Final Defense:

Jaz: To our research adviser and to our panelist, a pleasant morning to all of you. I am Jazmine Frias and
we will be presenting our research entitled “Student Engagement and its Relationship to Teachers’
Pedagogy in General Mathematics in Norzagaray National High School” along with my co-presenters,
Mr. Amaro, Mr. Tion, Ms. Reyes, and Ms. Polledo. Now, here is Ms. Polledo to present the statement of
the problem.

Bianca: Good morning! I am Bianca Polledo and let us now proceed to the statement of the problem.
Based on the preliminary observations conducted by the Department of Education, they indicate that
implementation of the new curriculum in the Philippines has not been maximized. This can be seen that
there are still many students who have difficulty in learning and are uninterested in discerning the
lessons in class caused of the monotonous learning processes, including the inappropriate teaching
pedagogy. Hence, the teaching and learning processes require focus. To motivate them, teachers must
recognize the diversity and complexity of students in the classroom, especially during mathematics class
which according to the studies is the most difficult subject of all. To present some arguments on this
topic, this study aims to determine the relationship between teachers’ pedagogy and student
engagement on the provided problem questions.

Question No:

1. What is the level of students’ engagement in General Mathematics?

2. What are the teaching pedagogies utilized by General Mathematics teachers?
3. Is there a significant relationship that exists between student engagement toward the learning
of General Mathematics and the teachers’ pedagogy?

To present the statistical treatment of data, here is Ms. Reyes.

Kristine: Good day! I am Ms. Reyes. So, in this study, the researchers used the average weighted
mean as well as adapted the Likert Scale to interpret the results. Also, Pearson R was used to
measure and interpret linear relationship between two variables, which is the student
engagement (the criterion) and the teachers pedagogy which is the predictor. As you can see, the
weighted mean was used to compute the data for the level of engagement as well as the different
teachers’ pedagogy. And Pearson r was used to measure the relationship between variables. To give
information regarding the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of data here is Ms. Frias and Mr.
Tion.
Jazmine: For the results, the researchers make tables containing the area of focus and the chords. The
area of focus contains the questions coming from the questionnaires. On the other hand, chords
contains the responses of the respondents. For the question no. 1 – What is the level of students’
engagement in General Mathematics? Table 1 shows that indicator no. 3 which is coming to class
everyday got the highest mean and indicator no.5 which is getting a high grades got the lowest average.

Tion: For the question no. 2 – What are the teaching pedagogies utilized by General Mathematics
teachers? Table 2.1 shows the average mean of the teaching skills of General Mathematics teachers in
Norzagaray National High School. Table 2.1 interpreted that indicator (1) which is “explains the
objectives of the lesson clearly at the start of each period” got the highest mean and indicator no. 5
which is “uses of various strategies, teaching aids/devices and techniques in presenting” got the lowest
mean.
In addition, Table 2.2 shows the average mean of Teaching Aids used by General Mathematics teachers
in Norzagaray National High School. Table 2.2 interpreted that indicator no.1 which is the use of chalk
and blackboard in explaining got the highest mean and indicator no. 4 which is the utilization of
fun/energizer got the lowest mean.

Jazmine: And for the last question, question no. 3 - Is there a significant relationship that exists between
student engagement toward the learning of General Mathematics and the teachers’ pedagogy?

As presented in Table 3, a Two-Tailed Significance test was conducted between teachers’ pedagogies
including teaching aids and teaching skills and student engagement. The findings of the test showed a p-
value of 0.000, R= .356 between the predictor and criterion which is less than the significance level of
0.005. This means that there is a moderate-positive relationship between variables, teachers' pedagogy
(predictor) and student engagement (criterion). Furthermore, a p-value of less than (a=0.05) means that
the null hypothesis (Ho) is to be rejected while (Ha) hypothesis is to be accepted.

For the summary, conclusions, and recommendations, here is Mr. Amaro.

Chapter V (Amaro)

Thank you, panelist. We hope that you accept our study. The floor is now open for clarifications and

questions.