EFFECTIVENESS OF USING MANIPULATIVE MATERIALS VIRTUALLY IN

ENHANCING MATHEMATICAL PERFORMANCE AMIDST COVID-19 PANDEMIC

OF GRADE I PUPILS OF BACLARAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
UNIT-1 SCHOOL YEAR 2021-2022

BERNADETTE C. MASUCBOL

School of Professional Studies

UNIBERSIDAD DE DAGUPAN
Arellano St. Dagupan City

Master of Arts in Education

Major in Educational Leadership

April 2022
 APPROVAL FORM

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF ARTS IN

EDUCATION, MAJOR IN EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP, the completed practicum paper
entitled “EFFECTIVENESS OF USING MANIPULATIVE MATERIALS VIRTUALLY IN
ENHANCING MATHEMATICAL PERFORMANCE AMIDST COVID-19 PANDEMIC OF
GRADE I PUPILS OF BACLARAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL UNIT-I”, prepared and
submitted by BERNADETTE C. MASUCBOL and is hereby endorsed for approval.
Dr. Arlyn D. Garcia

Adviser

This is to certify that the completed practicum paper mentioned above submitted by
BERNADETTE C. MASUCBOL has been approved and accepted in April 2022 by the Oral
Examination Committee.

FELIZA ARZADON-SUA, Ed.D.

Chairman

REYNALD JAY F. HIDALGO, Ph.D. FLORIBETH P. CUISON, DIT

Member Member

APPROVED and CERTIFIED as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master OF Arts in Education, Major in Educational Leadership on _____________ with a grade of

_________.

FELIZA ARZADON-SUA, Ed.D.

Chairman

ii
 DEDICATION

This paper is dedicated to my dissertation work, to my family, students, and many friends. A

special feeling of gratitude to my loving parents, whose words of encouragement and push for

tenacity rang in my ears. I will always appreciate all that they have done, to Ms. Ermelyn

Maminta and Ms. Marichelle Acosta for helping me to print out the output. To my adviser Dr.

Arlyn Devera Garcia for always reminding us about professional ethics and it is what made us

better individuals, for her advice that she had given us and her support to us. To my panelists,

Ms. Floribeth P. Cuison and Dr. Reynaldo Jay F. Hidalgo, I want to thank all their efforts in

guiding me as well as giving me helpful advice in making my action research possible and

successful.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to acknowledge and express my gratitude to my adviser Dr. Arlyn Devera Garcia who

made this work possible. Her guidance and advice carried me through all the stages of writing my

project. I would also like to give special thanks to my family for their continuous support and

understanding when undertaking my research and writing my project. Your prayer for me was what

sustained me this far. Finally, I want to express my gratitude to God for guiding me through all my

challenges. Day by day, I have felt your guidance. You are the one who gives me strength in facing

the obstacles I have. I will continue to put my faith in you for my future.

iv
 ABSTRACT

Manipulatives are physical objects used to describe mathematical concepts, whether the object was
intended specifically for mathematics or not. Manipulatives in mathematics have become more
prevalent recently, especially with the influence of technology. These have been proven to increase
engagement and show positive feedback on students’ environmental perception. This paper aimed
to find out whether the use of manipulative materials virtually would improve the mathematical
performance of Grade I of Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1. The research conducted a pretest
and a posttest consisting of 30-items within a control and an experimental group. The mean of the
respondents of the post math test was 19.67% with a standard deviation of 4.88 and a t-test score
of -0.56. Data showed that 16 or 53.33% of the respondents were already above average descriptive
rating, 7 or 23.33% of them were on average descriptive rating, 4 or 13.33% were below average,
10 or 10.00% were already outstanding, and no more pupils having poor descriptive rating. Pupils
who were taught using these strategies performed well based on the result. Manipulative materials
are an effective method of teaching math, for it gives students an opportunity to deal with their
pace of learning.

