You are on page 1of 29

1

“Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning: Its Effect on the


`Achievement and Attitude towards Mathematics of Grade 9
Learners”,

CARCELLER, GEORGIE R.

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of using Process Oriented

Guided Inquiry Learning on the achievement and Attitude towards

Mathematics of Grade 9 Learners. This was conducted in Lantapan

National High School, Division of Bukidnon during the school year 2017

– 2018. The activity worksheet on POGIL covered the topics on

quadrilaterals during the third grading period.

The study employed the quasi-experimental pretest-posttest

research design. Out of ten sections of grade 9 junior high school, two

intact groups were selected at random. In the same manner, one section

was randomly assigned as the control group and the other section the

experimental group with 30 participants each. The experimental group

was taught with POGIL approach; while the control group was taught

without the POGIL approach.

The first research instrument used in this study was the 30-item

achievement test. This was used in the pretest and posttest of the two

groups. The second research instrument was the 25-item attitude scale.

This was used to determine the attitude towards mathematics of


2

learners’ taught with POGIL approach and those without the POGIL

approach.

Findings revealed that there was a significant difference both in

the achievement and attitude of the learners towards mathematics

between the experimental and the control group. The learners taught

with the POGIL approach participated actively, value responsibility and

were involved in the activities most of the time.

Introduction

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) is an

approach used successfully in Chemistry, pre-calculus and calculus

courses (Hanson, 2006). It is a method of active learning that has two

major foundations. The first foundation is to emphasize process, the

idea of learning how to collaborate; and the second is guided inquiry

learning, where the teacher delivers content in a way that students can

access the content through an active learning process. It is both a

laboratory and classroom activity technique, which consists of some

students working in small groups on specially designed guided inquiry

materials. Each student is assigned a role, such as a manager, recorder,

spokesperson, or reflector.

Learning depends on the pedagogical approaches that teachers

utilize in the classroom. Various pedagogical approaches are common

in schools, but some strategies are more appropriate and effective than

others. From this, educators have developed learners’ centered


3

pedagogy that influences understanding of learning and teaching. One

of the teaching approaches that can be used in the classroom is the

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). The POGIL is a

cooperative learning technique in which students work in small groups.

POGIL is a student-centered, group learning instructional strategy and

philosophy (Hanson, 2006). The principle behind this characteristic is

the explicit emphasis on the development of process skills as an

important component of the student learning experiences. The process

skills for POGIL include both cognitive and affective processes. There

are seven areas for POGIL, namely: teamwork, management,

information processing, critical thinking, oral and written

communication, problem-solving, and assessment.

Many people recall their learning experiences in Geometry not

only as unpleasant but also difficult (Swartz, J. 2014). As observed by

the researcher, defining and classifying quadrilaterals appears to be a

difficult topic for many learners. They also have difficulties in

understanding the exact characteristics of the three kinds of

quadrilaterals. Properties of diagonals and bisectors of a quadrilateral,

as well as, the medians of the trapezoids are difficult for them to absorb.

High school students find these concepts difficult to understand and

master. The reasons for such difficulties relate to the complexities of

learning to analyze the attributes of different quadrilaterals and to

distinguish between critical and non-critical aspects. Such learning, if

it is to be effective, requires logical deduction, together with suitable

interactions between concepts and images.


4

To achieve real understanding and learning, learners must

explore the information they absorb. In exploring new knowledge,

learners will be integrating it with the previous knowledge and belief.

Generalize and make inferences. This cycle involves three stages,

namely: exploration, concept invention and application. In the

exploration phase, learners will develop a concept in response to the

series of questions given, guiding them to explore a model. The second

phase is concept invention. This involves the formation of concepts.

Learners are encouraged to explore and draw conclusions. The third

phase is the application. Once the concept is identified, learners use or

apply the new knowledge in exercises, problems and research situation.

Despite many strategies and approaches that are proven to be

effective, learners will have difficulties with the basic concepts even if

they are already in the higher grades. To address this problem teachers

are encouraged by the DepEd administrators to provide learning

activities or strategies that would be helpful in the teaching-learning

process. Hence, the researcher is challenged to conduct this study. The

lessons using the POGIL approach will be prepared by the researcher

to facilitate more meaning, more interesting and more enjoyable

Mathematics instruction.

