Chapter I

Introduction

The current outbreak of novel coronavirus named COVID-19; a catastrophic pandemic

originally emerged in Wuhan, China, in December, 2019, and spread all around the globe within

no time posed so much threat not just to our health bust also in or educational system (Thorat et

al., 2020). This led to the suspension of class since year 2019.

In the present scenario of COVID-19, the area of education, similar to other fields of life,

has seriously been affected. The conventional way of learning at schools, colleges, and

universities has been clogged altogether both in developed and underdeveloped countries (Wan,

2020).

But due to the initiatives of the government to provide vaccines and the efforts extended

by educational institution to follow health and safety protocols, the Philippines are now gradually

shifting from modular and online distance learning to the traditional face to face classes.

Over the years, face to face classes have been the traditional and most convenient way of

teaching and delivering basic education to learners. Traditional classroom teaching provides real-

time face-to-face instruction and sparks innovative questions. It also allows for immediate

teacher response and more flexible content delivery (Salcedo, 2010).

In a certain study, learners agreed that language learning with face-to-face interactions in

the presence of instructors in a traditional classroom is far more effective than learning alone in

an online setting for learning (S. Jabeen & A. Thomas, 2015).

As the KIDAPAWAN NATIONAL HIGHSCHOOL shifted back from online learning to

traditional face to face classes, timely research on evaluating the efficiency of the Grade 12
STEM E students in face-to-face class would give educators and the administration firsthand

information on the performance of students in this shift of learning.

In this study, the researcher opted to find out the efficiency of the Grade 12 STEM E

Students in Face-to-Face Classes considering the different learning activities. Furthermore, this

aims to assess the significant relationship of classroom activities to their performance or grade

during the face-to-face classes.

Statement of the Problem:

This study aims to determine the efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E students in face-to-face

classes. Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E students in terms of their grades

during face-to-face classes?

2. What is the level of interaction of Grade 12 STEM-E students in the different significant

classroom activities?

3. Is there any significant relationship between the efficiency of the students to the

identified significant classroom activities?

Significance of the Study

This study on the efficiency of students in face-to-face classes is beneficial to evaluate

the progress of the schools, pupils and instruction in the delivery of basic education.
 Students. This will give students the knowledge on how to improve their performance in

class.

Teachers. This will provide teachers data on how to help students improve their

performance by employing different course of actions that will improve students’ performance

though in times of pandemic.

Administration or school. This will inform the administration on how and what should

be done to address students’ needs in terms of teaching-learning process.

Objectives of the Study

This study aims to determine the efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E students in face-to-face

learning. Specifically, it aims to:

1. Determine the level of efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E students in face-to-face learning

in terms of their grades during face to face;

2. Determine the level of interaction of Grade 12 STEM-E students in terms of the

identified significant classrooms activities;

3. Determine the significant relationship between the efficiency of the students to the

identified significant classroom activities.

Time and Place of the Study

This study will be conducted at KIDAPAWAN NATIONAL HIGHSCHOOL,

Kidapawan City for the school year 2021-2022 specifically for the 2nd to 4th quarter only.
Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study is limited only on the efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E students in face-to-face

class. This includes determining the level of interaction of the respondents in the identified

significant face to face activities for the quarters where the respondents shifted back to face-to-

face classes.

Operational Definition of Terms

Attendance. This refers to the activity that measures physical appearance of students in school.

Class Participation. This means the act where students interact with teachers during classroom

discussion.

Face to Face class. This refers to the physical appearance of learners in school were students

and teachers interact.

Grade 12 STEM-E students. Refers to the students of Kidapawan National High School

undergoing STEM strand section E for the school year 2021-2022.

Individual Task Accomplishment. Refers to the activity given by the teachers of Kidapawan

National High School to students for individual learning and mastery.

Level of Efficiency. This means the performance of the student respondents in the period where

they are already attending face to face classes.

Summative Testing. This is the unit test given by the teachers of Kidapawan National High

School as means of evaluating the students’ progress in that particular subject.

Chapter II

Review of Related Literature

This chapter presents review of related literature and local literature of the studies as well

as articles that have bearing to the present study.

