1

Republic of the Philippines

NUEVA ECIJA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Cabanatuan City

CHAPTER I
The Problem and Its Setting

Introduction

Problem solving is the centerpiece of mathematics teaching

and learning. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics states

that instructional programs should enable all students to build

new mathematical knowledge through problem solving, solve

problems that arise in mathematics and in other contexts, apply

and adopt a variety of appropriate strategies to solve problems,

and monitor and reflect on the process of mathematical problem

solving.

Similarly, Kilpatrick et al. (2000) explained that studies

in almost every domain of mathematics have demonstrated that

problem solving provides an important context in which students

can learn about number and other mathematical topics. Problem

solving ability is enhanced when students have opportunities to

explore and understand what the problem is all about.

The researcher will conduct a study to lookinto the

competencies of the Grade 7 Students. Being one of the mentors of

these students, the researcher viewed word problem solving as a

vehicle to improve their mathematical thinking. It would prepare

 2

them for the next Grade levels and help them respond and

interpret things in their daily living.

Hence, this study aimed at describing the Word Problem

Solving Competencies of Grade 7 students of Selected High Schools

in the Congressional District IV of Nueva Ecija for the School

Year 2014-2015. Determining the remediation and enhancement

program to be employed to these students will also be considered.

Conceptual Framework of the Study

The research paradigm presented shows the input-process-

output model. The input includes the word problem solving

competenciesof the learners.

The process includes the data gathering, administration of

questionnaire, observation, and interview.

The output will be the identified word problem competencies

of the Grade 7 students and proposed policies and programs in

word problem solving.

Input Process Output

Competencies of  Data  Identified Word
Grade 7 Students Gathering Problem
in Selected High  Observation Competencies of
Schools in Grade 7 Students
 Interview
Congressional  Proposed
Input
District 4 of  Questionnaire
Policies and
Nueva Ecija. Programs in Word
Problem Solving

Figure 1. Research Paradigm

Statement of the Problem
 3

The purpose of the study is to determine the word problem

solving competencies of the Grade 7 students in Selected High

Schools in Congressional District 4 of Nueva Ecija during

theSchool Year 2014-2015 to serve as basis in making policies and

programs for Word Problem Solving.

Specifically, the researcher will seek answers to the

following questions:

1. How does the level of students’ word problem solving

competencies be described base on their scores?

2. What factors account to the students’ competencies in

Word Problems?

3. What interventions, policies and development programs

could be undertaken based on the results of the study?

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study will focus at determining the Word Problem

Solving Competencies of Grade 7 students in Selected High Schools

in Congressional District 4 of Nueva Ecija for the School Year

2014-2015 as basis for making interventions, policies and

development programs.

Significance of the Study

This study would be beneficial to the following:

 4

The Students. The findings of the study will be of great

help in improving their word problem solving skills; thus,

continue the high performance of the students in terms of

Mathematics.

The Teachers.The outcome of the study will serve as

benchmark of their teaching-learning activities. Through the

results of this study, they will know how to remedy the situation

after they learned the causes of the condition of the individual

students. Also, they will be having concrete ideas on how to deal

with students with low, average and high performance in Word

Problem Solving.

The Parents. They will cooperate with the teachers in

providing better learning aids to their children. They can work

out a plan or pattern to help their children enhance their word

problem competencies.

School Administrators. They may include remedial works and

interventions in their programs to help the students with

difficulties in solving word problems and enhance further the

skills of those students with average and high performance in

their school. They may request each of their teachers to

contribute to the development of student’s necessary skills for

effective word problem solving.

 5

Student-Teachers.The result of the study will serve as guide

in dealing with the possible problems or difficulties they will

be encountering in the actual service.

Community. Similarly, this study may also be important to

the community. The people in general may become aware of the real

situation in their school as regard to what is happening to their

children, whether the latter are doing well academically or not.