Framework of the Study

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning may affect the

achievement and attitude of students in mathematics. This study is

anchored on the constructivist learning theory which states that


5

learning is an active, constructive process (Piaget, 1973). Constructivist

learning theory emphasizes that learners actively construct or create

their subjective representation of objective reality (Piaget, 1973). This

enables learners to individually and socially construct meaning as they

learn in engaging activities. He believed that children learn through

organization and schemas. He also believed that children are in control

of the knowledge that they are provided and move forward in construct

their learning by taking part in social activities and exploration.

The main concern of constructivism is that knowledge is

constructed in the mind of the learner by the learner. This construction

is a continual process in which knowledge is continually tested.

Knowledge is only valid if it works in the situation in which it occurs

(Bodner, 1986). For learning to occur, education creates models of

teaching and learning where students are actively involved in the

learning process. Students should seek knowledge for themselves in the

interactive and social environment (Dewey,1938).

This study is also anchored on social constructivism. Vygotsky

(1962) believes that learning needs to be engaging. He also believes that

learning takes place as children are interacting with each other and

exploring the environment. He believed that learning is simultaneous to

social interaction and exploration. He thinks that a student must

construct his or her knowledge by incorporating new ideas into existing

knowledge for learning to occur. The role of the teacher is to provide

students an educational environment to make a meaningful

connection.
6

Furthermore, this study hypothesized that discovery learning and

the type of instruction used in teaching influence student’s academic

achievement. Discovery learning is an inquiry-based, constructivist

learning theory that occurs in problem-solving situations where the

learner draws on his or her existing knowledge and experience to

discover facts and new truths to be learned.

In line with the constructivist theory, students will learn in

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning, when: a) they are actively

engaged and thinking in class; b) they construct knowledge and draw

conclusions themselves by analysing data and discussing ideas; c) they

learn to work together to understand concepts and solve problems; d)

the instructor serves as facilitator to assist groups in the learning

process; and e) the facilitator answers no questions that the learners

themselves can reasonably be expected to answer themselves (Farrel,

Moog & Spencer, 1999).

POGIL can be implemented in mathematics to develop learners’

cognitive or affective domain. When implementing POGIL, the teacher

starts with an introduction; followed by the main activity, and finally

the closing activity. The Introduction can be started by praying and

greetings to train values to the learners. Then, the main activity follows.

The learning purpose is explained by the teacher to build students

motivation to study the material. Prerequisite materials will then be

given to the students. The closing activity comes in the form of tests and

performance activities.
7

The conceptual model in Figure 1 shows the relationship of

the variables in the study. The first box contains the two learning

approaches that will be used in teaching mathematics. These strategies

include: teaching mathematics using POGIL approach (experimental

group) and teaching mathematics without the POGIL approach (control

group). The first box is connected with an arrow pointing to the second

box which contains the achievement and attitude of grade 9 learners in

Mathematics. The study investigated whether there is a significant

difference in the achievement of learners considering their attitude

towards the subject between the two groups of students.

Teaching Approaches
 Mathematics
A. Teaching
Mathematics using Achievement of
Lear
POGIL Grade 9 Learners
1. Orientation
2. Learning Cycle
 Exploration Phase
 Concept Invention
Phase
 Application Phase
3. Closure  Attitude of
B. Teaching Learners towards
Mathematics Mathematics
Without Using
POGIL
 What to know?
 What to process,
to reflect on and
understand?
 What to transfer?

Figure 1. The Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework of the

Study
8

There are three phases of the POGIL. In the Exploration Phase of

the learning cycle, the model can be a figure, an equation, a table, text

or any combination of these. It is designed to develop a concept.

Students attempt to explain or understand the material that is

presented by proposing, questioning and testing hypothesis.

In the Concept Invention Phase of the learning cycle, the students

answer some critical thinking questions, which are crafted to lead the

students to make inferences and conclusions. The students employ

higher order thinking skills as they engaged in critical thinking and

inquiry learning through their discussions. Once the concept is

identified and understood, it is reinforced and extended in the

application phase.

The final phase of the learning cycle is the Application Phase. In

this phase, the students are given some exercises designed to give

students additional practice. This is best done with a combination of

teacher talk (summary – mini-lecture), homework and reading from a

textbook.

Before the closing activity, a quiz will be given individually to the

learners. This is to ensure feedback on how far the learners understand

the material that they learned. The learners will be trained to believe in

their ability and not influenced by others.