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Title Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
Approval Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Dedication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .viii

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3
Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Paradigm of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-6

2 METHODOLOGY
Research Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-8
Sources of Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..9
Instrumentation and Data Collection . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Tools for Data Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-14

4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 15-16
Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16-17
Recommendations.. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
APPENDICES
A Permit to Conduct a study . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
B Pre-test evaluation tool. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-23
C Results of Pre-test and Posttest. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
D Certification. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 25
E Picture Documentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26-30
F Letter to Validator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
G Curriculum Vitae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-35

vi
 List of Tables

Table 1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .11

in the Pre-Mathematics Test

Table 2. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

in the Post-Mathematics Test

Table 3. Frequency Distribution of the Scores in the Pre-Test and Post Test . . . . . . . . .13
of the Respondents

Table 4. Table of Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

vii
 List of Figures

Figure 1. Paradigm of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

viii
 Chapter I
INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The use of mathematics goes way back in the early days and has become significant throughout
history. Early civilizations already had the concept of the use of mathematical tools to interpret
simple math, wherein the abacus is one of the most popular and common objects associated. Van
de Walle et al. (2013) defines a mathematical tool as “any object, picture, or drawing that represents
a concept or onto which the relationship for that concept can be imposed.” They have also
highlighted the existence of manipulatives as a physical object to describe mathematical concepts,
whether the object was intended specifically for mathematics or not. Manipulatives in mathematics
have become more prevalent recently, especially with the influence of technology. Early
contributors on the concept arose from notable figures like Maria Montessori, Jean Piaget, and
George Cuisenaire. Montessori have used “golden bead materials” (Laski et al., 2015), Piaget
identifies concrete and pictorial stages to children’s learning, and Cuisenaire invented the
Cuisenaire Rods, for developing concepts on fraction, ratio, and proportion.

The use of manipulatives is supported by Piaget's theoretical work. According to Piaget, students
go through four phases of intellectual growth (Cope, 2015; Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). While
each stage has an age assigned to it, this might vary based on the individual. Piaget says that pupils
learn best through numerous representations and hands-on experiences with concrete materials at
the concrete operational stage (Kontas, 2016). As Cope (2015) points out, as students’ progress
from the concrete operations stage to the formal operations stage (12 years and up), their need for
concrete experiences "diminishes but never ceases." This suggests that manipulatives may be
useful in the lower secondary classroom when students are typically transitioning from the concrete
operations stage to the formal operations stage. Gardner's idea of multiple intelligences provides
theoretical support for the usage of manipulatives. According to this notion, students can perform
best or prefer learning from at least eight different areas of intelligence (Duchesne & McMaugh,

1
2016). Transmission mathematics, for example, allows auditory learners to get the most out of a
course. Manipulatives, on the other hand, incorporate elements of auditory, visual, tactile, and
kinesthetic learning, allowing a larger range of learning types to be reached (Kontas, 2016).

The Department of Education (DepEd) has embarked on a major plan to raise the overall quality
and to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of basic education through the K to 12 Basic
Education Program (K-12) as described in the Philippines Development Plan 2011-2016, the Basic
Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA) and as part of its commitment to achieve the
MDG/EFA goals. To meet the demands of the new curriculum and the increased enrollments in
urban, regional, and remote schools, DepEd has implemented a range of initiatives to bring
educational resources and services closer to learners nationally. The Learning Resources
Management and Development System (LRMDS) developed with the assistance of the Australian
Government (AusAID) under the STRIVE program is one initiative. AusAID continued to assist
the DepEd to implement the systems nationally by providing technical assistance to DepEd to
enhance the LRMDS system and to build capacity for a national rollout. The national rollout is
defined by the issuance of DepEd Order 76, s. 2011. The DepEd through the LRMDS is seeking
to exploit as best as possible ICT to increase the level of quality, relevance, reach and access to
education by all. The Department of Education encourages all teachers to develop learning
resources to utilize it in the teaching learning process. Learner’s engagement with learning material
results in a better academic performance. The development of learning resources also helps in
augmenting the shortage of textbooks as provided by the DepEd central office.

Aligned with this, the utilization of manipulatives within teaching can be a powerful medium to
improve academic performances of the students. Previous research has been conducted in relation
to the use of manipulatives in teaching. A study by Liggett (2017) showed that mathematical
manipulatives were effective in improving academic performance among Grade 2 students.
Students were divided into a control and a treatment group, wherein those who had manipulatives
had improved on their post-test as compared to those who did not have manipulatives. Although
manipulatives can be proven effective, some studies have concluded little indication of learning

2
with its use, along with uncomfortability and unfamiliarity to provided learning materials (Hurst
& Linsell, 2020). Manipulatives have also been proven to increase engagement and show positive
feedback on students’ environmental perception (Cockett & Kilgour, 2015). However, its use also
depends on the grade level and the topics covered. Overall, past research shows positive results in
relation to the effectiveness of manipulatives, thus, solidifying its importance.