Researchers. This study will serve as guide for further

researches, more specifically on how improve word problem solving

competencies.

Definition of Terms

To facilitate a clearer understanding of the study, the

following terms were defined:

Affecting- an emotion or feeling attached to an idea,

object, etc.

Basis- the fundamental assumptions from which something is

begun or developed or calculated or explained.

Difficulties-refer to condition or state affairs almost

beyond one’s ability to deal with and requiring great effort to

bear or overcome.

Economic-refer to anything that contribute causally to a

result.
 6

Mathematics Difficulty (MD) - refers to learners who are low

performers in mathematics. These learners lack skills in

performing the basic operations in Mathematics.

Mental/Intellectual- refers to the capacity and capability

of the student using his/her knowledge and understanding.

Methodical Condition- refers to the system of instructions

or techniques or teaching used by the teacher in teaching his

students on how to solve mathematical word problems.

Physical Condition- refers to the physical health of the

students that can affect his/her ability.

Problem solving - consists of using generic or ad

hoc methods, in an orderly manner, for finding solutions to

problems. Some of the problem-solving techniques developed and

used inartificial intelligence, computer

science, engineering,mathematics,medicine, etc. are related to

mental problem-solving techniques studied in psychology.

Program- refers to a series of steps to be carried out on

goals to be accomplished, usually designed to meet social needs.

Reading Difficulty(RD) – refers to the learners with poor

reading skills. These learners cannot comprehend what they are

reading.

Remediation- is the use of remedial methods to improve the

mathematical word problem skills of the students.

 7

Social Status- refers to the ability of the students to

interact with his/her family, friends and peers.

 8

CHAPTER II
Review of Related Literature

This chapter presents the review of related literature and

studies that makes this research comprehensible.

The following studies have relevance with the present sudy.

Foreign Literature

Students struggling with mathematics may benefit from early

interventions aimed at improving their mathematics ability and

ultimately preventing subsequent failure. This guide provides

eight specific recommendations intended to help teachers,

principals, and school administrators use Response to

Intervention (RtI) to identify students who need assistance in

mathematics and to address the needs of these students through

focused interventions. The guide provides suggestions on how to

carry out each recommendation and explains how educators can

overcome potential roadblocks to implementing the

recommendations.

The recommendations were developed by a panel of researchers

and practitioners with expertise in various dimensions of this

topic. The panel includes a research mathematician active in

issues related to K–8 mathematics education, two professors of

mathematics education, several special educators, and a

mathematics coach currently providing professional development in

 9

mathematics in schools. The panel members worked collaboratively

to develop recommendations based on the best available research

evidence and our expertise in mathematics, special education,

research, and practice.

Jordan and colleagues have devoted a good deal of effort to

distinguishingsimilarities and differences betweenchildren with

specific mathematics difficulties (MD) only and those withboth

mathematics and reading difficulties (MD + RD). In many earlier

studies,children with MD were defined asa single group of low

achievers (e.g.,Geary, 1993; Ostad, 1998). However,Jordan’s work,

as well as recent researchby Fuchs et al. (2004), has

suggestedthat children with MD who areadequate readers show a

different patternof cognitive deficits than childrenwith MD who

are also poor readers(Jordan et al., 2003; Jordan &

Montani,1997).

A distinguishing characteristic ofthis line of research

involves the domainsof mathematical cognition thatare assessed.

