CHAPTER I

A.) INTRODUCTION:

The new generation of globalization is approaching,

different technologies are being proposed, quality of education

are increasingly becoming sophisticated and disseminations of

information’s are increasing and unstoppable. Students learn in

different ways. They all have their own preferences and unique

learning styles. Some students preferred to have some group

instructions while others may enjoy some individualized

instructions. Other students learn through the teacher’s proper

discussion and authentic delivery of every lesson and on how the

teacher use effective method to engage every student’s capacity

of learning and to help student acquire knowledge constructively.

As what (MILKER 2001) says that the increase in learning happens

when the students are enjoying the process. The guarantee for

learning is the creation of joy, excitement and love for

learning. Many educators have had the experiences of not being

able to motivate some students not until they present the

information in a completely different way or provide new

strategies for students to learn. “Learning styles” refers to

students prefer method for approaching learning and gaining

knowledge (James Cook University, Australia 1995). This had made

the students uninterested and confused on the subject matter but

through the different strategies used by the teacher there is a

visually offered knowledge towards the student and a high chance

to build responsible and competitive one.

To create students that are authentic and

competitive in skills, education is very much needed,

specifically mathematics education. Through mathematics education

as a whole, the students will be able to have the ability of

understanding, communicating, connecting, reasoning, problem

solving, logical thinking, systematic thinking, critical thinking

and creative thinking (RAHMAH 2017).

General Education is one of the broadest subject

that needs to focus on specially when it is about the mathematics

subject. Mathematics includes algebra, geometry, trigonometry and

etc. It also deals with the letters and other general symbol used

to present numbers and quantities in formula and equations. Under

the mathematics subject is the topic fractions which the students

find hard to understand. The researchers conducted an informal

survey to the junior high school students of SLTCFI and ask for

some difficulties they have encountered on the mathematics

subject specifically on the topic fractions and found out that

most of the junior high school students find it hard to

comprehend and do the four fundamental operations on fractions.

The decrease on the students’ learning performances called for

innovation and creative application of the different strategies

and approaches in the teaching of mathematics. One of the methods

that could be used is the inductive method as against to the

traditional or deductive method of teaching. Inductive method

proceeds from particular examples to general rules, concrete

illustrations to abstract rules, known to unknown and simple to

complex (AMET ATTA, et al. 2015). Inductive Method which starts

with many observations of nature, with the goal of finding a few

and powerful statements about how nature works. It helps every

educator to engage their students as partners in the teaching-

learning process and help students to take more responsibility on

their own learning. Traditional or deductive method, on the other

hand is a teaching based on deduction where rules are given first

and students are asked to apply these rules to solve problems.

Hence, the researchers viewed the inductive method as one of the

effective methods in teaching mathematics specifically the four

fundamental operations on fractions. As a future math teacher, we

the researchers felt the need to conduct a study that will find

out if Inductive Method will be effective in teaching “The four

fundamental operations on fractions”.

B.) STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.

This study will aim to determine the use of Inductive

method in teaching the four fundamental operations on fractions

among the grade 7 students of SLTCFI (S.Y. 2018-2019).

The following specific questions are ways to guide the

study.

1. How is inductive method different from traditional or

deductive method?

2. Is there a difference between the performance of the

students in the use of the traditional or deductive and

inductive method?

C.) HYPOTHESIS.

Null Hypothesis: There is no difference between the result of

using the traditional/deductive and inductive method on the grade

7 students of SLTCFI.

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a difference between the result

of using the traditional/deductive and inductive method on the

grade 7 students of SLTCFI.

D.) SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY.

The action research will aim to introduce the use of

inductive method in teaching the four fundamental operations on

fraction. The result of this study will help the following:

Grade 7 students: This study will help the grade 7 students to be

more interested in every kind of mathematics subjects and apply

the importance of it to their daily lives.

Mathematics Teachers: This study will help the mathematics

teachers to use inductive method as another effective strategy in

teaching the four fundamental operations on fraction.

Future Researchers: This will serve as their guide and resources

as future researchers in mathematics using inductive method as

their strategies in teaching the four fundamental operations in

fraction.