9

In the closing activity, learners’ give their conclusion on the

material learned for the day. They make a reflection on their learning.

Each learner or group performance is given an evaluation.

Teaching mathematics without the POGIL approach follows the K

to 12 programs. Based from the teaching guides and the learners’

module of grade 9 Mathematics, lessons follow the following format:

“What to know, what to process, to reflect on and understand; and what

to apply.”

In what to know activities, students’ knowledge of the different

mathematical concepts previously learned is assessed. On what to

process reflect and understand activities, students apply the key

concept of the lesson and think deeper by answering different activities.

During what to transfer activities, students will apply their learning to

real-life situations by answering practical task.

Any teaching approaches could be effective in achieving good

academic achievement among the students. However, if the students do

not cooperate, even the best teaching strategies would become

ineffective. There is a need to consider students attitude towards the

subject to encourage participation in different mathematics activities.

In this study, students’ attitude will be based on Aiken’s Attitude scale.


10

Statement of the Problem

This study investigated the effects of using Process Oriented

Guided Inquiry Learning approach to the achievement and attitude of

Grade 9 learners in Lantapan National High School, Division of

Bukidnon. This was conducted during the third grading period of the

school year 2017 – 2018.

Specifically, the study sought answers to the following problems;

1. How do the achievement of Grade 9 learners in Mathematics

compare when taught with the use of Process Oriented Guided

Inquiry Learning approach and those taught without the

POGIL approach?

2. How does the attitude towards Mathematics of the Grade 9

learners compare when taught using the POGIL and when

taught without using the POGIL approach?

Statement of the Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance;

1. There is no significant difference in the achievement of Grade 9

learners in Mathematics when taught with the use of POGIL

approach and those taught without the POGIL approach.

2. There is no significant difference in the attitudes of the Grade 9

learners towards Mathematics when taught with the use of POGIL

and those learners’ taught without the use POGIL of approach.


11

Methodology

The study used a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest research

design to investigate the effects of teaching using Process Oriented

Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) approach to the Mathematics

achievement and attitude towards Mathematics of Grade 9 learners.

The design involved two intact groups of students, the experimental

group, and the control group. The experimental group was taught using

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning while the control group was

taught without the POGIL approach. The two groups were given the

same set of topics. The participants of each group were matched

according to their level of proficiency on their grades in math during the

second grading period. Both groups were given the researcher-made

achievement test and attitude scale before and after the conduct of

lessons in Quadrilaterals.

The study was conducted at Lantapan National High School of

the Division Bukidnon This institution is a level 2 passer of School-

Based Management, Regional Level. The school has a total population

of 2,016 where 936 are males, and 1080 are females for the Junior High

School for the school year 2017–2018. The school is managed by a

Principal II with 82 teachers including 7 Department Heads, two

personnel (the Disbursing officer and the Bookkeeper), and one

Guidance Counsellor. There are eight teachers who are teaching

mathematics subjects. These teachers are all graduates of Bachelor of

Science in Secondary Education with Mathematics as their major.

These teachers were able to attend the regional mass training for
12

mathematics teachers, enhancement training for secondary

Mathematics teachers on content and strategies, and other training and

seminars related to mathematics.

The participants of this study were the grade 9 learners of

Lantapan National High School who are enrolled for the school year

2017 – 2018. Two heterogeneous and intact classes were used in the

study. The two sections were randomly taken from the ten

heterogeneously grouped sections. Lottery method was used in

selecting the experimental group and control group. In this study, the

grade 9 Gomez was assigned the experimental; while the Grade 9

Dagohoy was assigned to the control group. Grade 9 Gomez has 45

learners, 20 male, and 25 females. Grade 9 Dagohoy has 58 learners,

27 males, and 31 females.

The students from the control group were matched with the

students in the experimental group based on their first grading grade.

There were 30 students from the experimental group, and each student

was matched with 30 students from the control group. The participants

from each group were matched according to their mathematical ability

levels. The mathematical ability descriptor was based on the DepEd

Order # 8, series of 2015.

The development of the lesson using the Process Oriented Guided

Inquiry Learning approach used three phases: Phase I, Phase II, and

Phase III (Simbulan, 2011). Phase 1 is the Pre-development stage which

includes the choice of topics, constructing the task analysis matrix and

initial critiquing of task analysis matrix. Phase II is the developmental


13

stage. This includes the writing of lessons and preliminary revisions.