Much of the early researchon children with MD was

narrowlyfocused, emphasizing only onearea of mathematical

competence - the arithmetic computation. Problemsolving and

number sense receivedless attention. Because mathematics

hasmultiple cognitive requirements (NationalResearch Council,

2001), Jordanet al. (2003) hypothesized that abilitieswould be

uneven across areas of mathematicalcompetence, especially

 10

amongchildren with MD only.Hanich et al. (2001)

identifiedchildren with MD only, MD + RD, RDonly and typical

achievement (TA) atthe beginning of second grade. In asubsequent

study with the same sample,Jordan, Kaplan, and Hanich

(2002)examined each group’s achievementgrowth in reading and in

mathematicson the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho–educational Battery–

Revised (Woodcock& Johnson, 1990) over a 2-yearperiod. MD and RD

were defined by performance at or below the 35th percentile,based

on national norms. TheMD-only group started at about thesame math

level as the MD + RD group(mean percentiles of 22 and 21,

respectively)and the RD-only group at aboutthe same math level as

the TA group(mean percentile scores of 60 and

68,respectively).Achievement growth of childrenwith MD only was

significantly morerapid than that of children with MD +RD. It is

important to note that this differencepersisted even when

adjustedfor IQ and income level. The RD-onlygroup performed at

about the samelevel in mathematics as children withMD only and at

a lower level than TAchildren at the end of third grade.

Difficultiesin reading seem to have anegative influence on

children’s developmentin general mathematicsachievement. In

contrast, mathematicsabilities did not influence readinggrowth.

On reading measures, childrenwith RD only achieved at thesame

rate as children with MD + RDwhen IQ and income level were

heldconstant. Reading difficulties identifiedin second grade

 11

remained steadythroughout the test period, regardlessof whether

they were specific (RDonly) or general (MD + RD).Gender and

ethnicity did not predictgrowth in math or in reading.However,

income level predictedgrowth in math but not in reading.

Notsurprisingly, special services weremuch more likely to be

provided inreading than in math during secondand third grades.

Jordan et al. (2003)speculated that early reading

interventionslevel the playing field for childrenwith RD, making

income less ofa factor in primary school readinggrowth.

According to Dumont (1994) two types of learning problems

can be distinguished: a learningdisability is situated in the

child’s own cognitive development whereas the cause of a

learningdifficulty is situated outside the child or in another

problem in the child. In this study, wefocus on mathematics

learning difficulties. Or as cited by Carnine, Jitendra,

&Silbert, 1997)

“Individuals who exhibit learning difficulties may not be

intellectually impaired; rather, theirlearning problems may be

the result of an inadequate design of instruction in

curricularmaterials” (Carnine, Jitendra, &Silbert, 1997, p.3).

In the literature, no concrete numbers are reported about

the prevalence of mathematicslearning difficulties. In contrast,

the prevalence of mathematics learning disabilities isestimated

at approximately five to eight percent (Desoete, 2007; Geary,

 12

2004; Stock, Desoete,&Roeyers, 2006). Compared to the large

number of studies focusing on children withlearning disabilities,

little systematic evidence-based approaches is available about

learnerswith learning difficulties. The present study is

presented as a concrete starting point todevelop such a line of

research.

Word problems, like many other mathematical concepts, can be

solved in a variety ofdifferent ways using multiple strategies.

Montague and Applegate (2000), both universityprofessors, did a

study on 54 students of different ability levels to determine

their perceptions ofvery easy to very difficult word problems;

the pair then had the students solve the problemswhile being

timed. Montague and Applegate found that gifted students or

students with higherability used more strategies and

representations when solving word problems than lowerfunctioning

students. Their strategies for solving the word problems were

also more complexthan those students of lower ability. They also

discovered that higher ability students, whengiven a more

difficult problem, were more persistent in solving the problem.

Verschaffel, Corte, and Vierstraete (1999), from the

University of Leuven, Belgium, dida study on 99 fifth graders and

100 sixth graders with differing socioeconomic backgrounds. Oneof

the factors they looked at with word problems is how they were

interpreted. They called these1+ or 1- problems because the

 13

student had to interpret the correct answer based on the

wordingof the question. Some of the factors students had to

consider were more abstract. For example, “John’s best time to

run the 100 m is 17 seconds. How long will it take him to run 1

km?”. One might consider the fact that John could not maintain a

constant speed throughout alonger run. Another example would be

“There are 450 soldiers to be bussed to their training site.Each

bus can hold 36 soldiers. How many busses are needed?”. Exact

calculation of theword problem does not yield an answer that the

authors are looking for; in this case students needto round the

exact answer to the next larger whole number.