Researchers: They will show the effectiveness of teaching using

inductive method as a strategy in teaching the four fundamental

operations on fraction.

School Administration: The administration will use the result of

this action research in promoting to all the mathematics teachers

to use inductive method in teaching for them to practice and

improve students learning and achievement.

E.) SCOPE AND DELIMITATION:

This Study will be limited only to the grade 7

students who are enrolled at Southern Luzon Technological College

Foundation Inc.(SLTCFI) at Legaspi Campus S.Y. 2018-2019. The

focus of this study is to determine the use of inductive method

in teaching the four fundamental operations on fractions.

 CHAPTER II

RELATED LITERATURE:

What is the best method to teach a certain

topic specifically in mathematics? How can mathematical

performance be improved? These are some questions which teachers

want to find out (MERCHANT 2009). According to Sadiq Merchant

(2009) “Methods of teaching mathematics”, different methods of

teaching have been proposed by different educators and the

knowledge of these methods may work an excellent outcome in

teaching mathematics. These different methods are as follows:

Lecture Method, Inductive-Deductive Method, Heuristic Method

(Discovery/Inquiry Method), Analytic-Synthetic Method, Project

Method, Brain Storming, Think-Pair Share, Learning by Doing and

Problem Solving Approach (2009).

All of the above mentioned methods may not be

equally fit and suitable for all levels of mathematics teaching.

The method that is adopted by the teacher should ensure maximum

participation of the child, proceed from the concrete to

abstraction, from simple to complex, from ordinary to high-

quality learning and provide knowledge at the understanding level

(MERCHANT 2009).
 According to the model that has dominated a

higher education for centuries POSITIVISM, absolute knowledge

(OBJECTIVE REALITY) exists independently of human perception. The

teachers’ responsibilities and task is to transmit knowledge to

the students and the students’ job is to absorb all of those

knowledge given and presented by the teacher. New information is

filtered through SCHEMATA that incorporates the students’ prior

knowledge, beliefs, preconceptions and misconceptions, prejudices

and fears. If the learnings are visually seen through those

structures it can be learned by them, but in contrast, the

students will just rote memorized all the lectures they had.

In 1942, Gullete, Keating, and Veins agreed

that the presentation of new materials should be presented

inductively whenever possible. Also psychologists agree that

material which is learned through long use is easier to retain

than that which is memorized. This method encourages learners to

develop their mental set of strategies for dealing with tasks.

This method tries to highlight grammatical and mathematical rules

implicitly in which the learners are encouraged to conclude the

rules given by the teacher (WIDODO 2006). Schimdt (1990) says

that inductive method has involved implicit awareness. That means

learning without intention or awareness.

 Inductive method comes from inductive reasoning,

stating that a reasoning progression proceeds from particular

which are observations, measurements and data. To generalities

which are rules, laws, concepts, and theories (WIDODO 2006).

The inductive method, according to (WIDODO 2006),

has some advantages and disadvantages given below:

ADVANTAGES:

1.) Learners are trained to be familiar with rule

discovery, this could enhance learning autonomy and self-

reliance.

2.) Learners’ greater degree of cognitive depth is

“exploited.”

3.) The learners are more active in the learning process,

rather than being simply passive recipient. In this

activity, they will be motivated.

4.) The approaches involve learners’ pattern-recognition

and problem solving abilities in which particular learners

are interested in this challenge.

5.) If the problem solving is done collaboratively,

learners get an opportunity for extra language practices.

DISADVANTAGES:
 1.) The approach is time and energy-consuming, as it leads

learner to have appropriate concepts of the rule.

2.) The concept given implicitly may lead the learners to

have the wrong concepts of rule taught.

3.) The approach can place emphasis on teachers in planning

a lesson.

4.) It encourages the teacher to design data or materials

taught carefully and systematically.

According to (NEUBERT and BINKO 1992; SEKHAR

2006), inductive method has its advantages and disadvantages too

which are as follows:

ADVANTAGES:

1.) The method is useful to introduce a new mathematical

concept along with a formula or rule.

2.) Students who like inductive approach can infer the more

complicated rules or formulas (FELDER 1993).

3.) This is a student-centred approach because students

play an active role on it.

4.) As the students may establish laws and priciples by

themselves so it gives them confidence.