FACE TO FACE CLASSES/ INTERACTION

The classroom setting provides more motivation, encouragement, and direction. Even if a

student wanted to quit during the first few weeks of class, he/she may be deterred by the

instructor and fellow students. F2F instructors may be able to adjust the structure and teaching

style of the class to improve student retention (Kemp and Grieve, 2014).
 Classroom teaching, is a well-established instructional medium in which teaching style

and structure have been refined over several centuries. Face-to-face instruction has numerous

benefits not found in its online counterpart (Xu and Jaggars, 2016).

Salcedo (2010) stated that first and, perhaps most importantly, classroom instruction is

extremely dynamic. Traditional classroom teaching provides real-time face-to-face instruction

and sparks innovative questions. It also allows for immediate teacher response and more flexible

content delivery.

Research studies have indicated the importance of face-to-face interaction (Marold &

Haga, 2003) and demonstrated that quality in education can be achieved by incorporating

computer technology and face-to-face interaction.

Marold’s study of performance and achievement between online students and classroom

students found that achievement tended to be higher in the Web students. However, performance

on projects and homework submissions was found to be higher in classroom students; especially

in programming classes, online students with an average ability level had more difficulty

applying the theory of programming problems than classroom students (Marold, Larsen, &

Moreno, 2000).

The importance of the face-to-face communication was also raised by Evans & Tregenza

(2002). They stressed that working on with a certain task that needs direct questioning process is

more convenient in a face to face interaction.

Related to this importance is the direct group interaction (Kiser, 2002). It was found out

in his study that dialogue not only allows students to assess their learning but also to develop a
sense of community with other students; this sense of community can alleviate the problem of

isolation often reported by distance students.

Zhao, Lei, Yan, Lai, & Tan (2005) agreed and stated that students need dialogue with

their teachers and with other students in order to consolidate and check on their own learning.

Moreover, they list the inability to offer dialogue in the way that conventional face-to-face

education does as one of three most significant weaknesses of distance education; the

inflexibility of content and study method and the isolation and individualisation of the student

are cited as the remaining two weaknesses.

According to Brown (1994), “In the era of communicative language teaching, interaction

is, in fact, the heart of communication; it is what communication is all about.” This likely reveals

that classroom interaction can be the language pedagogy that best facilitates language learning

since it maximizes opportunities of the speakers to create dialogic spaces (Yule, 2006) in an

interaction which is also thought to be important in naturalistic language acquisition. However, a

few dimensions (e.g. fluency) in language learning have achieved proficiency since interaction

can only be scouted for naturalistic discourse in which classroom interaction takes place. L2

learners need not only learn the rudiments of language but they also have to be able to use it

effectively and appropriately throughout the range of social, personal, school, and work

situations required for daily living in a given society (Eisenchlas, 2011).

Indeed, language pedagogy that sets the best practices and instructions is a necessity in

language learning that will address the exigencies that may arise whether in classroom

interaction or formal instruction. To this effect, a considerable amount of studies has been done

investigating different features of language instructions that relate to learning a target language

whether in formal instruction or classroom interaction (Choudhury, 2005).

 In the face to face settings, students’ performance are greatly influenced by some of the

factors such as the attendance, class participation, results of summative test and other form of

paper and pencil test and individual tasks given to learners. Some also considered values as

determinants in deriving the students’ grade for a certain quarter (Xu, D., and Jaggars, S. S.

2016)

Face to Face Significant Activities

Attendance

The economic concerns of education have led to many studies aiming at identifying the

determinants of student performance (Stanca, 2006).

Relationship between attendance and academic performance has been a debatable issue.

Many scholars and researchers believed that attendance is a good predictor of academic

performance while other disagree on the matter. Darling- Hammond (2000) argues that attending

classes regularly is important in providing students an opportunity to achieve a desired learning

outcomes.

Moreover, researchers found that when the material covered in the class was not available

in the course textbook, students who attend classes benefited from interactions with the teacher

and classmates and did better in the examinations. Students who attend classes also were able to

take class notes, and such note taking has been shown to have positive learning benefits (Ehsan,

2013).
 A widely cited study of Romer (1993) on absenteeism of undergraduate students in

economics reported that the average attendance rate of the students was 67 percent and showed a

significant difference in the mean of GWA of students with strong attendance over those with

poor attendance. He reported positive effects of class attendance on performance that prompted

some researchers to undertake the same study to improve on attendance of students and even

make it mandatory as a requirement for attending semester examinations. He even suggested that

class attendance must be considered mandatory in order to increase attendance rate.

