Professional Documents
Culture Documents
6-Pages-Chapter 4
6-Pages-Chapter 4
CHAPTER IV
Sub problem 1: Based on the preliminary survey, what among the different lessons
students' Response
Compensation/wages 5 25 1
and performance
evaluation/appraisal
Definition and 4 20 2
functions of
management
Delegation 1 5 4.5
VALERIANO E. FUGOSO MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL
Boys Town Complex, Parang, Marikina City
Schools Division Office of Manila
Total 20 100% 11
evaluation/appraisal” got ranked 1 with a “5” or “25” percent, while “Definition and
functions of management” got ranked 2 with a “4” or “20” percent and “The local and
Sub problem 2: In your opinion, what could be the impact of using the proposed
Management.
Encourages 12 60 1
cooperation and
Teamwork
Develops analytical 2 10 2.5
thinking skills
Develops decision 2 10 2.5
making skills
Encourage student 2 10 2.5
engagement
Enhances learning 1 5 5.5
interactions
Makes studying 1 5 5.5
convenient
Total 20 100 6
Table 4 shows the students' perception on the use of the Student-Focused Learning.
"Encourages cooperation and Teamwork" got ranked "1" with "12" or "60" percent. The
variables that followed had a rating of "2.5" with "2" or "10%," and they were "Develops
analytical thinking skills," "Develops decision making skills," and "Encourage student
Table 5, shows that the mean grade "91.7" with standard deviation "3.56" verbally
2021-2022.
VALERIANO E. FUGOSO MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL
Boys Town Complex, Parang, Marikina City
Schools Division Office of Manila
Sub problem 4: Based on the finding, what informational reading materials may
be proposed?
Frame 1 contains the procedures for the experiment, objectives, application and
Frame 2 contains the Introduction to the topic, and the main contents of the
subject.
VALERIANO E. FUGOSO MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL
Boys Town Complex, Parang, Marikina City
Schools Division Office of Manila
Sub Problem No. 6: Is there a significant difference between the pretest and
Table 15. Significant difference between the pretest and posttest results of the
student's respondents
Table 15 shows the computed t-value of “0.19” for Pre test of both Controlled and
Treatment Group verbally interpreted as “significant” for is less than the computed critical
value of 1.699127 at 0.05 level of significance. Thus, “reject null hypothesis”. This implied that
there was a significant difference from both respondents before and after .
Meanwhile, the computed t-value of “0.21” for Post test of both Controlled and
Treatment Group verbally interpreted as “significant” for is less than the computed critical
value of 1.699127 at 0.05 level of significance. Thus, “reject null hypothesis”. This implied that
there was a significant difference from both respondents before and after .