. Management Skills b.4. Evaluation Skills?

2.1 Is there a significant difference in the instructional competence of the teachers as perceived by the students, heads and teachers, themselves?
3. Is there a significant relationship between: a. Teachers profile and competence along content; b. Teachers profile and competence along instruction; and c. Competence

along

content

and

competence

along

instruction? 4. What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the mathematics teachers along: a. Content; and b. Instruction? 5. Based on the findings, what training program may be proposed to enhance the content and instructional competence of the

mathematics teachers? 5.1 What is the level of validity of the training program along: a. face; and b. content? Hypotheses The researcher is guided by the following hypotheses: 1. There is no significant difference in the perceived instructional competence of the teachers among the three respondent groups.

2. There is no significant relationship existing between: a. Teachers profile and competence along content b. Teacherss profile and competence along instruction c. Competence along Scope and Delimitation The primary aim of this study is to determine the level of competence of high school mathematics teachers in the Private Schools of the City Division of San Fernando for the academic year 2010-2011. The 13 (thirteen) schools include Brain and Heart Center (BHC), Saint Louis College (SLC), Christ the King College (CKC), Gifted Learning Center, MBC Lily Valley School, La Union Cultural Institute (LUCI), La Union Colleges of Arts, Sciences and Nursing (LUCNAS),Union Christian College (UCC), San Lorenzo Science High Schoool (SLSHS), National College of Science and Technology(NCST), Central Ilocandia College of Science and Technology (CICOSAT), Felkris Academy, and Diocesan Seminary of the Heart of Jesus (DSHJ). Further, there are three (3) respondent groups: the Mathematics teachers, the heads, and the students. Each Mathematics teacher in the private schools of San Fernando is evaluated by one of his/her classes. Based on the identified strenghts and weaknesses on the level of content and instructional competence of the mathematics teachers, a proposed two-pronged training program is formulated. The proposed

training program will be administered to the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union. Since it involves logistics, the administrators of the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando are asked to validate the proposed two-pronged training program for teachers. Importance of the Study This piece of work will greatly benefit the administrators, heads, teachers, students, the researcher and future researchers. To school administrators of the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, this study will provide them with data that can help them formulate the in-service training programs. Further, they will also be guided in structuring the Faculty Development Program that is aimed at intensifying and sustaining the skills of the teaching workforce; To the Mathematics heads of the City Division of San Fernando, this study will give them insights about the competence of their teachers. This will also provide them data in designing the Human Resources Development Plan; To Mathematics teachers, this study will give them baseline data of their strenghts and weaknesses in content and instruction. The output of the study, on the other hand, will make them more competent, prepared, directed and helped in carrying out their noble tasks;

To students of the Private Secondary Schools in San Fernando City Division, this study will lead them to a thoughtful understanding of mathematics for they are handled by more competent teachers; To the researcher, a Mathematics teacher and at the same time the Subject Area Coordinator for Mathematics of Christ the King College, this study will help him in improving his mathematics teachers competence; and To future researchers, who will be interested to conduct similar studies, this study will motivate them to pursue their research since this study can be used as basis. Definition of Terms To better understand this research, the following items are

operationally defined: Content Competence. This pertains to the subject matter knowledge of the Mathematics teachers in the four (4) secondary

Mathematics Algebra,

subjects:

Elementary

Algebra,

Intermediate &

Geometry,

Advanced

Algebra,

Trigonometry

Statistics. Further, this also gauges the cognitive skills in Mathematics along conceptual, analytical, computational and problem-sloving.

Analytical

Skills.

This

pertains

to

the

skills

on

comprehension that requires investigative inquiry and logical reasoning. Computational Skills. This pertains to the skills that involve the fundamental mathematical operations. Conceptual Skills. This pertains to the skills on learning facts and simple recall. Problem-Solving Skills. This pertains to the skills that require multiple-step plan to come up with a decision or a solution. Instructional Competence. This is divided into four dimensions: teaching/facilitating skills, management skills, guidance skills and evaluation skills. Evaluation skills. This is an area on instructional

competence which includes quality of appraisal questions, quality of assignment/enrichment activities, and quality of appraising students performance. Guidance skills. This is an area on instructional competence which includes quality of interaction and quality of activity.

Management competence

skills.

This

is

an

area

on

instructional in the

which

includes

atmosphere

classroom,and conduct and return of evaluation materials. Teaching skills. This is an area on intsructional competence which includes substantiality of teaching, quality of teachers explanation, receptivity to students ideas and contributions, quality of questioning procedure, selection of teaching methods, and quality of information and communication technology utilized. Heads. This pertains to the principals, academic coordinators, subject area coordinators and department heads. Level of Competence. This pertains to the degree or extent of attainment along content and instruction of the Mathematics teachers. Mathematics students. These are the students duly enrolled in a private high school in San Fernando for the academic year 2010-2011. Mathematics teachers. These are the teachers handling secondary mathematics in the Private Secondary schools in San Fernando for the academic year 2010-2011. Private Secondary schools in San Fernando. These are the nongovernment schools owned by private institutions and individuals where the three groups of respondents came from.

Profile. This contains the variables on highest educational attainment, number of years in teaching, and seminars attended. Highest educational attainment. This pertains to the highest academic qualification of the high school mathematics teachers number of trainings and

for the academic year 2010-2011. Number of years in Teaching. This refers to the length of service a mathematics teacher has in the academe. Number of Seminars attended. This refers to the frequency of trainings undergone by a Mathematics teacher for the past 2 years. Strength. This term refers to a content competence rating of 17 and above and to an instructional competence rating of 3.51 and above. Two-Pronged Training Program. This refers to an action plan devised in the study to enhance the content and instructional competence of mathematics teachers of the Private schools in the City Division of San Fernando. Weakness. This refers to a content competence rating of below 17 and an instructional competence rating of below 3.51.

Chapter 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES A summary of professional literature and studies related to the present study are presented in this chapter. These helped strengthen the framework of this study and substantiated its findings. Profile of Secondary Mathematics Teachers According to the Executive Summary on Teachers and Institution, teacher qualifications matter (www.sec.dost.gov.ph). It is with this idea that the areas on teachers profile are established. The areas include Highest Educational Attainment, Years in teaching Mathematics and Numbers of Trainings and Seminars Attended. Highest Educational Attainment Republic Act 9293, an act amending section 26 of RA 7836 states that no person shall engage in teaching or act as a professional teacher whether in preschool, elementary or secondary level unless the person is duly registered. Fianza (2009) revealed in her study that majority of the respondents possessed the required eligibility to teach secondary mathematics since most of the teachers were LET/PBET passers and degree holders of mathematics. She further stressed that 40 out of 56 respondents were bachelors degree holders, 15 had masters degree and 1 had doctorate degree.

Bautista, as cited by Binay-an (2002), stressed that teachers, in general, met the educational requirements in accordance with the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers. She also stressed that teachers didnt want to remain stagnant in their field. Eslava (2001) found out that out of the 40 teacher-respondents in the secondary schools in La Union, only 12 or 30% were AB/BS graduates, 19 or 47.5% were AB/BS with MA/MS units, or 8 or 20% were MA/MS graduates and 1 or 2.5 was a PhD/EdD graduate. It was pointed out that the mathematics teachers value continuing education to further equip themselves in the issues and concerns about teaching. In the Education Journal of the District of Thailand year 2009, the study of Dr. Naree Aware-Achwarin (2005) was noted. The findings of this published study disclosed that most of the teachers (92.88%) held bachelors degree; very few teachers (6.23%) held masters degree or higher degrees. Rulloda (2000), as cited by Oyanda (2003), expressed that teachers did not want to remain stagnant in their undergraduate degrees. They endeavored to improve their competencies by updating and upgrading themselves through the formal process. It was necessary for them to elevate their professional outlook to make them effective and worthy members of the profession.

Number of Years in Teaching Mathematics In the revised guidelines of the appointment and promotions of teaching and related teaching group (DepEd order No.66, s 2007) teaching experience is one of the criteria. Thus, the more experienced a faculty member is the more confident and effective he is in teaching. This was confirmed and affirmed by the study of Aware-Achwarin (2005). She stressed that most of the teachers (71.07%) had teaching experience of more than 10 years. However, several local studies ran nonparallel to these

international findings. Oyanda (2003) revealed that 136 high school Mathematics teachers taught for 5-9 years, 132 taught for 0-4 years and only a few had 20 years or more teaching experience. This implied that majority of the teacher-respondents were quite young in the service. Fianza (2009) also revealed that 67% of her respondents were very young in teaching high school geometry. These respondents are in the teaching service for less than 4 years. According to Laroco (2005), 10% of the Private High School Mathematics teachers in Urdaneta had been teaching for 15-19 years. 30% had 5-9 years of teaching and majority (60%) had taught for 4 years. The same implication was revealed. Yumul (2001) noted that the length of teaching experience was a valid indicator of performance. This is also seconded by the study of

Mallare (2001) stating that teaching experience is the best predictor of mathematics achievement. These assertions can be easily established since teachers develop their effectiveness as they become aware and more experienced in the realities and complexities of teaching. Number of Seminars and Trainings Attended As teachers become the 21st century teachers, they need to continually update and upgrade themselves to serve the needs of the socalled digital learners. One way of doing this is through attending mathematics seminars or trainings. Oyanda (2003) revealed that 6 (six) had attended international trainings and 45 had national trainings. However, 4 revealed that they had not attended any training. It was pointed out that only a few went to international seminars/in-service trainings due to financial reasons including lack of sponsorship from the government and private sectors. Laroco (2005) brought out that most of the teacher-respondents only attended seminars within the division level. The 2nd was regional. The 3rd was at school and 4th was at the national level. This was due also to financial constraints. Fianza (2009) divulged that more than fifty percent of the respondents attended trainings on curriculum, teaching strategies, management, and assessment methods/ tools. Less than fifty percent of

the respondents attended trainings on content in Geometry. These seminars are based on school and local. Cabusora (2004) unveiled that attendance of his teacher-

respondents to seminars and trainings were mostly local and regional. Oredina (2006) disclosed that the instructors have attended a few trainings and seminars for professional development. With these, majority of the teacher-respondents have very inadequate participation in seminars and training workshops. The reasons she stressed were financial constraints, non-availability of the instructors due to school commitments and the distance of the seminar venue. Level of Content and Instructional Competence The significant factor in achieving quality Secondary Mathematics Education is teachers competence along content and instruction. Diaz (2002) supports this by expressing that to be a successful mathematics teacher, one must be competent in math and in mathematics instruction. Thus, the levels of competence along the two dimensions show teachers strengths and weaknesses that serve as basis to develop and actualize activities that will further improve and enhance

competence. Mathematics teachers can therefore improve the ability of their learners when they have very good content knowledge of their subject area and at the same time sound instructional skills.

Subject Matter/ Content Cabusora (2004) stressed that the first essential of effective teaching is teachers thorough grasp of the subject matter he teaches. According to Toledo (1992) and Bagaforo (1998), as cited by Diaz (2000), teachers, in general, felt moderately competent in their knowledge and ability in mathematics. It was disclosed that the teachers still lack the knowledge of mathematics subjects, particularly the higher

mathematics. Thus, it was concluded that teachers did not possess math competence at level adequate for teaching secondary mathematics. Diaz (2000) also found out in her study that teachers were moderately competent in their knowledge in mathematics. Gundayao (2000) found in her study that the teachers teaching secondary mathematics in the Province of Quirino had good level of proficiency in Algebra, poor in Geometry and poor in Trigonometry. In general, the results were poor because the teachers lacked the competence in analyzing high level of category in analyzing problems. Subala (2006) found out in her study that the graduating math majors of teacher-training institutions in Region I were moderately competent in Basic Math, fairly competent in Algebra and Statistics and poorly competent in Geometry and Trigonometry.

Roldan (2004) revealed that her respondents were Above Average in Math I and II and average in Math III and Math IV. She concluded that the conceptual skills of the mathematics teachers were very important and teachers need to consistently update and upgrade their capabilities to enable them to cope with the challenges of the new millennium. Thus, teachers needed to improve their skills in the topics of a particular subject found to be weaknesses. Teaching or Facilitating Skills The shift of the teachers role as provider of knowledge to facilitator of learning or pathfinder of knowledge calls for proper application of teaching methods to make the learning experiences vital and relevant. Thus, the effectiveness of teaching Mathematics relies to a great extent not only upon the teachers educational attainment or skills but also upon his competence in the subject. Laroco (2005) unveiled that teachers mostly relied on textbooks to facilitate the teaching-learning process. She also cited Yumul (2001) revealing that the adequate instructional materials were not highly utilized. Sameon (2002) found out in his study that the most pressing problems encountered by the instructors were inadequate facilities and equipment; inadequate knowledge of teaching strategies and approaches.

Likewise, Bello (2009) also divulged that her respondents were capable in teaching but had not yet achieved the level of competence for optimum effectiveness. She stressed that teachers have more to enhance such as on educational technology, technology integration, professional relationship, community linkages and collaboration. Also, according to the monitoring and evaluation of the

implementation of the basic education curriculum, there were gross inconsistencies between the kind of graduates/learners that the schools desire to produce and the strategies they employ. Instruction was still predominantly authoritative and text-book based, learning was usually recipient and reproductive, supervision was commonly prescriptive and directive; and assessment was focused more on judging rather than on simproving performance. The second finding was that teachers wanted to know more about integrative teaching. Teachers did not feel confident to use the approaches because of the limited knowledge to operationalize them in terms of lesson planning, instructional materials development, subject matter organization, presentation and evaluation. There were still many teachers who do not have enough knowledge about the key concepts and approaches. However, they were willing to learn how to be more effective in facilitating the full development of the students potentials and to be facilitator of the integrative learning process.

Thirdly, teachers had limited knowledge of constructivism as a learning process. Learning as a construction process and the learner as a constructor of meaning is among the basic concepts of the BEC. Although the concept was unfamiliar to many teachers, it was observable in some classes where problem solving, inquiry, or discovery approaches were being used. Another finding of the team was that several factors constrained teachers from playing their role as facilitators of the learning process. The factors that inhibited teachers from playing the facilitators role effectively were students English deficiency, overcrowded classes, and insufficient supply of textbooks, prescriptive supervision and an examination system that encourages authoritative teaching. However, there were also findings which revealed positive results. One was the study of Aware-Achwarin (2005) on Teacher Competence of Teachers at Schools in the Three Southern Provinces of Thailand which revealed that teachers competence was at high level. The highest was on teachership. The second was that of Villanueva (1999), as cited by Binay-an (2002), which revealed that the instructional abilities of the teachers were rated high along ability to explain correctly, having a good command of the language and sufficient knowledge of the subject matter.

Further, the findings of Acantilado (2002) showed that the faculty members of Tertiary Accredited Programs of SUCs in Region I were highly competent. Another, Roldan (2004) cited Subala revealing that teacherrespondents were competent. This finding revealed that the instructors could be proper sources of assistance and guidance to their students in analyzing different mathematical problems. She stressed that the more competent the instructors are the better is the result in terms of the teaching-learning process. Grouws and Cebulla (2002), as cited by Fianza (2009) mentioned that research findings indicated that certain teaching strategies and methods should be worth careful consideration as teachers strive to improve their mathematics teaching practice. Teachers should use textbooks as just one instructional tool among many rather than feel duty-bound to go through the textbook as one section per day basis. As technology is used in mathematics classroom, teacher must assign tasks and responsibilities to students in such a way that they have active learning experiences with technological tools employed. Research then suggests that teachers should concentrate on giving opportunities for all students to interact in problem-rich situations. Teachers must encourage students to find own solution method and give opportunities to share and compare their solution method and answer in small groups. Such solutions were presented by Roldan (2004) as she

cited Diaz (2000). The solutions were: (1) the administration must hire only competent Mathematics Teachers to teach the subject. This step is supported by Rivera (2010) citing an article posted on www.eric.ed.gov conveying that schools are hiring teachers who are competent since students attainment level is hoped to improve; (2) the administration should also be fully aware of the importance of faculty development through the pursuit of graduate courses and attendance to seminars and in-service training, for such are essential to the teachers professional growth and development, particularly on effective teaching; (3) teachers should strive to elevate their level of attitudes along concept and mathematics from above average to higher level; (4) rigid annual evaluation of teachers may also be of help for them to assess their weaknesses, make improvements on such and maintain and sustain their strengths; (5) moderately competent and competent teachers attend Saturday and summer classes or workshops to be able to upgrade their competence; and (6) teachers should be encouraged to attend seminars and workshops particularly in Mathematics to update them with recent trends and educational innovations. Guidance Skills Educational Guidance is the process of helping students to achieve the self-understanding and self-direction necessary to make informed choices and move toward personal goals (Microsoft Encarta 2009).

One of the innate tasks of a teacher is to promote learning. He does this by guiding the learning process of students through planning and organizing meaningful learning experiences, creating a desirable learning environment, using a variety of instructional materials, providing for individual differences and appraising students growth and development. Diaz (2000) expressed in her study that a teacher who is the facilitator of learning should also have special knowledge and skills in guiding, directing and advising learners. She stressed that doing so gives substance to teacher-students relationship. Thus, in this special task, the teacher must possess knowledge and skills in assisting students in their problems. Graycochea (2000) revealed in his study that his teacherrespondents were highly competent in providing an environment conducive to learning. This had been perceived by the teachers, students and their heads. The study of Oredina (2006) exposed that mathematics teachers guidance skills were perceived as strengths. She emphasized that the teacher-respondents were very good in directing, supervising and guiding the learning process by providing an atmosphere which is

nonthreatening. Further, they were able to provide appropriate level and needs of the students. In addition, they can direct the work of the students properly. Management Skills The principle of a favorable learning environment is of universal acceptance. To teach effectively is to manage class effectively, too. This principle suggests that learning becomes interesting and enjoyable under favorable working conditions. Good classroom practices; thus, enter the scene. Bueno (1999), as cited by Tabafunda (2005), asserts that a sound classroom can be maintained by employing classroom management practices. These practices are: (1) structuring the learning environment; (2) religious preparation of lessons; and (3) maintenance of constructive pupil-behavior correction. Thus, a successful teacher is one who can evaluate situations and then apply appropriate styles to address such situations. (http//www.classroom%20management.03-29-10) One of the most difficult problems that confront teachers is to manage classrooms. This is because one cannot fully learn the techniques of proper management from books or from earning a bachelors degree.

Achwarin

(2005)

reveals

that

among

the

dimensions

of

instructional competence, classroom management was rated the lowest. Olbinado (2007) in her study entitled, Enhancement Program for Secondary Teachers who are Non-math Majors revealed that the teacher-respondents were good at classroom management. She stressed that even though the teachers were not holders of mathematics degree, they were good at managing classes since most of them were seasoned teachers. Oredina (2006) underscored that the teacher-respondents were very good at guidance skills. This means that the teachers were highly aware of the importance of extrinsic motivation and strengthen positive attitudes such as giving commendations and approval. Evaluation Skills When a teacher finishes the course of the discussion, he automatically administers the tools to assess learning. It is through assessment that students performance is monitored. The purpose of evaluation is hence necessary. According to Laroco (2005) there are four principles of educational assessment. These are: (1) educational assessment always begins with educational values and standards. Assessment is not an end in itself but a vehicle for attaining educational goals; (2) educational assessment

works best when it accurately reflects the students achievement/ attainment and understanding of educational goals and standards; (3) educational assessment works best when it is ongoing, not episodic and when varied measures are used; and (4) effective educational assessment provides students with information (e.g. goals, standards, feedback) to motivate and enable them to attain educational targets. Students should be aware of what they are being assessed for and should also be given information on what is needed to attain the expected outcomes. Sameon (2002) revealed that his respondents perceived themselves as very competent in assessment. He stressed that the teachers understood the underlying theories and practices to improve students performance. Rivera and Sambrano (1999), as cited by Tabafunda (2005), stressed that effective teaching should be coupled with the art of questioning. Good questions served as essential in developing students ability to define and exercise judgments. Oredina (2006) found out in her study that the teacherrespondents were perceived very good in evaluation and assessment. She revealed that along the four competence dimensions, the skill on evaluation had the highest rating. This means that the respondents were

highly capable in formulating questions with the purpose of developing critical thinking; mathematics teachers were competent in providing reasonable, appropriate, practical and challenging enrichment activities to substantiate what had been taken in class. Comparison in the Perceived Instructional Competence Among the Groups of Respondents According to the article accessed from Every

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/individual_differences_psychology,

man is in certain respect (1) like all other men, (2) like some other men and (3) like no other men. Thus, two contrasting ideas are revealed individual similarities and differences. This means that any two individuals may have same perceptions at a time; but they may also have opposing perceptions at another time. The adage, Everyone experiences different time and space than everyone else but can still find commonalities at a certain time in space with everyone else supports this thoughts and contentions very well

(http.//www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen06/gen06327.htm). Commonalities among perceptions exist because there is a common code (shared representations) for perceptions and actions. This is contained in the Common Coding On the Theory other

(www.en/wikipedia.org/wiki/common_coding_theory).

hand, differences exist because of different status of people, needs,

personalities, and beliefs. Further, individuals differ in terms of perception because of selective perception

(www.ask.com/questions_about_selective_perception). The aforecited thoughts are revealed in a study published in the web revealing that there is a significant difference in the perceptions along skills between the teachers and managers/heads. This is due to the observation that when one holds a position, he has a certain degree of confidence. He is sure of his capabilities and enjoys certain status higher than others. This can be supported through the educational thought presented by Johnson (2010) on administrative support and cordial teacherstudent relationships. He stresses that these educational principles integrate the concepts on backing-up, lending hands and sharing appreciation. Relationship of Profile and Level of Competence along Content A teacher cannot share what he does not have. He has to be a subject matter expert when he intends to instill lasting thoughts in the minds of his learners. Several articles posted on the World Wide Web implicitly and explicitly cite the relationship between profile variables along highest

educational attainment, teaching experiences and number of seminars attended and subject matter competence. One article contends that subject matter/ content knowledge is rooted from teaching experiences and the number of degrees a teacher holds. (http://doconnor.edublogs.org/finding-e-learning-and-online-

teaching-jobs/) Another supports this thought by mentioning that subject matter competence can be attained and maintained through continuing professional education. It also extended that teachers who are subject matter expert are the ones who have stayed in service for quite some time. (jobs.stanlake.co.uk/recruiter/users/jobs.php?id=22). A published research on Teacher Certification was also accessed. The study revealed that teachers who had certification, longer years of professional service and more frequencies of degrees show subject matter competence (http://www.sedl.org/pubs/policyresearch/resources/ARA2004.pdf). Another web article reveals that instructor-led training workshops also enhance subject matter expertise and skills.