Absenteeism is one of the common problems observed by teachers today. There are many

attempts that researchers have defined absenteeism. The definition depends upon the cultural

setting of the students. Some experts say that students who are absent for at least two or more

days are considered chronic absentees who normally gets low mark. Epstein and Sheldon (2002)

said that chronic absentee students are those who missed their class of at least 20 or more school

days in one academic year.

However, Balfanz and Byrnes (2012) argued that chronic absentees are those students

who missed their class for at least 10% or more of the total school attendance over the course of

one semester or school year for whatever reason, authorized or unauthorized absences. It is

believed that when the student is consistently missing his classes, he is identified as chronically

absent. The poor school attendance of the students can have an extreme effect on their academic

performance. Students who are chronically absent have various reasons, however, it can

positively influence on their slow academic performance (McCluskey, et al., 2004).

Similarly, the poor attendance rates and the high proportion of unauthorized absences can

affect the academic success and lead to poor academic performance (Zubrick, 2019). Jaykaran,

et al. (2011) conducted a research in an institute where attendance is a mandatory to students for
at least 75% rate for a student to sit for a semester’s final examination. In their study, there were

two groups of respondents: students who had at least 75% attendance and those with less than

75% attendance. Result showed that there was statistically significant difference between the two

groups for their mean mark. The mean mark of those with 75% attendance was higher than those

with less than 75% attendance.

However, a contrary result from Adegoke, et al. (2013) in their research on the impact of

attendance on students’ academic performance revealed a weak correlation between scores and

attendance of the students. Results showed that students can still score high even they fail to

attend classes. Moreover, in a meta-analytical study on the relationship of student attendance

with academic performance conducted by Crede, et al. (2010), revealed that those who have high

performance are those whose attendance are very good and those students with lowest mark are

those whose attendance were most likely very poor. It was also reported that the difference in

marks between students with poor attendance and students with average attendance was larger

than the difference between students with average attendance and students with very good

attendance.

Students’ class attendance and engagement plays an important role in contemporary

higher education. Several previous studies have shown that class attendance is an important

determinant of academic outcomes: students who attend more classes earn higher final grades

(Kirby and McElroy, 2003).

In a study conducted in Saudi Arabia by Alghamdi and his team, the overall percentage

of absenteeism was comparable to that of the studies carried out regionally and internationally.

The study showed the performance GPA mean is influenced by low attendance rates (Alghamdi

et al., 2016).
 By attending class regularly, students are more likely to keep up with daily lessons and

assignments and take quizzes and tests on time. Research has shown that students’ regular

attendance may be the greatest factor influencing his/her academic success. Many studies

revealed that students who attend classes on a regular basis are more likely to achieve higher

grades than those students who have poor attendance. Lukkarinena et al. (2016) said that class

attendance is, indeed, related to performance.

Punctuality also constitutes a very important part of the educational process. As per

attendance policy of schools, the students have to attend classes at least 70% of the total

attendance in a semester. Students who accumulated total number of absent below the required

number of attendances maybe excluded from further teaching and denied access to taking

examinations and refused the opportunity to submit assessment for the module, (GC Student

Handbook, 2019).

The attendance rate of the students in the class is important because students are more

likely to succeed in their academic performance when they attend classes regularly. Teachers

find it difficult to make their classes interactive and build students’ participation if a large

number of students are frequently absent. In addition to falling behind in academics, students

who are not in school on a regular basis are more likely to get low marks and believes that

attendance is a baseline factor in determining student success, (Great Schools, 2017).

It is important that students have to attend and engage with the learning opportunities

inside the classrooms to ensure that students feel the essence of being a student. Allen (2016)

said that class attendance is a way to succeed academically. However, he believes that from time

to time students may need to miss a class. Since college classes have fewer sessions compared to

high school, missing one class means missing more work. Class attendance enhances class
performance because through physical presence in the class, students can participate in all

classroom activities. Class activities or guided learning activities given by the teacher usually

help students to apply it on their final assessments. Another advantage of attending classes is that

students can interact with their teacher. If there are some clarifications about the topic, students

can ask questions which might be the same questions to all. So, going to the class enables

students to learn from teacher and classmates. Asking questions to the teacher can provide

students clear understanding of the topic which is missed out when absent from the class.

