LEARNING STYLES AND MOTIVATION IN LEARNING MATH-SPECIALIZED

STEM SUBJECTS AMONG GRADE 11 STEM STUDENTS IN MINDANAO

STATE UNIVERSITY-GENERAL SANTOS CITY

A Research Paper presented to

Senior High School
Mindanao State University
General Santos City

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements
In Practical Research 2

by

BERNADETTE DIANE A. DURIAS

ANIKA SOPHIA A. MILLADO
CLYNTH FELIX G. DELFINO
CRESARDO L. III MORENO
ANNA FAYE M. SAULON
JEDRICK J. RELATOR
RANIA S. ZACARIA

July 2023
 ABSTRACT

Among Filipino students, mathematics is regarded as one of the most

challenging subject. Any STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics) topic requires it. STEM students frequently face challenges in
keeping up with class due to difficulties with their math specialized subjects.
Students must have a good mathematical foundation in order to thrive in STEM
fields and make STEM-related topics meaningful in their daily life. However, not all
students are motivated to participate in mathematics-related coursework or
activities. This study aimed to determine the learning styles and level of motivation
in learning math-specialized STEM subjects of Grade 11 STEM students. The
study also assessed whether there is a significant difference in the level of
motivation in learning Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus of visual, aural, read/write,
kinesthetic, and multimodal learners. Data was gathered from 146 respondents
who were identified as Grade 11 STEM students and completed the study’s final
survey at Mindanao State University - General Santos City Senior High School.
The data were analyzed using weighted mean and one-way ANOVA. The study
found that out of the total 146 students surveyed, the majority (74, 50.68%) of the
students were multimodal learners, 49 (33.56%) were kinesthetic learners, 12
(8.22%) were aural learners, 6 (4.11%) were visual learners, and 5 (3.42%) were
read/write learners. Moreover, the study revealed that the level of motivation in
learning math-specialized STEM subjects among Grade 11 students was
moderate. Using the Kruskal Wallis test, the results reveals that the student’s level
of motivation towards Pre-Calculus and Basic Calculus do not differ across
learning styles. Hence, failing to reject the null hypotheses, there is no significant
difference in the level of motivation in learning math-specialized STEM subjects of
visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners.

Keywords: STEM students, learning styles, VARK, motivation in math, level of

motivation, Pre-calculus, Basic Calculus, expectancy-value theory

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researchers would like to express their heartfelt gratitude to all the

individuals who have contributed to the success of this study. Without their support

and assistance, this research would not have been possible.

First and foremost, the researchers would like to thank the Almighty God

for his guidance, enlightenment, and protection throughout the study, ensuring the

safety and well-being of everyone involved.

To the Research Project adviser, Mr. Ralph Laurence Valdueza, LPT, for

his unwavering patience and dedication in sharing his knowledge on the structural

and technical aspects of the study.

To the statistician, Ms. Bleziel E. Plomillo, LPT, for generously sharing her

time, skills, and profound knowledge in applying statistical treatment to the

collected data.

To the Grade 11 STEM Class Advisers, who provided the official class list,

enabling the researchers to conduct random sampling of respondents.

To the respondents, the Grade 11 STEM Students of Mindanao State

University-General Santos City, who willingly participated in the study and

generously shared their time. Their cooperation greatly contributed to the

research's success.

To the Panel of Examiners, Mr. Ralph Laurence Valdueza, LPT, and Ms.

Bleziel E. Plomillo, LPT, for their constructive criticism and invaluable feedback

throughout the entire process, enabling the researchers to enhance the quality of

this study.

iii
 To the Senior High School Directress, Mrs. Jean D. Bergante, MS, for her

kind support and permission to conduct the study among the Grade 11 STEM

students at Mindanao State University-General Santos City.

Lastly, to the researchers’ parents, for their continuous support and

encouragement throughout this study. Their efforts and assistance were highly

appreciated.

The Researchers

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
TITLE PAGE i
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF APPENDICES ix

CHAPTER
I THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 3
1.3 Hypotheses of the Study 4
1.4 Theoretical Framework 5
1.5 Conceptual Framework 7
1.6 Scope and Delimitation 8
1.7 Significance of the Study 9
1.8 Definition of Terms 11

II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES 14

2.1 Related Literature 14
2.1.1 Learning Styles 14
2.1.2 VARK Learning Style Model 15
2.1.3 Students’ Motivation in Math 24
Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of
2.1.4 26
Motivation
2.2 Related Studies 31
2.3 Synthesis 39

III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 41

3.1 Research Design 41
3.2 Research Locale 43
3.3 Research Respondents 43
3.4 Research Instrument 45
3.5 Data Gathering Procedure 47
3.6 Statistical Treatment 49

v
 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION
IV 52
OF DATA

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

V 58
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary 58
5.2 Findings 59
5.3 Conclusions 61
5.4 Recommendations 63

REFERENCES 65
CURRICULUM VITAE 88

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Distribution of Respondents 44

2 The Learning Style of the Grade 11 STEM Students in 52

Mindanao State University

3 The Level of Students’ Motivation in their Pre-calculus 53

and Basic Calculus Subjects

Kruskal- Wallis Test Result on the Difference in the

4 Level of Motivation towards Pre-Calculus Across 55
Learning Styles

Kruskal- Wallis Test Result on the Difference in the

5 Level of Motivation towards Basic Calculus Across 56
Learning Styles

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1 VARK Learning Style Model 5
2 Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of Motivation 6
3 Conceptual Framework 8
4 Research Design 42
5 Data Gathering Procedure 47

viii
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page
A Letter to the Senior High School Director 70
B Letter to the Respondents 71
C Survey Questionnaire 72
D Statistician’s Certification 77

E Frequency Of Responses for The Level of Motivation 78

in Learning Math-Specialized Stem Subjects

F Statistical Computations 80
G Documentation 86

ix
 CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

This chapter consists of the introduction, statement of the problem,

hypotheses of the study, theoretical framework, conceptual framework, scope and

delimitations, significance of the study, and definition of terms.

INTRODUCTION

Mathematics, in the present day, plays an important role in people's daily

lives and in society. It has become a vital component of the advancement of

modern civilization. It is significant to humans since it guides them in becoming

more practical. It also improves their analytical and logical reasoning skills.

Mathematics can also help us understand the world's deeper complexities, such

as natural patterns, social processes, and economic systems (Rayan, 2019). In

addition, math is used in a variety of fields, including engineering, architecture,

medicine, and finance. It enables people to make fact-based decisions (Abigail,

2022).

Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus are one of the specialized subjects under

the Grade 11 STEM learning strand. The Pre-calculus course fills the gap between

Basic Mathematics and Calculus. This course completes students' core

understanding in Algebra, Geometry, and Trigonometry. It equips the students with

conceptual knowledge and computational skills necessary for Basic Calculus and

other STEM courses (Contributor, 2019).