5.) This method helps to motivate the students to think

logically and make the learning environment more

interesting.
 6.) This is based on reasoning and experimentation.

7.) This is quite suitable for primary and secondary level

class.

8.) Students easily remember the laws or principles which

they prove by themselves.

DISADVANTAGES:

1.) It is quite time consuming and laborious as well.

2.) To establish a law or principle is not the complete

process of learning. Students have to practice a lot to

understand the concept fully.

3.) Sometimes a formula or rule proved with the help of

some similar does not applicable in other similar cases.

4.) Only experienced teachers can use this method in a

right way.

5.) This method does not help in developing problem solving

ability in the students.

Application of Inductive Method in Mathematics at Secondary

Level:

Inductive method is used to establish laws,

principles, formulas and methods instead of solving mathematical

problems. Therefore, it can be used in all branches of

mathematics but establishing laws or formulas at the secondary

level is only involved in algebra, matrices and to some extent

geometry. Hence we can use inductive method as one of the

effective method in teaching mathematics especially in teaching

the four fundamental operations on fractions.

On the other hand, the approach may frustrate the

learners with their personal learning styles, or their past

learning experience hence they would prefer simply to be told the

rule or the deductive method. Widodo (2006) says that the

deductive method is derived from the notion that deductive

reasoning from general to specific. That means rules, principles,

concepts or theories are presented first, and then their

application is treated. In this method, learners study grammar

and mathematical rules before applying the rules in doing

exercises. That means the learners work from general to the

particular (FORTUNE 1992).

Krumboltz and Yabroff (1965) define deductive

method as giving the generalization to the students, then they

are asked to deduce specific applications; whereas, deductive

method according to Scimdt (1990), has involved explicit

awareness, which means learning with intention and awareness.

The deductive method is related to conscious

learning. This method tries to place a great emphasis on error

correction and presentation of explicit rules. The deductive

method is often used with adult learners. The teacher in this

method teaches the rule explicitly to learners, and they are

ready to cope with exercises give (KRASHEN 2002).

This method is totally different from inductive

method. In this method, we proceed from general to specific and

from a rule to an example. Already constructed formulas. Rules,

methods or principles are taught to the students and then apply

them to solve the problem (SIDHU 1995). In this teaching

approach, we can also prove a theorem with the help of undefined

terms, defined terms, axioms and postulates. Then with the help

of that theorem along with the different rules and principles, we

can derive other theorems as well (SINGH 2007).

According to (SEKHAR 2006), deductive method has

its advantages and disadvantages as well which are as follows:

ADVANTAGES:

1.) This method is very easy and short.

2.) To remember a formula or rule is not very difficult so

this is blessing for those students who cannot remember

complicated procedures (BRIGHAM and MATINS 1999).

3.) Teacher can complete the syllabus easily by this

method.

4.) This method helps to enhance the computational ability

of the students.
 5.) It is helpful to teach those concepts in which

derivation of rules or methods is not involved.

6.) With the help of this method, we can prove different

theorems using already defined formulas or principles.

DISADVANTAGES:

1.) It becomes very difficult for students

2.) When they to remember so many rules and formulas.

3.) This method does not help in improving reasoning

ability in the students.

4.) It is not effective at lower level class.

5.) This method is not constructivist. If a student forgets

a rule or principle, then he or she cannot reconstruct that

easily (SIDHU 1995).

6.) This method does not encourage discovery learning.

7.) It cannot make students creative.

8.) Students may be doubtful about the reason of using one

particular formula.

Application of Deductive Method in Mathematics at Secondary

Level:

Deductive method is the highly used method in

mathematics. It is used to solve those problems in which

complicated procedures are not involved. It can be used to solve

different kinds of problems that can be found in all units in the

syllabus of mathematics at secondary level including sets,

logarithms, algebra, matrices, variation, statistics, geometry

and trigonometry.