Phase III is the validation and revision stage covered by the evaluation

of the experts, prospective teacher users, and the revision based on

their qualitative and quantitative feedback.

In the pre-development stage, the mathematics lessons that were

chosen were based on the current lesson for K to 12 Program in the

third grading period. The topics are on “Quadrilaterals that are

parallelograms, conditions that guarantee a quadrilateral a

parallelogram, find measures of sides, angles and other quantities

using the properties of parallelogram, Theorems on the different kinds

of parallelogram (rectangle, rhombus, square), midline theorem,

theorems on trapezoids and kites and solving problems involving

parallelograms, trapezoids and kites”.

In the developmental stage, each lesson for each topic was

developed based on TAM and Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning

Approach. The Task Analysis Matrix served as a guide in developing the

lesson using POGIL approach. This TAM contains Learning Objectives,

Learning Content, time allotment, and references. For validation

purposes, the researcher presented the materials to the experts in

Mathematics.

In the Post Developmental Stage, the evaluation of the lesson’s

content, accuracy, and appropriateness was conducted by the panel of

experts. The criteria for the evaluation were on the acceptability, clarity,

applicability, and usefulness of the developed activity sheets. The result


14

of their evaluation was used as the basis for improving, revising, and

refining the material.

The instruments used in the study were the achievement test, the

attitude scale test and the prompts for Experience. A variety of tools will

be used to gather data.

The following statistical tools were used to analyze the data. To

answer problems 1 and 2, the mean and standard deviation were used

to determine the academic achievement and attitude towards

mathematics of the learners who were taught with the use of the POGIL

approach and those that were taught without the POGIL approach. One

way Analysis of Covariance was used to determine the significant

difference in the achievement and attitude of students taught with the

POGIL approach and those that taught without the POGIL approach.

Results and Discussions

Achievement of Grade 9 Learners in Mathematics

To compare the achievement of learners taught with the use of

POGIL approach and those taught without the use of POGIL approach,

the means obtained from their scores were used. The data showing the

mean and standard deviation of the two groups in their pretest and

posttest are presented in Table 2. As shown in the table,the learners in

both groups did not meet the expectations. This shows that the students

struggle with their understanding and have not yet acquired the skills

before the conduct of the study.


15

On the other hand, the mean score in the posttest of the

experimental group is higher compared to the control group. The two

means have a noticeable difference. This difference in the posttest

means values between the two groups reveals that the experimental

group performed better than the control group in their achievement in

mathematics. Based on the achievement set by the Department of

Education, the experimental group possesses the minimum knowledge,

skills and core understanding but needs help throughout the authentic

task while the control group struggles with understanding the pre-

requisite and fundamental knowledge and skills in mathematics.

The students in the POGIL classroom were given the

opportunities to interact with each other and cooperatively answer the

critical thinking questions given to them. The study of Wilson, Taylor,

Table 2

Learners’ Academic Achievement in the Pretest and Posttest of the


Experimental and Control Group
Range
Level of of
Proficiency Scores Experimental Group Control Group
f % F % F % F %
Outstanding 27 – 30 0 0% 1 3.33% 0 0% 0 0%
Very
Satisfactory 24 – 26 0 0% 2 6.67% 0 0% 0 %
Satisfactory 21 – 23 0 0% 9 30% 0 0% 1 3.33%
Fairly
Satisfactory 18 – 20 0 0% 14 46.67% 0 0% 14 46.67%

DME 0 – 17 30 100% 4 13.33% 30 100% 15 50%


10.7 20.13 9.57 16.77
Sd 2.71 2.99 3.25 2.74

Legend: F – Frequency % - Percentage 𝑥̅ – mean


DME – Did not Meet Expectation sd – standard deviation
16

and Kowalski, (2010) disclosed that when students are actively involved

in the learning process, it enhanced the students’ academic

achievement as they interact with each other and create their meaning

of new ideas. This was supported by Hussain (2013), who upheld that

instructors and students considered the activities in cooperative

learning to be useful in enhancing students learning, developing a

problem-solving approach, and critical thinking and communication

skills along with motivation. It empowered students with critical

thinking and reflective practice

The Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test if there is

a significant difference in the achievement test scores of grade 9

learners in mathematics between those taught with the use of Process

Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) and those taught without the

use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). The results

are presented in Table 3.