(http://doconnor.edublogs.org)

A national study on teaching expertise, though in the HEIs, by Clemente-Reyes (2002) expresses that subject matter expertise is gained through possessing educational achievements, gaining years of

professional teaching service and attending training. She mentioned that earning a bachelors degree was not sufficient; thus, recommending for continuing professional education since majority of the teacher experts were masters degree holders or even doctorate degree holders. Also, when a teacher is exposed in the teaching profession, he is likely to expand his horizons in his field; thus, contributing to teaching expertise. Lastly, she asserted that training helped a lot in gaining additional input. Such input met or not met by teachers in her formal education can affect his content knowledge. Further , the Australian Government commissioned the Australian Council for Educational Research (2001) to conduct an investigation of effective mathematics teaching and learning in Australian secondary schools. The research revealed that teacher knowledge and educational background is positively, but weakly related to teacher effectiveness. The more this education has to do with mathematical content and pedagogy, the more likely it is that teachers will be effective. Keneddy (2001) also wrote in her article that a prospective teacher majoring a subject like mathematics or science does not guarantee that

teachers will have the kind of subject matter knowledge they need for teaching. She further stressed that college-level professional subjects do not address the most fundamental concepts in disciplines. Instead, professors provide massive quantities of information, with little attention given to significance or fundamentals on how to deal with teaching. Relationship of Profile and Level of Competence along Instruction Teaching is a systematic presentation of facts, skills and techniques. It needs certain competencies in order to teach effectively. One way of assuring this is having a degree in education or any related degrees. If a teacher wishes to teach in secondary, a field of specialization is required in order to teach more competently. But having a degree does not guarantee that one can teach well, he needs constant upgrading of what he knows. The study of Estoesta (1999), as cited by Fianza (2009) reveals that there was a strong relationship between educational attainment and teaching experiences to instructional competence. She stressed that the teachers who had higher educational attainment and teaching experience had high performance rating, thus higher competence. This study is seconded by the study of Sameon (2002). According to him, teaching competence is highly correlated to highest educational attainment and teaching experience.

These findings were also supported by the international study of Achwarin (2005) arguing that teachers qualification is positively and significantly related to teachers competence. Binay-an (2002) extended that length of service and number of seminars and trainings were significantly related to competence. Davis (2000), as cited by Binay-an (2002), claimed that teachers who are younger in the service are more likely to possess greater competence since they have greater inquisitive mind and zest for teaching. However, this was not in congruence to the study of Laroco (2005) claiming that teachers who had longer years in service are in better position to adjust themselves to different classroom situations; thus, they are more competent. She concluded that teaching experiences add to the teaching competence. Oredina (2006) accentuated that highest educational attainment is significantly correlated to teaching skills but not significantly correlated to guidance, management and evaluation skills. She also extended that number of years in teaching, performance rating and number of seminars attended are not significantly correlated to the four core dimensions of instructional competence. These imply that teacher with higher performance rating, with more number of years of teaching and seminars were not necessarily more competent than those with less.

Soria (1995), as cited by Laroco (2005), found out that there was no significant relationship between highest educational attainment and number of years in teaching and their professional proficiency. Parrochas (1998) also supported this contention, as cited by Laroco (2005), by claiming that there is no significant relationship between highest educational attainment of teachers and mastery level of pupils. Relationship of Subject Matter and Instructional Competence Global goals of education stress the connection between how teachers let the students know and what the teachers actually know. Some of these goals are (1) all children should be taught by teachers who have the knowledge, skills, and commitment to teach children well; (2) for all teachers to have access to high-quality professional development; and (3) for teachers and principals to be hired and retained based on their ability to meet professional standards of practice. It is only with these clearly stated and directed goals that teaching-learning process will be meaningful. Leinhardt, as cited by Subala (2006), disclosed that teaching practices were often considered as one of the reasons why American students were not currently demonstrating top achievement in science and mathematics. He further stressed that teachers knowledge of the subject matter necessarily influenced their classroom practices.

Moreover,

linkages

between

teachers

personal

knowledge

and

instructional activity had proven elusive despite the considerable level of concern expressed regarding low levels of mathematics and science knowledge possessed by pre and in-service teachers. Binay-an (2002), in her study, Determinants of Teaching

Performance, pointed out that subject matter expertise is significantly related to teaching expertise. He made use of the adage, One cant give what he does not have to substantiate this. Cabusora (2004) asserted that subject matter expertise and exemplary instruction are significantly correlated. He stressed that when teachers have thorough grasp of the teaching-learning process, they are likely to perform in instruction. Diaz (2000) also stressed that teachers who are competent in instruction are the ones who are competent in their field of expertise. In the study of Dr. Flordeliza Clemente-Reyes (2002) on Unveiling Teaching Expertise: A showcase of 69 Outstanding Teachers in the Philippines, it was revealed that subject matter expertise was a contributory factor to teaching expertise. It was stressed that mastery of content-specific knowledge and the organization of this knowledge affect effective instruction. If the teachers were not experts in their field, it is unlikely for them to possess teaching expertise

An international study was cited by an article posted on the Harvard Educational Review. This study was by Reynolds (1999). In the study, he exposed that subject matter expertise was not contributory to success in teaching. With these she expanded the meaning of subject matter expertise to include an awareness of that expertise as learned.
(http://www.hepg.org/her/abstract/164).

Strengths and Weaknesses in Teachers Competence The teacher is always confronted with different challenges that he needs to face. Challenges of a teacher might be extrinsic or intrinsic. Teachers might encounter problems on students population, sizes of classroom and the like. It can also be that a teacher finds preparing for a class meaningless. These challenges are undoubted to be contributory to the teachers success in teaching. Ordas (2000), as cited by Olbinado (2007), disclosed that schools were not only faced with great lack of teachers; but with the massive deficiency in qualified and competent teachers. She further stressed that teacher training was deficient in terms of frequency and accessibility for teachers. Roldan (2004) concluded that secondary mathematics teachers in Region I were proficient in concept and computations but they were deficient in their skills in problem-solving and the use of teaching strategies.

Oyando (2003) revealed in her investigation that teachers were highly competent in basic mathematics; but were moderately competent in higher mathematics. Almeida (1998) and Diaz (1998) revealed that their respondents, in separate studies, have moderate competence in their field. Diaz (1998) added that mathematical analysis was wanting. Verceles (2009) revealed that the use of calculators, especially computers were all weaknesses. Lecture method was very dominant. Nuesca (2006) indicated that Philippine Instruction is highly teacher-centered. She supported this by enumerating the three most common methods used by Filipino teachers: lecture, discussion and demonstration. Fianza (2009) disclosed that math instruction is often approached in terms of stating and emphasizing rules- the tell, show and do model. Graycochea teaching technique; were (2000) revealed serious. strategies that She and problems stressed on that mathematics questioning were the

somewhat

motivational

management

contributory factors in this finding. Cristobal (2004) found out that Instructors of Lorma Colleges exhibited capabilities along teaching procedure, substantiality of

teaching and evaluation. The only expressed need is in the use of varied instructional materials.

Roldan (2004) exposed that the secondary mathematics teachers in Region I were deficient in the use of teaching strategies. Binay-an (2002) supported this finding when she exposed that her respondents were not so competent in using methods and approaches. Alano (2003) of the Philippine Normal University mentioned that studies showed that almost half of the teachers teaching the core subjects have computer units, but only a few among them use such for classroom instruction. Oredina (2006) in her dissertation revealed that teachers level of instructional competence was very good. The evaluation skills were rated highest while their teaching skills were the lowest. Two-Pronged Training Programs To be a successful math teacher, one needs to continually upgrade himself. With this belief, the Congressional Commission in Education, as cited by Olbinado (2007), recommended that a periodic assessment of training needs of school teachers in both public and private schools is imperative. Eslava (2001) pointed out that attending service trainings

enhances, with no doubt, the professional qualities of teachers. Laroco (2005) added this thought expressing that when teachers wanted to continue improving on their teaching performance, they needed to undergo necessary training.

Cristobal (2004) claimed that while training remains only one of a number of alternative approaches towards human resource development, it remains to be the most utilized instrument for the development of adults, professionals and paraprofessionals alike in a wide variety of specific areas. Fianza (2009) believed that training is a very good approach to staff development. She opined that quality instruction, especially in

mathematics, can be attained and delivered through enhancing teachers competence. Roldan (2004) claimed that training should be of prime concern when quality of education is of prime concern, too. Such training has to be done before any plan for assigning longer period to the teaching of Mathematics is implemented. Lastly, Oredina (2006) discoursed that training allows teachers to show and share ideas, ask questions, make decisions and share personal experiences in teaching Mathematics. She stated that this program will make teachers change their traditional method of teaching to that of a facilitator of learning.

Chapter 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter presents, incorporates and discusses the research design, the sources of data, instrumentation, procedure and the tools for data analysis. Research Design The descriptive method of investigation was used in the study. This design aims at gathering data about the existing conditions. Calmorin (2005) describes descriptive design as a method that involves the collection of data to test hypothesis or to answer questions regarding the present status of a certain study. Further, Deauna (2003) defines such design as one that includes all studies that purport to present facts concerning the nature and status of anything. Since the comparison on the perceptions of the respondents along instructional competence and the relationship of the data on the teachers profile, content and instructional competence were established, the descriptive-comparative and the descriptive-correlational methods were employed, respectively. Sources of Data The population of this study is composed of three (3) groups of respondents: (1) heads, (2) High school mathematics teachers in the

Private City schools of San Fernando (3) high school mathematics students for the academic year 2010-2011. All the heads with the mathematics teachers were considered. For the students, one-third of the class population was considered. This is equivalent to thirty- three and one-third percent (33 1/3 %) of the total number of students in a class. According to Gay, as mentioned by Oredina (2006), ten percent (10%) of the population is an acceptable sample but twenty percent (20%) is required from a small population. However, to make the findings of this study more reliable and acceptable, the researcher preferred to implement the statistical idea that the bigger the sample, the more valid are the results. The total population of three hundred and fifty-seven (357) constituted the respondents of this study, broken down as follows: three hundred eighteen (318) students, twenty six (26) teachers and thirteen (13) heads. Substitute teachers or on-leave teachers are not considered as respondents of the study. Table 1 shows the distribution of the

number of specified respondents from the thirteen (13) Private Secondary Schools of the City Division of San Fernando, La Union for the academic year 2010-2011.

Table 1 Distribution of Respondents Number of Students Teachers Heads 33 2 1 20 2 1 75 3 8 7 14 7 7 7 90 11 24 318 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 1 2 26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13

SCHOOLS Brain and Heart of a Christian (BHC) Central Ilocandia Institute of Technology (CICOSAT) Christ the King College (CKC) Diocesan Seminary of the Heart of Jesus (DSHJ) Felkris Academy Gifted Learning Center (GLC) La Union Cultural Institute (LUCI) La Union Colleges of Nursing, Arts and Sciences (LUCNAS) MBC Lily Valley School National College of Science and Technology (NCST) Saint Louis College (SLC) San Lorenzo Science School (SLSS) Union Christian College (UCC) TOTAL

Instrumentation and Data Collection To gather the data essential to the realization of this study, two sets of data gathering instrument were utilized. One was a 60-point researcher-made mathematics competence test for mathematics teachers whose content was based on the 2010 Secondary Mathematics Curriculum. The other is a questionnaire-checklist, the key instrument in obtaining the data in evaluating the instructional competence of high school mathematics teachers in the Private Secondary Schools.

The mathematics competence test is divided into 4 areas of Secondary Mathematics (Elementary Algebra, Intermediate Algebra, Geometry, Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics). Each area includes 15 questions; each question corresponds to one (1) point. Further, it was made following the Blooms Taxonomy of Cognitive Skills for Mathematics (Conceptual, Reasoning/Analytical, Computational, and Problem-Solving). (Please see appended Table of Specifications) On the other hand, such questionnaire on instructional

competence was composed of two parts: Part I elicited the profile of the mathematics teachers along the highest educational attainment, years of teaching mathematics and number of mathematics trainings and seminars attended; Part II, on the other hand, drew out the level of instructional competence skills, along the four skills, areas guidance teaching and

skills/facilitating

management

skills,

evaluation skills. The statements in the questionnaire for studentrespondents were rephrased in such a way that these are parallel to the statements in the questionnaires for teachers and heads. This rewording ensured that the student-respondents clearly understood the details for assessment. Each of the teacher-respondent took the mathematics competence test not exceeding one hour or sixty (60) minutes in one sitting/ session. The administration of the test was conducted during their free periods,

lunch breaks, and after the class hours as agreed upon by the researcher and the teacher-respondents, themselves. Such being the case, the researcher took him almost 2 months to gather the required data. Also, each teacher was evaluated by his/ her students in one of his/her classes, heads and himself. With the permission of the school heads of the thirteen private secondary schools, copies of the two sets of instrument were given to the respondents to accomplish. In the mathematics competence test, teachers were not allowed to use calculators. This was made sure by the researcher during his proctoring of tests. The fully accomplished questionnaires were retrieved personally by the researcher. Validity and Reliability The mathematics competence test was a researcher-made test whose content was based on the 2010 UBD-Secondary Education Curriculum. The questionnaire-checklist, on the other hand, was a combination of the FAPE Performance Evaluation Tool, Institutional Supervisory Instrument of Christ the King College and the questionnairechecklist utilized by Oredina (2006) in her study, Mathematics Instruction in the HEIs in La Union: Basis for a Training Program. Since the key instruments were based on several manuscripts, their validity and reliability were established. The Education Supervisor for

Mathematics; a Master Teacher II of La Union National High School; the

Academic Coordinator of Christ the King College and the members of the reading committee served as the validators of the two sets of questionnaires. The computed validity rating for the Mathematics competency test was 4.63, which means that the Mathematics

competency test is of very high validity. On the other hand, the computed validity rating for the Instructional competence test was 4.71 indicating a very high validity, too. Further, all the suggestions cited by the validators were incorporated, especially on the competence test where the radical symbols and fractional bars have to be encoded using the equation editor to avoid unnecessary misconception. Conversely, their internal

consistency or reliability was determined using the Kuder-Richardson 21 formula. The first one was used to get the reliability of the content competence test while the second was used to get the reliability of the instructional competence checklist. 2002): ( where: k = number of items = mean of the distribution = the sample variance of the distribution or )(
( )

The formulas are (Monzon-Ybanez

(Garett 1966): where:

( ( )( )

n = product of the number of items in the test and the highest scale = variance = mean

Through

the

assistance

of

the

Education

Supervisor

for

Mathematics, Dr. Jose P. Almeida, a dry run of the questionnaires was administered to 20 students, 5 mathematics teachers and 1 Mathematics head of La Union National High School. The mathematics competence test had a reliability coefficient of 0.93, denoting that the competence test was very highly reliable. Alternatively, the questionnaire checklist was found to have very high reliability having a computed coefficient of 0.96. Tools for Data Analysis The data which were gathered, collated and tabulated were subjected for analysis and interpretation using the appropriate statistical tools. The raw data were tallied and presented in tables for easier understanding. For problem 1, frequency counts and rates were used to determine the status of the profile of the respondents along highest educational

attainment, years in teaching mathematics. A scoring scheme seen in data categorization together with frequency counts and rates were used to treat the number of seminars and trainings attended. The rates were obtained by using the formula below: R= n N where: x 100 R - rate n - number of frequencies gathered by each item N - the total number of cases 100 constant For problem 2.a, mean and rates were utilized to determine the mathematics competence; whereas for problem 2.b., weighted mean was employed to determine the level of instructional competence along the four areas. The formula for mean is as follows (Ybanez 2002): M = x N Where: M mean x sum of the product of the extent of the variables and their corresponding frequency N number of respondents

For problem 2.1, t-test independent (t-test between means), taken two at a time was used to determine the difference in the perceptions of the respondents. The formula for t-test for means

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student%27s_t-test) is:

where: = estimator of the common standard deviation of the two samples n = number of participants, 1 = group one, 2 = group two. n 1 = number of degrees of freedom for either group n1 + n2 2 = the total number of degrees of freedom, which is used in significance testing. t = degree of difference For problem 3.a, 3.b and 3.c, the Pearson-r moment of correlation was used to determine the significance of relationship between teachers profile and teachers level of content competence, profile and

instructional

competence

and

level

of

content

competence

and

instructional competence. The formula (Ybanez 2002) is:


( ( ( ) ( ) )( )( ) ( ) )

where: X observed data for the independent variable Y observed data for the dependent variable N size of sample r degree of relationship between X and Y The significance; computed correlation thus coefficients the were formula subjected to

used

(http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/ch4apx.html) is:

where: r computed correlation coefficient n-2 degree of freedom t degree of significance for r For problem 4, the major strengths and weaknesses were deduced based on the findings, particularly on the level of competence (content and instruction) through statistical ranking. An area was considered strength when it received a descriptive rating of very good or excellent; otherwise, the area was considered a weakness.

The MS Excel Data Analysis Tool and STATEXT were employed in treating the data. Data Categorization For the mathematics competence test, the Scale System is utilized. Ave. No. of Teachers who Got the correct Answer 22-26 17-21 12-16 7-11 0-6 Descriptive Equivalent rating DER class

Outstanding Above Average Competence Average Competence Fair Competence Poor Competence

strength strength weakness weakness weakness

For the mathematics trainings and seminars attended by teachers, data were categorized according to levels: school, local, national and international. Each level corresponds to a particular number of points. The scales below clarify the categorization: Level School Local Regional National International Frequency 1 1 1 1 1 Point Equivalent 1 2 3 4 5

No. of points 40 and above 31-40 21-20 11-20 1-10

Descriptive Equivalent rating Very Adequate (VA) Moderately Adequate (MA) Fairly Inadequate (FA) Slightly Inadequate (SI) Very Inadequate (VI)

For the level of instructional competence, the 5-point Likert Scale below is incorporated: Points 5 4 3 2 1 Ranges 4.51-5.00 3.51-4.50 2.51-3.50 1.51-2.50 1.00-1.50 DER Excellent (E) Very Good (VG) Good ( G) Fair (F) Poor (P) DER Class Strength Strength Weakness Weakness Weakness

Moreover, the major strengths and weaknesses are drawn out from the ratings given. Such ratings are ranked; hence, the ranking system was used. The item that gets the highest mean value in the strengths was ranked first indicating that it is regarded as the foremost strength. These procedures also apply in the items considered as weaknesses. Finally, the scales for interpretation on the degree of relationship of the identified correlates are as follows (Ybanez 2002): 1.00 -perfect correlation

0.91-0.99 0.71-0.90 0.41-0.70 0.21-0.40 0.01-0.21 0.00

-very high correlation -high correlation -marked correlation -low correlation - negligible correlation - no correlation

Proposed Training Program The proposed training program includes the following parts: rationale, objectives, content, methodology, training management,

participants, duration, logistics and success indicator (Cayabyab, 2010). A training program is set for content competence; another program is set for instructional competence. The trainers considered for the training program were some of the speakers met by the researcher in the seminars/workshops he attended, the Education Supervisor for

mathematics, and some of his professors in mathematics. Validity of the Training Program To establish the validity, acceptability and functionality of the proposed training program, it was presented to the Administrators of the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union.

