Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Situation Analysis

The Philippines has shown the world its skill and talent in

Mathematics, as one of the overall champions in the recently concluded

2008 12th Primary Math World Contest in Hong Kong. Seven Filipino

students earned perfect math scores and made the country one of seven

overall champions in the competition participated in by 44 teams from the

United States, Bulgaria, South Africa, Thailand, Taiwan, India, Hong Kong,

Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Mainland China, Macau and Mexico.

(http://article.wn.com/view/2008...)

Recently, The Philippine delegation to the 2008 International

Mathematics Competition held in Chiang Mai, Thailand, from October 25 to

30, garnered 39 medals, including two golds, in individual and group

categories, to finish fourth among 25 countries participated in the annual

event. (http://article.wn.com/view/2008...)

In another competition, the country’s bets in the International

Mathematics and Science Olympiad for Primary Schools, held in Lombok

Island, Indonesia, bagged a total of 14 medals, besting the other 11

participating countries on November 14, 2008

Moreover, a Filipino Mathematics teacher, Rechilda Villame was

conferred the Best Coach award in the recently concluded American

 2

Regional Math League tournament in Las Vegas. Villame received the

distinction after leading a 30-student Philippine delegation that competed in

the math tournament. (http://goodnewspilipinas.com/wp/?p=2058)

Filipino students and teachers have become internationally popular

because of their outstanding performances in international mathematics

competitions. It is noteworthy and remarkable that there are young Pinoys

in elementary and high school who are outstanding in mathematics–despite

the country’s overall decline in academic performance and standards.

These sets of headlines make everyday an informing day to the

education sector in its effort and effectiveness to uplift the country’s

educational system.

The Department of Education (DepEd) always designs programs to

uplift the educational system. As said, today, the challenge is very clear in

our minds that we need to produce competent learners who could follow to

the world of globalization and modernization” (Danganan, 2007).

According to former DepEd Secretary Raul Roco (2002), the

restructuring of the curriculum is a part of an ongoing effort to improve the

quality of learning. Focus is given on the basics of improving literacy and

numeracy while inculcating values across learning to achieve quality

education. The teacher and the administrators should perform their duties

and responsibilities to achieve the vision for a Filipino learner that is every

learner to be functionally literate, equipped with the skills, appreciation of

 3

the arts, and imbued with the desirable values of a person who is

makabayan, makatao, makakalikasan at makabansa.

Alegria (2007) quoted that “education is society’s

main avenue for development of basic literacy,
numeracy, thinking and work skills that will enable
Filipinos to become productive, civic-minded and well
developed. In our desire to provide individual with the
necessary training and to develop him into a dignified
and desirable person, we put up schools which
assume the role of directing and providing our youth
with experiences which will help him discover his
potentials and talents in order to attain quality life”.

The attainment of quality education of school children was among the

battlecry of the Philippines 2000 program of former President Fidel V.

Ramos. However, “we are still far behind comparing our pupil’s achievement

to ASEAN countries like Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand” (Samonte,

2008). The country needs to face the fact that the quality of education has

deteriorated. There is a strong perception that the Philippines is lagging

behind Asian countries such as those mentioned above.

Survey results and statistics prove this claim of declining pattern of

the country’s education system especially in the areas of mathematics and

science.

As viewed in the paper “Country Analysis Profile: An Analysis of

Learning Outcome in Mathematics and Science Among 13 Year Olds in the

Philippines” presented by UP-NISMED, Filipino students gave correct

answers to less than 50% of the questions in science and mathematics in

the National Secondary Achievement Test (NSAT) in year 2000.

 4

The diminishing importance given to education is all too obvious in

the results of the 2003 Trends in International Mathematics and Science

Study (TIMMS). Among 45 countries that participated in the TIMMS for

eight-grade students, the Philippines ranked 41 st in Mathematics and 42nd

in Science. The score was more than 100 points lower than Malaysia and

more than 200 points lower than Singapore, which ranked first. Among 25

countries that joined the study among the fourth-grade students, the

country ranked 23rd in both Mathematics and Science, with a score more

than 200 points lower than the first ranked Singapore.