The result shows that the p-value is less than the 0.05 level of

significance. Hence the finding reveals that the hypothesis which states

that “There is no significant difference in the achievement of Grade 9

learners in Mathematics when taught with the use of POGIL approach

and those taught without the POGIL approach” is rejected.

Based on these results, using POGIL in teaching Mathematics had

helped improve the academic achievement of the learners in the

experimental group. This shows that the learners in the experimental

group performed better than the students in the control group. Thus,
17

using POGIL in teaching mathematics could be an effective approach to

improve the achievement of the learners.

During the conduct of the study, the researcher observed that the

learners in the experimental group were more attentive and

participative. The activities using POGIL could have enabled the

students to broaden and deepen their understanding of their lesson

through discovering new concepts about the topics. This corroborates

to the findings of Farrel, Moog, and Spencer (1999) that students in

General Chemistry taught using POGIL strategy obtained higher grades

than those students who were taught with the conventional method.

Also, POGIL had contributed a lot to the learning process since it

is a student-centered approach which allowed the students to work in

small groups and be engaged in guided-inquiry activities. This was

used to teach the students in the experimental group in both content

Table 3

ANCOVA Summary Table comparing the achievement tests scores of


grade 9 Learners

Dependent Variable: Posttest


Type III Sum Mean
Source of Squares Df Square F Sig.

Intercept 1315.140 1 1315.140 162.163 .000


Pretest 14.565 1 14.565 1. 796 .186
Group 146.035 1 146.035 18.007 .000
Error 462.268 57 8.110
Total 21071.000 60

Moog, and Spencer (1999) that students in General Chemistry taught


18

and process skills of Mathematics using carefully designed

instructional materials following the learning cycle of exploration,

concept invention and application.

In the Exploration Phase of the learning cycle, learners explore a

topic or phenomena and interact with other learners or the teacher.

Observations were made, and questions usually arise from the

exploration where the learners utilize model, data, or information. The

models were figures, text, tables, equations or any combination of these.

These were designed to develop some concepts.

In the Concept Invention Phase of the learning cycle, the learners

utilize prior knowledge along with the acquired information from the

exploration phase to begin making a series of statements of

speculations concerning the concept being studied. Learners frequently

refer back to the model or materials utilized in the exploration phase as

they work to develop their concept.

In the application phase of the learning cycle, the learners apply

their newly formed concept to a situation to test the validity of their

idea. Learners look back to the previous two stages if their concept is

incorrect and continue refining and developing their concept. The

learners were given some exercises designed to provide them additional

practice in working exercises and solving problems using the concepts

discovered through models and questions.

Many studies using POGIL strategy also revealed similar findings

in the present study. The study of Fishback and Daniel (2011) adopted

POGIL (Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning) method into their


19

classrooms. The research concluded that POGIL had improved student

achievement. The result of the study is parallel with the result of

Villagonzalo (2014) whose findings revealed that POGIL method had

improved students’ level of performance more than the traditional

teaching method. There is also a significant difference in the

performance of the students in both groups.

Furthermore, Brown, S. (2010) declared that there was an

upward change in the students’ academic achievement in favor of those

students taught using the POGIL strategy. This was also supported

Brown, P. (2010) who utilized POGIL strategy to teach undergraduate

Anatomy and Physiology course. He reported an increase in students’

academic achievement in final exams and overall course grades.

The findings indicated that the academic achievement of

the experimental group learners in grade 9 Mathematics could be

accredited for the following reasons. It could be the teaching approach

given to them, the activities and experiences and the techniques drawn

by the teacher to improve the delivery of the lesson.

Comparatively, many of the learners in the control group were

passive learners. Absences and tardiness were prevalent. Most of them

were not interested in learning. Though some of them participated in

the activities most were not doing anything and were dependent on their

group mates. Unlike the learners in the experimental group, every

member had their specific roles; some of the learners in the control

group opted to do something else which made the sight of it to be


20

annoying. They tend to distract the attention of their classmates who

were interested in listening.

It is a common expectation that the use of POGIL as a teaching

approach had a better effect than the method used without it. The

study’s result gave the appropriate support on its effectiveness to the

former compared to the latter. Although the result of their achievement

test indicated lower marks than expected, it still showed a remarkable

difference than the previous result. Other factors could be attributed to

it, such as the mindset of the learners.