Attendance to the class also increase learning. Even some of the course works are done outside

the classroom, these make class sessions even more valuable. In-class time is devoted to the most

challenging discussions. It’s important to know what these are so that students can have a clear

understanding of what is likely to show up on the final assessments.

Class Participation

Learning is an active process of making sense of what has been taught. Active student

participation involves more than just listening; it refers to when students must read, write,

discuss, create, or be engaged in solving problems (Morgan, et. Al., 2015).

Stowell and Nelson provide evidence that learning and performance may be improved by

increasing active student participation (Stowel, 2007).

In the traditional lecture environment, opportunities for student interaction and active

participation are limited, resulting largely in a passive student learning environment, which

research is suggesting is not evidence based.6 In recent years, many instructors have tried to

increase active student participation in their lectures by incorporating strategies such as

traditional question and answer periods, use of paper response cards, or the more contemporary

use of electronic audience response systems (ARS) (Dirk, 2010).

In any learning contexts, both educator and learner are the main actors. As a main actor,

educators be it lecturers or teachers and learners, that is, students play complementing role in the

process of learning. Lecturers have the responsibilities to teach, guide, motivate, facilitate and

mould learners to become a useful, caliber and competent person. Learners, on the other hand

should absorb, seek and apply the skill and knowledge shared in the classroom or other learning

activities. These complementing engagements between lecturers and students do generate

conducive learning environment. Learning is a process which occurs in a social context and

involved interaction between students and lecturers. Effective learning process occurred when

both lecturers and students interact and actively participate in the learning activities (Liu, 2001.)

Participation between lecturers and students is integral in the process of learning. There

are several reasons why participation is important in the process of learning. Based on a study

conducted by Ferguson-Hessler de Jong (Theberge, 1994), it was found that students, who are

active participants, tends to have better academic achievement, compared with students, who are

passive in participation. This statement was supported by Astin (1999), claiming that students

who are actively involved in the classroom discussions showed higher satisfaction in the learning

process. Active participation of students with discussions in the classroom is important for the

purpose of achieving effective learning and plays an important role in the success of education

and personal development of students in the future (Tatar, 2005). This is because students will

learn how to think critically and enhance their intellectual development if they are an active

participant in the classroom (Siti Maziha, 2010).

 The relationship between student participation in the classroom and students' academic

achievement is undeniable. There are interactions between the process of teaching and academic

achievement. Linkages between the behaviors of children in the learning of mathematics with

their academic achievement has something to do with their interaction inside the classroom.

Therefore, student participation is one of instructional components in the instruction enhanced by

school to help students to learn more (Abu Bakar, 1986).

A study conducted by Tsou (2005) showed that students’ participation in the classroom

activities are essential for the purpose of creating effective learning.

In general, student participation in the classroom is through two communication

behaviors, that is verbal and nonverbal (Lee, 2005). Verbal or oral participation refers to

behaviors of speaking or giving opinions in the classroom, answering and asking questions or

comments and taking part in the classroom discussions. Students who do not take the initiative to

actively involved are usually considered as passive. In contrast, nonverbal participation is

associated with behavioral responses during the class, including node their head, raise their

hands, body movements and eye contact (Zainal Abidin, 2007).

Assessment

Assessing student progress and attainment of learning objectives is an important part of

any educational system (Hart, 2012). Authentically evaluating student learning within a

healthcare education system that is predicated upon the awarding of potentially discriminatory

quantitative grades has been a long-standing problem (Epstein, 2007; Rudolph, Simon, Raemer

& Eppich, 2008).

 Assessment practices can be used to facilitate the advancement of educational

pedagogical approaches when used appropriately for learners and educators to achieve learning

objectives (Cauley & McMillan, 2010).

The traditional approach to assessment of student learning is through the use of

“summative” methods (Black & Wiliam, 2009). Summative assessment frequently employs the

use of standardized exams, quizzes or assignments and subsequently provides quantitative

scoring associated with a culminating grade (A, B, C, D, F) (Knight, 2002).

Assessments in education are important because it establishes whether the learning

objectives in a course are being met. Examine the effects, the frequency and feedback, and the

various forms of assessments that are used to test students (Taras, 2010).

Exams and essays along with speeches and projects are forms of assessment. Assessment

is a critical step in the learning process. It determines whether or not the course's learning

objectives have been met. A learning objective is what students should know or be able to do by

the time a lesson is completed. Assessment affects many facets of education, including student

grades, placement, and advancement as well as curriculum, instructional needs, and school

funding (Khon, 2011).