The validation was guided by the following point assignments: Points 5 4 3 2 1 Ranges 4.51-5.00 3.51-4.50 2.51-3.50 1.51-2.50 1.00-1.50 DER Very High (VH) High (H) Moderate (M) Fair/Slight (F/S) Low/Poor (L/P)

Chapter 4 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA In this chapter, the data gathered were subjected to statistical analysis and systematically presented to manifest the levels of content competence along conceptual skills, reasoning/analytical skills,

computational skills and problem-solving skills; and instructional competence of the mathematics instructors along teaching skills, management skills, guidance skills and evaluation skills. The identified strengths and weaknesses were the foundations for formulating and structuring a proposed two-pronged training program for the

Mathematics teachers in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union. Profile of the Mathematics Teachers The first problem of the study focused on the profile of the Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando to provide basic but relevant information on teachers competence both for content and instructional competence. Highest Educational Attainment Table 2 shows the highest educational attainment of Mathematics Teachers. Out of the 26 teacher-respondents, 11 or 42.31% are licensed teachers, 14 or 50.00% are pursuing graduate studies and 2 or 7.69%

Table 2 Distribution of Teacher-Respondents According to Highest Educational Attainment Educational Attainment


BSED/BSE/AB/BS graduate (Non-licensed) BSED/BSE/AB/BS graduate (Licensed) BSED/BSE/AB/BS graduate w/ MS/MA units MS/MA graduate with EDd/PHd units EDd/Phd graduate Total

Frequency 0 11 13

Rate 0% 42.31% 50.00%

2 0 0 26

7.69% 0% 0% 100%

are Masters degree holders. This means that the Mathematics teachers are qualified to teach in the Secondary schools since they have met the necessary requirements stipulated in the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers and Republic Act 9293, which both require secondary teachers to be duly registered before engaging themselves in the teaching profession. It is also noticeable that majority of the teachers value continuing education since half of the total population are currently enrolled in their Masters program. This finding accepts the null

hypothesis that 50% of the respondents are pursuing their graduate studies. Also, it runs parallel to the studies of Fianza (2009), Eslava (2001) and Rulloda (2000) stressing that generally, the teachers meet the basic requirements for teaching and do not want to be stagnant because they want to elevate their professional outlook to make them effective and worthy members of the profession. Number of Years in Teaching Mathematics Table 3 reveals the distribution of teacher-respondents according to the number of years in teaching Mathematics. It further reveals that 18 or 65.38% have been teaching from 0-5 years, 2 or 7.69% from 6-10 years, 1 or 3. 85% from 11-15 years, 4 or 15.39% from 16-20 years, 1 or 3.85% from 21-25 years, and 1 or 3.85% has been teaching for more than 25 years. These data give a general impression that the Mathematics teachers of the Private Schools in San Fernando City, La Union are very young in the profession. It means that the general turnover of teachers in the private schools is high, especially in small schools where teachers stay only up to 1-2 years since they desire to be employed in the public schools or work abroad, where higher

compensation, more incentives and other benefits abound. Therefore, it rejects the null hypothesis of the study that 50% of the teacherrespondents have teaching experience of below 5 years. This finding runs parallel to the studies of Oyanda (2003) and Fianza (2009) revealing that

the teachers are generally quite young in the service. Their findings revealed that more than half of their respondents have less than 5-year teaching experience.

Table 3 Distribution of Teacher-Respondents According to Number of Years in Teaching Mathematics Years 0-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years 21-25 years 26 years and above Total Frequency 17 2 1 4 1 1 26 Rate 65.38% 7.69% 3.85% 15.39% 3.85% 3.85% 100%

However, the finding of this study does not support the finding of Aware-Achawarin (2005) when he revealed that 71.07% of his teacherrespondents were tenured in the teaching profession since they have been teaching for more than 10 years. Number of Seminar/Trainings Attended (for the last two years)

Table 4 presents the distribution of the teacher-respondents according to the number of seminars/trainings attended for the last two years. Out of the 26 respondents, 22 or 84.62% have very inadequate attendance or participation in trainings and seminars while the remaining 4 or 15.39% have slightly adequate attendance to seminars and trainings. This finding rejects the null hypothesis of the study stating that 50% of the teacher-respondents have adequate attendance to Table 4 Distribution of Teacher-Respondents According to Seminars Attended No. of Points Earned for the past 2 years 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 40 and above Total Descriptive Equivalent Very Inadequate Slightly Adequate Adequate Moderately Adequate Very Adequate Frequency of Teachers
22 4 0 0 0

Rate
84.62% 15.39% 0% 0% 0%

26

100%

seminars/trainings for the past two years. This implies that the teachers have not been sent to seminars and trainings where their participation

was highly expected. This is caused by financial constraints, nonavailability of teachers due to school commitments and the distance of the venue of the seminar. The finding of the current study is supported by the finding of Oredina (2006), which disclosed that majority of the teacher-respondents have very inadequate participation in seminars and training

workshops. This was due to financial constraints. However, it does not jibe with the finding of Fianza (2009), which revealed that more than 50% of her respondents have attended trainings on curriculum, teaching strategies, management and assessment methods.

Summary of Profile of Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in San Fernando City, La Union Table 5 reveals that majority of the Mathematics teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando possess the necessary requirements in the teaching profession. Thus, they are Table 5 Summary Table of Profile of Mathematics Teachers in the Secondary Schools in San Fernando City, La Union Variables A. Highest Educational Attainment Frequency 0 Rate 0%

BSEd/AB/BS Graduate (Non-licensed) BSEd/AB/BS Graduate (Licensed) BSEd/AB/BS Graduate w/ MS/MA units MS/MA graduate With EDd/PHd units EDd/PHd graduate Total B. No. of Years in Teaching Mathematics 0-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years 21-25 years 26 years and above Total C. No. of Seminars Attended (0-10) Very Inadequate (11-20) Slightly Inadequate (21-30) Fairly Inadequate (31-40) Moderately Adequate (41 and above) Very Adequate Total 22 4 0 0 0 26 84.62% 15.39% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2 1 4 1 1 26 7.47% 3.85% 15.39% 3.85% 3.85% 100% 11 13 2 0 0 26 17 42.31% 50.00% 7.69% 0% 0% 100% 65.38%

qualified to teach in the secondary schools. Also, they value continuing education by enrolling in graduate school programs; however, they are very young in the service and their attendance to seminars is very inadequate. Level of Subject Matter/ Content Competence The succeeding tables present the subject matter/ content competence of the Mathematics teachers in the private secondary schools in the City Division of San Fernando as revealed in the results of the Mathematics competence test along conceptual skills, reasoning/ analytical skills, computational skills and problem-solving skills. Conceptual Skills Table 6 shows the subject matter competence of the teacherrespondents along conceptual skills. There are twenty-four (24 or 92.31%) teachers who got the items correctly in Elementary Algebra, eighteen (18 or 69.23%) in Intermediate Algebra, fourteen (14 or 53.85%) in Geometry, and seventeen (17 or 65.38%) in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Thus, the teachers have outstanding competence in Elementary Algebra, above average competence in Intermediate Algebra, average competence in Geometry and above

average competence in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Generally, there are eighteen (18 or 69.23%) teachers who got the items correctly for conceptual skills; thus, they have above average competence

Table 6 Subject Matter Competence of the Teacher-Respondents along Conceptual Skills Average no. of teachers who got the items correctly 24 18 14 17 18

Area of Mathematics Elementary Algebra Intermediate Algebra Geometry Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry, and Statistics Mean

Rate 92.31% 69.23% 53.85% 65.38% 69.23%

DER Excellent Above Average Average Average Above Average

in conceptual skills. This rejects the null hypothesis of the study that the teachers have average competence in content along conceptual skills. This means that the teachers have mastered the basic mathematical terms, definitions and concepts in mathematics. This is attributed to the reason that they have finished their degrees in Mathematics and that majority of them are continuing their graduate studies. Such being the case, the teachers can impart to the students the basic mathematical concepts needed in the understanding of more complex analysis of mathematical problems. It is very true that definitions, theorems,

postulates and other facts in mathematics should be well understood by anyone first before he/she can fully understand the rudiments of Mathematics. As Mina (2002) explained, knowledge, concepts, principles and ideas are very necessary in teaching because these start the acquisition of further learning. Further, it implies that the teachers need to continually upgrade and update their knowledge in the subject they are teaching to be able to achieve excellent competence. Roldan (2004) stressed this in her study that conceptual skills of the teachers are very important because these serve as the foundations of their math skills. The finding of the study does not jibe with the studies of Toledo and Bagaforo, as cited by Diaz (2000), revealing that the teachers felt moderately competent in their knowledge in mathematics. It was concluded that the teachers did not possess mathematics competence at a level very adequate for teaching secondary mathematics. Reasoning/ Analytical Skills Table 7 shows the subject matter competence of the teacherrespondents along reasoning/ analytical skills. There are twelve (12 or 46.15%) teachers who got the items correctly in Elementary Algebra, sixteen (16 or 61.54%) in Intermediate Algebra, nineteen (19 or 73.08%) in Geometry, and fourteen (14 or 53.85%) in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry competence and in Statistics. Elementary Thus, the teachers have average in

algebra,

average

competence

Intermediate Algebra, above average competence in Geometry and average competence in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Generally, there are fifteen (15 or 57.69%) teachers who got the item for Table 7 Subject Matter Competence of the Teacher-Respondents along Reasoning/Analytical Skills Area of Mathematics Average no. of teachers who got the items correctly 12 16 19 14 15 Rate DER

Elementary Algebra Intermediate Algebra Geometry Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry, and Statistics Mean

46.15% 61.54% 73.08% 53.85% 57.69%

Average Average Above Average Average Average

reasoning/ analytical skills correctly; thus, the teachers have average competence in terms of their reasoning/ analytical skills. This accepts the null hypothesis of the study that the teachers have average competence in content along reasoning/analytical skills. This implies that the teachers can satisfactorily lead the students in comprehending mathematical problems. Further, it is evident that in Geometry, the

subject that requires more analysis and probing, the teachers achieved

higher competence than the other subjects. It means that they received more training in reasoning in this subject than the other subjects. This is very true since Geometry focuses much on deductive reasoning as a tool in analyzing geometric problems and illustrations. This finding also means that the teachers needed upgrading of their reasoning competence to be able to lead students to analyze all types of problems, especially the most complex ones. Roldan emphasized this in her study that teachers really needed to be excellent in comprehension. This finding does not corroborate with the study of Gundayao (2000) when she generalized that the teachers lacked the reasoning competence since they have poor skills in analyzing different categories of mathematical problems. Computational Skills Table 8 discloses the subject matter competence of the teacherrespondents along computational skills. The table divulges that there are nineteen (19 or 73.08%) teacherrespondents who got the items correctly in Elementary Algebra, nineteen (19 or 73.08%) in Intermediate Algebra, twenty-one (21 or 87.50%) in Geometry, and twelve (12 or 46.15%) in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Thus, the teachers possess above average competence in Elementary Algebra, Algebra, above average competence in in Intermediate and and Average Statistics.

above in

average

competence Algebra,

Geometry

Competence

Advanced

Trigonometry

Generally, there are eighteen (18 or 69.23%) teachers who got the item correctly in computational skills; thus, they have average competence in terms of their computational skills. This accepts the null hypothesis of the study that the teachers have average competence in content along computational skills. This means that the teachers are good sources of processes, procedures, and techniques in solving items in Mathematics. Table 8 Subject Matter Competence of the Teacher-Respondents along Computational Skills Area of Mathematics Average no. of teachers who got the items correctly 19 19 21 12 18 Rate DER

Elementary Algebra Intermediate Algebra Geometry Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry, and Statistics Mean

73.08% 73.08% 87.50% 46.15% 69.23%

Above Average Above Average Above Average Average Above Average

Subala (2006) stressed this when she concluded that when teachers have average competence or above, they can satisfactorily direct students in the correct process of solving mathematical items. Roldan stressed that mathematics teachers needed to be experts in computation because

when teachers are experts of this skill, it is expected that students can master this skill, too. A closer look at the table makes it evident that the teachers have much lower computational competence in Advanced Algebra,

Trigonometry & Statistics than the other subjects. This is due to the fact that this is a more complex subject than the other subjects. Problem-Solving Skills Table 9 illustrates the subject matter competence of the teacherrespondents along problem-solving skills. Table 9 Subject Matter Competence of the Teacher-Respondents along Problem-solving Skills Area of Mathematics Average no. of teachers who got the items correctly 11 10 13 12 12 Rate DER

Elementary Algebra Intermediate Algebra Geometry Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry, and Statistics Mean

42.31% 38.46% 50.00% 46.15% 46.15%

Fair Fair Average Average Average

It demonstrates that there are eleven (11 or 42.31%) teachers who got the items correctly in Elementary Algebra, ten (10 or 38.46%) in Intermediate Algebra, thirteen (13 or 50.00%) in Geometry, and twelve (12 or 46.15%) in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Thus, the teachers possess fair competence in Elementary Algebra, fair competence in Intermediate Algebra, average competence in Geometry and average competence in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Generally, there are twelve (12 or 46.15%) teachers who got the items correctly in problem-solving skills; thus, they have average competence in problem solving skills. This accepts the null hypothesis of the study that the teachers have average competence in content along problem-solving skills. This means that the teachers can guide their students in analyzing, interpreting and solving word problems in Mathematics. Since this is the case, it can be inferred that the students in the Private Secondary Schools is San Fernando City can analyze, solve and interpret word problems. This is rooted to their average competence in analyzing skills and above average competence in computation skills since a good foundation of analytical and computational skills are necessary in solving word problems. Further, among the four subject matter skills, this is the area that received the lowest mean score. This is due to the fact that these skills require more rigorous analysis and computation before one can actually

come up with an approach to the problem and eventually a correct solution. Summary on the Level of Content Competence of the Mathematics Teachers Table 10 reveals that the teachers have above average competence in Elementary Algebra, average competence in Intermediate Algebra, above average competence in Geometry; and average competence in Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry and Statistics. Generally, the teachers have average subject matter competence in Mathematics. This accepts the null hypothesis of the study that the teachers have average subject matter competence. This means that the teachers know what to teach since they have good proficiency in the Mathematics subjects offered in the Secondary schools. Since they have average Table 10 Summary on the Level of Content Competence of the Mathematics Teachers along Conceptual, Reasoning /Analytical, Computational and Problem-solving Skills Area of Mathematics Elementary Algebra Intermediate Conceptual Reasoning/ Computational Analytical Skills Skills Skills 24 18 12 16 19 19 ProblemSolving Skills 11 10 Mean DER

17 16

Above Average Average

Algebra Geometry Advanced Algebra, Trigonometry, and Statistics Grand Mean DER 14 17 19 14 21 11 13 12 17 14 Average Average

18 Above Average

15 Average

18 Above Average

12 Average

16 Average

competence in Mathematics, it can be inferred that they know what to teach; hence, they are qualified to teach secondary mathematics. Since they are qualified to teach, the students can get adequate concepts and skills in mathematics. The finding of this study is supported by the findings of Toledo and Bagaforo, as cited by Diaz (2000), which asserted that the teachers have average competence in their knowledge and ability in mathematics. They emphasized that the teachers needed updating and upgrading of subject matter competence to possess the needed competence situated at a level very adequate for teaching secondary mathematics. This was even stressed by Roldan (2004) that even if the teachers have average or above average competence, the teachers need to consistently upgrade their knowledge and capabilities in teaching so as to cope with the challenges of the new millennium. However, this does not jibe with the study of

Gundayao (2000) which revealed that the teachers, in general, have poor proficiency in the Mathematics subject they are teaching. He stressed that the competence was poor because the teachers lacked the competence in analyzing complex mathematical principles, concepts and problems. Level of Instructional Competence The subsequent tables reflect the instructional competence of the Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of La Union as perceived by themselves, heads and the students. There were four areas in which the teachers were appraised, namely: teaching/facilitating skills, guidance skills, management skills and evaluation skills. Teaching/ Facilitating Skills Table 11 shows the mathematics teachers level of instructional competence along teaching/ facilitating skills. The table reveals that the teachers have high level of competence as shown by the mean rating of 4.07, which is interpreted as very good.

Table 11 Level of Instructional Competence of the Teacher-Respondents Along Teaching/ Facilitating Skills

Instructional Competence Dimensions 1. Substantiality of Teaching a. show confidence and exhibit mastery of the subject matter b. show awareness of the developments of the subject matter as seen in the utilization of key concepts, relationships, and different perspectives related to the content area c. align classroom instruction with national standards, schools vision-mission and educational philosophy d. focus on and cover all important aspects of the subject matter e. connect students prior knowledge, life experiences, and interests in the instructional process f. provide values clarification and integration considering the applications of the subject area to the students practical life g. engage students in in-depth and varied experiences that meet the diverse needs and promote holistic growth h. relate ideas and information within and across content areas Sub-mean 2. Quality of teachers explanation I a. make abstract concepts clear for students understanding b. ask students how they got a particular answer c. encourage students to probe into reactions, answers and responses

Students Teachers Heads WM

DER

4.41 4.28

4.33 4.30

4.63 4.48

4.46 4.35

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

3.99 4.26 4.15 4.08 4.23 3.79 4.15

4.19 4.22 4 3.96 4.04 4.04 4.14

4.41 4.37 4.19 4.22 4.26 4.26 4.35

4.19 4.28 4.11 4.09 4.18 4.03 4.21

4.18 4.29 4.35

4.37 4.48 4.33

4.33 4.37 4.30

4.29 4.38 4.33

Very Good Very Good Very Good

d. use knowledge of students development to make learning experiences meaningful and accessible for every student Sub-mean 3. Receptivity to students ideas and contributions I a. b. c. lead students to ask or initiate thoughtprovoking questions integrate and elaborate students questions and contributions into the class discussion demonstrate flexibility and responsiveness in adjusting instruction to meet students needs, ideas and contributions Sub-mean

4.13 4.24

4.19 4.34

4.37 4.34

4.23 4.31

Very Good Very Good

3.95 4.14 4.1 4.06

4.15 4.22 4.19 4.19

4.07 4.11 4.22 4.13

4.06 4.16 4.17 4.13

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

4. Quality of questioning procedure a. pose thought-provoking questions that promote high-order thinking skills b. encourage students to explain ideas and ask questions about the content c. provide time for student to think, ponder on and express response d. pose follow-up questions to clarify initial question when a student is unable to respond effectively e. emphasize on essential ideas and problems f. ensure that factual information and skills are applied to ideas and problems Sub-mean 4.24 4.19 4.25 4.20 4.24 4.25 4.23 4.15 4.22 4.22 4.15 4.19 4.15 4.18 4.33 4.22 4.30 4.37 4.37 4.19 4.30 4.24 4.21 4.26 4.24 4.27 4.20 4.24 Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

5. Selection of teaching methods a. determined on behavioral objectives and appropriate to the content area b. used in expressing ideas and problems (projects, themes, panel discussion, demonstration, etc) c. emphasizing on and eliciting students inquiry d. used to address individual differences and develop multiple intelligences e. intended to engage students in learning and supportive of theories of collaborative and cooperative learning Sub-mean 6. Quality of information and communication technology used I use a. computers for designing and printing instructional materials b. the principles of computer-aided and computer-based instruction c. multi-media resources, including technologies such as the internet, in the development and sequencing of instruction d. computerized grading sheets (without received corrections) e. overhead/LCD projector Sub-mean Grand Mean Legend: WM Weighted Mean 3.54 3.26 3.08 3.53 3.19 3.32 4.01 3.59 3.33 3.33 3.70 2.96 3.38 4.03 3.85 3.77 3.7 4.04 3.56 3.78 4.18 3.66 3.45 3.37 3.76 3.24 3.49 4.07 Very Good Good Good Very Good Good Good Very Good 4.16 4.21 3.94 3.94 4.14 4.08 4.04 3.85 3.89 3.78 4.07 3.93 4.22 4.15 4.15 4.15 4.26 4.19 4.14 4.07 3.99 3.96 4.16 4.07 Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