Conceptual Framework
The herein study used the Input-Process-Output (IPO) to determine the effectiveness of
manipulative materials in Mathematics of Grade I pupils of Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1
with thirty (30) pupils enrolled for the school year 2021-2022.

The process will be held in the form of a questionnaire to be administered by the researcher. The
result of the process was to gather information and data necessary for the application of treatment.

Thus, the paradigm of the study shown below is the cycle that the researcher prepared and
established.

3
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Improveme
Conduct pre- nt of the
1. Performance level test performance
of Grade I pupils in the outcome in
Pre-test (Low) - Implem Math of Grade
entating rhe I pupils.
2. Performance level of intervention
pupils in the post test (Using Effectivene
after the implementation manipulative ss on the use of
of different manipulative
materials virtually
manipulative materials materials
in mathematics)
strategies-(Improved) virtually amidst
- Conduct covid-19
post-test pandemic in
Mathematics

Feedback
FIGURE I: PARADIGM OF THE STUDY

Input contains initial assumptions and possibilities before the conduction of the methodology. To
tackle poor performances on mathematics, the process stage highlights the solution that is
implemented to further increase and boost academic performance. Finally, output serves as a
reflection based on the respondents' scores on the proposed solution. Feedback will be necessary,
especially on the process, because of how the methodology can be changed for future research and
because of the wide range of variables that may affect academic performance in relation to
manipulative materials.

4
Statement of the Problem

This paper aimed to find out whether the use of manipulative materials virtually would improve
the mathematical performance of Grade I of Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1. Particularly, it
sought to answer the following queries:
1. What is the mathematical performance level of the respondents in the pre-test and post-test?
2. Is there a significant difference between the pre-test in math to the post-test in math after utilizing
manipulative materials virtually?

Hypotheses
There is a significant difference between the pre-test and the post-test in Math of Grade I Baclaran
Elementary School Unit-1 after using manipulative materials.

Significance of the Study

The research may be of benefit to the following sectors:

The Department of Education (DepEd) may benefit in this research through analysis on the
significant changes between pre-test and post-test scores of students. Thus, DepEd may consider
the use of this strategy to implement to different schools in achieving better academic performances
or may opt to use the paper as a basis on different variables that may have affected the results.
Schools, their administrators and teachers, may utilize manipulative materials as the main
medium or as a foundation to teaching strategies. In addition, the research findings may also serve
as the bases for administrators and teachers in designing a lesson that will enhance performance in
mathematics.
Parents could apply the same approach on teaching to their children, and both parents and
the students may be able to evaluate differences on their performance and attitude towards learning
with the provided approach.
Finally, this research can serve as an initial ground for future researchers who are interested
in the mechanics, effectivity, and feasibility of manipulative materials in academic learning. They

5
may also use the paper to further validate previous research on manipulative materials and compare
differences and notable variables affecting academic performance of students.

6
 CHAPTER II

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

A quasi-experimental pretest-posttest was used by the researcher. The goal of a quasi-experimental

research design is to establish a causal link between an independent and dependent variable. It was

created with the researcher's choice of experimental and control groups of respondents. The pre-

test and post-test scores were considered students’ achievement in math. Students were divided

into two groups: experimental and control. The pre-test was given to the respondents before the

implementation of the intervention, while the post-test was given after. Only the experimental

group has been given the manipulative materials after the pre-test. The researcher wrote every

noticeable detail or situation that would reflect how the relationships and interactions evolved in

the duration of the experiment.