These types of word problems are difficult for children

because after finding an exactcalculation, they must interpret

that answer to make sense and fit the word problem. Verschaffel,

Corte, and Vierstraete (1999) also note that these word problems

can be ambiguous, addinganother level of complexity for the

student who is solving it. Also, if given as an

assignment,students may recognize the ambiguity in one word

problem and try to manipulate each answer asthey did the last,

though at times it may not be needed. This can leave struggling

studentsunsuccessful and frustrated. Research about the different

types of word problems leads one tobelieve that students can be

successful at solving word problems. There are many variables

toconsider when teaching word problems, such as the degree of

 14

difficulty due to factors such as thenumber of steps, the

strategies involved, the wording of the problem, and the

studentsinterpretation of the problem.

Haines (2000) show clearly that mechanical problems are

easier than interpretive problems, which,in turn, are easier than

constructive problems. A limited number of problems appeared on

thequestionnaire of this study, none of which were interpretive,

due to constraints on the length of thequestionnaire.

Caldwell &Goldin (1987, 1979) carried out a similar study at

junior school level (1979) andsecondary school level (1987). The

problems that they presented to schoolchildren were all word

problems categorized as concrete or abstract, and hypothetical or

factual. Concrete and abstractproblems are defined in terms of

the realism of their context, that is concrete problems are set

in arealistic context and abstract problems have no immediate

real world analogy. Hypothetical andfactual problems differ in

that factual problems simply describe a situation, while

hypotheticalproblems suggest a possible change in the situation.

According to the study of Caldwell &Goldin (1979 & 1987), the

difficulty level of a problem was measured by the number of

students who successfullysolved the problem. Further, it was

found out that abstract problems were significantlymore difficult

than concrete problems.

 15

Smith et. al (1994) measured the readability of problems on

a university statistics examination paper according to number of

words, number of clauses, and two measures of lexical density.

Lexical density is measured as the ratio of lexical words to

grammatical words, either in total, orper clause. They accorded

each problem a difficulty level by recording how many students

successfully completed the problem. They found no correlation

between the readability and difficulty level of the problems. The

findings of this project are in agreement with those of Smith et

al (1994). The readability of a word problem does not appear to

affect the difficulty level, either perceived or actual.

Threadgill-Sowder & Sowder (1982) compared the difficulty

level of problems presented in verbal format versus those

presented with detailed diagrams and minimal wording. The

difficulty level was measured by the number of students (in

junior school) successfully carrying out the problem requirement.

The results showed that students found the problems presented

almost entirely in diagrammatic form significantly easier than

those presented in verbal form only.

The studies listed above all required the students to carry

out the problems and measured difficulty by the percentage of

students solving them correctly. This study was intended to be

rather different, in that the students were not required to

complete the problems. Indeed, the students were given no

 16

opportunity to do so. Difficulty ranking was to be affected by

their perceptions of the problems alone. The students were

required to read the problems and rank the minimum order of the

perceived level of mathematical challenge represented by each

one. Individual students could therefore judge this difficulty

level in different ways, such as number of variables, expected

time required to solve the problem, the geometric shapes

involved, etc. The students were free to decide for themselves

which problems they expected to require the most cognitive effort

to solve. The problems had to be chosen very carefully,

therefore, according to strict criteria, to allow a comparison of

which characteristics of the problems affected this perceived

level of cognitive demand.

Schoenfeld (1985, 1987) suggested that good problem solvers

can be distinguished from poor problem solvers in at least five

important ways:

1. The knowledge of good problem solvers is well connected and

composed of rich schemata while that of poor problem solvers

is not.

2. Good problem solvers tend to focus their attention on

structural featum of problems while poor problem solvers

focus on more features.