DER Descriptive Equivalent Rating

This finding is beyond the null hypothesis that the teachers have good performance levels in their instructional competence along

teaching/facilitating skills. Substantiality of Teaching. This aspect of the

teaching/facilitating skills received an average rating of 4.21, which is interpreted as very good. This is the area rated third highest among the areas under this skill. It means that the teachers exhibit the subject matter competence required in teaching secondary mathematics. This is even supported by the result of the mathematics test that the teachers have average subject matter competence. Being subject matter experts, the teachers were perceived to be skillful in the utilization of key concepts, relationships, and different perspectives related to the content area. Thus, it implies that the students can have adequate

comprehension of the subject matter. This slightly affirms the result of the competence test revealing that the teachers have average

competence in the Mathematics subject they are teaching. The Quality of Teachers Explanation. This area received a

rating of 4.31, interpreted as very good. This is the area with the highest rating among the areas under teaching/facilitating skills. It can be inferred that the teachers are able to explain mathematical concepts

since they have mastered the mathematical facts and concepts needed in their subject. With their mastery, the teachers are able to make abstract concepts clear. Further, the teachers were also perceived to be skillful in involving students in finding and explaining how they got their answers and in probing into their answers, reactions and responses. This is supported by the study of Villanueva (1999), which revealed that the teachers were rated very high along ability to explain correctly as evident in their content of the answer and command of the language of instruction. Receptivity to students Ideas and Contributions. This area was rated a mean value of 4.13, interpreted as very good. This finding suggests that the teachers can demonstrate flexibility and

responsiveness in adjusting teaching to meet students needs, ideas and contributions. Furthermore, the teachers are skilled in leading students in initiating thought-provoking questions. Rivera (2010) stressed that when teachers want students to learn, they have to provide opportunities for all students to interact in problem-rich situations, ask questions and probe into each question. Thus, teachers have to encourage students to find their own solution methods and give occasions for students to share and compare solution methods and answers in the groups. Quality of Teaching Procedure. The very high rating of 4.24 signifies that the teachers have the ability to ask thought-provoking

questions to find out if the students have understood the lesson very well. This means further that the teacher can formulate questions that develop the critical thinking ability of the students. If questions are understood, the teachers are able to follow up to find out the extent of students understanding; if questions are unanswered, the teachers are able to reformulate or rephrase the questions so as to fit students understanding. Selection of Teaching Methods. In connection to the selection of teaching methods, the teachers were perceived very good in all the identified skills with a mean value of 4.07. This means that the teachers are highly skilled in employing several approaches, methodologies and techniques with emphasis on student inquiry and on collaborative and cooperative learning. Grouws and Cebulla (2002), as cited by Fianza (2009), mentioned that when teachers want to improve mathematics teaching, certain strategies and methods of teaching should be considered to a great extent by the teachers, themselves. Quality of Information and Technology Utilized. The lowest

mean rating of 3.49, interpreted as good, was given to the quality of information and communication technology used. This implies that the teachers recognize to a lower degree the relevance of technology in teaching mathematics. They do not often use instructional gadgets such as the overhead projector, LCD projector and the like, although they have

received very good rating in terms of computerization of grades and some instructional materials. This finding corroborates with the study of Bello (2009) stressing that the instructors have to improve more on educational technology and technology integration. This also finds support from the study of Oredina (2006) asserting that the lowest area rated by her respondents was on quality of information and communication technology used since utilization of ICT was seldom. Guidance Skills Relative to the guidance skills, the mathematics teachers were evaluated along quality of interaction with students and quality of students activity. As revealed in Table 12, level of Instructional competence of the Teacher-Respondents along guidance skills, the mathematics teachers were rated a grand mean of 4.24, which is interpreted as very good. Table 12 Level of Instructional Competence of the Teacher-Respondents Along Guidance Skills
Instructional Competence Dimensions 1. Quality of Interaction with students Students Teachers Heads WM DER

a. arouse, maintain and sustain students interests b. give students recognition (phrases and reinforcements) c. regard students errors/mistakes as fruitful opportunities for learning d. make use of teaching as guide in helping students improve their work e. communicate high and realistic expectations from students Sub-mean 2. Quality of students activity a. activities are purposeful, relevant and experiential b. students are developing increased selfreliance and responsibility c. learning activities are appropriate for students developmental tasks d. time allocation is flexible to allow continuity of productive activities e. resources and facilities are appropriate for the learning activities Sub-mean Grand Mean Legend: WM Weighted Mean DER Descriptive Equivalent Rating

3.98 4.18 4.06 4.25 4.10 4.11

4.19 4.22 4.3 4.37 4.07 4.23

4.48 4.41 4.48 4.44 4.33 4.43

4.22 4.27 4.28 4.35 4.17 4.26

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

4.2 4.1 4.05 4.06 4.12 4.11 4.11

4.37 4.19 4.22 4.11 4.07 4.19 4.21

4.26 4.37 4.37 4.44 4.37 4.36 4.40

4.28 4.22 4.21 4.20 4.19 4.22 4.24

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

Quality of Interaction with Students. The teachers were perceived to have very good competence in helping students improve on their work, in providing encouragement, recognition and in developing self-reliance and responsible self-direction to students for a more effective learning. This means that the teachers are highly aware of the

importance of extrinsic motivation to maintain, strengthen and sustain positive attitudes such as giving commendations and approval. Also, they excel in encouraging students to learn and improve their performance. This finding is supported by the study of Graycochea (2000) which revealed that teachers were very highly competent in providing an environment conducive to learning. Quality of Students Activity. As regards the quality of students activity, the rating received by the teachers was 4.22, interpreted as very good. This implies that the teachers are highly capable in providing learning activities that are appropriate for students developmental tasks. The highest area rated was the area on activities are purposeful, relevant and experiential. Kolb and Rogers stressed that significant learning takes place when the subject matter is relevant to students experience and is purposeful to their personal interest. Management Skills Table 13 presents the instructional competence of the mathematics teachers in terms of their management skills. It is revealed that the level of management skills of the mathematics teachers was very good with a grand mean rating of 4.37. Atmosphere in the classroom. The three respondent groups indicated their highest response on the ability of the teacher to instill mutual respect, order and discipline as attested by the mean of 4.42.

This entails that the teachers are skilled classroom managers. They have the ability to create and sustain desirable behavior during classroom instruction. They also have that certain command over the class that effective classroom managers possess. According to Bueno, as cited by Tabafunda (2005), a sound classroom can be achieved and maintained through maintenance of constructive student-behavior correction. The teachers are also found to be skilled in establishing, communicating, modeling and maintaining standards of responsible behavior by incorporating creative and constructive discipline techniques rather than coercive and restrictive ones. This means that there is a thriving harmonious relationship existing between the teachers and their students. A genuine expression of care on the part of the teacher makes an atmosphere conducive to learning, a learning atmosphere of safety and free of threat (Lardizabal, 1991). Table 13 Level of Instructional Competence of the Teacher-Respondents Along Management Skills
Instructional Competency 1. Atmosphere in the classroom I a. create and encourage positive social interaction, active engagement and self-regulation for every student 4.27 4.26 4.44 4.32 Very Good Students Teachers Heads WM DER

b. am enthusiastic and maintain a warm friendly atmosphere conducive to learning c. establish, communicate, model, and maintain standards of responsible student behavior d. instill mutual respect, order and discipline e. incorporate creative and constructive discipline techniques rather than coercive and restrictive discipline techniques f. develop and implement classroom procedures and routines that support learning and enforce school policies among students g. cultivate students deep sense of controlling for their direction h. am organized, punctual and manage class time well; accomplish the objectives and procedures set for the time period Sub-mean 2. Conduct and return of evaluation materials I a. correct test papers, quizzes, assignments/requirements carefully b. return corrected test papers, quizzes, requirements promptly c. conduct efficiently quizzes/ examinations to avoid cheating Sub-mean Grand Mean Legend:

4.24 4.32 4.32 4.28 4.23 4.15 4.15 4.25

4.33 4.33 4.41 4.19 4.30 4.22 4.22 4.28

4.30 4.30 4.52 4.30 4.37 4.37 4.33 4.37

4.29 4.32 4.42 4.26 4.30 4.25 4.23 4.30

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

4.31 4.25 4.31 4.29 4.27

4.56 4.30 4.44 4.43 4.36

4.52 4.56 4.59 4.56 4.47

4.46 4.37 4.45 4.43 4.37

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

WM- Wieghted Mean DER Descriptive Equivalent Rating

Conduct and Return of Evaluation Materials. In connection to the conduct and return of evaluation materials, the teachers were perceived to be very good in all the areas included. This reflects that the teachers conduct efficiently quizzes to avoid cheating, and after the administration of tests, the teachers are able to correct and return the said evaluation materials. Cabusora (2001) emphasized that competence and efficiency of a teacher is also reflected in his ability to return promptly corrected test papers. Evaluation Skills Table 14 presents the instructional competence of the mathematics teachers along evaluation skills. It is reflected that the teachers have very good evaluation skills as attested by the mean value of 4.32. This implies that the teachers are able to maintain, enhance and sustain learning through their skill in evaluating learning outcomes; thus, they are able to determine students strengths and weaknesses as basis for an improved classroom interaction. Quality of Appraisal Questions. The teachers are found to be well adept in the preparation of well-framed test questions covering the

subject matter taken in the class and in asking questions that lead to the summary of the salient points of the lesson. These bring out the idea that Table 14 Level of Instructional Competence of the Teacher-Respondents Along Evaluation Skills
Instructional Competence Dimensions 1. Quality of Appraisal questions I am able to a. frame questions to find out students understanding b. ask questions, integrated in varying techniques, that lead to the synthesis of the salient points of the lesson c. prepare well-framed questions covering the subject matter taken in class d. guide students in goal setting and assessing their own learning e. provide students substantive, timely, and constructive feedback for specific area for improvement (write comments on paper/talk to students privately) Sub-mean 2. Quality of assignment/ activities I provide and consider enrichment 4.33 4.28 4.20 4.16 4.01 4.33 3.70 4.37 4.15 4.15 4.44 4.30 4.37 4.44 4.22 4.37 4.09 4.31 4.25 4.13 Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Students Teachers Heads WM DER

4.20

4.14

4.36

4.23

a. varying authentic assessments to gauge the extent of authentic learning b. assignment/ enrichment activities to supplement the days lesson and/or aligned to classroom instruction

4.20 4.25

4.08 4.22

4.37 4.48

4.22 4.32

Very Good Very Good

c. subject requirements that are practical and challenging d. adequate time for students to complete assignments/ requirements e. availability of materials in giving assignments and subject requirements Sub-mean 3. Quality of performance I appraising students

4.25 4.27 4.19 4.23

4.19 4.41 4.37 4.25

4.44 4.59 4.52 4.48

4.29 4.42 4.36 4.32

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

a. observe the standard grading system of the school b. grade/ score students objectively and accurately c. encourage students participation in creating rubrics d. utilize criteria/ requirements Sub-mean Grand Mean Legend: WM- Weighted Mean DER Descriptive Equivalent Rating rubrics in checking

4.37 4.37 4.15 4.21 4.28 4.24

4.52 4.48 4.04 4.30 4.34 4.24

4.74 4.70 4.30 4.56 4.58 4.47

4.54 4..52 4.16 4.36 4.40 4.32

Excellent Excellent Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

the teachers are well-skilled in directing the class to probe into situations that develop critical analysis through the formulation of very good questions. This finding corroborates with study of Sameon (2002) which

stressed that teachers perceived themselves as very competent in assessment. It means, therefore, that the teachers understood the underlying principles and theories in test construction to improve students performance. According to Rivera and Sambrano (1999), as cited by Tabafunda (2005), effective teaching should be coupled with the art of questioning. Good questions serve as essential in developing students ability to define and exercise judgments. Quality of Assignment/Enrichment Activities. The teachers were perceived very good in providing quality assignment/ enrichment activities as attested by the mean rating of 4.32. This means that the teachers are highly capable in providing varying authentic assessments to gauge the extent of learning. Further, they were also found to be wellskilled in providing activities that supplement the days lesson. Similarly, they were found very good in providing time to complete requirements and projects that are practical and challenging. This finding is supported by the finding of Oredina (2006) divulging that her respondents were very competent in providing reasonable, appropriate, practical and

challenging enrichment activities to substantiate what the students have learned in class. Quality of Appraising Students Performance. Relative to the quality of appraising students performance, the mathematics teachers were perceived very good in observing the grading system of the school,

in grading students objectively, in encouraging students in creating, utilizing rubrics/ criteria in checking requirements. This finding suggests that the teachers are skilled evaluators, interpreters and users of evaluation results or learning outcomes. This study is supported by the study of Sameon (2002) revealing that the respondents perceived themselves as very competent in assessment. He stressed that the teachers understood the underlying principles and practices in

evaluation and assessment. Comparison on the Perceived Instructional Competence between Students and Teachers Table 15 presents the comparison between the perceived

instructional competence between the students and teachers. The perceptions have insignificant difference in the teaching skills, significant difference in guidance skills, insignificant in management skills and insignificant in evaluation skills. Generally, there is no significant difference in the perceptions of students and teachers as regards the teachers instructional competence. This finding accepts the null hypothesis of the study that there is no significant difference in perceptions of the group of respondents. Table 15 Comparison on the Perceived Instructional Competence between Students and Teachers

Instructional Skills

Mean (Students)

Mean (Teachers) 4.03

Computed tvalue

t- critical @ 0.05 2.23

Decision

Interpretation

Teaching/ Facilitating Guidance Management

4.01

0.07

Do not reject Ho

Not significant Significant Not significant Not significant Not significant

4.11 4.27

4.21 4.36

5.00 1.10

4.30 4.3

Reject Ho Do not reject Ho

Evaluation

4.24

4.24

0.65

2.78

Do not reject Ho

Grand Mean

4.12

4.17

0.5

2.06

Do not reject Ho

This means that the students and teachers evaluated the teachers competence without discrepancy. This is rooted to the fact the teachers and the students are the ones who interact with each other on a daily basis, so they know very well what transpires and what does not in the classroom. This can also be explained using the educational thought by Johnson (2010) on teacher-student relationships. He stressed that backing up, sharing and appreciation helped maintain commonalities in perceptions of teachers and their students.

Comparison on the Perceived Instructional Competence between Students and Heads Table 16 presents the comparison between the perceived

instructional competence between the students and heads. There exists an insignificant difference in the teaching skills, significant difference in guidance skills, insignificant difference in management skills and significant difference in evaluation skills. Generally, there is a significant difference in the perceptions of the students and heads as regards the instructional competence of the mathematics teachers. This rejects the null hypothesis of the study on the difference of the perceptions. Table 16 Comparison on the Perceived Instructional Competence between Students and Heads
Instructional Skills Mean (Students) Teaching/ Facilitating Guidance Management 4.11 4.27 4.40 4.47 8.14 2.01 4.30 4.31 4.01 Mean (Heads) 4.03 Computed tvalue t- critical @ 0.05 2.23 Do not reject Ho reject Ho Do not reject Ho Not significant Significant Not significant Decision Interpretation

1.01

Evaluation Grand Mean

4.24 4.12

4.47 4.33

3.50 2.28

2.78 2.06

reject Ho reject Ho

significant significant

This means that the heads rated the teachers comparatively higher than the students. This is rooted to the period of interactions of the two groups of respondents: the students on a daily basis; while the heads on occasional basis. The students interact with the teachers daily during class interactions. They could assess when a teacher comes to class prepared or not. On the other hand, the head sees the class interaction during observation, a period when the teacher has prepared much for the teaching-learning process. This is supported by the thought presented by the article on www.ask.com that differences exist because of the different status of people, needs, personalities, interactions and beliefs. Comparison on the Perceived Instructional Competence between Teachers and Heads Table 17 manifests the comparison on the perceived instructional competence between the teachers and their heads. There exists an insignificant difference in terms of teaching skills, significant in guidance skills, insignificant in management skills and insignificant in evaluation skills. Generally, there exists an insignificant difference in the perceptions of the two respondents. This finding accepts the null hypothesis of the study that there is no significant difference in the

perceptions of the respondents. This can be explained through citing the Common Coding Theory. According to the theory, commonalities among perceptions of two groups of respondents exist because there is a Table 17 Comparison on the Perceived Instructional Competence between Teachers and Heads
Instructional Skills Mean (Teachers) Teaching/ Facilitating Guidance Management 4.21 4.36 4.40 4.47 4.59 0.91 4.30 4.30 4.03 Mean (Heads) 4.18 Computed tvalue t- critical @ 0.05 2.23 Do not reject Ho reject Ho Do not reject Ho Evaluation 4.24 4.47 2.68 2.78 Do not reject Ho Grand Mean 4.16 4.33 1.83 2.06 Do not reject Ho Not significant Significant Not significant Not significant Not significant Decision Interpretation

0.94

common code or shared representations for perceptions and actions. (www.en/wikipedia.org/wiki/common_coding_theory). Thus, the teachers and their heads share a common goal in instruction, that is, to impart

quality education to the students. The insignificant difference can also be explained by citing an excerpt in the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers asserting that teachers should always need to back up each other as sign of professionalism (Magna Carta for Public School Teachers: Teacher as Professionals).

Summary of the Level of Instructional Competence of Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City of San Fernando, La Union Table 18 reflects the summary of instructional competence of mathematics teachers. It is gleaned from the table that the instructional competence of the teachers obtained a grand mean of 4.24, interpreted as very good. This rejects the null hypothesis of the study that the teachers have only average/moderate instructional competence. All the levels of skills were rated very good with management skills as the highest and teaching skills as the lowest. Along teaching skills, one indicator was rated good only, that is on the quality of communication and information technology used. This implies that the teachers are not very familiar and unskillful in utilizing instructional technology; thus, they are not very competent along this area. This is also rooted to the access to such technologies. In the researchers observation during the proctoring of tests, teachers, especially the ones

in the big schools, own laptops. This gives an idea that the math teachers have limited access to projectors since other math teachers and teachers of other subjects also desire to use information and

communication technology in facilitating the teaching-learning process. Preparation of instructional technology is also a cause of this. Creating interactive slides, researching up-to-date clips including the setting up of the gadgets is also a complex task. Reinhardt, as cited by Oredina (2006), emphasizes that using ICT in teaching develops the proficiency desired among the students since features of computers such as video presentations; animations and the like are better instructional objects than chalkboards and transparencies. Table 18 Summary of the Level of Instructional Competence of Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in the City of San Fernando, La Union Level of Instructional Competence A. Teaching/ Facilitating Skills 1. Substantiality of Teaching 2. Quality of Teachers Explanation 3. Receptivity to students ideas 4.06 4.19 4.13 4.13 4.24 4.34 4.34 4.31 Students 4.15 Teachers 4.14 Heads 4.35 Mean 4.21 DER Very Good Very Good Very

and contributions 4. Quality of questioning procedure 5. Selection of teaching methods 6.Quality of information and communication technology used Sub-Mean B. Guidance Skills 1. Quality of interaction with students 2. Quality of students activity Sub-Mean C. Management Skills 1.Atmosphere in the Classroom 2.Conduct and return of evaluation materials Sub-Mean D. Evaluation Skills 1. Quality of appraisal questions 2.Quality of assignment/enrichment 4.23 4.25 4.48 4.32 4.25 4.29 4.27 4.20 4.28 4.43 4.36 4.14 4.37 4.56 4.47 4.36 4.30 4.43 4.37 4.23 4.11 4.11 4.19 4.21 4.36 4.40 4.22 4.24 4.23 4.08 3.32 4.01 4.11 4.18 3.93 3.38 4.03 4.23 4.30 4.19 3.78 4.18 4.43 4.24 4.07 3.49 4.07 4.26

Good Very Good Very Good Good Very Good Very Good

Very Good Very Good

Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good Very Good

activities 3.Quality of appraising students performance Sub-Mean Grand Mean Legend: WM- Weighted Mean DER Descriptive Equivalent Rating 4.28 4.24 4.16 4.34 4.24 4.21 4.58 4.47 4.38 4.4 4.32 4.24 Very Good Very Good Very Good

The very good evaluation given by the respondent groups to almost all the skills is pinpointing to a laudable instructional competence of the mathematics teachers in the Private schools in the City Division of San Fernando. This means that the mandate of the Department of Education (DepEd) to provide Quality Education for All (EFA) is present such that the realization of the goals and objectives of Mathematics teaching is achievable, especially in the Secondary schools. The studies of Acantilado (2002), Subala, as cited by Roldan (2004) and Oredina (2006) support the finding of the study. Their studies emphasized that their teacher-respondents were highly competent. Subala explained that since the teachers were competent, they can be proper sources of assistance and guidance to their students in analyzing

different mathematical concepts. It is noteworthy that the perceived instructional competence of teachers is in line with the goal of DepEd of achieving and providing sound functional literacy to the students. (Secondary Education Curriculum Framework, 2010). Relationship Between Profile and Level of Content Competence Table 19 manifests the relationship existing between profile variables and content competence variables. It further reveals that highest educational attainment is significantly correlated to

computational skills but not with conceptual skills, analytical and problem-solving skills. This means that when a math teacher has higher educational attainment, he has higher computational skills; but not necessarily conceptual, analytical and more so with problem-solving skill since such skill requires complex analysis with accurate solutions to deal with certain mathematical problems. This can be explained through citing an article by Keneddy (2001). Her article explained that a prospective teacher majoring a subject like mathematics or science does not guarantee that teachers will have the kind of subject matter knowledge and skills they need for teaching. Moreover, the table shows that number of years of teaching is significantly correlated to problem-solving skills but not conceptual, analytical and computational skills. Thus, a teacher who is more tenured Table 19

Relationship Between Profile and Level of Content Competence Profile Highest Educational Attainment Number of Years in Teaching Seminars Attended Conceptual Skills
0.23 Low t= 1.16 0.37 Low t= 1.95* 0.49* marked t= 2.75*

Analytical Skills
0.32 Low t= 1.90* 0.19 negligible t= 0.95 0.31Low t= 1.60

Computational Skills
0.57* marked t= 3.40* 0.27 low t= 1.37 0.19 Negligible t= 0.95

Problem-solving Skills
0.05 Negligible t=0.25 0.42 * marked t= 2.27* 0.06 Negligible t= 0.29

Legend *- The relationship is significant df = n-2 = 24; t critical value = 1.711

in teaching mathematics has higher competence in problem solving. It is true that when someone is more exposed to certain routine, he is able to master it. The table also presents that the number of seminars attended is significantly correlated to conceptual skills but not to analytical, computational and problem-solving. This implies that when a teacher frequently attends seminar-workshops, he has more content knowledge of a certain discipline. It is with attending seminars that changes or developments of an area of learning are taught and learned. A further examination of the table reveals that all the marked or substantial correlations (highest educational attainment- computational

skills, number of years in teaching-problem solving skills, seminars attended- conceptual skills) had been found to be significant. This means that the relationship existing among the cited variables are significant. It can be strongly inferred that once a teacher has higher educational qualifications, he is more competent in terms of computational skills; once a teacher becomes more tenured in the teaching profession, he is more competent along problem-solving skills; and, once a teacher has attended more seminars, he is more competent in terms of conceptual skills. It can also be noted that even the correlations between highest educational attainment-analytical skills and number of years in

teaching- conceptual skills, which were found to be low, are significant. This means that there is really no strong connection between having higher educational qualifications and competence along analytical skills, and number of years in teaching and conceptual skills. The finding of this study is supported by the ideas of web-article writers suggesting that subject matter competence can be attained and sustained through continuing professional education and teaching experiences. Also, the data fully support the contention of ClementeReyes (2002) in her study. Reyes expresses that subject matter expertise is gained through possessing educational achievements, gaining years of professional teaching service and attending training. She mentioned that

earning a bachelors degree was not sufficient; thus, recommending for continuing professional education since majority of the teacher experts were masters degree holders or even doctorate degree holders. Also, when a teacher is exposed in the teaching profession, he is likely to expand his horizons in his field; thus, contributing to teaching expertise. Lastly, she asserted that training helped a lot in gaining additional input. Such input met or not met by teachers in her formal education can affect his content knowledge. Relationship Between Profile and Level of Instructional Competence Table 20 discloses the relationship existing between profile variables and instructional competence variables. It shows that highest educational attainment is significantly correlated to teaching skills, guidance skills, management skills and evaluation skills. This implies that when a teacher has higher educational achievement, he is likely a master of the teaching-learning process he can facilitate classroom instruction, can provide needed guidance to his students, is an effective classroom manager, and a good evaluator of learning outcomes. Since the computed correlation coefficients were found to be significant, there exists a strong relationship between the variables correlated. It can be strongly expressed that when a teacher possesses higher educational attainment, he is likely more competent in instruction.