This design was used by the researcher because the subjects of the study were an intact group of

the grade one pupils in regular Math class in a naturally assembled setting at Baclaran Elementary

School Unit-1, Parañaque City. This design also requires pretest and posttest which is perfect to

the chosen instruments of the researcher. This design method of research was also used by the

researcher since it is an approach to a basic research method that investigates the circumstances of

its existence. The design also aims to describe a population, situation, or phenomenon accurately

and systematically, where it uses a wide variety of research methods to investigate one or more

variables by observation and measurement as anchored by McCombes (2019). The design can

provide valid results for the ongoing study; hence, it was utilized. The prefix quasi means

“resembling.” Thus, quasi-experimental research is research that resembles experimental research

7
but is not true experimental research. Although the independent variable is manipulated,

participants are not randomly assigned to conditions or orders of conditions (Cook S., 2015).

Because the independent variable is manipulated before the dependent variable is measured, quasi-

experimental research eliminates the directionality problem. However, because participants are not

randomly assigned, making it likely that there are other differences between conditions, quasi-

experimental research does not eliminate the problem of confounding variables. In terms of internal

validity, therefore, quasi-experiments are generally somewhere between correlational studies and

true experiments.

The pre-reading comprehension test was helpful in assessing student’s prior knowledge and testing

initial equivalence among groups. A post-reading comprehension test was administered to measure

treatment effects. In addition, the results of the pre-reading comprehension test and post-reading

comprehension test scores were analyzed.

Furthermore, this study employed statistical tests, percentage and mean, in the treatment of data.

Mean is being described as a center of gravity of a distribution and is described as the common

score of the entire group.

The researcher used manipulative materials that could enhance the mathematical performance of

Grade I Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1 in Mathematics during the school year 2021-2022.

The researcher made use of instructional approaches which attempted to make the process of math

more enjoyable, more exciting, and more meaningful. It significantly improves mastery of key

concepts and vocabulary. It helps the pupils relax and reduce the stress, which many of the pupil’s

experience because of math anxiety. The materials were in the form of the different kinds of

manipulative materials that were used virtually through Google Meet.

8
Sources of Data

The respondents of this study are the 30 heterogenous Grade I pupils who are enrolled for the

School Year 2021-2022. The study was conducted at Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1 in

Paranaque City. The researcher used a convenience sampling method to select the respondents.

Instrumentation and Data Collection

The researcher employed a 30-item multiple choice pre-test and post-test math test. A pretest was

provided to students at the start of a course to determine their initial comprehension of the learning

goals' metrics, and a post-test was given shortly after the course ended to determine what the

students have learnt. This 30-item test questionnaire was given to the pupils to measure their math

performance. Each selection has check-up comprehension questions. The researcher used problems

in math to come-up with 30 items of pre-test and post-test research instruments. For the math

scoring guide, the researcher provided a scale in assessing the math performance level of

elementary students.

The test questions were checked and validated by the master teachers of the primary department

and the school head of Baclaran Elementary School. The pre-test and post-test were designed to

measure the academic achievement of grade one pupils or students. The pre-test and post-test both

consist of a 30-item test to determine the level of math achievement of the pupils. The subjects

took the test twice with the same content of the test, pretest, and posttest. This study only covered

one grading period (second grading) with a coverage of 8 weeks. Lessons tackled during the

implementation of the intervention are the topics of the second quarter.

9
Tools for Data Analysis

The researcher made use of the t-test. A t-test is a statistical test that is used to compare the means

of two groups. It is often used in hypothesis testing to determine whether a process or treatment

influences the population of interest, or whether two groups are different from one another.

The formula for the two-sample t-test is shown below:

where x1 and x2 are the means of the two groups being compared, s2 is the pooled standard error
of the two groups, and n1 and n2 are the number of observations in each of the groups.

10
 CHAPTER III

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This Chapter deals with the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of data:

Table 1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in the

Pre-Mathematics Test

Table 1 shows the reading comprehension level of the Grade I pupils in the pre-Mathematics test

prior to the implementation of the manipulative materials strategies. The data shown suggests that

7 or 23.33% of the respondents had poor descriptive rating, 15 or 50.00% of them were below

average descriptive rating and 8 or 26.67% of them were average descriptive ratings. The table

also shows that the mean of the 30 respondents in the Pretest was 10.43%. It implied that many of

the respondents had below average descriptive rating in the pre math test result and some had poor

and average descriptive rating. Therefore, the math performance level of the respondents was in

11
the below average, poor and average descriptive rating level and the standard deviation is 4.22.