RELATED STUDIES:

According to the study entitled, “Comparative Study

of Inductive and Deductive Methods of teaching Mathematics at

Elementary Level” of Dr. Malik Amer Atta, Dr. Muhammad Ayaz and

Qayyum Nawaz (2015), using T-test and coefficient of variance, it

is concluded that there is a difference between the achievement

of control and experimental groups of students. The students of

the control group were taught by the deductive method and the

students of the experimental group were taught by the inductive

method significantly the experimental group of students who were

taught by inductive method was better than control group of

students who were taught by deductive method, so inductive method

is better than the deductive method for teaching mathematics at

elementary level (Amer Atta, et al. 2015). Since the study is in

the elementary level the researchers wanted to try it on the

secondary level of students which is the grade 7.

 Another study reviewed which was entitled “A study

of relative effectiveness of inductive and deductive methods of

teaching arithmetic to pupils of the Prentiss Institute,

Prentiss, Mississippi” of Lelar Christine Watts (8-1-1956),

concluded that the control and experimental group utilized in

this study were at an equal level of mental development prior to

the beginning of the experimental. Achievement in “skills” and

“reasoning” occurred at the same level in both groups, there was

no statistically significant difference in achievement in either

the initial or post-testing periods. Therefore, the inductive and

deductive of teaching arithmetic utilized in this study were

equally effective: achievement, or lack of it, in arithmetic did

not appear to be function of teaching method.

In the study entitled, “Inductive-Deductive

Approach to Improve Mathematical Problem Solving for Junior High

School” of Mariam Ar Ramah (2017), it was concluded that there is

no significant difference on the improvement and development of

the mathematical understanding and mathematical knowledge between

the experimental and control group.

In another study entitled “A comparison of the

inductive and the deductive methods in teaching two units of

sequential mathematics” of Holyoke, Frederick Vernon (1954), it

was concluded that there is no statistically significant

difference in using the inductive method and deductive method in

teaching two units of sequential mathematics between the

experimental and the control group.

According to the study of Glynna Strait (May 1993)

entitled “A comparison of inductive and deductive teaching

strategies utilizing graphing calculator capabilities, she

concluded that the deductive strategy or method resulted in

better knowledge of the facts and both treatments produced

similar results on the procedural skills and in conceptual

reading thus she states that deductive method is better that

inductive method.

The study of Mariam Ramah (2017) merely

contradicts the researchers study. The findings showed that with

or without using the Inductive-Deductive Approach in improving

and developing the mathematical problem solving of Junior High

School. The study also states that the learnings of the students

before and after the discussion remains the same. The study of

Holyoke, Frederick Vernon (1954) also contradicts the researchers

study. The research study showed that between the two groups of

students who were taught by inductive and deductive method, it

was the deductive method group or the control group who has the

advantage in learning and knowledge are retain if deductive

method is being used in the discussion.

GAP BRIDGE BY THE STUDY:

This study focuses on the senior high school which

is the grade 7 students of SLTCFI to prove that inductive

approach is one of the most effective method in teaching

mathematics. This also determines how the learning and knowledge

of students was being manipulated by the teaching methods the

teachers used in teaching the four fundamental operations on

fractions.

Out of the five studies that was conducted by the

different researchers, one of the research paper agreed that

there is a significant difference in teaching mathematics using

Inductive method, three research papers agreed that there is no

significant difference in teaching mathematics using either of

the two methods or approach, and one research paper states that

inductive and deductive method is equally effective and useful in

teaching mathematics. On the other hand, the researchers wanted

to find out which among the two methods is more effective and

applicable in teaching the said topic in mathematics which is the

four fundamental operations on fractions.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK:

The researchers decided to use Discovery learning,

an inquiry-based, constructivist learning theory. Constructivist

theory are theories that was made by the wide accepted and
authentic principle that students construct and create their own

version of reality experiences rather than simply acquire

versions presented by the teachers. It follows topics introduced

by presenting specific observations, case studies or problem, and

theories are taught and the students are guided to explore and

discover their hidden abilities and talents to established a

concise knowledge within them. Discovery learning takes place in

problem solving situations where the learner draws on his or her

own past experiences and existing knowledge to develop and

discover facts, relationships and authentic truths to be learned.

It was proposed by Jerome Bruner (1915), a psychologist who

emphasizes the role of the teacher, language and instruction. He

thought that different processes were used by learners in problem

solving and abstract reasoning, that these should be vary by the

learners and that social and peer interaction lay at the root of

good learning ability.