The study found out that the academic achievement of the

learners can be improved if POGIL is used as an approach to teaching.

Learners who may have been difficult to manage become engaged in

participating with their ideas and thoughts. POGIL has been a positive

learning experience for everyone who experienced the approach (Radhi,

2013).

The Attitude of Learners towards Mathematics

The 25 item Mathematical attitude scale adopted from Aiken was

used to obtain data on the attitude of the learners towards

mathematics. Table 4 presents the mean and standard deviation of the

attitude towards mathematics between those learners taught with the

POGIL approach, and tho.se learners taught without the POGIL

approach before the conduct of the study. As seen in the table, the

learners from both the experimental and control group have the same

range in the scale, respectively.


21

Table 4

Learners’ Attitude towards Mathematics before the conduct of the study.


Experimental Control
Items
Mean Sd QD Mean Sd QD
1.Math is subject that I am afraid of* 2.50 1.07 A 2.33 .84 A
2.When I work with Math problems my thinking 3.70 .79 A 3.77 .90 A
and reasoning are sharpened
3. I am unable to think clearly when working with 2.60 .93 U 3.33 1.09 U
Math*
4. I feel excited learning about Math 3.53 1.07 A 3.50 1.07 A
5. Studying of Math is not important unless you 4.23 1.16 SD 2.23 1.01 A
are an engineer*
6. Learning Math Makes feel bored* 3.60 1.16 D 3.27 .98 U
7. I feel bored listening to people talking about 3.80 .96 D 3.10 1.15 U
Math*
8. Math is a topic I greatly enjoy. 3.70 .99 A 3.23 .89 U
9. Of all my teachers , I like Mathematics teachers 2.57 .86 A 3.07 .83 U
least*
10.Being with people who are good in Math is 3.97 .99 A 3.70 .79 A
enjoyable
11. No matter how hard I try , I cannot 2.80 1.06 U 2.97 1.21 U
understand Math*
12.I feel happier in my Math class than any other 2.97 .99 U 3.07 .69 U
class
13. Math give me such satisfaction 3.40 .89 A 3.33 .84 U
14. Math is not necessary in our country* 3.90 1.30 D 3.77 1.10 D
15. I find math useful for problems of everyday 4.40 .89 SA 3.60 1.10 A
life
16. I don’t enjoy going beyond assigned work on 3.27 1.01 U 3.03 .93 U
Math*
17. I feel I have a good foundation on Math 3.23 .86 U 3.47 .94 A
18. I study Math just to pass the year level* 2.53 1.04 A 2.57 1.04 A
19. I feel nervous in math class* 2.97 1.07 U 2.70 1.14 U
20. I have a feeling I can get high grade in Math 3.33 1.09 U 3.53 1.17 A
21. I feel uncomfortable listening to math* 3.23 .82 U 2.87 .97 U
22. I would not enjoy working with math* 3.43 .86 A 3.17 1.01 U
23. Learning math makes me feel great 3.70 .92 A 3.30 .95 U
24. Being with people who are good in Math is 4.18 .77 D 3.53 .97 D
boring*
25. I am confident when solving math 3.27 1.20 U 2.80 1.09 U
Overall 3.39 .38 U 3.17 .33 U
Legend: SA – Strongly Agree A – Agree U – Undecided D – Disagree
SD – Strongly Disagree *negative stated statements
22

The table also shows that before the conduct of the study the

experimental group had a higher mean value than the control group

with a very slight difference. The overall value shows that they were

Undecided with their attitude. This indicates that the learners in both

groups were not sure of their attitudes towards math. This indicates

further that both groups were Undecided since the teaching approach

was not yet introduced to the experimental group. However, the pre-

test served as a covariate of the study.

On the other hand, Table 5 presents the responses of the

students in their attitude towards Mathematics after the conduct of the

study. Comparing the responses of the learners in both groups, it shows

that they had mixed responses, though there are still statements where

they have similar responses. Varied responses can be shown from their

results.

As shown in the table, the mean scores of the groups differed by

0.63. This indicated that the experimental group displayed a positive

and favorable attitude towards mathematics; while, the control group

indicated on undecided attitude towards mathematics. This could mean

that used of worksheets/activity sheets using POGIL approach in

teaching mathematics helped generate a positive and favorable attitude

of the learners in the experimental group towards the subject. The

learners from the control group remained to have an unfavorable

attitude towards mathematics.