 17

3. Good problem solvers are more aware than poor problem

solvers of their strengths and weaknesses as problem

solvers.

4. Good problem solvers are better than poor problem solvers at

monitoring and regulating their problem-solving efforts.

5. Good problem solvers tend to be more concerned than poor

problem solvers about obtaining "elegant" solutions to

problems.

Heller and Hungate (1985) reviewed several empirical and

theoretical analyses related to scientific problem solving and

noted that novices tend to be quite deficient with respect to

understanding or perceiving problems in terms of fundamental

principles or concepts. They cannot, or do not, construct problem

representations that arehelpful in achieving solutions. Experts

solve problems using a process of successive refinements - unless

they are dealing with a simple problem for which they can

immediately recall a specific solution method. The strategy used

by experts is to perform high-level planning and qualitative

analysis before beginning to generate equations. Novices do not

have the knowledge required to approach problems in this way, and

tend to go directly from the problem text to equations. Experts

have a large amount of domain-specific factual knowledge that is

both technically correct and well organized. Experts also have

 18

knowledge about when concepts and principles are applicable and

useful, and procedures for interpreting and applying their

factual knowledge. Novices lack in much of this knowledge, do not

have their knowledge well organized, and frequently exhibit naive

preconceptions rather than scientifically correct ideas. Experts

have repertoires of unfamiliar patterns and knowledge of problem

types and solution methods which novices have not yet developed.

Foong (1990, 1994) in her studies of pre-service teachers

who were training to be mathematics teachers found that:

1. Successful problem solvers translated the problem statement

more correctly and more exactly than those unsuccessful

problem solvers.

2. Unsuccessful problem solvers tended to attend to obvious

details, translating statement by statement without having a

global representation of the problem situation.

3. Successful problem solvers planned their solutions in more

detail before carrying them out than unsuccessful solvers,

who tended to be impulsive in executing a solution without a

complete understanding of the problem.

4. Unsuccessful problem solvers tended towards impulsive

solutions and when in difficulty they often returned to the

same incorrect method, sometimes repeatedly.

 19

5. Successful problem solvers used more metacognitive processes

which were tasked directly showing greater awareness of how

things were in the solution path and where they should be

going in the process.

6. Negative emotional expressions such as frustration and

confusion were found to be more frequent amongst the

unsuccessful problem solvers.

Lester (1994) contended that there was a general agreement

that problem difficulty is not so much a function of various task

variables such ascontent and context variables, structure

variables, syntax variables and heuristic behaviour variables as

it is of characteristics of the problem solver. Traits such as

spatial visualization, ability to attend to structural features

of problems; dispositions such as beliefs and attitudes; and

experiential background such as instructional history, and

familiarity with types of problems, seemed to be a function of

problem difficulty.

Local Literature

In accordance with Philippine national policy, mathematics

is taught in English. However, many children from poor families

 20

have little knowledge of English and it is recommended that

instruction begin “with an assumption of zero knowledge”

(Gonzales, 2006).Word problems primarily serve as a means to

apply computational skills. The curriculum documents are quite

explicit about how children should solve word problems.

Children should be able to state what is asked and what are

given, identify word clues, and specify the correct operation to

be used. For two-step problems, children are also asked for the

“hidden question”. These stringent requirements are evident not

only in textbooks but also in standardized assessments as cited

below.

Example. Word problem assessments for Grade 2 students from all public schools in one city.

As mentioned by the researches and studies done on academic

achievement of students, there areseveral factors which

significantly correlate with academic success especially in

Mathematics area. Most of these studies mentioned mental

 21

ability, attitudes of students towards mathematics and study

habits as significant factors. Other factors like personality

traits, problem-related reasons, time management, teacher’s

attitude, self-esteem, and test anxiety were also found to be

contributory factors to performance of students. The least

mentioned factor was self-concept or self-efficacy, the effects

of which were presented lengthily by Bandura (1986). Astin’s

(1993) framework has an important influence in the current study.