1
 Ilçin et al. (2018) explored that a person's preferred method of processing

new information for efficient learning is referred to as their learning style.

Understanding learning styles can drive students to participate in these programs

and obtain professional knowledge. Learning style refers to how pupils learn as

opposed to what they learn. (Ilçin et al., 2018). The learner can be categorized as

unimodal if they are showing a predominance of one learning preference and

multimodal if they are showing a predominance of two, three, or four learning

styles, respectively based on individual preferences, including in teaching the most

common learning styles (Bangladesh Journal of Medical Education, 2019). The

four most common learning styles are visual, auditory, read/write, and kinesthetic.

Visual learning is when students learn by sight and comprehend information better

when it is given visually. Auditory learning occurs when the topic content is

reinforced by sound. They prefer to hear a lecture rather than study written notes,

and they frequently utilize their own voices to reinforce new concepts and ideas.

Reading/writing learners prefer to learn through written words. These learners are

drawn to expression through writing, reading articles or books, writing in journals,

looking up terms in dictionaries, and surfing the internet for almost anything.

Kinesthetic learners learn by doing or feeling things. They enjoy being involved in

acting out events or touching and handling concepts with their hands (Malvik,

2020).

According to studies, factors including teaching styles, have an impact on

not only achievement but also numerous facets of motivation (Ghaedi & Jam,

2014). Research also shows that the field of mathematics education, which views

2
motivation as a desirable outcome and a way to improve understanding, reflects

the significance of student motivation (Pantziara & Philippou, 2015).

There is a lack of study conducting a comparative analysis on the learning

styles and the level of students’ motivation in learning math-specialized for

Mindanao State University General Santos City STEM (Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics students) students. The proposed research

attempts to determine the learning styles of the students that contribute to their

level of motivation. Furthermore, the result of this research is expected to help

students address areas regarding this matter and understand how their learning

styles influence their motivation to learn math-specialized subjects such as Pre-

calculus and Basic Calculus.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Generally, this study aims to assess and compare the level of motivation in

learning math-specialized STEM subjects of Grade 11 STEM students in

Mindanao State University-General Santos City in terms of their learning styles.

Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the learning style of the students given the categories listed below:

1.1. visual;

1.2. aural;

1.3. read/write;

1.4. kinesthetic; and

1.5. multimodal?

1.5.1. bimodal;

3
 1.5.2. trimodal; or

1.5.3. quad modal?

2. What is the level of students’ motivation in their Pre-calculus and Basic

Calculus subjects in terms of:

2.1. expectancy;

2.2. value; and

2.3. cost?

3. Is there a significant difference in the level of motivation towards Pre-calculus

among visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners?

4. Is there a significant difference in the level of motivation towards Basic

Calculus among visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal

learners?

HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

The following hypotheses will be tested in this study:

1. H0: There is no significant difference in the level of motivation in learning

Pre-calculus of visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners.

2. H0: There is no significant difference in the level of motivation in learning

Basic Calculus of visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners.

4
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

1. VARK Learning Style Model

Figure 1. VARK Learning Style Model

Determining the learning styles of the students is crucial to this study. Many

models have been proposed and created to explain students' needs for learning,

such as David Kolb’s Experiential Learning, Felder-Silverman’s Index of Learning

Styles, the Grasha-Riechman Learning Styles Inventory, and many more. In this

study, the VARK model introduced by Flemming will be used to assess and identify

the learning styles of the students. Rather than anticipating students' learning

abilities through a personality assessment, Boatman (2008) contends that the

VARK inventory directly examines how students prefer to learn, making it a useful

tool for determining learning style. Additionally, “it is one of the most common and

widely-used categorizations of learning styles. This model provides a simple way

to explain and understand learning styles” (The Peak Performance Center, 2017).

5
 Learning styles are not limited to one. A student can have two, three, or

even four preferred learning styles. According to VARK Learn Limited (2023),

those who do not have a standout mode with one preference score well above

other scores are defined as multimodal. A multimodal learner is classified into

bimodal, trimodal or quad modal. Being a bimodal learner means that a student

has two preferred learning styles (e.g., VA, VR, VK, AR, AK, and RK). While a

trimodal learner has three preferred learning styles (e.g., VAR, VAK, VRK, and

ARK). Lastly, a quad modal learner prefers four or all of the learning styles under

the VARK construct (e.g., VARK).

2. Expectancy-Value Theory

Figure 2. Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of Motivation

A significant variable in students' academic achievement and engagement

is their motivation to learn (Getty, Hullleman, Barron, Ruzek, Flake, & Foley, 2017).

According to this theory of motivation, a student's expectation of success in a task

or the accomplishment of a goal should be compared to the importance of

completing the work or achieving the goal (OSU Motivation in Classrooms Lab,

2022). To assess the level of motivation of students, the revised Expectancy-

Value-Cost model of motivation will be used as the theoretical underpinning of the

6
study. In Barron & Hulleman’s revised Expectancy-Value-Cost model, they added

a third component, which is “cost”, that will also determine the student’s motivated

behavior. Prior Expectancy-Value models theorize that cost is a sub-component,

but as stated by Wigfield & Camba (2010), previous empirical research has mostly

neglected this. Barron & Hulleman (2015) wants to “highlight the additional role

that the cost of engaging in an activity plays in influencing motivation.” According

to their study, current research has also shown the value of including cost in the

framework for motivation, as it will help to have a better grasp of the challenges

faced by those who lack motivation.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The following figure shows the study’s independent and dependent

variable. The independent variable of the study is the students’ learning styles.

Based on the VARK learning style model, it has four types: visual, aural, read/write,

and kinesthetic. There are instances that a student might prefer multiple learning

styles; they are referred to as multimodal learners. On the other hand, the

dependent variable of the study is the students’ motivation in learning math-

specialized STEM subjects which will be measured in terms of expectancy, value,

and cost.

In this study, the relationship of these variables will be investigated in order

to observe whether the learning styles will affect the level of students’ motivation

in learning math-specialized STEM subjects.

7
 Figure 3. Conceptual Framework

SCOPE AND DELIMITATION

This study aims to assess and compare the level of motivation in learning

math-specialized STEM subjects of visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic and

multimodal learners. The selected respondents will be the Grade 11 STEM

students of Mindanao State University - General Santos City who are officially

enrolled in the school year 2022-2023. The researchers aim to gather one hundred

forty-nine (149) responses among Grade 11 STEM students from the sections:

Ganymede, Titan, Callisto, Io, and Luna. The study will use quantitative research

methods, particularly a survey questionnaire, to gather and analyze data from the

sample respondents. The learning styles of students are limited to visual, aural,

read/ write and kinesthetic which are constructs of the VARK model; while the level

of students’ motivation is limited to expectancy, value, and cost specifically about

in learning math-specialized STEM subjects, namely, Pre-calculus and Basic

Calculus. It will be conducted on May xx, 2023.