Assessment is a key component of learning because it helps students learn. When

students are able to see how they are doing in a class, they are able to determine whether or not

they understand course material. Assessment can also help motivate students. If students know

they are doing poorly, they may begin to work harder (Epstein, 2007).

Just as assessment helps students, assessment helps teachers. Frequent assessment allows

teachers to see if their teaching has been effective. Assessment also allows teachers to ensure
students learn what they need to know in order to meet the course's learning objectives (Rudolph

et. Al., 2008).

Cowan (2005) described assessment as designed so that students understand their

progress towards course goals and modify their behavior in order to meet those goals. In order to

do that, assessment should be ongoing. In other words, classes that use one or two exams a term

are not using assessment as effectively as it could be used. In order for students to gain a true

representation of their understanding, frequent assessment is critical, and it should be

accompanied with feedback.

Assessment is really only as good as the feedback that accompanies it. Feedback is the

teacher's response to student work. In order to make assessment as effective as possible, teachers

should provide their feedback as well as a letter grade. It is important that students understand

why a particular question was incorrect or why their essay did not meet requirements (Nicol, et.

Al., 2006).

Assessment plays an important role in the process of learning and motivation. The types

of assessment tasks that we ask our students to do determine how students will approach the

learning task and what study behaviours they will use (Astin, 2012).

Well-designed assessment can encourage active learning especially when the assessment

delivery is innovative and engaging. Peer and self-assessment, for instance, can foster a number

of skills, such as reflection, critical thinking and self-awareness – as well as giving students

insight into the assessment process (Race et. Al., 2005).

 A performance task is any learning activity or assessment that asks students to perform to

demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and proficiency. Performance tasks yield a tangible

product and/or performance that serve as evidence of learning. Unlike a selected-response item

(e.g., multiple-choice or matching) that asks students to select from given alternatives, a

performance task presents a situation that calls for learners to apply their learning in context

(Black et. Al., 2009).

Performance tasks are routinely used in certain disciplines, such as visual and performing

arts, physical education, and career-technology where performance is the natural focus of

instruction. However, such tasks can (and should) be used in every subject area and at all grade

levels (Cauley et. Al., 2010).

Theoretical Framework

The relevant theories and researches that have been discussed in the literature review

come together configuring the context of the current study. In the theory of social constructivism,

the education theorist Vygotsky defines the learning process as a “zone of proximal

development” where a teacher, a learner, and a problem to be resolved exist. The teacher creates

a social environment to assist the learner to assemble and construct the required knowledge to

solve that problem (Picciano, 2017). So, according to Vygotsky, the learning process is a

problem-solving process.

Conceptual Framework
 This study focus mainly on the efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E students in face to face

classes considering the identified significant activities in a face to face interaction.

The independent variables of the study are the significant activities which include

attendance, class participation, and assessment. These variables are all crucial activities that

might affect directly or indirectly the dependent variable. Meanwhile, the dependent variable is

the efficiency of the respondents during face-to-face classes which is measured in terms of their

grades.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Significant Face to face

Activities Efficiency of Grade 12
-Attendance STEM-E Students
-Class Participation (Grades)
-Assessment

Figure 1. Schematic presentation of the study ‘Efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E Students in

Face-to-Face Class.
Null Hypothesis
There is no significant relationship between the identified face to face activities to the

efficiency of the Grade 12 STEM-E students in face to face class.

 Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design, sources of data, data gathering procedure, data

analysis, statistical treatment and research instrument to be utilized in the study.

Research Design

This study will employ descriptive quantitative design to gather data and interpret

the results on efficiency of Grade 12 STEM-E Students in face to face classes. Descriptive

method describes the characteristics of the population or phenomenon that is being studied. This
design uses the correlational statistic to describe and measure the degree or association or

relationship between two or more variables or sets of scores. Responses will be taken using

Descriptive Survey method. This is a method that describes the characteristics of the population

or phenomenon that is being studied. This focuses more on the “what” of the research subject

rather than the “why” of the study. In other words, this research primarily focusses on describing

the nature a demographic segment w/o focusing on the “why” a certain phenomenon occurs. It

describes the subject of the research without covering “why” it happens (Creswell, 2014).