His explanations of the input-environment-outcome model for

studying college students are summarized below.

The input characteristics included the student’s academic

ability, mathematical ability, psychological well-being, values,

personality, self-concept, reasons for attending college, and

choice of field or major. There are other correlates of choice

of field as mentioned like age, gender, parents’ occupation and

religion.The environment characteristics included the

institutional characteristics, peer group, faculty, and

curriculum. The institutional characteristics are subdivided

into type, class and size of the institution. The peer group

involved intellectual capacity of the peer group of the students,

their self-esteem, interest, socioeconomic status, academic

preparation, as well as their values and attitudes. The faculty

characteristics was divided into morale, job satisfaction, method

of teaching, method of examining, interaction with students and

 22

other faculty members and administrators, values and behaviour.

The curriculum included such factors as written evaluation, core

areas, requirements, thesis, comprehensive examinations and

internship.

The present study concentrated on specific causes which were

grouped into student-related factors and environment- related

factors. Under the environment-related factors were the home,

teacher, and the curriculum. All these play primary or supporting

roles in the growth and development of the learners.

CHAPTER III
Research Methodology

This chapter discusses the method of research, techniques

and instruments use for data gathering.

 23

This chapter also includes a brief presentation of the

respondent’s information and other details which maybe important

to this study and may give the reader a more comprehensive view

of this research work.

Methods of Research

The researcher will use the descriptive method, which

involves fact finding with adequate interpretation. Through the

use of the descriptive method the question of “what is existing”

or “what is” describes a certain educational phenomenon that is

answered.

Descriptive research is concerned with the description of

the existing distribution of variables, as opposed to theory

building. Or, in plain language, descriptive studies focus on

answering the basic W questions: Who, what, when, where. The

fifth W, "why" falls outside of the scope of descriptive

research, that by definition must not concern itself with the

effect that one variable has on another.

Research Locale

This Study shall be conducted at Selected High Schools in

Congressional District 4 of Nueva Ecija. CD-IV has 7

Municipalities namely: Cabiao, San Isidro, Jaen, San Antonio, San

 24

Leonardo, Gen. Tinio and Peñarandawith a total Grade 7 enrolment

of 5,722.

Samples

The study will involve Grade 7 students from Selected High

Schools in Congressional District 4 of Nueva Ecija for the School

Year 2014-2015. One school per municipality will be chosen

purposively and from each school, 15 students will be chosen

based on their Mathematics’ final grade in Grade 6 to be the

respondents. This includes 5 students with 75-79 (Developing)

average, 5 students with 80-84 (Approaching Proficiency) average

and 5 students with 90 and above (Advanced) average.

Instruments

Description.The questionnaire consisting of series of word

problem solving questions will be prepared by the researcher to

gather data and information from the respondents. To strengthen

the validity of the data gathered, the researcher will also use

observations and unstructured interview which will be both

informally conducted as to avoid the stem and serious tone that

might frighten the student-respondents and thus defeat the

purpose of the study.

Validity and Reliability. To test the validity of the instrument,

the researcher ensures the appropriateness of its content. The

 25

word problems in the questionnaire were all coming from the Grade

6 Mathematics of the student-respondents. Moreover, the

researcher conducted “Test-Retest” to estimate the reliability of

the instrument. Through this, the consistency of a measure has

been evaluated over time.

Administration Mode. Paper-and-pencil questionnaire

administration, where the items are presented on paper will be

the administration mode of the instrument. Also, right after the

student-respondent finish answering the questions, interview will

be done.

The researcher will personally administer the distribution

and retrieval of the questionnaires which will be answered by the

student-respondents. He will also observe all the occurrences

before and during the test (e.g. the behavior of the students).

Then, right after the test were being answered, the researcher

will check it right away and conduct an interview to the

respondents.