(http://www.nscb.gov.ph/headlines/StatsSpeaks/2007...) Danganan (2007)

also added that in the same TIMMS in 2003, the performance of Grade 5

Filipino learners was only 50.03%.

Findings showed that the Philippines performed below average based

on set international standards. While the international average for

Mathematics and Science was 484 and 479 respectively, the average score

of the country was 386 in Mathematics and 382 in Science (Padolina, 2007).

The problem of poor quality education in the country can be

attributed to several factors in the teaching and learning process. These

include the pupils and their families, the teachers, the curriculum and

instructional materials and the school management (Samonte, 2008).

Agravio (2007) stressed that parents have a strong influence on

children’s academic motivation and achievement. Furthermore, Haclao

(2007) emphasized that parents should become totally aware of their roles
 5

in the transformation of their children. Oftentimes, families are not aware

and not involved in helping to determine the educational goals.

In addition, improving the quality of basic education is affected by

teacher’s incompetence. It was pinpointed that these deficiencies can be

attributed to their pre-service training. Many of the teacher-education

institutions are of sub-standard quality due to inexperienced faculty and

inadequate facilities (Samonte (2007). Samonte added that based on the

recent survey, high school graduates who intend to take up education

course are those who belong to the lower third level of the class.

This is further seconded by Evasco Jr. (2007) that the education

course is a choice of substandard flock of college goers. Here goes the saying

in Filipino, “Ito si Neneng, dahil mahina sa klase ay magtititser na lamang”.

This toxic Filipino culture promotes the continuous deterioration of the

country’s system of education.

A result of this notion is the hiring of teachers who lack the necessary

preparations and equipped with insufficient knowledge skills and

competencies.

On the other hand, the frequent change in the curriculum affects the

mastery of the subject matter by the teacher. The Philippines’ school

curriculum focuses too much on content. Thus, Filipino student have to

study several subjects daily, resulting to the overcrowding of varied

knowledge in their intellect.

 6

The report of the Committee on Technologies of the Presidential

Commission on Education Reform (PCER) stated that “the elementary

curriculum in the Philippines is overcrowded. Having too many subjects

limits the extent to which teachers and students can focus in their

performances and success in the later grade levels (Danganan, 2008).

In another issue of curriculum-related problems is the inadequacy of

instructional materials. There are several reasons of the performance

deterioration of Filipino students today particularly in Mathematics and

Science. Among these are the lack of textbooks, classrooms and science

equipments and laboratories. These shortages on instructional materials

and facilities are the aftermath of giving low budget to the education sector

by the government.

UNESCO Institute of Statistics compiled the following

financing/investment of the country on the education sector.

“The country spends only 3.3% of the GDP on public educational

institutions for all levels of education; this is lower than the 7.4% of

Malaysia and 4.07% of Thailand. In all levels of education, the Philippines

spends only 17.2%, which is very pale in comparison to the 40% spent in

Thailand and 28% in Malaysia. (http://www.nscb.gov.ph...)

Another thing that affects Filipino learners’ competencies is the

administration factor. Many school institutions are managed by

incompetent administrators who lack trainings in administration and

supervision. A school to be effective must be led by a principal who is

 7

academically goal-oriented. With these predicaments, what shall the

government do then in addressing these problems? the teachers? the

students? the parents and the community?

The Philippines to be competitive should continue to invest in its

educational system, which produce the country’s pride – its human

resources.

Science Secretary William Padolina suggested that 20,000 teachers

yearly should undergo trainings. Furthermore, teachers should be given

more time to teach, noting that teachers spend more time in tasks other

than teaching. “Most of the teachers need to be trained and they have to be

trained fast in order for the country to catch up”, he added.

Einstein once posted this adage: “The world will not evolve past its

current state of crisis by using the same thinking that created the

situation”.

The quality of education will remain as it is if all the factors affecting

the teaching and learning process will not include the sense of innovation in

the competencies, support, needs and adequacies of education

administrations especially by the teachers. Promoting the growth and

development of the learner requires the use of varied instructional methods

and approaches propped up by the innovativeness and creativity of the

teachers (Alegria, 2007).