8
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The significance of this study is to examine the connection between

students' motivation to learn math-specific STEM (Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics) subjects and their preferred learning styles. This

study aims to add to the body of knowledge on how students' learning preferences

impact their motivation to learn math-related STEM subjects. This may be

significant to the following:

● To the students: Understanding the relationship between learning styles

and motivation can help students identify their own learning preferences

and how to stay motivated while learning math-specialized STEM subjects.

● To the teachers: The results of the study can aid educators in better

understanding the effects that various learning styles may have on students'

motivation to study math and other specialized STEM subjects. This

information can be used to create instructional strategies that accommodate

different learning styles and raise student engagement.

● To the parents: The study can help parents understand how their children

learn and what inspires them to pursue STEM disciplines with a strong math

component. Parents may improve their child's academic performance and

overall learning experience by providing help and resources that are suited

to their particular needs by understanding their child's learning style and

motivation.

● To the curriculum developers: The study's findings can provide insight

into how learning styles and motivation should be taken into account when

9
 designing a curriculum for math-specialized STEM subjects. This

knowledge can help ensure that educational materials are engaging and

effective for all students.

● To the school policy-makers: The study's conclusions can help guide

decisions about funding education programs for STEM fields with a strong

math component. With this information, policies and funding decisions can

be made to support teaching strategies that encourage academic success

and student engagement.

● To the researchers: The study can add to the body of knowledge on

motivation and learning styles in STEM education. The study's conclusions

can be used to build novel teaching strategies, curricula, and interventions

that improve students' learning results in STEM fields with a strong math

component. The study's conclusion can be a contribution to other

researchers' related literature if they have the same study. This may

eventually result in an improvement in STEM education and the growth of

a more knowledgeable and capable STEM workforce.

● To the future researchers: This study can contribute to the existing

literature on learning styles and motivation in STEM education. The findings

of this study can inspire further research on this topic, and may lead to the

development of new teaching practices and strategies that enhance student

learning outcomes in math specialized STEM subjects.

10
DEFINITION OF TERMS

The following terms used in the study are defined conceptually and/or

operationally to ensure clarity and better understanding.

Aural refers to a factor that pertains to hearing or to the auditory system in

some manner (Psychology Dictionary, 2013). Operationally, it refers to the learning

style of students from the VARK Learning Style Model that involves remembering

given information by perception of sounds through hearing.

Basic Calculus is a course in mathematics that refers to the study of

change (Russel, 2020). This course focuses on the study of limits and functions.

Basic calculus analyzes functions by utilizing limits, sequences, series, derivatives,

differentials, and integrals.

Bimodal learners refer to individuals that combine two different

approaches in effective learning. Operationally, it refers to students that utilizes

two different learning styles that includes: visual, aural, read/write, or kinesthetic.

Cost refers to the amount or equivalent paid in exchange for something.

Operationally, cost refers to the expectancy-value motivation theory that indicates

the time and circumstances that students omit for another task.

Expectancy relates to the act or state of expecting. Operationally, it refers

to the expectancy-value motivation theory that describe the students’ perception

or expectation for upcoming academic outcomes through evaluating their past

experiences or accomplishments.

11
 Kinesthetic pertains to the perception of body movements (Cherry, 2022).

Operationally, it refers to the learning style of students from the VARK Learning

Style Model that utilizes hands-on experience to better absorb information.

Learning Styles refer to the concept that individuals differ in regard to what

mode of instruction or study is most effective for them (Pashler et al., 2008).

Multimodal learners refer to a person that learns through multiple sensory

systems and action systems (Massaro, 2012). Operationally, a multimodal learner

refers to a student that engages in multiple learning styles: visual, aural, read/write,

and kinesthetic; this can be classified into: bimodal, trimodal, or quad modal.

Pre-calculus is an algebra and trigonometry-centric mathematics course

that prepares students for the study of calculus.

Quad modal learners refer to individuals that use four different approaches

in learning. Operationally, it refers to students that have a preference of four

different learning styles, consisting of: visual, aural, read/write, or kinesthetic.

Read/Write pertains to the act of comprehending and composing words.

Operationally, read/write refers to the learning style of students from the VARK

Learning Style Model which rely on reading and writing of information as a learning

strategy.

Student Motivation refers to the reason behind one’s actions or the drive

that pushes someone to do something. Operationally, it refers to the level of

students’ motivation based on the expectancy-value theory.

Trimodal learners pertain to individuals that have three different

approaches in learning. Operationally, it refers to students that have a combined

12
preference that consists of three learning styles. It can either be visual, aural,

read/write, or kinesthetic.

Unimodal learners refer to a person that has a single approach in learning.

Operationally, a unimodal learner refers to a student that engages in a single

learning style that can either be: visual, aural, read/write, or kinesthetic.

Value pertains to the importance or worth of something. Operationally, it

pertains to the expectancy-value motivation theory that indicates one’s reason for

performing an activity based on how important, enjoyable, and useful it is for them.

VARK is a model theorized by Neil Fleming that determines the different

learning styles. The VARK learning style model is divided into four categories:

visual, aural, read/write, and kinesthetic.

Visual refers to seeing or sight. Operationally, it refers to the learning style

of students from the VARK learning style model that utilizes pictures, illustrations,

and graphic displays as a tool to learn.

13
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents a variety of studies and literature related to the

investigation at hand. Additionally, the study's research synthesis is provided here.

RELATED LITERATURE

This section consists of four parts, namely: 1) Learning Styles; 2) VARK

Learning Style Model; 3) Students’ Motivation; and 4) Expectancy-Value-Cost

Model of Motivation.

Learning Styles

The preferred method a person uses to process new information in order to

learn well is referred to as learning style. According to Rita Dunn, a student's

learning style is "a unique way developed by students when he/she was learning

new and difficult knowledge". Instead of focusing on what kids learn, learning style

considers how they learn. Each person's learning process is unique, and even

within the same educational setting, not all students learn at the same pace or

quality. There are many different learning styles, which people can use when

learning (Ilçin et al., 2018). Learning styles are important because they can assist

many people, including students, educators, professionals, and learning and

development specialists, in better understanding the specific modalities that can

help learners receive information most successfully (Indeed Editorial Team, 2022).

Recognizing students' individual learning styles in a classroom setting is an

important aspect of developing students' awareness of alternative methods of

14
approaching learning experiences. They also claim that instructors are free to

present a class in ways that match their own learning style. This technique of

instruction may not correspond to a student's learning style and may be

disadvantageous to the student. If a teacher just employs a learning style that is

dissimilar to the preferred learning style of a student, the lesson is likely to be

rejected or opposed by that student. Learning one's own distinct learning style may

enhance student motivation and keep them actively involved in the learning

process (Jerome, 2012).