Response Mode. The student-respondents will be given a 20-point

word problem solving test. The first eight item-word problems

have four choices while the last 4 problems have none. Each

student will be allotted 30 minutes to answer the test.

 26

During the test, the researcher will observe, using the

researcher’s checklist, on how the student-respondents are

performing in solving word problems.

After the test, the researcher will conduct an interview,

using the interview guide, as to determine whether the students

find difficulties or not in answering the test.

Scoring. Item numbers 1 to 8 will be given one point each per

correct answer while item numbers 9 to 12 will be given 3 points

each. For item numbers 9 to 12, the rubric below will be used in

giving score.

  3 pts 2 pts 1 pt
Important 3 2 1
Words 
Important words Important words Important words
are underlined are not all are not
or written in underlined or underlined
both the word written.  and/or the
problem and the wrong words are
question.  underlined. 
Number 3 2 1
Sentence 
The math The math The math
problem is problem is problem is not
written mostly written written. 
correctly correctly or an
including incorrect
+,-,x, / and = problem is
sign.  written. 
Answer  3 2 1

The answer to The answer is The answer is

the math correct but not wrong or not
 27

problem is labelled.  present. 

correct and
labelled. 
Strategy  3 2 1

The strategy A strategy was No strategy is

used matches used but does used. The
the problem not match the strategy does
correctly.  problem.  not match the
math problem or
the answer. 
Explanation  3 2 1

The student The student The student did

explained their explained their not explain
work.  work. The their work or
The explanation explanation is explanation
is fully NOT fully does not
correct, and correct, or correlate with
matches the does not match work. 
problem.  the problem. 

To compute the score to be given in item numbers 9 to 12,

the total score garnered for every item will be divided by five,

since there are 5 criteria in the rubric.

Moreover, to determine the level of word problem solving

competencies of the students through their scores, the following

table of equivalent will be utilized:

Score Numerical Rating Descriptive Rating

0.00-2.90 70-74 Beginning

3.00-6.30 75-79 Developing

6.40-9.60 80-84 Approaching Proficiency

9.70-12.90 85-89 Proficient

13.00-above 90-above Advanced

 28

Data Gathering Procedure

Before the actual data collection, the researcher will seek

approval from the Principals thru the Head Teachers or designated

Area Chairmen of Selected High Schools for the conduct of the

study.

After seeking approval, the researcher will now coordinate

with the Grade 7 Mathematics Teachers and seek help from them in

identifying who will be the respondents.

The researcher will now move on to the next stage of

gathering data which is the actual distribution of questionnaires

to the student-respondents. He will now then observe the behavior

of the respondents in answering the test. He will also conduct

an interview after checking it and finally, summarize the data

gathered. He will then analyze and interpret the recorded data

and describe them to identify the factors affecting the word

problem competencies of Grade 7 students and formulate policies,

intervention and remediation programs which could enhance the

skills of the students in terms of word problem solving.

Data Analysis
 29

The researcher will tallythe data gathered from the student-

respondents. The recorded observations, behaviors and results of

the interview will be interpreted and analyzed in details.

The skills shown by the student-respondents in answering the

word problems will be recorded carefully. These identified skills

will be very useful in formulating policies and programs for the

enhancement of word problem solving competencies of the student-

respondents.

However, in order for the researcher to determine the

Word Problem Competencies of Grade 7 Students in terms of

Mental/Intellectual Condition while they are answering the test,

the following table of equivalent will be utilized.

Degree of Response Verbal Verification Range

5 Very often 4.20-5.00

4 Often 3.40-4.19

3 Sometimes 2.60-3.39

2 Seldom 1.80-2.59

1 Never 1.00-1.79

The researcher will surely try his best to identify and

define clearly the factors affecting the word problem solving

competencies of Grade 7 students in the Congressional District 4

 30

of Nueva Ecija which will be used in making policies and programs

to enrich the mathematical skills of the students.