23

Table 5
Learners’ Attitude towards Mathematics after the conduct of the study.
Experimental Control
Items
Mean Sd QD Mean Sd QD
1.Math is subject that I am afraid of* 4.23 .63 SD 3.27 1.26 U
2.When I work with Math problems my thinking 3.90 .76 A 3.67 1.02 A
and reasoning are sharpened
3. I am unable to think clearly when working with 3.90 .84 D 3.07 1.04 U
Math*
4. I feel excited learning about Math 4.23 .68 SA 3.57 0.94 A
5. Studying of Math is not important unless you 4.27 .83 SD 3.67 1.03 D
are an engineer*
6. Learning Math Makes feel bored* 4.20 .89 SD 3.27 .98 U
7. I feel bored listening to people talking about 3.93 .74 D 3.00 1.11 U
Math*
8. Math is a topic I greatly enjoy. 3.80 .85 A 3.27 .87 U
9. Of all my teachers , I like Mathematics teachers 3.27 .83 U 3.17 .75 U
least*
10.Being with people who are good in Math is 4.23 .63 SA 3.60 .89 A
enjoyable
11. No matter how hard I try , I cannot 3.97 .67 D 3.57 1.01 D
understand Math*
12.I feel happier in my Math class than any other 3.36 .81 U 3.07 .74 U
class
13. Math give me such satisfaction 3.77 .68 A 3.07 .91 U
14. Math is not necessary in our country* 4.17 .75 D 3.63 1.09 D
15. I find math useful for problems of everyday 4.30 .75 SA 3.43 1.10 U
life
16. I don’t enjoy going beyond assigned work on 3.90 .66 D 2.83 .83 U
Math*
17. I feel I have a good foundation on Math 3.67 .64 A 3.40 .89 A
18. I study Math just to pass the year level* 4.18 .86 D 3.57 .97 D
19. I feel nervous in math class* 3.97 .85 D 3.57 .97 D
20. I have a feeling I can get high grade in Math 3.83 .83 A 3.67 1.15 A
21. I feel uncomfortable listening to math* 3.77 .93 D 2.80 .96 U
22. I would not enjoy working with math* 3.90 .76 D 3.17 1.01 U
23. Learning math makes me feel great 3.87 .73 A 3.37 .96 U
24. Being with people who are good in Math is 4.37 .61 SD 3.47 1.01 D
boring*
25. I am confident when solving math 3.53 1.04 A 2.90 1.06 U
Overall 3.95 .25 A 3.32 .37 U
Legend: SA – Strongly Agree A – Agree U – Undecided D – Disagree
SD – Strongly Disagree *negative stated statements
24

One of the reasons behind this good outcome is the use of Process

Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) approach in teaching the

subject. Moreover, the approach used in the teaching makes them more

interested to learn and to participate in the class. However, in the

control group, although there was a slight improvement in the overall

mean value, still the attitude of the learners towards mathematics did

not change.

The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was employed at 0.05 level

of significance to test the significant difference in the attitude towards

mathematics between the experimental group and the control group.

The data analysis is presented in Table 6.

The null hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the

attitude towards mathematics between the grade 9 learners taught with

POGIL and those learners taught without POGIL was tested using

ANCOVA at 0.05 level of significance. As gleaned from the table, the p-

value is smaller than the significance level. This leads to the rejection

of the null hypothesis. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the

attitude towards mathematics between the learners taught with POGIL,

and those learners taught without the POGIL approach.

This finding shows that using POGIL in the lesson would help the

learners obtain a positive disposition towards the subject. The

experiences of the learners give importance of using POGIL worksheets

in the classroom. Fishback and Daniel (2011) found out that POGIL

interventions had positive affective experiences to students. Rajan

and Marcus (2009) found out that learner in the POGIL group ended
25

Table 6
Summary Table comparing the attitude of grade 9 Learners

Dependent Variable: Posttest


Type III Sum Mean
Source of Squares Df Square F Sig.

Intercept 2.183 1 2.183 36.524 .000


Pretest 2.307 1 2.307 38.586 .000
Group 3.339 1 3.339 55.851 .000
Error 3.407 57 .060
Total 804.253 60

with significantly more positive attitudes relating to group work and

communication.