VARK Learning Style Model

The VARK Learning Style model, developed by Neil Fleming, suggests that

individuals possess unique preferences for how they receive and process

information. This model identifies four primary learning modalities or channels:

visual, aural, read/write, and kinesthetic. According to Khongpit et al. (2018), the

VARK model focuses on understanding learners' abilities and motivates them

through tailored content and activities. Chouhan et al. (2022) also highlight its

value as a tool for educators and students to identify learning style preferences.

By recognizing their preferred mode of learning, both students and teachers can

adapt their behaviors to personalize the learning and teaching process.

Additionally, an educational article by David L. Reese, Considering VARK

Modalities to Support Personalized Learning, explains that teachers can utilize the

VARK model to plan and facilitate student learning based on individual learning

styles. This approach assists students in comprehending their preferred learning

15
style and optimizing their learning by emphasizing the mode that benefits them the

most.

The VARK model offers learners the necessary flexibility to adapt to various

learning environments. It promotes effective learning by providing individuals with

personalized experiences in acquiring new knowledge or information. Harappa

(2021) supports this perspective, stating that different learning tools within the

VARK framework stimulate learners and enhance engagement. This aligns with

views from Othman and Amiruddin (2010), as cited by Chakravarty et al. (2022),

which considers VARK as an individualized approach that fosters the acquisition

of knowledge, positive skills, and attitudes, thereby creating an engaging learning

environment that stimulates students' senses. This can lead to increased

motivation and improved learning outcomes.

This is significant in education as it facilitates personalized learning, enables

tailored instructional strategies, and creates an engaging learning environment

that caters to individual learning preferences. Additionally, it emphasizes that

students can learn effectively when the teaching methods align with their individual

preferences and learning styles (Shah et al., 2013).

Visual Learning Style

Visual learning style is defined as comprehending information through

visual aids like charts, graphs, diagrams, and maps. Learners are more aware of

their surroundings and spatial orientation (Fleming, n.d.). Chouhan et al. (2022)

16
also emphasize that students often favor visual aids such as graphs, figures,

diagrams, handouts, and maps to receive information.

According to Othman & Amiruddin (2010), visual learners benefit from

demonstrations and descriptive materials in their learning process. They have a

tendency to explain concepts to others by drawing figures or pictures (Murphy et

al., 2004; Othman & Amiruddin, 2010). In the VARK learning style, students excel

when information is presented visually or graphically to acquire new knowledge

(Harappa, 2021). Visual learners possess unique characteristics that influence

their learning style, including their ability to quickly process and retain information.

They tend to excel when provided with strategies and methods that cater to their

visual learning preference (Bay Atlantic University, 2022).

Aural Learning Style

According to Eads (2022), aural learning style refers to a preference for

learning through listening, with individuals retaining information better when it is

presented audibly rather than in written form. This style encompasses various

auditory elements such as music, tone, rhythm, rhyme, internal dialogue, and a

strong voice (DePorter, 1999; Syofyan & Siwi, 2018).

Fleming suggests that individuals who favor aural learning excel when

information is conveyed through listening and speaking. They possess strong

auditory processing abilities and often have a good memory for information they

have heard. These learners prefer spoken or heard information and thrive in

environments that involve discussion, oral feedback, email, cellphone chat, texting,

17
discussion boards, oral presentations, classes, tutorials, and interpersonal

communication with peers and instructors. Harappa (2021) also supports this

viewpoint, emphasizing the benefits of group discussions and verbal sharing of

ideas for auditory learners.

Galagan et al. (2010) further assert that aural learners perform well in

lecture-based learning settings and are drawn to interactive activities that involve

speaking and listening. Eads (2022) reinforces the idea that learners with an

auditory modality primarily rely on speaking and listening as their primary channels

for learning. Overall, aural learners process and acquire knowledge by actively

listening to information, taking into account aspects such as pitch, emphasis, and

speed. The Auditory Learning Style, as described by David Reese, caters to

individuals who learn most effectively through hearing or speaking.

Read/Write Learning Style

The read/write learning style is characterized by a preference for learning

through reading and writing activities, such as using textbooks and taking notes.

Individuals with this style exhibit a strong inclination toward printed words and note-

taking as their primary methods of acquiring information (Draco & Wagner, 2004;

Othman & Amiruddin, 2010). According to Chouhan et al. (2022), optimal learning

outcomes for individuals with a read/write learning style are achieved through

reading course materials and actively taking notes during lectures. These learners

may also benefit from strategies such as summarizing and organizing information

in written form (Pashler et al., 2008).

18
 In terms of information preference, individuals with this style favor written

text. They prefer taking notes and rely on reading them to comprehend information

during discussions or meetings (Harappa, 2021). This preference for written

information is often observed among academics and high-achieving learners who

place a strong emphasis on language precision and utilize quotes, lists, texts,

books, and manuals in their learning process (Hemming, 2022).

Kinesthetic Learning Style

The kinesthetic learning style is characterized by a preference for

experiential and hands-on learning, as described by Flemming. Kinesthetic

learners rely on their physical senses such as touch, sight, and hearing, to acquire

knowledge. They have a natural inclination towards learning through physical

movement, practical projects, and real-life experiences, often incorporating text

and graphics into their hands-on assignments (Larry & Marie, 2005; Othman &

Amiruddin, 2010).

According to Silverthorn and Thorn (2012), the use of gestures during

learning can be beneficial for kinesthetic learners as it enhances their

understanding and recall abilities. To optimize the learning experience, learners

benefit from engaging in real-life examples that emphasize practical application

and active participation (Shah et al., 2013). Their strengths lie in tasks that involve

active exploration, movement, testing, and experimentation (Bay Atlantic

University, 2022). Furthermore, the preference for interactive experiences among

kinesthetic learners stems from their ability to sense position and movement,

contributing to their understanding and retention of information (Harappa, 2021).

19
Multimodal Learning Style

Multimodal learning has gained prominence as a pedagogical approach that

integrates various modes of representation and engagement in the learning

process. Blikstein (2013) proposed multimodal learning analytics to support

learning by analyzing data from various modalities such as visual, audio, and

gesture. Sankey et al. (2010) emphasized the importance of creating multimodal

learning environments that encourage students to participate in active and

collaborative learning. In addition, Massaro (2012) discussed how using different

sensory channels improves cognitive processing and memory retention.

The idea of multimodal learning is supported by Massaro (2012), who states

that the use of multiple sensory modalities can facilitate the processing and

retention of information. Ojeh et al. (2017) conducted a study on medical students

and found that a majority of the participants preferred multimodal learning styles.

Aldosari et al. (2018) utilized the VARK questionnaire to investigate the learning

style preferences of dental students in Saudi Arabia and discovered that the

majority of the students preferred multimodal learning.

Since students have diverse learning preferences, which can influence their

performance and retention of knowledge, employing the VARK modalities can be

beneficial in planning instructional strategies and designing learning experiences

that support a multimodal classroom and encourage personalized learning (Reese,

n.d.).

20
Bimodal Learning

Bimodal learning is a learning style in which two modes of learning

are used. Several studies have been conducted to investigate the

connection between bimodal learning styles and academic performance.