Table 2. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in the

Post-Mathematics Test

Table 2 showed the math performance level of the Grade I pupils in the Post math test after the

implementation of the manipulative materials strategies. The data shown that 16 or 53.33% of the

respondents were already at the above average descriptive rating, 7 or 23.33% of them were

average descriptive rating, 4 or 13.33% were below average and 3 or 10.00% were already

outstanding and no more pupils got poor descriptive rating.

The table also suggested that the mean of the respondents of the Post math test was 19.67%. It only

suggested that many of the respondents in the post math test were in the above average descriptive

rating, followed by average, below average and outstanding descriptive rating. Therefore, the math

performance level of the respondents was in the above average and average descriptive rating level

12
and the standard deviation is 4.88.

Table 3: Frequency Distribution of the Scores in the Pre-Test and Post Test of the

Respondents

Table 3 showed the mean scores in the post reading math test of the respondents were increased.

The number of respondents got an above average descriptive rating and no more got a poor

descriptive rating as shown in the table. It only implied that using manipulative materials as an

intervention increases the performance level of the pupils in Mathematics.

Based on the result, the reading comprehension level of the Grade I pupils in the Post math test

after the implementation of the intervention, the data shown that 16 or 53.33% of the respondents

were already in the above average descriptive rating, 7 or 23.33% of them were in the average

13
descriptive rating, 4 or 13.33% were in the below on average, 3 or 10.00% were already outstanding

and no more pupils had poor descriptive ratings.

It also showed that the mean of the respondents in the post math test was 19.67%. It implied that

many of the respondents in the post math test were above average descriptive rating, followed by

average, below average and outstanding descriptive rating. Therefore, the reading comprehension

level of the respondents was in the above average and average descriptive rating level and the

standard deviation is increased by 4.88 the t-test score of the pretest and the post test is -0.56.

Based also from the result, the mean scores of the post math test of the respondents have increased.

The number of respondents who got an above average descriptive rating was more than 50% and

no more got poor descriptive rating as shown in the table. It only implied that using manipulative

materials strategies, the performance level in Math was improved.

This study examines manipulative materials as a strategy as it relates to Math performance test

achievement in Grade I of Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1. The study has implications for

educational change because it can add to the discussion of providing reading development for math

strategies to assist in the challenges of meeting the needs of diverse learners. Findings of the action

research study will be shared with the administration team and the school district to provide

opportunities to enhance the instructional methods for teaching across grade levels. Utilizing

different manipulative materials is a way to better meet the needs of all learners and provide them

with an opportunity for success. Providing better instructional strategies could lead to a higher

achievement in math and other subjects in the elementary level.

CHAPTER IV

14
 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

This study aimed to find out whether the use of manipulative materials virtually would improve

the math performance level of Grade I, it also sought to answer the following sub problem: a).

What is the mathematics performance level of the respondents in the pretest and posttest diagnostic

test after using manipulative materials? b) Is there a significant difference between the pretest in

math to the posttest in math after utilizing manipulative materials?

The researcher made use of descriptive methods of research, wherein its design aims to

describe a population, situation, or phenomenon accurately and systematically, using a wide variety

of research methods to investigate one or more variables by observation and measurement

(McCombes, 2019). The design can provide valid results for the ongoing study; hence, it was

utilized. The researcher used a quasi-experimental pre-test and post-test approach on 30

respondents from Grade I of Baclaran Elementary School. The test, specifically a mathematics test,

consisted of a 30-item multiple choice question. The researcher also used the t-test formula to

conduct hypothesis testing.

The overall results showed that the math performance level of the respondents was in the above

average and average descriptive rating level. The mean scores of the post math test of the

respondents have increased and the number of the respondents got an above average descriptive

rating was more than 50% and no more got poor descriptive rating is shown in the table. It only

implied that using manipulative materials the performance level of the math test was improved

thus, its hypothesis: there is no significant difference between the pre-math tests to the post math

15
test of Grade I of Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1 before using different manipulative

strategies, was rejected. The mean of the respondents of the post math test was 19.67% and with

a standard deviation of 4.88 and a t-test score of -0.56. It implied that many of the respondents in

the post math test were above average descriptive rating, followed by average, below average and

outstanding descriptive rating. The result of the mean scores in the pretest and posttest in math of

the respondents clearly revealed that there is a great increase of the mean scores of the respondents

to the post math test. As comparison to previous studies (Liggett, 2017), manipulatives are helpful

in learnings of students. Although Hurst & Lindsell (2020) have said there is little indication of its

benefits, our study proves its effectivity despite it being done virtually. Thus, other factors may

have affected the little learning assumed with manipulatives and may be because of the previously

mentioned unfamiliarity of the materials.