Table 20 Relationship Between Profile and Level of Instructional Competence Profile Highest Educational Attainment Number of Years in Teaching Seminars Attended Teaching Skills 0.71 * high t = 4.94* 0.18 low t=0.90 0.21 low t=1.05 Guidance Skills 0.54 * marked t=3.14* 0.24 Low t=1.21 0.41* marked t=2.20* Management Skills 0.51 * marked t=2.90* 0.28 Low t=1.43 0.24 Low t=1.21 Evaluation Skills 0.61* marked t=3.77* 0.33 Low t=1.71* 0.41 * marked t=2.20*

Legend *- The relationship is significant df = n-2 =24; t critical value= 1.711

This finding is supported by the study of Sameon (2002) stating that highest educational attainment is strongly correlated to teaching competence. Also, this corroborates with the international study of Achwarin (2005) arguing that teachers qualification is positively and significantly related to teachers instructional competence. The table also illustrates that number of years of teaching does not correlate with teaching, guidance, management and evaluation skills. This means that the skills under instructional competence (teaching, guidance, management, evaluation) are not necessarily brought about by the number of years a teacher has spent in teaching. Further, a teacher

who has a 30-year teaching experience is not necessarily more competent than a teacher who is still earning his teaching experience. Moreover, the correlation between number of years of teaching to teaching skills, guidance skills and management skills were found to be insignificant. This means that the relationship is not strong enough to contend that a teacher who stayed long in the service does not necessarily have higher competence along teaching, guidance and management skills. On the other hand, the correlation between the number of years of teaching to evaluation skills was found to be significant. This means that it is safe to assert that a teacher who stayed in the service for a longer period of time does not necessarily have higher evaluation skills. These findings run parallel to the study of Oredina (2006) revealing that number of teaching experience is not significantly correlated to the four instructional competence dimensions. However, these findings do not corroborate with the study of Davis (2000), as cited by Binay-an (2002), which claimed that teachers who are younger in the service are more likely to possess greater competence since they have greater inquisitive mind and zest for teaching. Further, these were not also in congruence to the study of Laroco (2005) claiming that teachers who had longer years in service are in better position to adjust themselves to different classroom situations; thus, they are more

competent. She concluded that teaching experiences add to the teaching competence. Same table also exposes that the number of seminar-workshops attended by the teachers is significantly related to guidance and evaluation skills but not to teaching and management skills. This means that the more seminar-workshops a teachers attends, the teacher becomes more competent in guiding students and in evaluating their learning. This can be strongly asserted since the correlation for these variables have been found to be significant. It further means that a teacher who has more seminars or trainings is not more competent in teaching and managing a class compared to a teacher with less number of seminars. Relationship Between Content and Instructional Competence Table 21 unveils the relationship existing between content and instructional competence of the mathematics teachers. It relates that conceptual skill is significantly related to guidance skills. Thus, a teacher who is more competent along concepts is more likely a good source of guidance. However, conceptual skill is not correlated to teaching skills, management and evaluation skills; thus, a teacher who possesses more conceptual skills does not necessarily mean that he can teach well, manage class effectively and evaluate learning outcomes accurately.

Table 21 Relationship Between Content and Instructional Competence Cognitive Skills Conceptual Skills Teaching Skills 0.25 Low t=1.26 Analytical Skills 0.23 Low t=1.15 Computational Skills 0.35 Low t=1.83* Problem-Solving skills 0.22 Low t=1.10 Guidance Skills 0.45* marked t=2.47* 0.37 Low t=1.95* 0.37 Low t=1.95* 0.16 Negligible t=0.79 Management Skills 0.31 Low t=1.60 0.27 Low t=1.37 0.21 Low t=1.05 0.17 Negligible t=0.85 Evaluation Skills 0.33 Low t=1.71* 0.33 Low t=1.71* 0.25 Low t=1.27 0.14 Negligible t=0.69

Legend *- The relationship is significant df=n-2=24; t critical value = 1.711

Moreover, analytical, computational and problem-solving skills do not correlate with teaching, guidance, management and evaluation skills. This means that when teachers possess high skills along analysis, computational and problem-solving, they do not necessarily possess skills along teaching-facilitating, guidance, management and evaluation lls. An international study which was cited by an article posted on the Harvard Educational Review supports this finding very well. This study was by Reynolds (1999). In the study, he exposed that subject matter

expertise was not contributory to success in teaching. With these she expanded the meaning of subject matter expertise to include an awareness of that expertise as learned.

(http://www.hepg.org/her/abstract/164).

This means that when a

teacher has more content competence, it does not necessarily follow that he can teach better. On the other hand, these findings do not support several studies, which include that of Binay-an (2002), Cabusora (2004), Diaz (2000), and Clemente-Reyes (2002) which revealed that subject

matter expertise was a contributory factor to teaching expertise. It was stressed that mastery of content-specific knowledge and the organization of this knowledge affect effective instruction. If the teachers were not experts in their field, it is unlikely for them to possess teaching expertise. Summary on the Relationship existing among Profile, Instructional and Subject Matter Competence Table 22 summarizes the relationship existing between profile and content competence, profile and instructional competence, and

competence along content and instruction. It further reveals that the computed correlation coefficients between the profile variables and content competence profile are all below the substantial coefficient of 0.41; thus profile (highest educational attainment, number of years of teaching and number of seminars attended) is not significantly related to content competence.

Summary on the Relationship existing among Profile, Instructional and Subject Matter Competence Table 22
Highest Educational Attainment Content Competence Instructional Competence 0.40 low t = 3.10* 0.64* Marked t = 4.08* 0.38 low t = 2.01* 0.28 low t = 1.43 Legend: * Significant df=n-2=24; t critical value = 1.711 0.31 low t = 1.60* 0.35 low t = 1.83* 0.38 low t = 2.01* Number of Years of Teaching Number of Seminars Attended Instructional Competence

Moreover, it divulges that highest educational attainment is significantly correlated to instructional competence with a correlation coefficient of 0.64, which is interpreted as marked or substantial correlation. However, the number of teaching experience and number of seminars attended do not correlate with instructional competence.

It also reveals that the computed correlation coefficient between instructional competence and content competence is 0.38, interpreted as low correlation. This means that instructional competence and content or subject matter competence are not significantly related. Strengths and Weaknesses of Mathematics Teachers Along Content Competence Table 23 manifests the strengths and weaknesses of the

mathematics teachers along the content/subject matter competence dimensions such as conceptual skills, analytical/reasoning skills, computational skills and problem-solving skills. As basis for determining the strengths from weaknesses, a mean rating lower than 17 is considered a weakness; otherwise, it is considered as strength. They are ranked accordingly for an organized presentation. The strengths are ranked in such a way that the item that garnered the highest mean value obtained the first rank to indicate that it is regarded as the foremost strength; the lowest mean value under the strength is ranked first indicative that it is a foremost weakness. Analytical skills and problem-solving skills are considered

weaknesses; conceptual and computational skills are considered as strengths. Generally, the teachers have a grand mean below 17; thus, the teachers are found to be weak in terms of their subject matter/ content competence. This accepts the null hypothesis of the study that the

teachers weaknesses are on analytical and problem-solving skills and their strengths are on conceptual and computational.

Table 23 Strengths and Weaknesses of Mathematics Teachers along Content Competence Area of Content Competence Conceptual Skills Analytic/Reasoning Skills Computational Skills Problem-Solving Skills Grand Mean 16 18 1.5 12 1 Strength 18 Rank 1.5 15 2 Weakness Rank

The foremost weakness is problem-solving. This is due to the fact that this skill encompasses all the other skills. One should know enough mathematical facts, should know how to reason out and probe deeper, and of course, should know how to compute before he can actually deal with mathematical problems.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Mathematics Teachers Along Instructional Competence Table 24 manifests the strengths and weaknesses of the

mathematics teachers along the instructional competence dimensions such as teaching/facilitating skills, guidance skills, management skills and evaluation skills. As basis for determining the strengths from weaknesses, all items rated 3.50 and above are strengths; otherwise, weaknesses. They are ranked accordingly for an organized presentation. The strengths are ranked in such a way that the item that garnered the highest mean value obtained the first rank to indicate that it is regarded as the foremost strength; the lowest mean value under the strength is ranked first indicative that it is a foremost weakness. Table 24 Strengths and Weaknesses of Mathematics Teachers Instructional Competence
Instructional Competency A. Teaching / Facilitating Skills 1. Substantiality of Teaching I...

Strength Rank Weakness Rank

a. show confidence and exhibit mastery of the subject matter b. show awareness of the developments of the subject matter as seen in the utilization of key concepts, relationships, and different perspectives related to the content area

4.46 4.35

1 2

c. align classroom instruction with national standards, schools vision-mission and educational philosophy d. focus on and cover all important aspects of the subject matter e. connect students prior knowledge, life experiences, and interests in the instructional process f. provide values clarification and integration considering the applications of the subject area to the students practical life g. engage students in in-depth and varied experiences that meet the diverse needs and promote holistic growth h. relate ideas and information within and across content areas
2. Quality of teachers explanation I

4.19 4.28 4.11 4.09 4.18 4.03

4 3 6 7 5 8

a. make abstract concepts clear for students understanding b. ask students how they got a particular answer c. encourage students to probe into reactions, answers and responses d. use knowledge of students development to make learning experiences meaningful and accessible for every student
3. Receptivity to students ideas and contributions I

4.29 4.38 4.33 4.23

1 2 3 4

a. lead students to ask or initiate thoughtprovoking questions b. integrate and elaborate students questions and contributions into the class discussion c. demonstrate flexibility and responsiveness in adjusting instruction to meet students needs, ideas and contributions
4. Quality of questioning procedure I

4.06 4.16 4.17

3 2 1

e.

a. pose thought-provoking questions that promote high-order thinking skills b. encourage students to explain ideas and ask questions about the content c. provide time for student to think, ponder on and express response d. pose follow-up questions to clarify initial question when a student is unable to respond effectively emphasize on essential ideas and problems
f. ensure that factual information and skills are applied to ideas and problems 5. Selection of teaching methods I use teaching methods which are a. determined on behavioral objectives and appropriate to the content area

4.24 4.21 4.26 4.25 4.27 4.20

4 5 2 3 1 6

4.14 4.07 3.99 3.96 4.16

2 3 4 5 1

b. used in expressing ideas and problems (projects, themes, panel discussion, demonstration, etc) c. emphasizing on and eliciting students inquiry d. used to address individual differences and develop multiple intelligences e. intended to engage students in learning and supportive of theories of collaborative and cooperative learning
6. Quality of information and communication technology used I use

a. computers for designing and printing instructional materials b. the principles of computer-aided and computerbased instruction c. multi-media resources, including technologies such as the internet, in the development and sequencing of instruction d. computerized grading sheets (without received corrections) e. overhead/LCD projector

3.66

2 3.45 3.37 3 2

3.76

1 3.24 1

B. Guidance Skills 1. Quality of Interaction with students I

a. arouse, maintain and sustain students interests b. give students recognition (phrases and reinforcements) c. regard students errors/mistakes as fruitful opportunities for learning d. make use of teaching as guide in helping students improve their work e. communicate high and realistic expectations from students
2. Quality of students activity I ensure that

4.22 4.27 4.28 4.35 4.17

4 3 2 1 5

a. activities are purposeful, relevant and experiential b. students are developing increased self-reliance and responsibility c. learning activities are appropriate for students developmental tasks d. time allocation is flexible to allow continuity of productive activities e. resources and facilities are appropriate for the learning activities
C. Management Skills 1. Atmosphere in the classroom I

4.28 4.22 4.21 4.20 4.19

1 2 3 4 5

a. create and encourage positive social interaction, active engagement and selfregulation for every student b. am enthusiastic and maintain a warm friendly atmosphere conducive to learning c. establish, communicate, model, and maintain standards of responsible student behavior

4.32 4.29 4.32

2.5 5 2.5

d. e.

instill mutual respect, order and discipline

4.42 4.26 4.30 4.25 4.23

1 6 4 7 8

incorporate creative and constructive discipline techniques rather than coercive and restrictive discipline techniques f. develop and implement classroom procedures and routines that support learning and enforce school policies among students g. cultivate students deep sense of controlling for their direction h. am organized, punctual and manage class time well; accomplish the objectives and procedures set for the time period
3. Conduct and return of evaluation materials I

d. correct test papers, quizzes, assignments/requirements carefully e. return corrected test papers, quizzes, requirements promptly f. conduct efficiently quizzes/ examinations to avoid cheating
4. Evaluation Skills 1. Quality of Appraisal questions I am able to

4.46 4.37 4.45

1 3 2

a. frame questions to find out students understanding b. ask questions, integrated in varying techniques, that lead to the synthesis of the salient points of the lesson c. prepare well-framed questions covering the subject matter taken in class d. guide students in goal setting and assessing their own learning e. provide students substantive, timely, and constructive feedback for specific area for improvement (write comments on paper/talk to students privately)
2. Quality of assignment/ enrichment activities

4.37 4.09 4.31 4.25 4.13

1 5 2 3 4

I provide and consider

a. varying authentic assessments to gauge the extent of authentic learning b. assignment/ enrichment activities to supplement the days lesson and/or aligned to classroom instruction c. subject requirements that are practical and challenging d. adequate time for students to complete assignments/ requirements e. availability of materials in giving assignments and subject requirements
3. Quality of appraising students performance I

4.22 4.32 4.29 4.42 4.36

5 3 4 1 2

a. observe the standard grading system of the school b. grade/ score students objectively and accurately c. encourage students participation in creating rubrics d. utilize criteria/ rubrics in checking requirements

4.54 4.52 4.16 4.36

1 2 4 3

Teaching/ Facilitating Skills In general, teaching skills were considered as strengths of the teachers as regards substantiality of teaching, quality of teachers explanation, receptivity to students ideas, quality of questioning procedure and selection of teaching methods. However, the quality of information and communication technology used was regarded as weakness. Thus, it entails that the teachers are very good facilitators of the teaching learning process. They are able to execute their function

effectively. They are effective pathfinders of knowledge who can instill the essentials of their subject in the students. But, they need to improve along the quality of information and communication technology utilized the mere fact that they were found wanting along this area. The reason for this weakness may be the accessibility of the teachers to these kinds of technology. Guidance Skills All the indicators under this area were perceived as strengths. This implies that the Mathematics teachers are very good in directing, supervising, and guiding the teaching-learning process. They are able to provide an atmosphere conducive to humane learning. Also, they provide activities which are relevant and purposeful for the students, and which they can direct and control to aim for optimum learning. Such being the case, the students are trained to become responsible element of the teaching-learning process. Management Skills The indicators of this skill are all perceived as strengths. A further comparison of the four skills gives an idea that this area is the skill rated the highest, the foremost strength. This means, in general, that the teachers are very good classroom managers. As such they are able to instill mutual respect, good behavior and discipline among students since they, themselves, model good behavior that their students emulate.

Evaluation Skills Like all the indicators under guidance and management skills, all the indicators under evaluation skills are perceived strengths by the three groups of respondents. This means that the teachers are able to gauge the extent of learning of their students. In synthesis, all the identified skills along teaching, guidance, management and evaluation were perceived to be strengths by the three groups of respondents, except in the quality of information and communication utilized, which is considered a weakness; thus, a primary concern. The finding of the current study runs parallel to the studies of Cirstobal (2004), Oredina (2006), and Bello (2009). In their studies, all the other areas were perceived strengths such as in teaching procedure, methodologies, assessment strategies, guidance, and management but the three divulged that the teachers lacked the necessary competence in technology utilization and integration. Proposed Two-Pronged Training Program for Mathematics Teachers of the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union I. Rationale The task impressed by the educative process on the shoulders of the teachers is not easy. Despite this, teachers still strive for the best to

provide the quality education every student deserves. Teachers still desire to be the best for their students. If this ideal holds greater than the challenges, then the teacher should not fail to upgrade and update himself. In doing so, teachers certainly improve their weaknesses and sustain or intensify their strengths. Indeed, training is necessary. . Training is the process of acquiring specific skills to perform a better job. It helps people to become qualified and proficient in performing their tasks. Through training, peoples behavior towards a task becomes modified. Such modified behavior contributes to the successful attainment of goals and objectives. The proposed two-pronged training program is based upon the identified strenghts and weaknesses of the mathematics teachers competence along content and instruction. The items rated the lowest in content competence dimensions (reasoning/analytical and problemsolving skills which were average competence), and instructional

competence dimensions (Information and Communication Technology (ICT) utilization) are considered priorities. The other dimensions

considered very good are still included for sustainability and possible enhancement. The insufficiency of Information and Communication Technology used in the private secondary schools in the City Division of San Fernando is theorized to be a contributory factor in the low rating given

to the quality of ICT used. To improve such, each school should upgrade its facilities in terms of technology, besides training the teachers in the use of such technology. The training program shoud be implemented during the preservices of the institution so that the attendance of the teachers will be assured. The teachers will simultaneously have their training. Follow-up will be done, if necessary. Assessment will be done on the last day of the program. Post-test will be done to ensure mastery of the subject matter. Demonstration lesson, on the other hand, will be conducted to see the extent of manifestation of instructional competence. In the selection of topics to be taught, the area with the lowest competency rating will be considered. II. General Objectives 1. Improve content and instructional pedagogical competencies; 2. Apply and adopt technology and utilize varied instructional materials in teaching mathematics; 3. Utilize the different motivating techniques and classroom

interactive activities; 4. Develop the proper techniques in the art of questioning and classroom management; and

5. Construct reliable and valid evaluative materials to measure students achievement. III. Training Course Contents A. Content Competence 1. Problem-Solving Skills 2. Reasoning/Analytical Skills 3. Computational Skills 4. Conceptual Skills B. Teaching Skills 1. Information and Communications Technology 2. Instructional Aids and Devices 3. Methodology/Strategies Interaction 4. Art of Questioning C. Guidance Skills 1. Motivating Techniques D. Management Skills 1. Classroom Management and Discipline E. Evaluation Skills 1. Evaluative Techniques IV. Methodologies and Approaches in Classroom

Lectures integrated with Interactive discussion with, application, skill builders, and follow-up workshops will be the main methodologies of the training course. Partcipants will be engaged in different set-ups: individual for the lecture, solving and application, pair for the brainstorming and group for the workshops. The teacher-participants can sometimes be asked to share their know-how and procedures about certain situations so that the discussion will be more substantial, fruitful and participative. V. Training Management The mathematics training shall be under the over-all management of the prinicipal with the assistance of the academic coordinator and the mathematics coordinator. The facilitators for the proposed training program were chosen based on their qualifications, trainings and seminars attended and organized, and competence along the different areas of concern. Most of the facilitators were speakers of the different seminar-workshops attended by the researcher. Such being the case, their expertise have really been considered in choosing their area for training. For Content Competence Training
Name Mr. Gerry Hoggang Position Head, Mathematics Saint Louis College High School Experiences/Qualifications/ Area/s of Concern BSEd, MAMT Elementary Algebra