Febrina and Hali (2020) examined the mathematical problem-solving ability

of students based on their learning styles. The study found that students

with bimodal learning styles had a higher mathematical problem-solving

ability than those with unimodal learning styles. The authors suggested that

educators should use teaching methods that cater to different learning

styles to enhance students' problem-solving skills.

Almigbal (2015) investigated the relationship between learning style

preferences and academic achievement among medical students. The

study found that very few students preferred the bimodal learning style.

Similarly, Singh et al. (2015), found that only a significant proportion of

medical students preferred a bimodal learning style. Rusnayati and Putri

(2022) investigated the relationship between bimodal learning styles and

student learning outcomes in the areas of work and energy. The study has

not found any statistical relationship between bimodal learning styles and

learning outcomes.

Trimodal Learning

Trimodal learning refers to a learning approach that combines three

different modes of learning. Daud et al. (2014) studied the learning styles of

medical students and found that most preferred the visual and kinesthetic

21
learning styles. In addition, Asiry (2016) examined the learning styles of

dental students and also found that visual learners performed better than

auditory learners. Certain learning styles were associated with better

academic performance (Karalliyada, 2017).

Febrina and Hali (2020) found that students' mathematical problem-

solving ability varied depending on their learning style preferences.

Widharyanto and Binawan (2020) studied the relationship between learning

styles and language learning strategies and found that there was a

significant correlation between the two variables. Mohamed et al. (2015)

compared the learning styles of medical students in preclinical and clinical

years, and found that there were significant differences in their learning

styles.

The research shows that there is a relationship between learning

styles and academic performance. Some studies show a positive

relationship between certain learning styles and academic performance,

while others do not. However, identifying one's learning style can assist

students in developing effective learning strategies that fit their specific

needs.

Quad modal Learning

Quad modal learning refers to the use of four different learning styles:

visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and reading/writing. The aim is to engage

students through a variety of modalities, allowing them to learn in ways that

22
best suit their preferences. Incorporating quadmodal learning into the

curriculum could improve student engagement and academic performance

(Metgud et al., 2021).

Blikstein (2013) suggests that incorporating multiple modalities in

learning can help identify students' learning strengths and weaknesses, and

also personalize their learning experience. In addition, incorporating

multiple modalities in learning helped students develop a deeper

understanding of the content and improved their retention of information

(Sankey et al., 2010).

According to Febrina and Hali (2020), students who preferred visual

and kinesthetic learning styles had higher mathematical problem-solving

abilities compared to those who preferred auditory and reading/writing

styles. This suggests that quad modal learning could be an effective way to

teach mathematics, as it incorporates all four learning styles. In contrast,

Massaro (2012) argued that multimodal learning does not necessarily lead

to better learning outcomes, and the effectiveness of different modalities of

learning depends on the individual learner and the context in which learning

takes place.

Studies exploring the effectiveness of incorporating multiple

modalities in learning suggest that it can be beneficial for enhancing student

learning outcomes. However, the effectiveness of various modes of learning

23
 may vary depending on the individual learner and the context in which

learning occurs.

Students’ Motivation in Math

Borderless Charity, Inc (2017) specified that students get motivated in a

variety of ways, “especially when it comes to acquiring knowledge and achieving

academic performance.” Some students may prefer to participate in class activities

or discussions while others may find that studying by themselves or in a quiet

environment, such as the library, is the most effective. Others may, however, be

more interested in sports, extracurricular activities, or social work (Borderless

Charity, Inc, 2017). Student motivation is referred to the energy, force, and/or

desire that pushes students to carry out certain actions (Kalyar & Ahmad, 2018).

This is the key factor in determining one’s success in academic performance. As

stated by Andersen (2016), a person is said to be successful in learning if he or

she has the will to learn, or what you may refer to as "motivation."

Seyedaliyan & Salehi (2021) state that one of the challenges facing the area

of education today is the decrease in students' motivation to learn, particularly in

mathematics subjects. It's widely acknowledged that teaching in this field of study

is a challenging task. In learning calculus, a branch of mathematics, many students

question why they should learn it and how it would help them in their future careers

once they graduate (Mokhtar et al., 2013). Since mathematics is renowned for

having challenging and boring topics, it makes students unmotivated and

uninterested in learning this (Kusuma et al., 2022; Mokhtar et al, 2013). Based on

Sinaga's (2022) field observations on learning mathematics, less motivated

24
students were discovered to be "preoccupied with other things that cause students

not to focus on learning," and when asked to complete assignments, they failed to

do so for a variety of reasons, including being "too lazy to study." Sinaga (2022)

concluded that this occurred because the students lacked the motivation to learn.

Using teaching aids and information technology in the classroom to teach

mathematics improves students' learning process and achievement in the subject

by "facilitating the transfer of lessons, improving the learning process and its

sustainability, enhancing learning motivation, improving the grades, and improving

problem-solving skills" (Seyedaliyan & Salehi, 2021). On top of that, Sumarigayani

et al. (2022) implied that video lessons can be used to boost the motivation of

pupils to learn integral calculus. According to their research, eight indicators—

concentration, curiosity, spirit, independence, readiness, enthusiasm, never give

up, and self-confidence—is used to assess students' learning motivation while

using video lessons to teach integral calculus.

According to the findings of the article by Kiliç et al., Motivation in the

classroom, one of the factors affecting student motivation are the “learning &

teaching factor”. Learning & teaching factor, was divided into sub-themes for

further explanation. This were support, encouragement, setting goals, focusing on

success, feeling of trust, positive class culture and feeling valued. It is said that the

findings were similar to other research results. For instance, as stated by Kiliç et

al. (2021), “It has been revealed that students' focusing on the goal has a great

effect on achievement and that teacher-student communication is among the

important factors affecting student motivation.” They also showed a similar study

25
by Brewer & Burgess (2005), wherein it is stated that by having a flexible planning

process, promoting participation in the course, creating a welcoming learning

environment, and establishing the course objectives will have a positive impact on

student’s motivation.

Motivation is a very important factor in determining one’s academic

success. That’s why it is very important for teachers to be aware of what increases

and decreases their students’ motivation, they play a crucial role in a student’s

progress. Additionally, it is considered that family support is also essential (Kiliç et

al., 2021).

Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of Motivation

The expectancy-value-cost (EVC) model of motivation is an instrument

designed to measure one’s motivation. The components of motivation;

expectancy, value, and cost respectively have unique roles in affecting a person’s

motivation. Expectancy is a person’s confidence in succeeding in a task, value

being the task’s purpose, and cost as the factor that prevents a person from doing

a task (Barron & Hulleman, 2014). Originally, cost was only theorized in the original

expectancy-value model and was not studied any further (Getty et al., 2017; Barron

& Hulleman, 2015; Wigfield & Cambria, 2010); but as researchers delve further

into the topic, they have suggested that cost has a major part in influencing one’s

motivation. In the study “A Rapid Measure of Student Motivation – Using an

Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of Motivation to Understand Student Achievement

and Future Interest in STEM Classrooms” by Getty, Hulleman, Barron, Ruzek,

Flake, & Foley (2017) where they developed a new motivation instrument based

26
on the original expectancy-value theory (EVT) model of motivation, their study

proved that cost is an independent motivation factor, along with the expectancy

and value factors.