Students today are curious and interactive

especially in exploring and manipulating objects, brainstorming

of mathematical questions and problems and wide controversies or

performing experiments. As a result, students can be more likely

to remember and vast knowledge are being discover by new

information which is required to a specific subject of learning.

Proponents of this theory believe that discovery learning:

encourages active engagement, promotes motivation, promotes

autonomy, responsibility, independence, develops’ creativity,

problem solving skills and molds’ learning experiences.

In connection with this study, this theoretical

model showed that by the use of inductive method which includes

the different engaging and interesting activities, students will

have a deeper understanding, students’ learning and knowledge

will retain in their minds more than using the Deductive method

since Discovery Learning is an Inductive based theory.

Figure 1: Conceptual Paradigm

Grade 7
Students

Inductive Teaching
Method Methods/
Deductive
Interventions Method

Academic
Performances
 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

Population of the study:

Only the grade 7 junior high school students of

SLTCFI will be the population of the study. This study will be

conducted to 48 grade 7 students of SLTCFI. This subject matter

will be part of their accomplishments for the first grading

period. The grade 7 students of SLTCFI will be randomly divided

into two groups. Names will be picked through a fish bowl

lottery. The first group will be consisted of 24 students, 14

boys and 10 girls which will be the experimental group which will

be taught using the inductive method. The second group will be

consisted of 24 students, 14 boys and 10 girls which will be the

control group which will be taught using the deductive method.

Design and Procedure:

 The pretest–posttest experimental design will be

used in this study. The pre-test will be composed of 45-items

multiple choice and which will be given to the two groups before

the experimental session. The post-test will be composed of 45-

items multiple choice parallel to the pre-test and will be

administered to the two groups after the experimental sessions.

The inductive method or experimental group will be called group A

while the deductive method or control group will be called group

B. The class discussions will be scheduled 2 hours a week. The

pre-test will be given to the two groups for a 40 minutes

allotted time before the experimental session and 40 minutes

allotted time after the experimental sessions. The discussion of

the two groups: Inductive method (experimental group) and

Deductive method (control group) will be conducted next week as

part of the researchers gathering of data. There will be a three

sessions of 1 hour per session about the four fundamental

operations on fractions. The experimental sessions will last for

three weeks. The first session is about addition of fractions and

mixed numbers. The inductive method or the experimental group

will be the first to undergo the discussion from 10:00 am to

11:00 am, followed by the deductive method or control group from

11:00 am to 12:00 pm. The second session is about subtraction of

fraction and mixed numbers and the same with the first session

the experimental group will be taught first and after them is the
control group. Lastly, the third session is about multiplication

and division of fractions and mixed numbers. The inductive method

or the experimental group will be the first to undergo the

discussion from 10:00 am to 11:00 am, followed by the deductive

method or control group from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm.

Instruments:

The researchers of this study will be making use

of the K-12 curriculum guide in choosing the topic and objectives

and will be asking for an approval from the mathematics teachers

of the grade 7 students of SLTCFI. In addition, this study will

also be using a 45-item multiple choice pre-test and post-test

developed by the researchers themselves. In developing the test,

the first thing we will do is to make a table of specifications

in order to determine the number of items for knowledge,

comprehension, analysis, and application. Each item of the test

will have one correct answer and three distracters. The 45-items

pre-test/post-test will be submitted to the mathematics teacher

and the mathematics coordinator for evaluation. Furthermore, in

order to find if there will be a significant difference between

the performance of two groups the researchers will be using the

T-test table to compare the mean and standard deviation of the

experimental group and the control group at 0.05 level of

significance.

Southern Luzon Technological College Foundation Inc.

Ramon Santos St. Brgy. 33, Peñaranda, Legazpi City
College of Education

In partial fulfillment of the course Math 117 entitled:

The Effectiveness on the Use of Inductive Method in The Four

Fundamental Operations on Fractions among the Grade 7 students of
SLTCFI (S.Y. 2018-2019.

Researchers:

Abiera, John Mark C.

Serrano, Rasie M.
Sierra, John B.
Dondonilla, Anjie C.
 Research Adviser

Mrs. Ma. Antifas Llagas