Dr. Jose Almeida

Education Supervisor I Mathematics, DepEd

BSEd, MATE, PHd Intermediate Algebra BSED, MAED Geometry BSEd, MAEd-Math, EDd.Mgt. - Advanced Algebra, Trigo and Stat

Mrs. Edwina Manalang Dr. Ramir Austria

Faculty Saint Louis College Head, Mathematics Instruction University of the Cordilleras

For Instructional Competence


Mr. Jayson Toquero

Instructional Media Center-In charge BSIT, MS Comp Ed Units CKC-High School - Info. and Com. Tech utilized Head, Mathematics Saint Louis College Principal St Paul College, Manila Principal STC, QC BSEd, MATE, EDd -test construction BSED, MAED -classroom management BEED, MAED -guidance skills, lesson planning

Dr. Nora A. Oredina

Mrs. Debbie Graffil

Mrs. Gloria Cruz

VI. Participants All mathematics teachers of the Private Secondary Schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union VII. Duration 5 days (refer to the proposed program of activities) VIII. Logistics Honoraria for speakers (1,500/speaker) Meals/Snacks for the speakers (P150/speaker) Seminar Kits (P50/teacher) P12000.00 P 1200.00 P 1300.00

Others: Documentation, LCD projectors Laptop (c/o IMC officer) Certificates (c/o secretary) TOTAL IX. Success Indicator The mathematics teachers of the private secondary schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union shall improve on their content competence: conceptual, reasoning/analytical, computational and P14,500.00

problem-solving skills; and instructional: teaching/facilitating, guidance, management and evaluation skills by 25 percent. Level of Validity of the Two-Pronged Training Program It can be seen from the Table that the level of face and content validity of the proposed two-pronged training program as perceived by the validators was high. This suggests that the proposed program is highly functional, acceptable, appropriate, timely, implementable and sustainable. Table 25 Level of Validity of the Two-Pronged Training Program
Level of Validity Weighted Mean Descriptive Equivalent

I. II.

Face Content a. Functionality

4.17

High

4.50 4.50 4.33 4.17 3.83 3.83 4.20 4.19

High High High High High High High High

b. Acceptability c. Appropriateness d. Timeliness e. Implementability f. Sustainability Average Over-all Rating

Area of Concern A. Content Competence

A VALIDATED TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM FOR MATHEMATICS TEACHERS Materials Time Human Objectives Methods/ Content Needed Frame Resource Strategies Through the conduct of lecture, testretest, skill builders strategies, the mathematics teachers should be able to: Algebra I Participants: All math teachers

Logistics

Outcomes

-real number system -First degree equations and inequalities in one variable -rational algebraic expressions -linear equations in 2 variables -lecture -systems of linear equations Problem Sets 1 day
May 24, 2011

Speaker: Mr. Gerry Hoggang

Problem Solving Skills

- examine different word problems, mathematics illustrations or items accurately

Snacks: P 300.00

- solve

-Skill-building

Compass

(Morning)

Honorarium

There is a significant increase in the mathematics competence pretest and

mathematical problems with ease and accuracy

exercises Algebra II -sharingdiscussion Supplemental Materials Participants: Overhead/ or LCD projectors All math teachers

P3000.00

posttest

-develop additional techniques in solving word problems

-Quadratic Equations -variations -Sequences and Series

Test-retest strategy

Speaker: Laptops Dr. Jose P. Almeida

Geometry

-Writing Proofs -Triangle congruence Participants:


1 day

All math

Snacks:

-inequalities -Similarity -Circles -Coordinate Geometry

May 24, 2011 (Afternoon)

teachers

P 300.00

Speaker: Mrs. Edwina Manalang


Honorarium

P3000.00

Math IV -Functions Quadratic Polynomial Exponential Logarithmic Circular -trigonometric Identities and Equations -Counting techniques and Speaker: Dr. Ramir Austria Participants: All math teachers

probability -Intro to Statistics

Area of Concern A. Content Competence

Objectives

Methods/ Strategies

Content

Materials Needed

Time Frame

Human Resource Participants: All math teachers

Logistics

Outcomes

Through the conduct of lecture, testretest, skill builders strategies, the mathematics teachers should be able to:

Algebra I

-real number system -First degree equations and inequalities in one variable -rational algebraic expressions -linear equations in 2

Speaker: Mr. Gerry Hoggang

- examine different word problems, mathematics illustrations or

Snacks:

There is a significant

Reasoning/ Analytical Skills

items accurately

variables -lecture -systems of linear equations Problem Sets 1/2 day


May 23, 2011

-use deductive or inductive reasoning in solving exerices

-Skill-building exercises Algebra II -sharingdiscussion

Compass

(morning)

increase in the mathematics competence pretest and Honorarium posttest P 300.00 P3000.00

Supplemental Materials -Quadratic Equations -variations -Sequences and Series Overhead/ or LCD projectors

Participants: All math teachers

Test-retest strategy

Speaker: Dr. Jose P. Almeida

Laptops Geometry

-Writing Proofs -Triangle

congruence -inequalities -Similarity -Circles -Coordinate Geometry 1 /2day


May 23, 2011 (afternoon)

Participants: All math teachers

Speaker: Mrs. Edwina Manalang

Math IV -Functions Quadratic Polynomial Exponential Logarithmic Circular -trigonometric Identities and Equations -Counting Speaker: Dr. Ramir Austria Participants: All math teachers

techniques and probability -Intro to Statistics

Area of Concern A. Content Competence

Objectives

Methods/ Strategies

Content

Materials Needed

Time Frame

Human Resource Participants: All math teachers

Logistics

Outcomes

Through the conduct of lecture, testretest, skill builders strategies, the mathematics teachers should be able to:

Algebra I

-real number system -First degree equations and inequalities in one variable -rational algebraic

Speaker: Mr. Gerry Hoggang

Conceptual Skills

Computational skills

- restate on their own the different basic mathematical concepts, theorems, postulates, laws and properties/ axioms

expressions -linear equations in 2 variables -systems of linear equations Overhead/ -Skill-building exercises Algebra II or LCD projectors

-lecture

1 day
May 25, 2011

There is a significant P 300.00 increase in the mathematics competence pretest and Honorarium posttest P3000.00 Snacks:

- solve mathematical problems mentally

-panel discussion

-Quadratic Equations -variations

Laptops

Participants: All math teachers

-improve performance in the mathematics competency test

-sharingdiscussion

-Sequences and Series

Problem sets

Speaker: Test-retest strategy Geometry Dr. Jose P. Almeida

-Writing Proofs -Triangle congruence -inequalities -Similarity -Circles -Coordinate Geometry Speaker: Mrs. Edwina Manalang

Participants: All math teachers

Math IV -Functions Quadratic Polynomial Exponential Logarithmic Circular -trigonometric Identities and Participants: All math teachers

Equations -Counting techniques and probability -Intro to Statistics

Speaker: Dr. Ramir Austria

Area of Concern B.

Objectives

Methods/ Strategies

Content

Materials Needed

Time Frame

Human Resource

Logistics

Outcomes

Through the

Instructional Competence

conduct of lecture, seminarworkshop, demonstration panel discussion, and hands-on activities, the mathematics
teachers should be able to:

Teaching Facilitating Skills (utilization of ICT)

- use ICT gadgets such as projectors, laptops, computers and the like

-acquaint themselves in the basic usage of the features of MS PowerPoint

-lecture

Basic features of MS PowerPoint, Excel, MS

1 day LCD Projector

Participants All Math teachers

Snacks: P600.00

95% of the teachers have improved on the use of ICT

slides such as hyperlinking, videos, photos, and the like

-workshop

Math, Math Lab, Geogebra, Internet Statext

May 26, 2011

in instruction Speaker: Mr. Jayson Toquero


Honorarium

-demonstration

P1500.00

-use MS Excel, Geogebra, MS Math, MathLab and Statext

-panel discussion

Mathematical Softwares

-familiarize themselves with the different interactive classroom activities that supplement classroom instruction

-structure thought provoking questions that

develop the critical and analytical thinking of the students

Area of Concern B. Instructional Competence

Objectives

Methods/ Strategies

Content

Materials Needed

Time Frame

Human Resource

Logistics

Outcomes

Through the conduct of lecture, seminarworkshop, demonstration panel discussion, and hands-on activities, the mathematics teachers should be able to:

- use the varied motivating techniques in instruction

Guidance Skills (Motivating techniques)

-lecture Motivating techniques LCD Projector

1 day

Participants All Math teachers

-workshop

May 27, 2011

-demonstration

Laptop

Speaker: Mrs.Gloria Cruz

95% of the teachers have P800.00 improved on motivating techniques, classroom discipline, Honorarium assessment P1500.00 strategies) Snacks:

-panel discussion
-acquire and utilize skills and techniques in improving classroom instruction

Internet

Mathematical Softwares

Management skills (Classroom discipline)

-construct wellframed test questions with table of specifications

Classroom Discipline techniques

Articles on Classroom situations

Participants All Math teachers

Speaker: Mrs. Deffie Graffil Evaluation skills (assessment strategies)

Honorarium

P1500.00

-Authentic assessment Strategies

Test samples

Participants All Math teachers


Honorarium

P1500.00

Speaker: Dr. Nora A. Oredina

Prepared by: MR. FELJONE G. RAGMA Researcher

Noted by: MRS. EVANGELINE L. MANGAOANG HS Principal

Approved by: SR. TERESITA A. LARA, ICM School Directress

Chapter 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter incorporates the summary, findings, conclusions and recommendations of the study. Summary The study aimed at determining the competence of Mathematics teachers in the private secondary schools of San Fernando City, La Union as basis for a proposed two-pronged training program. Specifically, it sought to find answers to the following questions: 6. What is the profile of the mathematics teachers along: a. highest educational qualification; b. number of years in teaching mathematics; and c. number attended? 7. What is the level of competence of mathematics teachers along: a. Content a.1. Conceptual Skills a.2. Reasoning/ Analytical Skills a.3. Computational Skills a.4. Problem-Solving Skills ; and
b. Instruction

of

mathematics

trainings

and

seminars

b.1.Teaching Facilitating Skills

b.2. Guidance Skills b.3. Management Skills b.4. Evaluation Skills? 2.1 Is there a significant difference in the instructional competence of the teachers as perceived by the students, heads and teachers, themselves?
8. Is there a significant relationship between: a. Teachers profile and competence along content; b. Teachers profile and competence along instruction; and c. Competence

along

content

and

competence

along

instruction? 9. What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the mathematics teachers along: a. Content; and b. Instruction? 10. Based on the findings, what training program may be

proposed to enhance the content and instructional competence of the mathematics teachers? 5.1 What is the level of validity of the training program along: a. face; and b. content?

The descriptive survey method was used in this study. Data were gathered with the use of two sets of questionnaire. One is a teacher-made competence test to determine the content competence. The other one is questionnaire-checklist to determine the instructional competence. Respondents were heads, teachers and their students. Findings The following are the salient findings of the study: 1. a) All the mathematics teachers are licensed and majority of them are pursuing graduate studies. b) Majority of the teacher-respondents, 17 or 65.38%, had 0-5 years of teaching experience. c) 84.62% had very inadequate and 15.39% had slightly adequate attendance in seminars. 2. a) The teachers level of subject matter/content competence was average with a mean rating of 16. They scored highest in conceptual and computational skills but lowest in problem-solving skills. b) The teachers level of instructional competence was very good with a mean rating of 4.24. They were rated highest in management skills but lowest in teaching skills. 2.1) There is no significant difference in the perception between students and teachers; there is a significant difference in the

perception between students and heads; and there is no significant difference in the perception between teachers and heads. 3. a) There is no significant relationship between profile (highest

educational attainment, number of years of teaching, number of seminars attended) to content competence. b) There is a significant relationship between highest

educational attainment and instructional competence; but there is no significant relationship between number of years of teaching and number of seminars attended to instructional competence. c) There is no significant relationship existing between content competence and instructional competence. 4. a) Conceptual skills and Computational skills are considered as strengths. On the other hand, reasoning/analytical skills and problem-solving skills are considered as weaknesses. b) All the other skills under teaching, guidance, management and evaluation were considered strengths. The weakness of Mathematics teachers along instructional competence was on the quality of utilization of information and communication technology. 5. The two-pronged training program enhances the weaknesses and the sustainability of the strengths. 5.1 The training program along face and content validity was high.

Conclusions In the light of the above-cited findings, the following conclusions are drawn: a) The mathematics teachers in the secondary schools of the City Division of San Fernando, La Union are all qualified in the teaching profession. b) The teachers are very young in the service because of the high turn-over rate of the private schools. The rate may be rooted to the teachers desire to be employed abroad or in the public schools. c) The mathematics teachers are exposed minimally to trainings and seminars but they still perform well in their teaching. 2. The teachers had only average competence in terms of their content competence but were perceived very skillful in teaching Mathematics. 2.1 The heads rated instructional competence higher than the students; but all the respondents consider the teachers very skillful in teaching. 3. a) Teachers who have higher educational attainment, number of years in teaching and seminars attended do not have higher subject matter competence. b) Teachers who have higher educational attainment have higher instructional competence; but, teachers who are more experienced in

teaching and have more seminars do not mean that they have higher instructional competence than those who are younger and those who have lesser seminars. c) It does not mean that when a teacher has high content competence, he has high instructional competence as well and vice versa. 4. Teachers are not so skilled at analysis and problem-solving and they do not use ICT and other innovative instructional technology much in their daily teachings but still have very good teaching performance. 5. The proposed two-pronged training program is timely for the new and tenured teachers to update and upgrade their content and instructional competence. Moreover, it is a helpful tool for them to understand more their subject and know more about the ways on how to present a subject matter, especially on the use of ICT. 5.1 The administrators of the private secondary schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union considered the two-pronged training program valid. Recommendations Based on the conclusions of the study, the researcher recommends the following:

1. The teachers have to be encouraged to enroll in their graduate studies, especially in line with their fields of specialization so that their competence will be elevated. 2. Incentive Scheme for outstanding performance should be devised by administrators to enhance or sustain teaching performance; and keep outstanding teachers in the service. 3. Teachers should always be sent to seminars and workshops where their participation is necessary. If funding isnt enough, there should be mechanisms such as improving faculty development plan to remedy the predicament. Further, if a teacher is sent for a seminar, he has to echo the essentials of the seminar to his/her area members. 4. Teachers should use ICT in their teaching. On the other hand, the school has to provide the materials in order for the teacher to integrate technology to instruction. 5. A closer monitoring system has to be applied by the heads to ensure that teachers utilize ICT in their teaching. If materials are scarce, scheduling should be done. 6. The proposed two-pronged training program for the Mathematics teachers should be implemented in the private secondary schools in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union.

7. A study to determine the efficiency or efficacy of the two-pronged training program should be undertaken. 8. A parallel study should be undertaken in other subject areas such as English and Science.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Calmorin, Laurentina. Methods of Research and Thesis Writing. Manila: Rex Book Store, 2001. Clemente-Reyes, Flordeliza. Unveiling Teacher Expertise. Manila: De la Salle University Press,Inc., 2010. Devela, Mileah. Strategies for Teaching. Sampaloc, Manila: Rex Publishing, 2000. Esclabanan, Corazon. Teaching the High School Subjects. Quezon City, Philippines: Phoenix Publishing House, 2001. Galton, M. Teaching in the Primary Schools. London: David Fulton Publishers, 2001. Lardizabal, Amparo. Principles and Methods of Teaching. Quezon City: Phoenix Press, Inc., 2001. Isidro, Antonio. The Philippine Educational System. Manila, Philippines: Bookman, Inc, 2000. Sanchez, Custodia A. Methods and Techniques of Research. Manila: Rex Book Store, 2002.

Shulman, L.S. Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 2001. Sumagaysay, Lourdes. "Mathematics in the Secondary Curriculum." In Teaching the High School Subjects, by C Esclabanan, 89-100. Quezon: Phoenix Publishing Houise, 2001. B.JOURNALS/PERIODICALS Adams, S.K. "The Ethnographic stuidy of outstanding Veteran teachers." Dissertation Abstracts International. 2002. Berliner, D.C. "In Pursuit of the Expert Pedagogue." Educational Researcher, 2006: 5-13. "Consolidated Results of the Monitoring and Evaluation of the Implementation of the Basic Education Currciulum." Department of Education, 2002. "CSC Ruling: DepEd Can hire Unregisered Teachers." Educator's Journal, 2003: 1-2. Darling-Hammond, Linda. "Creating Excellent and Equitable High Schools." Educational Leadership, May 2008: 14-19. Dizon-Andres, Jenny. "The Government in the high School Scene." Educational Leadership, May 2009: 7-11.

Eligio, Janet. "Seminar on Trends in Teaching Mathematics." Rationale on the Seminar on Teaching Trends. San Fernando, City, July 2010. Esperanzate, Estrella. "Making Mathematics Class Enjoyable." The Modern Teacher, 2006: 146-147. Farol, Isaac. "Make Teaching More Fun." Educator's Journal, 1999: 2-3. Gonzalez, Andrew. "Development Imperatives in Education." Tanglaw, 2002: 1-6. Gonzalez, Andrew. "DECS Secretary's Desk: Preparation of the Philippine Educational System to the Challeges of the 21st Century." The Philippine Journal of Education, 2000: 2. Gubrud, Allan. "Learning Achievement and Efficiency of Learning the Concepts of Vector Addition at Three different Grade Levels." Science Education, 2003: 2-5. Ibe, Milagros. "Filipino Studes lack Math and Science Skills." The Philippine Journal of Education, 1998: 1-3. Kennedy, Mary. "How Teachers Learn to Teach." Educator's Journal, 2001: 6-8.

Lee, Mariano. "Great Ideas for teaching Mathematics." Philippine Journal of Education, 2010: 6-7. Lobo, Fred. "The Effective Mathematics Teacheer." Philippine Daily Inquirer, 1995: 12-15. Montealegre, Ma. Antoinette. "Cooperative Learning Activities." Educator's Journal, 2003: SIBS Publishing. Nava, F.J.G. "Effective Teaching Behaviors." Paper Presented at the International Conference on Teacher Education. Hongkong: The Hongkong Institute of Education, February 23, 1999. Scherer, Marge. "The High School Scene." Educational Leadership, 2008: 7-9.

"Secondary Mathematics Education Curriculum Guide." Educational Manuscripts. 2010. C.PUBLISHED /UNPUBLISHED RESOURCES Achwarin, Naree A. Teachers Competence at the Schools in the Southern Provinces of Thailand. Published Dissertation. Assumption University of Thailand-Graduate School of Education, 2005.

Aspiras, Rosabel Rizalinda N. Predictors of Performance of the Second Year Students of Christ the King College. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2004. Bambico, Teresita A. INSET as a Tool for Improving Mathematical Competence: Analysis of the Teachers Performance in Region I. Unpublished Dissertation. Pangasinan State University.2002 Bello, Elizabeth Constancia F. Competence of Teacher Educators: Input for Capacity Building Program. Unpublished Dissertation. Saint Louis Colege, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2009 Binay-an, Imelda N. Determinants of Teaching Performance of Secondary School English Teachers. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University-SLUC, Agoo, La Union, 2002. Cabusora, Edmund A.A Model for the Enhancement of Professors Competence in the Graduate Schools. Unpublished Dissertation. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, October 2004. Cayabyab, Vanessa P.Mathography: A Basis in Making a Learning Program for Future Mathematics Teachers. Unpublished

Dissertation. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2010. Crisrtobal, Joseph M. Capabilities and Needs of the Faculty of Lorma Colleges along Instruction, Research and Instruction: Basis for a Training Program. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Saint Louis College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2004 Eslava, Perpetua M. A Proposed Training Program for Mathematics Teachers in the Secondary Schools of La Union, SY 2002-2005. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2001. Diaz, Patricia U. Predictors of Mathematical Competencies of the Public and Private Secondary Mathematics Teachers of the Division of La Union. Unpublished Dissertation. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2000. Fianza, Ester T. Competencies and Needs of Geometry Teachers: Input to a Training Program. Unpublished Dissertation. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2009

Graycochea, Leonardo F. Math Teaching in the Secondary Schools in La Union, SY 1999-2000: A Model for DMMMSU-Graduate School. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2000. Hoggang, Nancy. Physics Teaching in the City Division of San Fernando, La Union Unpublished Masters Thesis. Saint Louis College, City of San Fernando, La Union,2001 . Laroco, Marlyn R. Mathematics of Instruction Plan for the Private Secondary Schools of the City Division of Urdaneta: Basis for an Instruction Plan. Unpublished Masters Thesis, 2005. Mallare,L. A Proposed Three-Year Action Plan for the Bachelor of Science in Computer Science in Lorma Colleges. Unpublished Masters Thesis. DMMMSU-GC,2001 Olbinado, Emily M. Enhancement Program for Secondary Teachers Who are Non-math Majors. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2007.