Conclusion

The reading comprehension level of the Grade I pupils in the Post math test after the

implementation of the intervention are as follows: data shows that 16 or 53.33% of the respondents

were already in the above average descriptive rating, 7 or 23.33% of them were in the average

descriptive rating, 4 or 13.33% were in the below on average, 3 or 10.00% were already outstanding

and no more pupils had poor descriptive ratings. It also showed that the mean of the respondents

in the post math test was 19.67%. This implies that many of the respondents in the post math test

were above average descriptive rating, followed by average, below average and outstanding

descriptive rating. A significant difference was observed between the pretest and posttest results

in the use of manipulatives. The mean using the different reading strategies as an intervention result

in the post math test were increased. Pupils who were taught using these strategies performed well

16
based on the result. Manipulative materials are an effective method of teaching math, for it gives

students an opportunity to deal with their pace of learning. This strategy is a promising approach

for supporting the diverse developmental learning needs of all students for it consistently has

positively affected student performance.

Recommendations

Based on the conclusions, the researcher recommends the following:

1. Use manipulative materials virtually in teaching in the different learning areas in all grade

levels, particularly during the time of pandemic.

2. The school principal and other administrators should provide seminars or training to encourage

the teachers to use manipulative materials virtually as a strategy in teaching the different learning

areas, particularly in Mathematics.

3. A parallel study should be conducted in a wider perspective to further validate the result of this

study.

4. Future researchers may investigate what variables could positively affect the use of

manipulative materials to further improve its implementations.

5. Researchers may also opt to compare the differences of effectiveness of manipulative materials

among different mathematical subjects, analyzing which topics show the least and most

improvements when this teaching style is applied.

17
 Bibliography
Bevans, R. (2020, January 31). An introduction to T-tests | Definitions, formula and examples.
Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/t-test

Chiang, I.-C. A., Jhangiani, R. S., & Price, P. C. (2015, October 13). Quasi-experimental research.
Research Methods in Psychology 2nd Canadian Edition. Retrieved May 25, 2022, from
https://opentextbc.ca/researchmethods/chapter/quasi-experimental-research/

Cockett, A., & Kilgour, P. W. (2015). Mathematical manipulatives: Creating an environment for
understanding, efficiency, engagement, and enjoyment. TEACH COLLECTION of
Christian Education,1(1), 47-54. Retrieved from
https://research.avondale.edu.au/teachcollection/vol1/iss1/5
Cope, L. (2015). Math manipulatives: Making the abstract tangible. Delta Journal of Education,
5(1), 10-19.
Duchesne, S., & McMaugh, A. (2018). Educational psychology for learning and teaching.
Cengage AU.
Hurst, C. and Linsell, C. (2020). Manipulatives and Multiplicative Thinking. European Journal of
STEM Education, 5(1), 04. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/5808
Kontas, H. (2016). The effect of manipulatives on mathematics achievement and attitudes of
secondary school students. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 10-20.
https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n3p10
Liggett, R. S. (2017). The impact of use of manipulatives on the math scores of grade 2 students.
Brock Education Journal, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v26i2.607
Marley, S. C., & Carbonneau, K. J. (2014). Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence
relevant to classroom instruction with manipulatives. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 1-7.
McCombes, S. (2019, May 15). Descriptive research design | Definition, methods and examples.
Scribbr.
Thomas, L. (2020, July 31) Quasi-Experimental Design | Definition, Types & Examples.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/descriptive-research/
Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2013). Elementary and middle school
mathematics: Teaching developmentally (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

18
 APPENDICES

Appendix A
PERMIT TO CONDUCT A STUDY

November 10, 2021

AGNES A. PELOVELLO
Principal I
Baclaran Elementary School Unit-1

Dear Madam:

I have the honor to request permission to conduct a study on the “EFFECTIVENESS OF

MANIPULATIVE MATERIALS VIRTUALLY IN ENHANCING MATHEMATICAL
PERFORMANCE AMIDST COVID-19 PANDEMIC OF GRADE I PUPILS OF
BACLARAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLUNIT-1, SCHOOL YEAR 2021-2022.
In the partial fulfillment of the requirements leading to the Degree of Master’s in Education:
Major in Educational Leadership Arellano St., Dagupan City, Pangasinan.