The study “An expectancy-value-cost approach in predicting adolescent

students’ academic motivation and achievement'' conducted by Jiang,

Rosenzweig, and Gaspard (2018) investigated the benefits of using an

expectancy-value-cost approach in predicting students’ academic motivation and

achievement in math which highlighted the importance of using expectancy, value,

and cost in predicting educational outcomes, and also gave extra notice about cost

as a motivational factor. This study suggested that cost is stronger than value when

it comes to predicting academic outcomes in mathematics, and self-efficacy

(expectancy) is a stronger predictor than other motivation variables. Lastly, this

study confirmed that expectancy, value, and cost can indeed predict students’

educational outcomes in addition to their overall levels (Jiang et al., 2018).

Finding which variable of motivation is closely related towards mathematics

is important to aid the mathematics planning process (Yurt & Eyup, 2015).

According to the study “Understanding Middle School Students’ Motivation in Math

Class: The Expectancy Value Model Perspective” by Yurp & Eyup (2015),

expectancy beliefs, task difficulty and intrinsic interest value were the most

effective variables on mathematics performance. The results of the study also

suggested that students that have a high expectancy score often deal with lesser

difficulties in studying mathematics, and are more likely to perform well or have a

higher mathematics achievement.

27
 As stated in “An Expectancy-Value Approach to Math Underachievement:

Examining High School Achievement, College Attendance, and STEM Interest”

written by Fong & Kremer (2019), motivation in the mathematics subject measured

by expectancy and value has an association with students’ underachievement.

Some of their findings read that value stands as a negative predictor of

underachievement. This means value is associated with math underachievement

based on how a student has incorporated a domain like “mathematics” into their

identity. It is explained that when a student views mathematics as important to their

identity, it is less likely that they will underachieve in mathematics (Fong & Kremer,

2019). The other finding follows, showing the intrinsic interaction between

expectancy and value. It is shown that the math intrinsic value of those students

who have low self-efficacy in math are more likely to negatively influence a

student’s achievement; meanwhile, it is stated that students who value math have

lower levels of underachievement in contrast to students who have lower levels of

intrinsic value. It is suggested that math underachievers’ performance are most

likely influenced by their intrinsic interests on the subject.

The studies stated above offer varied findings and results based on the

intended problems; however, they all share the similar viewpoints when it comes

to the original and current model of motivation: they heavily influence the academic

performance of an individual, each variables have unique effects that affect each

other when it comes to the respective variables and the overall motivation as a

whole, the studies also show that each variables are effective predictors in

mathematics achievements.

28
The Expectancy Component

Expectancy is one of the factors of the Expectancy-Value-Cost (EVC) model

of motivation parallel to value and cost. Expectancy is a belief that one possesses

when faced with the feeling of whether one can be successful in accomplishing a

task (Spott, 2022). Two dimensions of expectancy include ability beliefs and

expectancy beliefs. Ability beliefs refer to what students think about what they can

do in the present, while expectancy beliefs pertain to what students think they can

do in the future (Getty et al., 2018).

The Value Component

Value refers to the perceived importance of partaking in activities or

performing tasks (Expectancy-Value Theory, 2023). Value is a crucial part on

determining if a task can be done successfully or not. Giving higher values or

perceiving something as important helps with accomplishing a task as it gives the

person greater motivation and encourages them to finish what they started. As

stated by Feather (1992), values serve as an indicator for one’s attitudes and

behaviors. A person’s goal can be affected by the values that they hold. This

affects the effort, the duration, the choices, analyzation, and the emotions that they

will implement on a task (Feather, 1992). This explains why value can affect how

one can successfully finish a task or not as it plays an important role in various

factors that affect an individual’s behavior when it comes to accomplishing a settled

goal.

29
The Cost Component

Cost pertains to the sacrifices a person has to make in order to complete a

task. Sacrifices are any time, thing, and event that has to be given up so a person

can perform a task accordingly. Additionally, cost is an extension to the

Expectancy-Value Theory framework that interacts with the expectancy and value

factors (Expectancy–Value Theory, 2022; Getty et al., 2018; Spott, 2022).

As an individual dedicates oneself to a task, their expectancies and values

are understood to determine how successful they can be in completing the task.

In every task, cost is consistently present along with expectancy and value. A

person’s expectancy and value cooperate with the increase of motivation.

However, cost is relatively the opposite, as it causes one’s decrease in action and

of motivation regardless of their expectancies and values (Barron & Hulleman,

2015). Expectancies and values hold various factors that affect a student’s

motivation. Both expectancy and value variables are correlated positively with one

another, but cost is shown to be negatively correlated with both, and is even

suggested as an independent variable on student achievement and persistence

(Durik, Vida, & Eccles, 2006; Getty et al., 2018).

The reasoning behind cost’s involvement in a person’s decrease in

motivation is assumed to be the barrier that inhibits task engagement, such as the

required time and effort in a task that greatly sacrifices pending tasks when

management is not considered, and the tasks sacrificed that result in interference

with one’s progress and relationship with other people (Eccles et al., 1983; Wigfield

& Eccles, 2000).

30
RELATED STUDIES

According to a study conducted by Ishartono et al., (2021) entitled “Visual,

Auditory, and Kinesthetic Students: How They Solve PISA-Oriented Mathematics

Problems?”, students with visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles

demonstrated the ability to analyze, evaluate, and create as part of higher-order

thinking. However, each group had weaknesses in these skills. The study aimed

to examine high-order thinking skills in solving PISA-Oriented math problems

based on students’ learning styles. This research employed a mixed-method

approach with a Concurrent Triangulation Strategy design. The sample included

several students from the population of all Class X Students at SMA Negeri 2

Surakarta, selected through purposive sampling. Data collection involved

interviews, documentation, and tests. The findings of the study shows that there is

no significant differences in the ability to solve PISA-oriented math problems

among students with visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles.

Sakinah & Avip (2021) in their study entitled “An analysis of students'

mathematical literacy skills assessed from students' learning style” aims to assess

students’ literacy skills based on their learning styles. A descriptive research

approach was employed, utilizing a learning style questionnaire, a mathematical

literacy test for students, and interviews to augment the gathered data. To ensure

data validity, the analysis involved examining the learning style and mathematical

literacy using the triangulation method. Several noteworthy findings emerged from

this study: First, students with visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles

exhibited deficient mathematical literacy skills, with only fourteen percent (14%) of

31
students accurately answering the mathematical literacy questions; second, the

mathematical literacy skills of students with a kinesthetic learning style surpassed

those of students with visual and auditory learning styles; third, students with a

visual learning style demonstrated proficiency in formulating given mathematical

problems, but struggled with applying mathematical concepts and interpreting the

problems; fourth, students with auditory learning style displayed the weakest skills

in formualting mathematical problems, often mistakenly employing basic

mathematical concepts; and fifth, despite challenges in interpreting mathematical

problems, students with a kinesthetic learning style were able to correctly formulate

and utilize mathematical concepts.