Studies were conducted to search for the most effective method of

teaching Mathematics and a good number of researchers have continued

 8

their quest for this endeavor. Part of their concern is the selection and

utilization of appropriate educational approaches that attuned to the latest

trends in instruction and at the same time upgrade teaching effectiveness.

Every Mathematics teacher is expected to be aware of the trends in

instruction; and keeping well informed on the significant findings on current

researches will definitely give him an edge on modern teaching. Recent

researches suggest that students develop new knowledge through a process

where thoughtful discussions, learners’ involvement and not just teacher

lecturing or student recitation are involved. Teachers, therefore, have to

provide authentic tasks that call for critical thinking, and not just memory

or reproduction (Doctolero, 2001).

As Kahn (2003) pointed out that:

“If our students are to function effectively in this time of

extraordinary and accelerating global change, they must understand

and be able to use Mathematics both in their personal and

professional lives. There has never been a greater need to be

mathematically literate than these days. Those who understand and

can do Mathematics will have significantly enhanced opportunities

and options that will open doors to productive futures. Those who

lack mathematical competence will find many such doors and options

closed.”

In similar view, teachers, then, must look for instructional materials

that have sound and mathematical content. They must also look for
 9

materials that will help bridge the gap between traditional approaches and

reform-based pedagogies. And since so many teachers rely heavily on

textbooks for instructional guidance, it is also important to evaluate these

instructional materials. This is a step towards a better quality of

mathematics education (Kulm, 2000).

The ultimate challenge of mathematics rests squarely on the teachers.

The success and failure of Mathematics goals depend mainly on the ability

and creativity of each and every teacher teaching the subject. It is, therefore,

a common knowledge that the success of the students towards Mathematics

depends upon the teacher’s ability and creativity to teach (Facun, 1999 in

Teñido, 2006).

Conceptual Framework

Education is a continuous process of learning for both teachers and

learners. Learners learn from day to day experiences inside and outside the

classroom setting. Most importantly, they learn from the daily teaching-

learning process of the teacher, being the most influential figure inside the

classroom.

On the other hand, teachers continually grow personally and

professionally to assure learners of a quality education. As a part of the

growth, they undergo seminars, trainings, workshops; pursue their

graduate studies and other academic-related activities. This is to improve

 10

their intellectual capacities and gain additional strategies in delivering a

more effective instruction of the lesson.

Every teacher becomes an integral heart of any educational

institution. It is therefore highly responsible in the dissemination of

knowledge as well as the formation of good moral values and skills

necessary to meet the global challenges (Padilla and Plomantes, 1999).

Further, teachers are the molders and developers of learners. Teachers and

other educational leaders should therefore, consistently help students and

parents to understand that an increased emphasis on the importance of

effort is related to improved performance and this requires change.

In this context, education requires flexibility on which the education

sector must be and should be receptive to change. This change may require

revisions of methods, techniques and approaches to cope up with society’s

challenge.

To achieve improvement and elevation of the mathematical

competencies of Filipino learners, teaching Mathematics needs dynamic

innovations/changes on the teaching-learning strategies. Teachers need to

be functionally innovative and put greater emphasis on the process of

delivering instructions rather than on focusing more on the content.

Collaborative learning is just one of the many strategies that can be

innovating used in teaching Mathematics. Collaborative learning describes

the variety of educational approaches involving the joint intellectual efforts

of students, or students and teacher organizing from a small group projects

 11

to a more specific form of group work known as cooperative learning (Nagata

and Ronkowski, 1998).

In these educational approaches, students are given the opportunity

to actively explore or learn to apply the lesson content. Collaborative

learning fosters the development of critical thinking through discussion,

clarification of ideas and evaluation of other’s ideas and encouraging the

practice of higher level cognitive thinking skills (Totten, Sills, Digby and

Russ, 1991)

Collaborative learning as a teaching approach uses small groups

and/or bigger groups of learners in the teaching process that encourages

them (learners) to maximize their own learning and each other’s learning.