Oredina, Nora A. "Mathematics Instrcution in the HEIs in La Union: Basis for a Training Program." Unpublished Dissertation. Saint Louis College, San Fernando City, La Union, June 2006. Oyanda, Emy F. Extent of Knowledge of Secondary Mathematics Teachers in the Division of La Union: Input to an Instructional Plan. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2003 Ramos, Delilah P. The Effectiveness of Games and Puzzles in Secondary Mathematics I Instruction. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Saint Louis College, San Fernando City, La Union.2009. Rivera, Imelda Lyn R. instruction Plan in Contemporary Mathematics for Teacher Education. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2010. Roldan, Jinkee. Achievement and Competence of Mathematics Teachers in the Division of La Union: Basis for a Proposed Training Program. Unpublished Dissertation. Saint Louis College, San Fernando City, La Union.2004. Subala, Gloria Filomena. Competence of the Graduating Math Majors in the Teacher Training Institutions in Region I. Unpublished

Dissertation. Saint Louis College, San Fernando City, La Union, 2006. Tabafunda, L. Level of Effectiveness of Secondary Mathematics

Teachers:Input to A Training Program. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Benguet State University, 2005 Verceles, Joan. Mathematics Instruction in the College of Technology of DMMSU-MLUC: Basis for an Enriched Math Instruction.

Unpublished Masters Thesis. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University Graduate College, City of San Fernando, La Union, 2009 D.ON-LINE RESOURCES Australian Government: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2001). Retrieved July 31, 2010, from Investigation of Effective Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Australian Secondary Schools:http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications _resources/other_publications/effective_mathematics_teaching_learning. htm

http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/discussion/what-qualities-make-an-excellentteacher/1039890/ (accessed 13, July 2010) http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_Mathematics_Indispensable

http://oprf.com/Rogers (accessed 12 August 2010). http://doconnor.edublogs.org/finding-e-learning-and-online-teachingjobs/ (accessed 01 September 2010) jobs.stanlake.co.uk/recruiter/users/jobs.php?id=22 September 2010) http://www.sedl.org/pubs/policyresearch/resources/AERA-2004.pdf (accessed 11 September 2010) Dersal, Van. 2006. http://www.fao.orhg/docrep/w5030e/w583eoh.htm (accessed August 10, 2010). "eric edu." 2009. www.eric.edu/practicalities_mathed (accessed August 15, 2010). "www.deped.gov." 2010. www.deped.gov/basic_education (accessed July 31, 2010). www.britannicaonlineenyclopedia.com http://world.bank.org (accessed 13 2010, August) http://www.thejournal.com/articles2009 http://www.psypdx.edu/PSIcafe/keytheorist/Gagne.html (accessed 02

www.jifsan.umd.edu/pdf/gaps-en/VI-Effective-Training-Com.pdf (accessed July 17, 2010) www.ask.com/questions_about_selective_perception. (accessed October 01, 2010) (www.en/wikipedia.org/wiki/common_coding_theory). (accessed October 01, 2010) (http.//www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen06/gen06327.htm). (accessed October 01, 2010) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/individual_differences_psychology(accessed October 01, 2010) http//www.classroom%20management.(accessed March-29-10) www.sec.dost.gov.ph (accessed June 2010) Microsoft Encarta 2009. 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

APPENDICES

Sample Computation of Reliability of the Questionnaires

For the College Algebra test: ( where: k = number of items = mean of the distribution = the sample variance of the distribution )(
( )

( ( r = 0.79

)( )(

)
) )

( (

CRITERIA

Validators

Mean

Sample Computation on the Validity College Algebra Test

A 1. The directions are specific and can be understood well by the students. 2. The questions are encoded correctly. There are no grammatical errors and lapses. 3. The sentences are formulated in a manner that the target students can understand. 4. Mathematical expressions and equations are encoded correctly. They are easily understood for easier calculations. 5. The test items cover the course contents as indicated in the table of specifications. 7. There are provisions for students to write solutions on the question sheets. 6. Generally, the test items are representations of what they are ought to measure.

E 4.8

4.8

4.4

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.6 Overall Mean 4.0 5.0 4.43 4.71 5.0 4.63

Summary of Suggestions:

Sample Computation on the Validity of the Instructional Competence Questionnaire-Checklist Criteria A


1. Are the items representative of the concepts being measured? 2. Are the questions free from grammatical error? 3. Are the items perfectly clear and unambiguous? Is the general frame and reference from which these are asked, and from which the answers should be given clear? 4. Are the test items stable, relatively deep-seated, wellconsidered, non-superficial, non-ephemeral, but something which is typical of the subject area? 5. Do the test item pull? That is, can these be responded to by a large enough proportion of examinees to permit validity? Are the test items engaging enough to get response with some

Validators B 5 C 5 D 5 E 5 Mean 4.8

4 4

5 5

5 5

5 4

5 5

4.8 4.6

4.8

4.8

depth and reality? 6. Are the options of reasonable range of variations? 7. Are the test items sufficiently inclusive? Are full scope and intent of the test items so clearly indicated that the test takers will not omit parts of the options through lack of certainty as to what the test items desired. Overall Mean

4 4

5 5

5 4

4 5

5 5

4.6 4.6

4.0

5.0

4.86

4.71

5.0

4.71

Sample Computation on the Validity of the Two-Pronged Training Program Criteria A I. Face II. Content a.Functionality b.Acceptability c.Appropriateness d.Timeliness e.Implementability f.Sustainability 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 4.50 4.50 4.33 4.17 3.83 3.83 4 B 5 Validators C 5 D 4 E 4 F 3 4.17 Mean

Average Overall Mean

4.67 4.34

4.67 4.83

4.83 4.92

4.5 4.25

4.0 4.0

2.50 2.78

4.20 4.19

MATHEMATICS COMPETENCE TEST NAME:________________________________SCHOOL_______________:SCORE::______ INSTRUCTIONS: Select the letter of the correct answer. Write your answers on the space provided for. CALCULATORS ARE NOT ALLOWED! (30) _____1.Which axiom supports the idea that 2x +y = y +2x? a. commutative b. associative c. inverse d. identity _____2. Which of the following statements is always true? a. The quotient of two numbers is not always an integer. b. The quotient of two numbers is not always a fraction.

c. The quotient of two number is not always rational d. All statements are true except a e. Statements a, b and c are true. _____3. San Fernandos temperature, which is 40C, is how many F? a.104 b. 77 c. 400 d. 273.4 _____4. Len borrowed P10,000 at 10% simple interest. If she paid an interest and principal at the end of 18 mos., how much did she pay? a.P11,550 b. P18000 c.P11500 d. P10010 _____5. From a 100cm x 100cm x 60cm block of marble, a pyramid with square base of 100cm and a height of 60cm is carved. What is the volume of the marble carved in scientific notation? a. 2x105 b. 4x104 c. 4x105 d. 5x102 _____6.If the sum of x and y is subtracted from the sum of their squares, the answer is N. What is the relevant equation? a. x+y- x2+y2 =N b.(x2+y2)-(x+y)=N c.(x+y)2 -(x+y)=N d. (x-y) + (x+y)2=N _____7. Which of the following is not a polynomial? a. 5x2 +2x -1 b. x3- 3.4x+7 c. d. _____8.Which of the following describes an identity equation? a.4a-7=1 b. x= y+1 c.3(8-10)=-8+2 d. 4(7-2) =18 _____9. RJ and JR are traveling north in separate cars on the same highway. RJ is at 65kph and JR is at 70kph. RJ passes Dau Exit at 2:30p.m. JR passes the same exit at 2:45p.m. At what time will JR catch up to RJ? a. 3:25p.m. b.6:00p.m. c. 5:30 p.m. d. he cant catch up _____10. If a.v = u - 2f then what is the formula for v? b. v= c. v= ? c. d. 2a2+2b2-2 d. v =

_____11. What is the complete factored form of a. (a-b)(a2+b2-1) b.

_____12. Which of the following lines has an undefined slope? a. Vertical b. horizontal c. skewed to the right d. skewed to the left _____13. If three vertices of a parallelogram are A(2,0), B(4,4), C(6,0), find the vertex D if D is in the 4th quadrant. a. (1,-1) b.(4,-4) c.(2,-4) d.(4,-1) _____14.The line with equation 2y= - 4x +8 is perpendicular to a line whose one point is (2,-3). What is the equation of the line? a.y= b. y= c. y = -2x +1 d. y= 2x+1 _____15. For how many different positive integers n is 0<10-n<1? a.19 b. 21 c. 23 d. 18 _____16. To solve x2 +8x =-5 by completing the square, what number must be added to both sides of the equation? a. 64 b. 8 c. -64 d. 16

_____17. What is the complete factored form of a. x-2 a.k >0 b. b. k> c. 2 (x-2) c. k <

? d. not factorable d.k >

_____18. For what values of k will kx2 +11x -2 =0 have unequal roots? _____19. In the quadratic equation y= x2-8x +3, what is the minimum point? a.(13,4) b.(-13,4) c.(4,-13) d.(-4,13) _____20. For what values of x will a.1,2 b. 1,3 _____21. What is the simplified form of a. a. b. b. c. c. c.1

be meaningless? c.1,0 ? d. d. d.0 c. d.


d. 0

_____22.What is the value of (81/256)-3/4? _____23.If 62(3x-2)=324, what is x? a.4 b.3 _____24. If

:_______ a.

b.

_____25. If , then xy3 is equal to? a.31 b.63 c.96 d.15 _____26. y varies directly with x such that and y =12 when x=4. What is the equation of variation? a. xy=k b. y=-3x/12 c.4x=12y d. y=3x _____27. The distance of a body falls from rest is directly proportional to the square of the time it falls. If an object falls 256 feet in 4 seconds, how far will it fall in 8 seconds? a.128ft b.1024ft c.64ft d. none among the options given _____28. What is the general term for the sum of the first 100 whole numbers? a. ( ) b.
( )

c.

d.

_____29.Find the 11th term of the sequence 25,50,75 a.250 b.200 c.275 d.300 _____30. Suppose a ball always rebounds 1/3 of the height from which it falls and the ball is dropped from a height of 24 feet. What is the general tem of its sequence whose sequences are the heights from which the ball falls? a.an = 24(1/3)n b. an = (8)n c. an = 24(1/3)n-1 d. an = 8n-1 _____31. Which of the following geometric statements is stated correctly? a. A polygon is a plane figure formed by two or more non-collinear segments such that each segment intersects exactly two others, one at each endpoint. b. Among skew, perpendicular, parallel and intersecting lines, only skew lines are non-coplanar. c. An angle is formed by rays that have a common endpoint. d. A segment bisector is a ray that divides a segment into two congruent parts. e. All statements are stated correctly. _____32. E is the midpoint of segment FL. If FE = 4x2 x +12 and EL = 3x2 +x +60, what are the possible lengths of FL? a. 260 and 162 b. 144 and 200 c. 520 and 364 d. 8 and -6

_____33. <a and <b are both right angles. Which can justify the conclusion that the two right angles, <a and <b, are congruent? a. Definition of right angles b. definition of congruent angles b. Right angles theorem c. Transitive property of Equality _____34.Which among these is a geometric corollary? a. Law of Substitution b. Supplement Theorem c. Supplement Postulate d. Definition of Linear Pair _____35. Angles C and A are same-side interior angles. What type of angles are they if m<A=m<C? a. right b. acute c. obtuse d. cant be determined due to limited data _____36. Which of the following is not a triangle congruence postulate? a. SAS b.SSS c. AAA d. ASA A B _____37.(Refer to the figure at the right) If M is the midpoint of AC and BD, which postulate M can be used to prove that the 2 s are congruent? a. SAS b. ASA c. AAS d. AAA _____38. Which inequality describes an obtuse triangle? D C a. c2 a2+b2 b. c2 > a2+b2 c. c2 < a2+b2 d. c 2 a2+b2 _____39. Which is correct for the angles of a rectangle and square? a. Two consecutive angles are supplementary b. Two nonconsecutive angles are congruent c. One of the four angles is right. d. all statements _____40. The consecutive angles of a parallelogram are (3x +4) and (2x+6) degrees. What is the measure of (3x+4)? a. 10 b. 106 c.74 d. b or c _____41. The diagonals of an isosceles trapezoid are denoted by 2x2+3 and x2+28. What is the length of one diagonal? a.43 b. 53 c.5 d.106 For nos. 42-43, refer to circle E at the right. J _____42. What is the measure of <IEB if its 1/8 of a revolution? O D J a.45 b. 10 c. 170 d. 135 M E D _____43. IF m<IEB=73, what is the measure of <IOB? J a.73 b. 143.5 c. 36.5 d. 287 B _____44. What is the other endpoint of a segment with one endpoint at (3,-7) and the midpoint at (2,0)? J a. (1,7) b. (-4, 3) c. (3, 4) d. (7,1) _____45. The line through (-2,-1) with a slope of 3/8 also passes through the point (6,y) What is the coordinate of y? a. y=1 b. y = -1 C. y=2 d. y =-2 _____46. Which correspondence is a function? a. One-to-one b. one-to-many c. many-to-one d. a and b e. a and c _____47. If y = x/4, how many sixths of y does 1/12 of x represent? a. 0 b.1 c.2 d.3

_____48. For what values of x is x2 + 5x -14 greater than 0? a. x< -7; x >2 b. x> -7; x >2 c. x> 7; x >2 d. x> -7; x >-2 _____49. Which polynomial has the integral roots of -1/3 and 1 ? a. 3x3-5x2-5x-1=0 b. 3x3-5x2-5x+1=0 3 2 b. 3x +5x +5x-1=0 d. 3x3+5x2-5x+1=0 _____50. What is the domain of y = ? a. x 5/3 b. x /3 c. x -5/3 d. the set of reals (R) 7 _____51. If x = log8 8 then what is the value of x? a. 1 b. 8 c. 7 d. 0 _____52. If x = eln5, then what is the value of x? a. 0 b. e c. 1 d. 5 _____53. Which is a coterminal angle of -150 degrees? a. 30 b. 210 c. 510 d.330 _____54. The second hand of a clock is 10.5cm. What is the linear speed of the tip of this second hand as it passes around the clock face? a. 2 cm/sec b. 3.3 cm/sec c.1.099cm/sec d. 1.315cm/sec _____55. Which of the following is equal to ( /2, 1/2)? a. [5/6, 17/6, 29/6, 41/6] b. [7/6, 19/6, 31/6, 43/6] b. [11/6, 23/6, 35/6, 47/6] d. [/6, 13/6, 25/6, 37/6] 2 _____56. What is the solution of cos x+ sin x = 1; 0 x /4? a. /2 b. 90 c. /2, 7/6, 11/6 d. no solution _____57. Two dice are tossed. How many possible outcomes are there? a. 12 b. 24 c. 36 d. 42 _____58.In how many ways can 4 people be seated in a round table? a.12 b. 6 c. 24 d. 30 _____59. Which of the following is equal to the median? a. 5th decile b. 50th percentile c. 2nd quartile d. all _____60.When gathering raw data using a 5-point Likert Scale, what is the appropriate statistical tool to be used to determine the desired data necessary to interpret results? a. Standard deviation b. Variation c. weighted Mean d. Frequency count

ANSWER KEY TO MATHEMATICS COMPETENCE TEST ITEM NO. 1 Answer ITEM NO. A 31 B Answer

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

E A C C B C C B C C A B A D D B D C A B A A

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

C B B A C A B D B B A C A B E C B A D C D B

24 25 26 27 28 29 30

C B D B D C C

54 55 56 57 58 59 60

C D D C B D C

TEST SPECIFICATIONS FOR MATHEMATICS COMPETENCE TEST


Knowledge Comprehension/ Analysis Application Synthesis/ Evaluation

AREA OF GRADING MATHEMATICS PERIOD

CONTENT STANDARDS
Conceptual Skills

Pts

Total Pts

Analytical/ Reasoning Skills

Computational

Skills

ProblemSolving Skills

1ST E L E M E N T A 2ND

Real Number System Measurements Scientific Notation Algebraic Expression First-degree Equations and Inequalities in One variable

#1

#2 #3 #4 #5

2 2 1

3 1/3% 3 1/3% 1 2/3%

#7 #8

#6 #9

2 2

3 1/3% 3 1/3%

R Y

3RD

Rational Algebraic Expressions Linear Equations and Inequalities in Two Variables #12 #13

#10 #11

15

3 1/3%

3 1/3%

A L G E B R A 1ST I N T E 2ND 4TH

Systems of Linear Equations and Inequalities in Two Variables Special Products and Factors Quadratic Equations Equations Involving Rational #20 #16

#15

#14

3 1/3%

#17

3 1/3%

#18

#19

3 1/3%

#21

3 1/3%

R M E D I A T E 4TH 3RD

Expressions Expressions with Rational Exponents Radical Expressions and Equations Variations Sequences and Series #26 #28 #29 #24 #22 #23 #25 2 2 15 3 1/3% 3 1/3%

#27 #30

2 3

3 1/3% 5%

A L G E B R A

1ST G E O M E T R Y 2ND

Geometry of Shape and Size Geometric Relations Writing Proofs Perpendicular Lines and Parallel Lines Triangle Congruence Inequalities in a Triangle

#31

1 2/3%

#32 #34 #33 #35

1 2 1

1 2/3% 3 1/3% 1 2/3%

#36

#37

3 1/3%

#38

1 2/3%

3RD

Quadrilaterals Similarity

#39 #40 #41

1 2 15 2

1 2/3% 3 1/3%

4TH

Circles

#42

3 1/3%

#43 Plane Coordinate Geometry #44 #45 2 3 1/3%

A D V A N C E D

1ST

Relations and Functions Linear Functions Quadratic Functions

#46 #47 #48

1 1 1

1 2/3% 1 2/3% 1 2/3%

2ND

Polynomial Functions Exponential and Logarithmic Functions #51 #52

#49 #50

3 1/3%

3 1/3%

A 3RD

Circular

#53

#54

3 1/3%

L G E B R A 4TH

Functions Trigonometric Identities and Equations Counting Techniques and Probability Measures of Central Tendency and Variability #59 #55 #56 2 15 3 1/3%

#57 #58 #60

3 1/3%

3 1/3%

T R I G O &

S T

A T TOTAL PERCENTAGE 14 23 1/3 % 16 26 2/3 % 16 26 2/3% 14 23 1/3% 60 100%

Questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HEADS (SAC/Dept. Head/Academic Coordinator/Principal)

SAINT LOUIS COLLEGE City of San Fernando, La Union GRADUATE SCHOOL October 11, 2010

Highly Esteemed Educators, The undersigned is a Master of Arts in Education Major in Mathematics (MAEd-Math) student of Saint Louis College undertaking the study entitled, Competence of Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in San Fernando: Basis for a Two-Pronged Training Program. It is with this cause that your support is sincerely solicited so that this study can be carried out and may greatly contribute to the improvement of the teaching-learning process. Please accomplish then this very objectively and accurately. It may take much of your precious time but your responses will contribute much to the success of this study. Please dont leave an item unanswered. Rest assured that all information obtained herein will be held strictly confidential. Your immediate attention to this request is highly cherished. Thank you so much! Sincerely yours, Mr. Feljone G. Ragma Researcher

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HEADS COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM
PART I. PROFILE OF THE HEADS Directions: Please fill in the data needed by putting a check mark ( ) in the option that corresponds to your answers. A. Name (Optional): _______________________________________________ B. Institution Connected with: ___BHC ___CICOSAT ___CKC ___DSHJ ___UCC ___FELKRIS ___GLC _ __ LUCI ___LUCNAS ___MBC ___NCST ___SLC ___SLSHS

PART II. LEVEL OF INSTRUCTIONAL COMPETENCY Directions: Below are behaviors of an effective and efficient Mathematics Teacher. Please feel free to rate your math teacher by checking the blank in the appropriate column using the scale below: Scale Equivalent Description 5 Outstanding (O) -refers to performance that is rarely equaled and with numerical rating within 95-99 4 Very Satisfactory (VS) - refers to performance that clearly exceeds acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 90-94 3 Satisfactory (S) - refers to performance that meets acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 85-89 2 Fair (F) - refers to performance below acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 80-84 1 Poor (P) - refers to performance that is unacceptable and with numerical rating within 75-79
D. Teaching / Facilitating Skills 7. Substantiality of Teaching The teacher...