According to a study conducted by Aventijado et. al. (2020) entitled "The

Journey to Learning: Through the Learning Styles of the Senior High School

Academic Strand Students A.Y. 2019-2020,” recognizing students’ learning styles

is crucial for optimizing their academic performance. By understanding how

students learn best, teachers can tailor their teaching methods to better meet their

needs and enhance their motivation to succeed. The aim of this study is to

understand the perceptions of the University of the East (UE) Caloocan Senior

High School Academic strand students by utilizing the narrative research method

to determine the students’ learning styles. By identifying the learning styles of the

students, the researchers aimed to enhance their learning experience and

encourage them to become active learners. The results of the study showed that

students enjoy learning when their preferred type of activities are performed. This

finding highlights the importance of recognizing the learning styles of students in

32
order to facilitate effective learning in school. By catering to the learning

preferences of students, they can be motivated and supported in achieving the aim

of producing globally competitive students. Thus, understanding the learning styles

of students is crucial in providing a conducive learning environment and promoting

their academic success.

Halif et al. (2020) in their study entitled “Moderating Effects of Student

Motivation on the Relationship between Learning Styles and Student Engagement”

mentioned that there were only a few studies that focused on the relationship

between students' motivation, engagement, and learning outcomes with GPA as a

measure of their academic achievement. The aim of this research is to investigate

the effects of learning styles on student engagement and to determine the

moderating roles of student motivation towards the relationship between learning

styles and student engagement. A descriptive qualitative survey was used to learn

the effects of motivation on the relationship between learning styles and student

engagement among Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) students. Three UiTM

state campuses were selected and convenience sampling was utilized to pick the

sample. The findings showed that only the visual learning style had an impact on

the behavioral, cognitive, and emotional components of student engagement.

Additionally, these findings demonstrated that compared to both aural and

kinesthetic learners, visual learners had greater classroom engagement.

According to the study of Punjabi & Acharya (2020), “Learning Style On

Mathematical Learning”, learning styles can be described as a factor, behavior,

and attitude of a learner when learning. Learning style is a natural or habitual

33
pattern of learners when acquiring and processing information. In this study, the

researchers’ goal is to mainly describe how learning styles can affect the learners’

achievement in mathematics. The researchers used the VAK learning style model

in order to show the different types of learning styles. In the study, the researchers

gathered information from different studies in order to know whether or not the

learners’ learning styles will really affect their performance and achievements in

mathematics. According to the results and discussion of the study, with the use of

VAK learning styles, the learners will be able to enhance their performance, and

thus they will be able to acquire higher achievements in mathematics. In addition

to that, students with visual styles are the learners who are able to solve

mathematical problems more effectively compared to other learning styles.

Therefore, there is a significant relation between the learning styles and the

mathematics achievement.

Daoruang et al. (2019) in their study entitled “The Study of Learning

Achievement of Learners Classified VARK Learning Style in Blended Learning”

aims to classify learning styles based on the VARK model using blended learning

activities for the subject of multimedia design and development. According to

Daoruang et al. (2019), the design of most learning materials does not consider

the learning style of the learners. In their research, they examine how learners

differ in terms of their preferred learning styles, which can help enhance their

comprehension of the material, motivate greater participation, and boost their

academic performance. This study used a quantitative method in which forty-seven

(47) undergraduates from the Information Technology Department who enrolled in

34
the second semester of the academic year 2018 were selected by using the

purposive random sampling method. The results showed that most of the learners

were multimodal and had an average score higher than unimodal learners.

Daoraung et al. (2019) concluded that this was possible because multimodal

learners prefer a wide variety of learning styles, which makes them interested in

learning a specific type of content, making them somewhat flexible. On the other

hand, unimodal learners could struggle to comprehend the lesson material when

they come across stuff that does not fit their preferred learning style.

Markuzi et al. (2019) in their study entitled “Creative Thinking Ability Based

on Learning Styles Reviewed From Mathematical Communication Skills” said that

one of the things that contributes to the success of someone’s life is creativity.

Especially now where the world and technologies rapidly change, that is why it is

important to develop students’ creativity especially in mathematics. Being able to

develop one’s mathematical creativity means being able to enhance one’s

mathematical communication skills. Mathematical communication skills allow the

students to develop their mathematical thinking skills, both orally and written. With

this skill, students will be able to have a deep understanding of mathematics and

mathematical concepts without having to memorize formulas. The goal of this

study is to determine the difference of creative mathematical thinking skills of

students who use visual learning styles and kinesthetic learning styles. The type

of questionnaire that the researchers used is a descriptive questionnaire. This

research study is a comparative causal study, it has an independent variable which

is the mathematical communication skills and learning styles where the

35
mathematical communication skills is also seen as covariant variables, while the

dependent variable of this study is the ability to think creatively mathematically.

Since the study has three variables, the researchers used ANCOVA in order to

analyze the data of the study. According to the results of the study, there are

differences in creative thinking skills between students who have visual learning

styles and kinesthetic learning styles.

Tambaoan et al. (2019) in their study entitled “Differentiating Instruction in

a Mathematics Classroom: Its Effects on Senior High School Learners' Academic

Performance and Engagement in Basic Calculus” discusses the problem of how

learners are having difficulty adjusting with the content of Basic Calculus, resulting

to a decline in their expected level of mathematics achievement which posses a

challenge to teachers. This study was conducted to investigate the engagement

and academic performance in Basic Calculus of senior high school students before

and after undergoing differentiated instruction. This study used a quasi-

experimental pretest-posttest research design in which two intact classes in

Bukidnon State University-Secondary School Laboratory, during the second

semester of the school year 2017-2018, was implemented on. One class was

randomly assigned to be the experimental group, which received the differentiated

instruction, and one class to be the control group, which was taught using the

traditional method. Before the study was conducted, all groups received a pretest,

and after the developed differentiated Basic Calculus classes had been

implemented, all groups received a posttest. In the analysis of data, only thirty (30)

students were selected from each class. Based on the findings, it showed that

36
there is a significant difference before and after using differentiated instruction to

teach Basic Calculus lessons, as it can be inferred that it increases students'

engagement in the topic. When teachers add differentiated activities into lessons,

students have the chance to learn more effectively. This improves students’

academic performance and heightens their motivation in learning.

