INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Mathematics is a general education subject in which students are

expected to gain an understanding and appreciation of its principles as they

apply them to problem-solving, critical thinking, communicating, reasoning,

making connections, representations, and making real-life decisions (K to 12

Basic Education Curriculum). A number of factors influence students'

arithmetic performance, as evaluated by their grades. This study will focus on

the affective characteristics of students, among other things. Concentrate on

your study habits and attitudes, which, as previously said, are referred to as

study orientations. Biswas wrote the article (2015).

In addition, one method for assessing pupils' success is by evaluation

of their official outcome. When administering formative or summative exams,

educators frequently still solely employ the oldest mode of student

assessment. Unfortunately, this forces a pupil to use only a simple strategy,

preventing them from developing their mathematical literacy. Despite the fact

that there have been numerous studies on the use of scaffolding to help

students develop their skills, one on how to evaluate pupils was published in

1982.
 2

Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy provided

by Biggs and Collis (1982) was used in this study to assess the quality of

student arguments. The SOLO taxonomy has two primary aspects as a

systematic approach of defining and describing the spectrum of student

performances: modes of thinking and levels of response (complexity within

each mode) (Biggs & Collis, 1982). Understanding, according to the SOLO

taxonomy, is defined as an increase in the number and complexity of objects.

Using SOLO taxonomy to classify student behaviour challenging as the

students will be selecting actions that others have provided rather than

performing the action themselves. In setting SOLO task, teachers need to

know which behaviour they seek to access and to have a clear understanding

of how to classify the student’s response Understanding, according to the

SOLO taxonomy, is defined as an increase in the number and complexity of

objects. As students grow from novice to expert, they build a network of

relationships. It is divided into five stages of increasing complexity. Pre-

structural, Uni-structural, Multi-structural, Relational, and Extended Abstract

are the levels, each of which covers and transcends the one before it

(Caniglia and Meadows, 2018).

Most teachers are comfortable using the Solo Taxonomy as a measure

of comprehension of thinking or cognitive learning outcomes. Solo

Taxonomy's hierarchical model is comprehensive, includes objective criteria,

and can be applied for a wide range of subjects and assignments. Teachers
 3

like how SOLO shows student learning utilizing a variety of materials in

increasing levels of structural complexity, and how these levels follow a

consistent pattern across tasks. In the 2013 curriculum, the level of

competency is based on the taxonomy of the observed structure (SOLO

taxonomy) learning outcomes, this is where taxonomy is a classification

system that looks at how people think.  kids to find solutions and concentrate

on them (M. Yurtyapan et al. 2021). Furthermore, this PISA-style math can

also benefit from taxonomy issues. As a result, the SOLO was used in this

research. To determine, taxonomy is employed as the basis of analysis. and

explain the various levels of thought processes pupils' abilities to solve math

problems similar to those found in PISA.

Objectives of the Study

The general objective of the study is to explore learning outcomes of

student in problem-solving Specifically, it aimed to:

a. determine the socio- demographic profile of student respondents in

terms of age, sex, and mathematics performance (GPA);

b. classify the most dominated level of structure of observed learning

outcomes of student outcomes in problem-solving .

 4

c. determine students performances using a Structure Observation

Learning Outcome measured in terms of foundational knowledge,

analysis, reasoning, and communication;

d. determine the relationship of student’s mathematics performance

(GPA) and mathematical literacy in Structure of Observed Learning

Outcomes ; and

e. determine the factor that impact of a students’ mathematical learning

performance in problem-solving task.

Significance of the Study

This study will significant for the student to define their mathematical

learning performances using the level of Structure of Observation Learning

Outcomes in a questionnaire processes. and help them to encourage to step

up from their learning capability in mathematics problem-solving and learning

of students can be influenced in ways that encourage deep learning..

Teacher will use the Structure of Observation Learning Outcomes

(SOLO) for scaffolding in the formative test or in the other assessment.