Collaborative learning engages learners in knowledge sharing, inspiring,

depending on each other, and applying active social interaction in a small

group. In addition, collaborative learning depends upon the art of social

interaction among learners rather than a mechanical process.

Furthermore, collaborative learning is a personal philosophy, not just

a classroom technique. In all situations where people come together in

groups, it suggests a way of dealing with people, which respects and

highlights individual group members’ abilities and contributions. There is a

sharing of authority and acceptance of responsibility among group members

for the group’s actions (Panitz, 1996).

Teachers need to shift their authority, under the auspices of ideal

collaborative learning, to the learners and provide the foundation and

 12

learning structures to guide them through various learning processes and

experiences and through active social interaction on substantive issues by

applying modern technology.

“Good learning, like good work, is collaborative and social, not

competitive and isolated. Sharing one’s ideas and responding to others’

improves thinking and deepens understanding” (Gerdy, 1998).

Merely grouping learners into groups does not assure ideal

collaborative learning. Four important issues must be considered when

integrating online collaboration into instruction: empowering learners,

building communities, continuing support, and being patient. Regardless of

how collaborative learning is implemented, these four important issues

must not be neglected. (http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~ct68...)

Collaborative learning can take place any time students work together

- for example, when they help each other on their homework. It takes place

when a small group of students work together in the same place on a

structured project. It also works effectively in mixed-skill groups of students

in developing their social abilities. In a world where being a "team player" is

often a key part of business success likewise in educational, collaborative

learning is useful and relevant tool. (http://www.thirteen.org/edonline...)

Collaborative classrooms have four general characteristics. The first two

capture changing relationships between teachers and students. The third

characterizes teacher’s new approach to instructions. The fourth addresses

the composition of a collaborative classroom (Randall, 1999).

 13

1. Shared knowledge among teachers and students.

2. Shared authority among teachers and students.

3. Teachers as mediators.

4. Heterogeneous grouping of students.

Cooperative learning and collaborative learning are often used

interchangeably, although they tend to assume very distinct meanings.

Cooperative learning is a set of instructional methods in which the students

work in small mixed ability working groups. It involves the use of small

groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each

other’s learning. Cooperative learning encompasses a wide variety of

strategies to promote academic learning through peer cooperation and

communication. It implies that the students help each other, share ideas

and resources and plan cooperatively what and how to study (Alegria,

2007). Whereas collaborative learning happens in both small and large

groups leaving the assigned responsibility to the students, cooperation

refers primarily to small groups of students working together in an

environment structured by the teacher. Both terms share the common

social element of learning and emphasize this social approach to the

personal development of learning skills, work skills and life skills (Prince

and Felder, 2007).

With the above discussion, the researcher was inspired to prove the

effectiveness of collaborative learning structures and techniques to the

enhancement of performance in Geometry of high school students.

 14

One concept is the introduction of anticipation-reaction guide as a

pre- and post-instructional technique in teaching Mathematics. This is in a

tabular form which serves as the teacher’s tool to assess and identify the

knowledge or what the students know about the topic to be discussed. The

students’ response on their agreement or disagreement to the statements,

served as the pre-knowledge on the topic leading to the acquisition of a new

knowledge immediately after the teaching-learning process. In addition, the

anticipation-reaction guide, likewise, served as a way to generalize the

lesson of the day. The instructional technique was employed together with

collaborative learning.

The input variables are the respondents’ profile and the third grading

topics in Geometry. This includes triangle congruence (congruence

postulates and isosceles triangle theorems). The profile of the respondents

includes their learning style, attitude towards Mathematics, second grading

grades in Geometry and final grades in Mathematics II.

The performances of the two groups determined the effectiveness of

the anticipation-reaction guide and collaborative learning strategy in

delivering Mathematics instructions.