Sources of Data

The data will be collected from the Grade 12 STEM-E students of __________ (School),

Kidapawan City for the school year 2021-2022 who undergone face to face classes from second

quarter onwards.

Respondents will be identified through simple random sampling where respondents will

be chosen randomly and entirely by chance such that each individual has the same probability of

being chosen. A total of 30 students will be chosen as the respondents of the study.

Data Gathering Procedure

To obtain the needed data, the researcher will send letter of permission to the

administration of ______ (school) to allow him to use this population as respondent of the study.

Afterwhich the confirmation letter is secured; the researcher would then inform the selected

respondents for their importance participation. After the respondents would agree, the researcher

will explain the essential details about the study and its impact on them as well. The respondents
will be given enough time to answer the research instrument. After answering, all the instruments

will be collected tor consolidation, tabulation and interpretation.

Data Analysis

The gathered results will be tabulated, interpreted and presented in a tabular form where

each individual indicator will be explained thoroughly and supported by various authors and

studies.

For the level of efficiency of the students, their performance will be interpreted using the

scale below:

Mean of Grades Descriptive Equivalence

90-100 Outstanding
85-89 Very Good
80-84 Good
75-79 Fair
Below 75 Poor

Statistical Treatment

The following statistical treatment will be utilized in interpreting the result of the study:

for the level of efficiency and level interaction of the Grade 12 STEM-E students, these will be

tabulated using weighted mean while the relationship of the identified activities to the efficiency

of the student will be tabulated using Spearman Rho’s Correlation Coefficient.

Research Instrument

The main instrument to be utilized in this study will be a researcher-made questionnaire

focusing on the level of interaction in terms of identified significant activities during face to face

classes which include attendance, class participation, summative test and individual tasks.

The questionnaire will be divided into two parts. Part 1 is the socio-demographic profile

of the respondents and Part 2 is the level of interaction of students in terms of identified

significant activities. The questionnaire will use a 5-pont Likert Scaling in obtaining the

responses of the students. The scaling is presented below:

Level Range Descriptive Descriptive interpretation Rating

equivalent
The item described is always
Always Practiced/ 90% and
5 4.24-5.00 observed or the condition is
Highly Evident Above
very extensive.
The item described is often
4 3.43-4.23 Practiced/Evident observed or the condition is 85%- 89%
extensive.
Moderately The item described is
3 2.62-3.42 Practiced/ sometimes observed or the 80%- 84%
Moderately Evident condition is very limited.
Less Practiced/ The item is rarely observed,
2 1.81-2.61 75%- 79%
Less Evident or the condition is limited.
The item is never observed,
Least Practiced/ 74% and
1 1.00-1.80 or the condition is very
Least Evident below
limited.