During the conduct of the study, learners show interest in

learning mathematics. They learn through discoveries because of the

given activities. With this, learning becomes more effective because they

feel that they are part of the learning process. The rotation of roles in a

group also provided interest to the learners because these help them to

be more participative and cooperative in the group. As observed, during

the conduct of the study, the learners were participative and

cooperative with each other. During the reporting of their answers on

the different activities, they were very eager to present their answers. It

showed really that they understood the lessons given to them. The

departure from a routinary teacher talk and activities following the page

in the textbook did not have the same excitement as being involved in

the POGIL lesson. This means that the learners found POGIL to be an

enjoyable experience.
26

Findings

The study revealed the following:

1. There was a significant difference in the academic achievement

in mathematics between the grade 9 learners taught with the use

of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) and those

learners taught without the use of Process Oriented Guided

Inquiry Learning (POGIL). The experimental group performed

better compared with the control group.

2. There was a significant difference in the attitude towards

mathematics between learners taught with the use of POGIL and

learners taught without the use of POGIL.

Conclusions

Based on the aforementioned findings of this study, the following

conclusions were drawn:

1. The use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) in

teaching grade 9 mathematics could help improve the academic

achievement of learners. Students who were taught with POGIL

approach had higher scores in Mathematics and showed

competence in knowledge and skills compared with those in the

control group who were exposed to conventional teaching.

Therefore, the use of POGIL in Mathematics lessons leads to

better academic achievement result.


27

2. The use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) in

teaching Mathematics influences attitude towards mathematics

learners. Therefore, the use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry

Learning (POGIL) could enhance and sustain the positive attitude

of students towards mathematics.

Recommendations

From the findings and conclusions, the following

recommendations are hereby offered.

1. Mathematics teachers could use POGIL in order to help improve

the achievement of the learners not only in Mathematics but

other subjects as well.

2. Teachers could be given training workshops or orientation in the

use of POGIL approach to be able to use it in their classes and

improve the achievement of learners.

3. POGIL could be implemented in mathematics classroom since it

can be used to develop learners’ competence.

4. Since the learners’ were observed to be interested in POGIL, it is

recommended that further studies about learners’ engagement in

POGIL be conducted.
28

References

Bodner, G. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of


Chemical Education, 63, 873.

Brown, P. (2010). Process oriented guided-inquiry learning in an


introductory anatomy and physiology course with a diverse
student population. Advances in Physiology Education, 34: 150-
155. Retrieved July 2017 from
http:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih..gov/pubmed/20826770

Brown, S. (2010). A process oriented guided inquiry approach to


teaching
medicinal chemistry. Retrieved from
https//www.ncbi.nlm.nih..gov.pmc/articles/PMC2972515

DepEd Order #8 s. 2015. Policy Guidelines on Classroom Assessment


for
the K-12 Basic education Program

Dewey, J. (1938). My Pedagogic Creed. The School Journal, 54(3), 77-

80

Farrell J. J., Moog R. S. and Spencer J. N., (1999). A guided- inquiry


general chemistry course, J. Chem. Educ., 76, 570-574

Fishback, C. and Daniel, D. (2011). Improving student achievement


and
Acquisition of 21st century skills through implementation of
Inquiry-based learning strategies

Hanson, D.M. (2006). Instructor’s guide to process-oriented guided-


inquiry learning. SUNY: Stony Brook University.
Piaget, J. (1973). The child and reality: Problems of genetic psychology.
(Trans. Arnold Rosin). Oxford, England

Rajan, N. and Marcus, L. (2009) Student attitudes and learning


outcomes from process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL)
strategy in an introductory chemistry course for non science
majors: An action research study. The Chemical Educator,
volume 14 issue 2 pp. 85 – 93

Swartz, J.E. (2014). Why do people have difficulties in Geometry?


Retrieved: https://www.education.com/reference/article/why-
people-have-difficulty-geometry/

Villagonzalo, E. (2014). Process oriented guided inquiry learning: An


effective approach in enhancing students’ academic performance
29

retrieved from:
https//pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6df4/19f58f5c2189dc0fb6267
f1fcbdb8dfdd6a70.pdf

Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and Language, The MIT Press:


Cambridge, MA

Wilson, C.D, Taylor, J.A., Kowalski, S.M. & Carlson, J. (2010). The
Relative effects and equity of inquiry-based and commonplace
science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and
argumentation. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 47, 276

301