1. Respondents’ Profile
a. Learning Style
b. Attitude towards Geometry
Research c. Final Grade in Mathematics II Paradigm
d. Second Grading grade in
Geometry
2. Third Grading Period Topics in
INPUT
Geometry
VARIABLES A. Triangle Congruence
A.1. SSS Postulate
A.2. SAS Postulate
A.3. ASA Postulate
A.4. SAA Postulate
A.5. Isosceles Triangle Theorem
 15

PRETEST

PROCESS VARIABLES

CONTROL GROUP EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

Conventional TLP* Collaborative Learning

Teaching Strategy and
Method Anticipation-Reaction
Guide

POSTTEST

OUTPUT Enhanced Performance Level

VARIABLES in Geometry
*
Teaching-learning processes.

Figure 1. Interrelationships of Variables in the Study

Statement of the Problem

Generally, this research study determined the performance

enhancement of high school students in Geometry – Triangle Congruence

 16

through the use of collaborative learning strategy and anticipation-reaction

(A-R) guide.

The study answered the following research questions:

1. What is the profile of the students in Geometry as to:

a. Learning Style;

b. Attitude Towards Geometry;

c. Final Grade in Mathematics II;

d. Second Grading Grade in Geometry?

2. What is the performance level in Geometry - Triangle Congruence of

the experimental group with the use of collaborative learning strategy

and A-R guide and the control group using the conventional teaching

method?

3. Is there a significant difference between:

a. the pretest and posttest scores of students exposed to:

3.a.1. conventional teaching method?

3.a.2. collaborative learning strategy and A-R guide?

b. the means of the scores in the posttest of the two groups?

c. the performance level of the two groups in the formative

activities?

4. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’ profile

and their performance in Geometry?

Hypotheses
 17

Using the t-test and Pearson Product Moment of Correlation

Coefficient with the SPSS software program, the study tested the following

hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance:

1. There is no significant difference between:

a. the pretest and posttest scores of the students exposed to

conventional teaching method and the pretest and posttest scores

of the students exposed to collaborative learning strategy and

anticipation-reaction guide.

b. the means of the scores in the posttest of the two groups.

c. the performance level of the two groups in the formative activities.

2. There is no significant relationship between the respondents’ profile and

their performance level in Geometry.

Significance of the Study

The everyday use of Mathematics and the exposure to information by

means of graphs are an everyday commonplace. Applications were

developed from the study of general ideas for their own sake, numbers,

symmetry, area and volume, rate of change, shape, dimension, randomness

and many others.

The study of Mathematics may satisfy a wide range of interests and

abilities. It develops the imagination. It trains the clear and logical thought.

It is a challenge with varieties of difficult ideas and unsolved problems,

because it deals with the questions arising from complicated structures. Yet
 18

it also has a continuing drive to simplification, to finding the right concepts

and methods to make difficult things easy, to explaining why a situation

must be as it is. In so doing, it develops a range of language and insights,

which may then be applied to make a crucial contribution to our

understanding and appreciation of the world, and our ability to find and

make our way in it (Biggs, 1999).

This promotes the need and the importance of learning Mathematics.

The researcher, who is aware to the countless applications of Mathematics

in every day life, designed this study to discover and facilitate the effective

way of teaching Mathematics. He believes that the results of this study may

be useful and beneficial to the following groups of individuals:

Learners. Results of the study serve as an eye-opener to actively

engaging themselves to the countless skill-building activities of

Mathematics, and to recognize the importance of learning and mastering the

basic Mathematics skills which are essential for success in several aspects

of every day life such as studying, working, managing household finances

and trading and in the field of scientific and technological developments on

which today’s leading industries in developed countries are based.

Parents. This study would provide them the value of recognizing their

roles in enhancing the Mathematics performances of their children.

Research-based results would lead them to identify that their stand towards

Mathematics may contribute to the tendency for their children to dislike the

subject and thus, results to their poor performances and achievements, and
 19

to gain and build cooperation and partnership with the educational

institutions to give emphasis on the need to educate their children

collaboratively.

Teachers. Results of the study will usher up information that serve as

a basis in increasing commitment to the mission of their profession by

continuously improving their personal and professional competencies in the

teaching profession. This is to offer effective solutions to the countless

problems and challenges that confront them in their classroom teaching.

