Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Department of Education
Region III - Central Luzon
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF TARLAC PROVINCE
ANAO HIGH SCHOOL (SENIOR HIGH)
San Francisco East, Anao, Tarlac
H. Making generalizations and abstractions In your own study, do you think you were able to follow the guidelines in writing recommendations If
yes, how? If not why?
about the lesson (GENERALIZATION)
Directions: Write T if the statement is TRUE and F if the statement is FALSE:
1. Recommendations are either specific or general. They may include suggestions for further studies. (F,
I. Evaluating learning (ASSESSMENT) maybe specific or general or both)
2. Present and discuss the kinds of additional research suggested by your Project. (T)
3. Write a general statement about the nature and timing of an evaluation plan that would be used to
determine the effectiveness of the proposed policy (T)
J. Additional activities for application or
remediation (REMEDIAL)
V. REMARKS
VI. REFLECTION
A. No. of learners who earned 80% in the evaluation
B. No. of learners who require additional activities for
remediation who scored below 80%
C. Did the remedial lesson work? No. of learners who
have caught up with the lesson.
D. No. of learners who continue to require
remediation?
E. Which of my teaching strategies worked well? Why
did these work?
F. What difficulties did I encounter which my principal
or supervisor can help me solve?
G. What innovation or localized materials did I use
discover which I wish to share with other teachers?
H. Making generalizations and abstractions In your own study, do you think you were able to follow the steps in writing a recommendation, If yes,
how? If not why?
about the lesson (GENERALIZATION)
I. Evaluating learning (ASSESSMENT) Read the sample recommendations below and determine how the results of the study support it.
Recommendations:
1. The researchers recommend that the “Do-It-Yourself” instrument approach should be used in the classroom for
it enhances the performance of the students than the lecture method done through PowerPoint presentation.
2. PowerPoint presentation is recommended to be employed for classroom lecture in the absence of science
gadgets for hands-on learning, since it also aides in learning.
3. The researchers also recommend to improve the construction of the gadgets making it more stable and
functional for classroom use.
4. Science teachers should be encouraged to design and construct simple gadgets for classroom use in order to
explain other science principles.
5. The innovative gadgets are simple and materials locally available, therefore, it is recommended that more
gadgets should be reproduced so that each student can work individually or reduce the number of students per group.
Chapter V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusion and recommendations of the study entitled “Comparative
Study on the Effectiveness of Using “Do-it-yourself” instrument and PowerPoint Presentation in Teaching Selected
Topics in Chemistry.”
The respondents were the 80 third year high school students, sections Newton, Einstein and Masunurin of Iligan City
East High School – Sta. Felomina, Sta. Felomina, Iligan City.
The pretest was given before the discussion and the posttest was administered. The test was composed of 65 items.
Summary of Findings
Based on the data gathered the following findings are revealed:
1. In the pretest 67.5% of the respondents subjected to PowerPoint presentation performed fairly while 32.5% of
the respondents performed satisfactorily. On the other hand, in the posttest, 52.5% of the respondents performed very
satisfactorily and 47.5% performed satisfactorily.
2. In the pretest, 70% of the respondents exposed to “Do-It-Yourself” instrument performed fairly while 30%
performed satisfactorily. In the posttest, 65% had an excellent performance while 35% performed very satisfactorily.
3. The pretest and posttest mean of the respondents subjected to PowerPoint presentation were 44.10 and 60.78
with the mean difference of 16.68. The respondents exposed to “Do-It-Yourself” instrument had a pretest and posttest
means of 43.62 and 77.47, respectively, with the mean difference of 33.85.
4. The posttest’s mean rank and sum of rank difference were 40 and 1600, respectively. This shows that there was
a relatively great difference between the scores of the respondents in the posttest.
Conclusions:
Based on the preceding findings of the study, the following conclusions are set.
1. The levels of performance of respondents exposed to “Do-It-Yourself” instrument and PowerPoint presentation
were Fair in the pretest implying that their entry knowledge on the topics are the same for both groups.
2. The levels of performance of the respondents subjected to PowerPoint presentation and “Do-It-Yourself”
instrument were different in the post-test. The group working with “Do-It-Yourself” instrument had Excellent
performance while the PowerPoint presentation group performed very satisfactorily.
3. The “Do-It-Yourself” instrument and the PowerPoint presentation approach in teaching can facilitate learning
for both were found effective. However, hands-on experience proved to be the better approach than the lecture done
through PowerPoint presentation.
J. Additional activities for application or
remediation (REMEDIAL)
V. REMARKS
VI. REFLECTION
A. No. of learners who earned 80% in the evaluation
B. No. of learners who require additional activities for
remediation who scored below 80%
C. Did the remedial lesson work? No. of learners who
have caught up with the lesson.
D. No. of learners who continue to require
remediation?
E. Which of my teaching strategies worked well? Why
did these work?
F. What difficulties did I encounter which my principal
or supervisor can help me solve?
G. What innovation or localized materials did I use
discover which I wish to share with other teachers?