The respondents of this study are the Grade I pupils of Baclaran, Elementary School Unit-1

I hope for a favorable consideration and approval on the above-mentioned request.

Very truly yours,

BERNADETTE C.MASUCBOL
Researcher

19
 Appendix B
Pretest Evaluation Tool
Mathematics I

Pangalan:_______________________________________

20
21
22
23
 Appendix C

Result of Pretest and Posttest

24
 Appendix D

Certification

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE ACTION RESEARCH

This is to certify that we have read the action research of BERNADETTE

C. MASUCBOL entitled “ Effective of using manipulative materials virtually

in enhancing mathematical performance amidst covid-19 pandemic of grade

1 pupils of Baclaran Elementary School Unit 1 School Year 2021-2022”.

She defended before a Research Defense Committee on April 26, 2022. The

committee found the action research acceptable.

FELIZA ARZADON SUA,Ed.D

Chairman

ARLYN V .GARCIA, Ed.D

Adviser

25
 Appendix E

DOCUMENTATION
Pictures while conducting the study

Students conducting online class Activity Part 1

26
Students conducting online class Activity Part 2

27
Administering the Pre Test Part 1

28
Administering the Pre Test Part 2

29
Administering the Post Test

30
 Table 4: Table of Specification

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
REGION III
BACLARAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL UNIT-1

TABLE OF SPECIFICATION
POSTTEST
MATHEMATICS TEST (GRADE I)
SY 2021-2022

31
Schedule of the conduct of the study

32
 Appendix E

LETTER TO VALIDATOR

Name of the Evaluator: AGNES A.PELOVELLO

Highest Educational Attainment: Master of Education

Sir /Madam:

I would like to inform you that you had been selected as one of the content validators for

the intervention tool modified graphic organizer done in the action research of the author

entitled “Effectiveness of using manipulative materials virtually in enhancing

mathematical performance amidst covid-19 pandemic of grade 1 pupils of Baclaran

Elementary School Unit 1 School Year 2021-2022”.

A copy of the intervention material device, as adjusted by the researcher for your evaluator,

is attached in this letter. This intervention material's aim, objectives, and method of

implementation are all described. Your answers to the questions will be extremely useful

in the implementation of the intervention tool.

Thank you.

Respectfully,

BERNADETTE C.MASUCBOL
Teacher Researcher

33
 Appendix E

CURRICULUM VITAE

BERNADETTE C.MASUCBOL
Contact # 09324859807
E-mail Address: bernadette.masucbol@deped.gov.ph

PESONAL DATA
Address: 3128-A General Garcia St.Bangkal Makati
Date of Birth: July 28,1976
Civil Status: Married
Parents: Rogelio B.Culas
Angelita S.Culas

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Graduate Studies
2019-present Master in Education
Major in Educational Leadership
Colegio De Daguapan
Arellano St.Dagupan City,Pangasinan

Tertiary
1998-2001 Bachelor of Elementary Education
General Education
SouthEastern College
Pasay,City

34
Secondary
1989-1993 Burauen Provincial High School
Burauen,Leyte
lll. ELIGIBILITY
Licensure Examination for Teachers
March 2016
Sampaloc Manila

Midwifery Licensure Examination

April 1995
Manila

1V. EMPLOYMENT
2017-Present Baclaran Elementary School Unit 1
District 1 Paranaque,City
Teacher 1

2007-2017 Paranaque Doctors Hospital

Paranaque,City
OR-DR Midwife

V. CONFERENCE/TRAININGS /SEMINARS/WORSHOPS ATTENDED NATIONAL

- VIRTUAL IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHESR

August 30 - September 3, 2021

- VIRTUAL IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHESR

March 15 – 19, 2021

35