Data would likewise help teachers determine new techniques and strategies

to be adopted that excite learner’s interest and to keep students involved at

all times. Furthermore, this study would provide and challenge teachers to

be innovative in the transfer and promotion of the teaching-learning

process.

Administrators. The results of this study would serve as a basis for

administrators to support and determine the appropriate trainings,

seminars, workshops and conferences for teachers. This is to further

improve the teaching techniques and strategies which ultimately increase

the effectiveness of the teaching- learning process. In addition, results of the

study would also contribute to the development of a regular close

supervision of their teachers; to monitor the progress of the learners and the

teaching instructional delivery skills and techniques of their teachers.

Likewise, administrators would be provided with the data as guidelines in

 20

the recruitment of teacher applicants to assure that the educational

institution offers a high quality education.

Government. The study ushers-in data that would serve as input in

identifying the needs of the education sector for immediate actions and

solutions. Furthermore, for them to improve the education system as well as

to provide learners with the necessary and needed instructional materials.

Teacher education institutions. The result of this study will likewise

serve as a factor in setting a higher standard in qualifying high school

graduates who want to pursue education courses. This will also provide the

institutions a room for their syllabus to be revised or to be improved so that

it will be of congruence to the demands of the education system of the

country. This will also help them determine what pre-service trainings and

programs to be provided to the student teachers to equip them with the

necessary skills and abilities in instructional deliveries to achieve

competence in giving quality education when they are already in the field of

teaching.

Future researchers. The results of this study may heighten the

interests of future researchers who are teaching mathematics. This is for

them to conduct related studies using collaborative learning strategy and

anticipation-reaction guide to validate and strengthen the results of this

study.

Definition of Terms
 21

To gain a better grasp and understanding on the concepts and

variables of this study, each term used is defined cognitively and

operationally.

Input variables are the concepts and characteristics to be measured

and manipulated to have the output. This includes respondents profile

along their learning styles wherein the respondent students consistently

respond to and use stimuli in the context of learning. As Keefe (1979) puts it

as the "composite of characteristic cognitive, affective, and physiological

factors that serve as relatively stable indicators of how a learner perceives,

interacts with, and responds to the learning environment." Stewart and

Felicetti (1992) define learning styles as those "educational conditions under

which a student is most likely to learn." Thus, learning styles are not really

concerned with "what" learners learn, but rather "how" they prefer to learn.

(http://nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/styles.html). In the study, it was the

determination whether the student is a visual, tactile, auditory, group,

kinesthetic or individual learner. In addition, attitude towards Geometry

refers to respondents’ feelings of acceptance towards the subject.

Meanwhile, final grade in Mathematics II is the computed numerical

equivalent of the respondents’ performance during the second grading

period as a result of their combined scores in the different formative and

summative tests like quizzes, seatwork, assignments, long test and

periodical test.
 22

In another aspect, triangle congruence focuses on congruence

postulates and theorem. Triangle congruence composes the main topic to be

pre-tested and post-tested, likewise subjected to the teaching-learning

process both in the experimental and conventional teaching process.

The process variable refers to how the researcher operationalized the

study. It included the pretest-posttest which is the test instrument

administered to the respondents before and after the introduction of the

unit of instruction and the treatment. This is administered to both the

control group and the experimental group, and the teaching-learning

process (TLP) wherein the researcher taught the Geometry topics on triangle

congruence to both groups. The experimental group, which refers to the

third year students section Our Lady of Lourdes, was treated with the

instructional delivery techniques – collaborative learning strategy and

anticipation-reaction guide. While the control group, composed of third year

students section Our Lady of Guadalupe, was treated with the traditional or

usual teaching technique, the chalk and board method.

The output variable is referred to as the result of the teaching-

learning process through the posttest and other learning measures and

formative activities used by the teacher. Thus, the result is the enhanced

performance level of the student respondents in Geometry which was

determined by comparing the pretest and posttest results of both groups,

likewise, if there was a change in students’ performance during the

teaching-learning process. Furthermore, the performance of the

 23

respondents refers to their computed grades as a result of their scores in

the different formative and summative tests during the third grading period.