Teachers like how SOLO shows student learning utilizing a variety of

materials in increasing levels of structural complexity, and how these levels

follow a consistent pattern across tasks and can be used in the classroom to
 5

improve learning quality and provide a systematic approach to achieving deep

understanding (Damopolii, 2020)

Lastly, future researchers as basis for their future studies to provide

insights about Structure of Observation Learning Outcomes in developing

students’ mathematical literacy.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The scope of the study is to explore and describe the learning outcomes of

the grade 10 students in problem-solving based on the SOLO ( Structure of

the Observe Learning Outcome ) measure in terms of foundational

knowledge, analysis, reasoning, and communication. It also explores and

describes the factors that impede the respondents’ performances.

The respondent of the study are the Grade 10 students during the

school year 2022-2023.

The researcher focused in the problem-solving task result and define

the factor that impact on their mathematical learning performances in

problem-solving.

Theoretical Framework of the Study

 6

This study was anchored on underlying learning principle and theories:

Biggs and Collis (1982) introduced the Structure of the Observed

Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy as a generic educational classification.

It is content agnostic, allowing it to be used as a generic measure of

comprehension across disciplines. SOLO is a developmental schema for

describing learning outcomes in terms of their complexity, allowing instructors

to assess students' work in terms of quality rather than the number of correct

replies in a given subject task or activity (Chan et al., 2002). The SOLO

taxonomy identifies the levels of increasing complexity in students'

performance for comprehending when mastering new material by providing

criteria (Biggs, 1999). SOLO can be used not just for evaluation, but also for

curriculum development in terms of learning outcomes intended. It is divided

into five levels, each of which reveals the structure and intricacy of the

students' knowledge as they learn. . The lower levels are concerned with

quantity (the amount of information a learner has), whereas the higher levels

are concerned with integration, or the development of connections between

details and concepts outside the learning domain (the integration of the

details into a structural pattern). This schema is assumed to apply to any

academic area as a general educational taxonomy. Biggs (1979) provides

insight into the production of assessment items without creating a framework

for writing assessment by explaining the quality of student learning. Students'

responses were categorised into one of five hierarchical levels using the
 7

Structure of Observe Learning Outcomes (SOLO) Taxonomy, which are pre-

structural, uni-structural, multi-structural, relational, and extended abstract, in

that order. A pre-structural response show no logical relationship to the task,

whereas in a uni-suctural response, the student will respond with only one

relevant action and ignore other relevant information which is provided. A

response classified as being structural when the student identifies but does

not analyse or synthesize, several relevant aspect of the response. When the

aspects synthesized and the stundent makes a accurate conclusion, the

response is deemed to be relational. At the highest level. a response to

classified as extended abstract. when student behaviour involves challenging

the assumption made providing counter example or generating new idea.

Conceptual Framework

Mathematical Literacy

Mathematics Performance  Foundational

(GPA) Knowledge
 Analysis
 Reasoning
 Communication
 8

Figure 1. Figure showing relationship between Mathematics Performance

and Mathematical Literacy, and vice versa.

Hypothesis of the Study

Ho: Mathematics performance has no relationship on Mathematical literacy of

respondents measured in terms of foundational knowledge, analysis,

reasoning, and communication and vice versa.

Operational Definition of Terms

These terms investigate appear throughout the study and refer to

specific ideas relate to the research conduct.

Structure of the Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) – a taxonomy

introduced by Biggs and Collins in 1982, taxonomy as a generic

educational classification. It is content agnostic, allowing it to be

used as a generic measure of comprehension across

disciplines.

Learning Outcome – measurable statements that articulate at the beginning

what students should know, be able to do, or value as a result of

taking a course or completing a program.

 9

Pre-structural is the first level. At this level, students use their information

without understanding it, just repeating the questions

Uni-structural is the first level. Students have a poor grasp at this level.

Students concentrate solely on the usage of data that is relevant

to the question (Biggs & Tang, 2011).

Multi-structural is the second level. Students can concentrate on more than

one facet of the question at this level, but they are unrelated to

one another (Biggs & Tang, 2011; Chalmers, 2011).

Relational is the third level. Students at this level comprehend how to

construct the entire as well as the relationships between the

various structures that make up the total (Biggs & Tang, 2011).

Extended Abstract (Level 4) Students can make inferences based on

abstract qualities.  is able to create broad generalizations.

Students can view topics from many perspectives, hypothesize,

and make generalizations (Biggs & Tang, 2011; Brabrand &

Dahl,2009).