5 4 3 2 1

i. j.

shows confidence and exhibits mastery of the subject matter

shows awareness of the developments of the subject matter as seen in the utilization of key concepts, relationships, and different perspectives related to the content area k. aligns classroom instruction with national standards, schools visionmission and educational philosophy

l.

focuses on and covers all important aspects of the subject matter

m. connects students prior knowledge, life experiences, and interests in the instructional process n. provides values clarification and integration considering the applications of the subject area to the students practical life o. engages students in in-depth and varied experiences that meet the diverse needs and promote holistic growth p. relates ideas and information within and across content areas
8. Quality of teachers explanation The teacher

e. makes abstract concepts clear for students understanding f. asks students how they got a particular answer

g. encourages students to probe into reactions, answers and responses h. uses knowledge of students development to make learning experiences meaningful and accessible for every student
9. Receptivity to students ideas and contributions The teacher

d. e. f.

leads students to ask or initiate thought-provoking questions integrates and elaborates students questions and contributions into the class discussion demonstrates flexibility and responsiveness in adjusting instruction to meet students needs, ideas and contributions
The teacher

10. Quality of questioning procedure

g. h.

poses thought-provoking questions that promote high-order thinking skills encourages students to explain ideas and ask questions about the content

i. j.

provides time for student to think, ponder on and express response poses follow-up questions to clarify initial question when a student is unable to respond effectively

k. emphasizes on essential ideas and problems


l. ensures that factual information and skills are applied to ideas and problems

11. Selection of teaching methods The teacher uses teaching methods which are f. determined on behavioral objectives and appropriate to the content area

g. used in expressing ideas and problems (projects, themes, panel discussion, demonstration, etc) h. emphasizing on and eliciting students inquiry
i. used to address individual differences and develop multiple intelligences

j.

intended to engage students in learning and supportive of theories of collaborative and cooperative learning
The teacher uses

12. Quality of information and communication technology used

f.

computers for designing and printing instructional materials

g. the principles of computer-aided and computer-based instruction h. multi-media resources, including technologies such as the internet, in the development and sequencing of instruction i. computerized grading sheets (without received corrections) j. overhead/LCD projector

E. Guidance Skills 3. Quality of Interaction with students The teacher

f.

arouses, maintains and sustains students interests

g. gives students recognition (praises and reinforcements) h. regards students errors/mistakes as fruitful opportunities for learning i. makes use of teaching as guide in helping students improve their work

j.

communicates high and realistic expectations from students

4. Quality of students activity The teacher ensures that

f.

activities are purposeful, relevant and experiential

g. students are developing increased self-reliance and responsibility h. learning activities are appropriate for students developmental tasks i. j. time allocation is flexible to allow continuity of productive activities resources and facilities are appropriate for the learning activities

F. Management Skills 1. Atmosphere in the Classroom The teacher

i. creates and encourages positive social interaction, active engagement and self-regulation for every student j. is enthusiastic and maintains a warm friendly atmosphere conducive to learning k. establishes, communicates, models, and maintains standards of responsible student behavior l. instills mutual respect, order and discipline m. incorporates creative and constructive discipline techniques rather than coercive and restrictive discipline techniques n. develops and implements classroom procedures and routines that support learning and enforce school policies among students o. cultivates students deep sense of controlling for their direction p. is organized, punctual and manages class time well ( accomplish the objectives and procedures set for the time period)
2. Conduct and return of evaluation materials The teacher

g. corrects test papers, quizzes, assignments/requirements carefully

h. returns corrected test papers, quizzes, requirements promptly i. conducts efficiently quizzes/ examinations to avoid cheating
G. Evaluation Skills 4. Quality of Appraisal questions The teacher is able to

f.

frame questions to find out students understanding

g. ask questions, integrated in varying techniques, that lead to the synthesis of the salient points of the lesson h. prepare well-framed questions covering the subject matter taken in class i. j. guide students in goal setting and assessing their own learning provide students substantive, timely, and constructive feedback for specific area for improvement (write comments on paper/talk to students privately)
5. Quality of assignment/ enrichment activities The teacher provides and considers

f. varying authentic assessments to gauge the extent of authentic learning g. assignment/ enrichment activities to supplement the days lesson and/or aligned to classroom instruction h. subject requirements that are practical and challenging i. adequate time for students to complete assignments/ requirements j. availability of materials in giving assignments and subject requirements
6. Quality of appraising students performance The teacher

e. observes the standard grading system of the school f. grades/ scores students objectively and accurately

g. encourages students participation in creating rubrics

h. utilizes criteria/ rubrics in checking requirements

Questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MATHEMATICS TEACHERS

SAINT LOUIS COLLEGE City of San Fernando, La Union GRADUATE SCHOOL October 11, 2010

Dear Fellow Math Teachers, The undersigned is a Master of Arts in Education Major in Mathematics (MAEd-Math) student of Saint Louis College undertaking the study entitled, Competence of Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in San Fernando: Basis for a Two-Pronged Training Program. It is with this cause that your support is sincerely solicited so that this study can be carried out and may greatly contribute to the improvement of the teaching-learning process. Please accomplish then this very objectively and accurately. It may take much of your precious time but your responses will contribute much to the success of this study. Please dont leave an item unanswered. Rest assured that all information obtained herein will be held strictly confidential. Your immediate attention to this request is highly cherished. Thank you so much! Sincerely yours, Mr. Feljone G. Ragma Researcher

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MATHEMATICS TEACHERS COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM
PART I. PROFILE OF THE TEACHER-RESPONDENTS Directions: Please fill in the data needed by putting a check mark ( ) in the option that corresponds to your answers. A. Name (Optional): _______________________________________________ B. Institution Connected with: ___BHC ___CICOSAT ___CKC ___DSHJ ___UCC ___FELKRIS ___GLC _ __LUCI ___LUCNAS ___MBC ___NCST ___SLC ___SLSHS C. Highest Educational Attainment ___ BSED/BSE/AB/BS graduate (Non-licensed) ___ BSED/BSE/AB/BS graduate (Licensed) ___ BSED/BSE/AB/BS graduate MS/MA units ___ MS/MA graduate ___ with EDd/PHd units ___ EDd/PHd graduate D. Years of teaching mathematics ___0-5 years ___6-10 years ___11-15 years ___16-20 years ___21-25 years ___26 years and above E. Mathematics seminars/trainings attended (last two years) Name of Seminar School Local Regional National Internatl _____________________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _____________________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _____________________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _____________________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

PART II. LEVEL OF INSTRUCTIONAL COMPETENCY Directions: Below are behaviors of an effective and efficient Mathematics Teacher. Please feel free to rate yourself by checking the blank in the appropriate column using the scale below: Scale Equivalent Description 5 Outstanding (O) -refers to performance that is rarely equaled and with numerical rating within 95-99 4 Very Satisfactory (VS) - refers to performance that clearly exceeds acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 90-94 3 Satisfactory (S) - refers to performance that meets acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 85-89

2 1

Fair (F) Poor (P)

- refers to performance below acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 80-84 - refers to performance that is unacceptable and with numerical rating within 75-79 5 4 3 2 1

A. Teaching / Facilitating Skills 1. Substantiality of Teaching I...

a. show confidence and exhibit mastery of the subject matter b. show awareness of the developments of the subject matter as seen in the utilization of key concepts, relationships, and different perspectives related to the content area c. align classroom instruction with national standards, schools visionmission and educational philosophy d. focus on and cover all important aspects of the subject matter e. connect students prior knowledge, life experiences, and interests in the instructional process f. provide values clarification and integration considering the applications of the subject area to the students practical life g. engage students in in-depth and varied experiences that meet the diverse needs and promote holistic growth h. relate ideas and information within and across content areas
2. Quality of teachers explanation I

a. make abstract concepts clear for students understanding b. ask students how they got a particular answer c. encourage students to probe into reactions, answers and responses d. use knowledge of students development to make learning experiences meaningful and accessible for every student
3. Receptivity to students ideas and contributions I

a. lead students to ask or initiate thought-provoking questions

b. integrate and elaborate students questions and contributions into the class discussion c. demonstrate flexibility and responsiveness in adjusting instruction to meet students needs, ideas and contributions
4. Quality of questioning procedure I

a. pose thought-provoking questions that promote high-order thinking skills b. encourage students to explain ideas and ask questions about the content

c. provide time for student to think, ponder on and express response d. pose follow-up questions to clarify initial question when a student is unable to respond effectively emphasize on essential ideas and problems
f. ensure that factual information and skills are applied to ideas and problems

e.

5. Selection of teaching methods I use teaching methods which are a. determined on behavioral objectives and appropriate to the content area

b. used in expressing ideas and problems (projects, themes, panel discussion, demonstration, etc) c. emphasizing on and eliciting students inquiry d. used to address individual differences and develop multiple intelligences e. intended to engage students in learning and supportive of theories of collaborative and cooperative learning
6. Quality of information and communication technology used I use

a. computers for designing and printing instructional materials b. the principles of computer-aided and computer-based instruction c. multi-media resources, including technologies such as the internet, in the development and sequencing of instruction

d. e.

computerized grading sheets (without received corrections) overhead/LCD projector


B. Guidance Skills 1. Quality of Interaction with students I

a. arouse, maintain and sustain students interests b. give students recognition (praises and reinforcements) c. regard students errors/mistakes as fruitful opportunities for learning d. make use of teaching as guide in helping students improve their work e. communicate high and realistic expectations from students
2. Quality of students activity I ensure that

a. activities are purposeful, relevant and experiential b. tudents are developing increased self-reliance and responsibility c. learning activities are appropriate for students developmental tasks d. time allocation is flexible to allow continuity of productive activities e. resources and facilities are appropriate for the learning activities
C. Management Skills 5. Atmosphere in the classroom I

a. create and encourage positive social interaction, active engagement and self-regulation for every student b. am enthusiastic and maintain a warm friendly atmosphere conducive to learning c. establish, communicate, model, and maintain standards of responsible student behavior

d. e.

instill mutual respect, order and discipline

incorporate creative and constructive discipline techniques rather than coercive and restrictive discipline techniques f. develop and implement classroom procedures and routines that support learning and enforce school policies among students g. cultivate students deep sense of controlling for their direction h. am organized, punctual and manage class time well; accomplish the objectives and procedures set for the time period
6. Conduct and return of evaluation materials I

a. correct test papers, quizzes, assignments/requirements carefully b. return corrected test papers, quizzes, requirements promptly c. conduct efficiently quizzes/ examinations to avoid cheating
D. Evaluation Skills 1. Quality of Appraisal questions I am able to

a. frame questions to find out students understanding b. ask questions, integrated in varying techniques, that lead to the synthesis of the salient points of the lesson c. prepare well-framed questions covering the subject matter taken in class d. guide students in goal setting and assessing their own learning e. provide students substantive, timely, and constructive feedback for specific area for improvement (write comments on paper/talk to students privately)
2. Quality of assignment/ enrichment activities I provide and consider

a. varying authentic assessments to gauge the extent of authentic learning b. assignment/ enrichment activities to supplement the days lesson and/or aligned to classroom instruction

c. subject requirements that are practical and challenging d. adequate time for students to complete assignments/ requirements e. availability of materials in giving assignments and subject requirements
3. Quality of appraising students performance I

a. observe the standard grading system of the school b. grade/ score students objectively and accurately c. encourage students participation in creating rubrics d. utilize criteria/ rubrics in checking requirements

Questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENT-RESPONDENTS

SAINT LOUIS COLLEGE City of San Fernando, La Union GRADUATE SCHOOL October 11, 2010

My Dearest students, The undersigned is a Master of Arts in Education Major in Mathematics (MAEd-Math) student of Saint Louis College undertaking the study entitled, Competence of Mathematics Teachers in the Private Secondary Schools in San Fernando: Basis for a Two-Pronged Training Program. It is with this cause that your support is sincerely solicited so that this study can be carried out and may greatly contribute to the improvement of the teaching-learning process. Please accomplish then this very objectively and accurately. It may take much of your precious time but your responses will contribute much to the success of this study. Please dont leave an item unanswered. Rest assured that all information obtained herein will be held strictly confidential. Your immediate attention to this request is highly cherished. Thank you so much! Sincerely yours, Mr. Feljone G. Ragma Researcher

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENT-RESPONDENTS COMPETENCE OF MATHEMATICS TEACHERS IN THE PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN SAN FERNANDO CITY, LA UNION: BASIS FOR A TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM
PART I. PROFILE OF THE STUDENT-RESPONDENTS Directions: Please fill in the data needed by putting a check mark ( ) in the option that corresponds to your answers. A. Name (Optional): _______________________________________________ B. School Connected with: ___BHC ___CICOSAT ___CKC ___DSHJ ___UCC ___FELKRIS ___GLC _ __LUCI ___LUCNAS ___MBC ___NCST ___SLC ___SLSHS

PART II. LEVEL OF INSTRUCTIONAL COMPETENCY Directions: Below are behaviors of an effective and efficient Mathematics Teacher. Please feel free to rate your math teacher by checking the blank in the appropriate column using the scale below: Scale Equivalent Description 5 Outstanding (O) -refers to performance that is rarely equaled and with numerical rating within 95-99 4 Very Satisfactory (VS) - refers to performance that clearly exceeds acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 90-94 3 Satisfactory (S) - refers to performance that meets acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 85-89 2 Fair (F) - refers to performance below acceptable standards and with numerical rating within 80-84 1 Poor (P) - refers to performance that is unacceptable and with numerical rating within 75-79
A. Teaching / Facilitating Skills 1. Substantiality of Teaching The teacher...

5 4 3 2 1

a. knows very well his lesson b. is updated with his subject c. connects teaching to schools vision-mission, philosophy and national goals

d. teaches all important areas of the subject matter e. connects students knowledge, life experiences, and interests to the lesson f. gives values integration practical to life g. gives students different activities (puzzles, games, recitation) h. connects the lesson to other lessons and subjects (ie. English, Science,AP)
2. Quality of teachers explanation The teacher

a. makes math concepts clear b. asks students how they got an answer c. asks students to agree or disagree with presented answers d. makes his teaching understandable to all (teacher simplifies lessons)
3. Receptivity to students ideas and contributions The teacher

a. pushes students to raise very good questions b. c. includes students questions into the discussion fits lessons to students level

4. Quality of questioning procedure The teacher a. asks questions that make students think deeply b. lets students explain answers

c. allows students to think and react d. rewords questions when a student is unable to answer e. emphasizes important ideas (formulas, techniques etc.)

f.

makes sure that concepts and skills are learned

5. Selection of teaching methods The teacher uses teaching methods which are a. applicable to the subject

b. used in explaining ideas and problems c. allowing students to investigate and examine d. appropriate to every student in the class (no one is left behind) e. intended to keep students learning
6. Quality of information and communication technology used The teacher uses

a. computers for making and printing materials for teaching b. computers in teaching c. the internet in teaching d. computerized grading sheets (without mistakes) e. overhead/LCD projector
B. Guidance Skills 1. Quality of Interaction with students The teacher

a. awakens, keeps and sustains students interests (students are not bored) b. appreciates students correct response (says very good, thank you) c. doesnt get angry when a student commits mistakes d. helps students improve their work

e. talks of high but practical expectations from students


2. Quality of students activity The teacher ensures that

a. activities are practical, focused and applicable b. students are developing independence and responsibility c. activities are appropriate for students (not too hard but not too easy) d. time is flexible for students activities e. materials and facilities are proper for learning
C. Management Skills 1. Atmosphere in the Classroom The teacher

a. leads students to correct their misbehavior b. maintains a friendly classroom environment (students dont fear the teacher)

c. shows good behavior d. e. f. encourages respect, order and discipline uses positive discipline procedures implements school policies among students

g. develops students sense of control h. is organized, punctual and manages class time well
2. Conduct and return of evaluation materials The teacher

a. checks test papers, quizzes, assignments/requirements carefully

b. returns corrected test papers, quizzes, requirements on time c. conducts efficiently quizzes/ examinations to avoid cheating
D. Evaluation Skills 1. Quality of Appraisal questions The teacher is able to

a. ask questions to find out students understanding b. ask questions that lead to the important points of the lesson
c. prepare very good questions covering the lessons taken in class

d. guide students in evaluating their own learning (helps a student if he needs improvements or not) e. provide feedback for specific area for improvement (write comments on paper/talk to students privately)
2. Quality of assignment/ enrichment activities The teacher provides and considers

a. different activities and ways to measure the amount of learning b. assignment/ enrichment activities that support learning c. subject requirements that are practical and challenging d. adequate time for students to complete assignments/ requirements e. availability of materials in giving assignments and subject requirements
3. Quality of appraising students performance The teacher

a. uses the standard grading system of the school b. grades/ scores students with accuracy and fairness c. encourages students participation in creating rubrics

d. utilizes criteria/ rubrics in checking requirements

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR VALIDATION ON THE INSTRUCTIONAL COMPETENCE CHECKLIST NAME:_____________________POSITION:___________________DATE:______ Purpose: To validate questionnaire on instructional competence for Secondary Mathematics Teachers in the City Division of San Fernando Direction: Please put a check () in the box that corresponds to your judgment on validity of the instructional competence questionnaire for the secondary mathematics teachers. 1-poor 2-slight 3-moderate 4-high 5-very high 5 4 3 2 1

CRITERIA

1.Every sentence is easily understood 2.The sentences are grammatically correct 3.There are no errors in sentence construction 4.The directions are clear and easy to follow 5.The headings/titles of the different items are Appropriate 6.The scales are suited to what they are supposed to Measure 7.The questionnaires are representation of what they are to measure Other comments: ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________

QUESTIONNAIRE TO ESTABLISH CONTENT VALIDITY OF THE MATHEMATICS COMPETENCE TEST NAME:________________________________POSITION:__________________ EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT:_____________________________________ YEARS IN TEACHING MATHEMATICS:_____________________________ DIRECTION: Please place a check () on the appropriate point value to evaluate the extent of content validity of the test indicate by the factors below: 1-poor 2-slight 3-moderate 4-high 5-very high Criteria 5 4 3 2 1 1. Are the items representative of the concepts being measured? 2. Are the questions free from grammatical error? 3. Are the items perfectly clear and unambiguous? Is the general frame and reference from which these are asked, and from which the answers should be given clear? 4. Are the test items stable, relatively deep-seated, wellconsidered, non-superficial, non-ephemeral, but something which is typical of the subject area? 5. Do the test item pull? That is, can these be responded to by a large enough proportion of examinees to permit validity? Are the test items engaging enough to get response with some depth and reality? 6. Are the options of reasonable range of variations? 7. Are the test items sufficiently inclusive? Are full scope and intent of the test items so clearly indicated that the test takers will not omit parts of the options through lack of certainty as to what the test items desired.

Other Comments ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Lifted from the study of Dr. Ramos (2009) on Mathematics Education.

QUESTIONNAIRE TO ESTABLISH THE VALIDITY OF THE TWO-PRONGED TRAINING PROGRAM NAME:________________________________POSITION:__________________ EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT:_____________________________________ DIRECTION: Please place a check () on the appropriate point value to evaluate the extent of validity of the two-pronged training program as indicated by the factors below: 1-poor 2-slight 3-moderate 4-high 5-very high Criteria 5 4 3 2 I. II. Face Content a. Functionality b. Acceptability c. Appropriateness d. Timeliness e. Implementability f. Sustainability Other Comments ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________

CURRICULUM VITAE PERSONAL DATA Name: Date of Birth: Place of Birth: Home Address: e-mail Address: Civil status: Feljone Galima Ragma July 31, 1986 San Isidro, Candon City, Ilocos Sur San Isidro, Candon City, Ilocos Sur feljrhone@yahoo.com single

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Pre-Elementary: UCCP Candon City, Ilocos Sur Candon South Central School Candon City, Ilocos Sur Santa Lucia Academy Santa Lucia, Ilocos Sur Saint Louis College San Fernando City, La Union Bachelor in Secondary Education Major in Mathematics Graduate Studies: Saint Louis College San Fernando City, La Union Master of Arts in Education Major in Mathematics Graduated 1991 With honors Graduated 1997 With honors Graduated 2003 With honors Graduated 2007 Cum Laude Recognition Award Graduated 2011 Cum Laude Best in Research

Elementary:

Secondary:

Tertiary:

BOARD EXAMINATION/ CIVIL SERVICE ELIGIBILITY Licensure Examination for teachers (LET) 2007 P.D. 907 Civil Service Eligible

WORK EXPERIENCE. POSITIONS/SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS Saint Christopher Academy Bangar, La Union Classroom Teacher, 2007-2008 Christ the King College San Fernando City, La Union Classroom Teacher, 2008- present Subject Area Coordinator, 2010- present TRAININGS/SEMINAR-WORKSHOPS FACILITATED Problem-Solving Techniques in Secondary Mathematics Association of Private Schools City of San Fernando, La Union July, 2010 Seminar-Workshop on Creating Gradebooks through MS EXCEL Christ the King College City of San Fernando, La Union 2009 Seminar-Workshop on Creating Interactive Slides through MS PowerPoint Christ the King College City of San Fernando, La Union 2009 Seminar-Workshop on Campus Journalism Saint Christopher Academy Bangar, La Union 2008

How to Love and Like Math Saint Louis College City of San Fernando, La Union 2007 CONFERENCES/ SEMINARS PARTICIPATED Moving Forward with Backward Design: A Deeper look at UBD Saint Louis University Laboratory Elementary School January, 2011 Understanding and Planning for the 2010 SEC for Mathematics Phoenix Hall, Quezon City November, 2010 Training Program for Mathematics Teachers University of the Cordilleras September, 2010 Seminar on Yoga and Relaxation Christ the King College August, 2010 Critical Questions to Elicit Critical Thinking Christ the King College July, 2010 Seminar-Workshop on Homeroom Guidance and Counseling Techniques Christ the King College June, 2010 Utilizing and Interpreting CEM Test Data University of Baguio May, 2010 In-Service Training and Workshop on Curriculum Programs and Teaching Strategies Christ the King College November, 2009 Seminar on Innovations in Teaching and Learning Approaches Christ the King College

July, 2009 Understanding and Planning for the SEC Phoenix Hall, Pangasinan September, 2009 First Aid Program for Teachers Christ the King College June, 2008 PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION/ GROUPS Professional Teachers Organization Mathematics Teachers Association in Region I (MATARI)