Literature Cited
Abu Bakar Nordin. (1986). The effect of improved participation on learning. Jurnal Pendidikan,
10(2), 21-31.
Adegoke, B. O., Salako, R. J., & Ayind, L. A. (2013). Impact of attendance on students‘
performance in ICT related courses: Faculty of engineering, Osun State Polytechnic, Iree.
Journal of Education and Practice, 4(16), 95-98.
Alghamdi A, Yamani A, Khalil A, Albarkati B, Alrehili O, Salih M, 2016. Prevalence, causes
and impacts of absenteeism among medical students at UQU. Education, 6(1): 9-12.
Allen, W. (2016). Class Attendance, Available [Online] at www.courses.lumen.com, Date
Accessed, 16 March 2021. Attendance Initiatives, Theory of Action
Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: a development theory for higher education. Journal of
College Student Development., 40, 518-529.
Astin, A. W. (2012). Assessment for Excellence: The Philosophy and Practice of Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education. (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Balfanz, R., and Byrnes, V. (2012). The Importance of Being in School: A Report on
Absenteeism in the Nation’s Public Schools. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Center
for Social Organization of Schools. Retrieved August 19, 2016, from
http://new.every1graduates.org/the-importance-of-being-in-school/
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational
Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.
Brown, H.D. (1994). Teaching by Principles. Prentice Hall. New Jersey.
Cauley, K. M., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). Formative assessment techniques to support student
motivation and achievement. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues
and Ideas, 83(1), 1-6.
Choudhury, S. (2005). Interaction in second language classrooms. BRAC University Journal,
2( 1), 77-82.
Cowan, J. (2005) In: Designing assessment to enhance student learning.
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/ps/documents/practice_guides/practice_guides/
ps0069_designing_assessment_to_improve_physical_sciences_learning_march_2009.pdf [7th
February 2012].
Crede, M., Roch, S. G., & Kieszczynka, U. M. (2010). Class attendance in college: A meta
analytic view of the relationship of class attendance with grades and student characteristics.
American Educational Research Association, 80, 272-295.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654310362998
Creswell, J. W. (2014)” Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches. 4th ed. SAGE Publication.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State
Policy Evidence, Education Policy Archives, 8 (1) pp 154.
Dirk K. “I hope it's just attendance”: what does participation mean to freshman composition
students and instructors? Composition Stud. 2010;38(1):88–107. [Google Scholar] [Ref list]
Ehsan Latif, S. M. (2013). Class Attendance and Academic Performance: A Panel Data Analysis.
The Economic Society of Australia, 32(4), 470-476.
Eisenchlas, S. (2011). On-line interactions as a resource to raise pragmatic awareness. Journal of
Pragmatics 43, pp. 51-61
Epstein, J. L., and Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student
attendance through family and community involvement. The Journal of Educational Research,
95(5): 308-317.
Epstein, R. M. (2007). Assessment in medical education. New England Journal of Medicine,
356(4), 387-396.
Evans, T., & Tregenza, K. (2002). Academics’ experiences of teaching Australian ‘non-local’
courses in Hong Kong. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education
Conference, Crossing borders: New frontiers for educational research. Brisbane, Australia.
Retrieved February 2006 from http://www.aare.edu.au/02pap/eva02510.htm
Great Schools (2017). Why Attendance Matters, Available [Online] at www.greatschools.org,
Date Accessed, 17 March 2021.
Jaykaran, Yadaav, P., Chavda, N., Kantharia, N. D. (2011). Factors associated with performance
of second year student in pharmacology examinations. Journal of pharmacology and
pharmacotherapeutics, 2(2),123-125.
Kemp, N., and Grieve, R. (2014). Face-to-Face or face-to-screen? Undergraduates' opinions and
test performance in classroom vs. online learning. Front. Psychol. 5:1278. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278
Kirby A, McElroy B, 2003. The effect of attendance on grade for first year economics students
in University College Cork. Econ Soc Rev, 34: 311–326.
Kohn, A. (2011). The case against grades. Educational Leadership, 69(3), 28-33.
Lee, P. (2005). Students’ personality type and attitudes toward classroom participation.
Proceedings of the CATESOL State Conference, California State University, Los Angeles, USA.
Liu, J. (2001). Asian students classroom communication patterns in U.S. universities: an emic
perspective. Westport, CT : Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
Lukkarinena, et al. (2016). Relationship between Class Attendance and Student Performance’,
Available [Online] www.sciencedirect.com, Date Accessed 09 March 2021.
Marold, K., & Haga, W. (2003). The emerging profile of the on-line learner: Relating course
performance with pretests, GPA, and other measures of achievement. Proceedings of the
Information Resource Management Association (IRMA) Conference (pp. 248-251). Idea Group
Publishing,
Marold, K., Larsen, G., & Moreno, A. (2000). Web-based learning: Is it working? Challenges of
information technology management in the 21st Century (pp. 350-353). Idea Group Publishing.
Hershey, PA.
McCluskey, C., Bynum, T. S., and Patchin, J. W. (2004). Reducing chronic absenteeism: An
assessment of an early truancy initiative. Crime and Delinquency, 50(2): 214234
Morgan S, Martin L, Howard B, Mihalek PH. Active learning: what is it and why should I use it?
Dev Bus Simul Experiential Learn. 2015;32:219–223. [Google Scholar] [Ref list]
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A
model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-
218.
Race, P. Brown, S. and Smith, B. (2005) 500 Tips on assessment: 2nd edition, London:
Routledge.
Romer, D. (1993). Do students go to class? Should they? The Journal of Economic Perspectives,
7, 167-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.7.3.167.
Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Raemer, D. B., & Eppich, W. J. (2008). Debriefing as formative
assessment: Closing performance gaps in medical education. Academic Emergency Medicine,
15(11), 1010-1016
Salcedo, C. S. (2010). Comparative analysis of learning outcomes in face-to-face foreign
language classes vs. language lab and online. J. Coll. Teach. Learn. 7, 43–54. doi:
10.19030/tlc.v7i2.88
Siti Maziha Mustapha. (2010). Understanding classroom interaction: a case study of international
students’ classroom participation at one of the colleges in Malaysia. International Journal for the
Advancement of Science & Art. 1(2), 91-99.
Stanca L, 2006. The effects of attendance on academic performance: Panel data evidence for
introductory microeconomics. J Econ Education, 37(3): 251-266
Stowell J, Nelson J. Benefits of electronic audience response systems on student participation,
learning, and emotion. Teach Psychol. 2007;34:253–258. [Google Scholar] [Ref list]
Taras, M. (2010). Assessment for learning: Assessing the theory and evidence. ProcediaSocial
and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3015-3022.
Tatar, S. (2005a). Classroom participation by international students: the case of Turkish graduate
students. Journal of Studies in International Education. 9(4), 337-355.
Theberge, C. L. (April, 1994). Small group vs. whole-class discussion: gaining the floor in
Science lessons. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. Los Angeles, New Orleans.
Thorat, B., Mali, S., & Pratap, A. (2020). The Rise of New Coronavirus Infection (COVID-19):
A Recent Update. doi: 10.14744/ejmo.2020.22222
Tsou, W. (2005). Improving speaking skills through instruction in oral classroom participation.
Foreign Language Annals, 38 (1), 46-55.
Vygotsky, L. (1979). Consciousness as a problem in the psychology of behavior. Soviet
Psychology, 17(4), 3–35. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and Speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S.
Carton (Eds.), Collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1 (pp. 39–285). New York: Plenum.
Wan, Y. S. (2020). Education during COVID-19.
Xu, D., and Jaggars, S. S. (2016). Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses:
differences across types of students and academic subject areas. J. Higher Educ. 85, 633–659.
doi: 10.1353/jhe.2014.0028
Zainal Abidin bin Sayadi. (2007). An investigation into first year Engineering students’ oral
classroom participation: a case study. (Unpublished degree dissertation). Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,
Malaysia.

Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical
analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record, 107(8),
1836-1884.
Zubrick, S. R. (2019). School Attendance: Equities and Inequities in growth trajectories of
academic performance. University of West Australia and Telethon Kids Institute.
https://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference/RC2014/4august/7.
 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
EFFICIENCY OF GRADE 12 STEM-E STUDENTS IN FACE TO FACE CLASS

This research is one of the requirements in the subject Practical Research 2 of ____ (school),
Kidapawan City.

Kindly answer honestly. Rest assured that your answers in this study will be given with high
confidentiality.

Part I. Socio-Demographic Profile.

Name: ___________________________________ Age: ___________________
Gender: ______________________

Part II. Level of Interaction.

Check the box that corresponds to your answer.

In order to guide you in answering the statements, descriptive scoring procedure are as follows:

Score Descriptive equivalent Descriptive interpretation

Always Practiced/ The item described is always observed or the

5
Highly Evident condition is very extensive.

The item described is often observed or the

4 Practiced/Evident
condition is extensive.
3 Moderately Practiced/ The item described is sometimes observed or
 Moderately Evident the condition is very limited.

Less Practiced/ The item is rarely observed, or the condition

2
Less Evident is limited.
Least Practiced/ The item is never observed, or the condition is
1
Least Evident very limited.

Statement 5 4 3 2 1
Attendance
1. When the face to face classes started, I am coming to
school everyday, motivated and eager to learn.
2. I do not have any absences since face to face started.
3. I make sure that I come to school before the time.
4. Going to school everyday makes me feel excited to learn.
5. Face to face classes urge me not to be tardy and absent
each day.
Class Participation
1. I am motivated to join any class activity.
2. I am always reciting and answering when the teacher ask
questions.
3. I am asking questions now and then when there are things
or concepts I do not understand.
4. It is much easier to understand the lesson when there is a
teacher who instructs and explains the concept of lesson
well.
5. Eliciting the response and ideas from my classmates during
class participation enriches my knowledge and
experiences.
Assessment
1. My teacher gives summative test when face to face begun.
2. The answers in our summative test and result are being
checked and explained to us by the teacher.
3. The assessment prepared by m teachers help create a less
stressful environment.
4. There are varied form of assessments provided to help
students to learn the lesson well.
5. The result of the assessment provide feedback for me to
fully understand my strength and weaknesses as a student.
_____________________________
Researcher