According to a study carried out by Magulod (2018) entitled “Learning

Styles, Study Habits and Academic Performance of Filipino University Students in

Applied Science Courses: Implications for Instruction,” to enhance university

students’ proficiency and productivity in the 21st century, instructional strategies

that align with their learning preferences are crucial. This study examined learning

styles, study habits, and academic achievements of applied science students at

Cagayan State University, Philippines. Using a descriptive correlational design, the

researchers sampled 75 participants and collected data through standardized

instruments. Results indicated that students preferred visual, group, and

kinesthetic learning styles, and moderate study habits, and achieved good

academic results. Differences in learning styles were found based on academic

performance, father’s occupation, and type of high school attended. Study habits

also varied with academic standing, writing skills, mothers’ education, and test

anxiety. The study highlighted the significant relationships between learning styles,

study habits, and academic performance. These findings hold implications for

instructors to plan interventions aligned with the students’ preferences and habits,

ultimately improving teaching effectiveness and learning outcomes. The study’s

37
relevance lies in its exploration of how different Learning styles impact learning

effectiveness across disciplines.

According to the study of Bossman & Schulze (2018), “Learning style

preferences and Mathematics achievement of secondary school learners”,

Mathematics is the key to further develop the economy of a country, as

Mathematics allows learners to enroll in the field of engineering, natural science,

accountancy and other careers that could potentially contributes in a country’s

economic development. Furthermore, Achievements in Mathematics is a

fundamental indicator of the performance of a school system of any country

(Reddy, 2005). In this study, the researchers’ goal is to address the problem of

South African learners’ Mathematical achievement and performance. In order to

address the issue that the researchers are facing, they used the VARK learning

style model in order to determine the different learning styles that the learners use.

The study has 240 learners as the participants and it used likert scale in order to

determine each learners’ learning styles. In data analysis, the researchers used

Pearson in order to assess the correlation between the learning styles and the

achievements in mathematics. As for the result of the study, it showed that the

correlation between visual and auditory learning is significant as well as for the

correlations between kinaesthetic and visual learning. To put it simply, the more

the learner is able to use one learning style, the more he or she is also able to

implement another style.

38
SYNTHESIS

A number of researchers have conducted research and found that students'

preferences for visual and kinesthetic learning methods and their enthusiasm to

learn math in STEM disciplines are positively correlated. According to this study,

including kinesthetic and visual learning exercises in STEM subjects with a focus

on math can increase students' enthusiasm to learn (El-Rouby & Mohammed's,

2018). Students who liked the visual and kinesthetic learning styles outperformed

those who favored the auditory learning style in STEM disciplines. The study also

discovered that using technology-enhanced teaching strategies that complement

students' chosen learning preferences can have a favorable effect on their

academic success in STEM subjects. (Akçayr and Okur, 2018). Another study

concluded that students who preferred auditory learning styles had lower problem-

solving skills in STEM topics, whereas students who preferred visual and

kinesthetic learning styles had higher problem-solving skills (Selçuk and Erol,

2019). These studies tend to look at the correlation between students' preferred

learning styles, such as visual and kinesthetic learning methods, and their

academic success in STEM-specialized subjects, particularly in the field of math.

The studies also explore the effectiveness of technology-enhanced teaching

strategies that complement students' chosen learning preferences, as well as the

significance of taking into account students' learning preferences when introducing

problem-solving concepts applicable to Grade 11 STEM students in Mindanao

State University-General Santos City. There is a dearth of research that

investigates the differences between students' preferred learning styles, such as

39
visual and kinesthetic learning methods, and academic success in STEM-

specialized subjects, particularly math, in a specific context or setting, such as

Grade 11 STEM students at Mindanao State University-General Santos City.

Furthermore, research on the effectiveness of technology-enhanced teaching

practices that complement students' chosen learning preferences in boosting

academic achievement in STEM fields is needed. There is a need to look into the

underlying causes of these correlations and consider how instructional methods

can be changed to better support students' learning preferences. In addition,

studies in this field frequently concentrate on the causal-comparison between

learning styles and academic success.

40
 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research methodology used in the study. It

consists of the research design, research locale, research respondents, research

instrument, data gathering procedure, and statistical treatment of data.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Upon undergoing the procedure of this study, the researchers utilized a

quantitative process to acquire applicable data and reach a conclusion. According

to Sheard (2018), Quantitative research is a method that deals with data, mainly

numerical data that can be converted into numbers and is investigated through a

statistical process or “statistics”. This method undergoes a process of collecting

and analyzing numerical data, allowing researchers to predict, describe, and

generalize behaviors or a phenomenon (Mcleod, 2023).

Moreover, the design applied to this study is a causal-comparative design.

As stated by Brewer & Kubn (2012), causal-comparative design is a method used

to identify the cause or consequences of differences between the independent and

dependent variables by comparing two or more groups of individuals. The results

are formulated by investigating the effects inflicted by the independent variable

towards the dependent variable.

A quantitative and causal-comparative method is applied in this study as it

aims to determine the significant difference between senior high school students'

learning styles and level of motivation in learning math-specialized STEM subjects.

41
The researchers will determine the level of motivation students based on each

learning styles: visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic and multimodal, then the

results are analyzed to identify the differences. Using this method will be

appropriate for analyzing data relevant to the original goal of the study.

Figure 4. Research Design

42
RESEARCH LOCALE

The study will be conducted inside the premises of Mindanao State

University - General Santos City (formally abbreviated as MSU-GSC) in the Senior

High School Department as it constitutes the variables: Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics Strand (abbreviated as STEM) specialized subjects

and Grade 11 student respondents. The research will specifically assess Pre-

calculus and Basic Calculus as these specialized subjects were taught during the

first and second semester by the same teacher across all Grade 11 - STEM

sections of the current batch. This study will be conducted during the second

semester of the academic year 2022-2023.

RESEARCH RESPONDENTS

The respondents of the study will be the Grade 11 Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics' students of Mindanao State University-General

Santos City during the school year 2022-2023. The researchers will conduct an

initial survey to identify the students' learning styles and levels of motivation.

According to Hayes (2023), "Stratified random sampling is a method of sampling

that involves the division of a population into smaller subgroups known as strata.

In stratified random sampling, or stratification, the strata are formed based on

members’ shared attributes or characteristics, such as income or educational

attainment." The researchers will divide the population of 11th grade Science,

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics' students into categories based on

their sections from Ganymede, Titan, Callisto, IO, and Luna.

43
 To prevent biases throughout the assessment, the researchers will employ
𝑁
the the Yamane formula n = 1+𝑁𝑒 2 (Yamane, 1973) with the desired margin of error

of 0.05 or 5% to statistically calculate the sample size from the given population of

two hundred thirty-seven (237) senior high school STEM students of the university.

Calculating the values in the Yamane formula will result in a value of one hundred

forty-nine (149) students which will be used as the total number of samples.
𝑁ℎ
The researchers will apply the proportional allocation formula nh = ( ) 𝑛to
𝑁

distribute the total number of respondents from the different sections. Proportional

allocation sets the sample size in each stratum equal to be proportional to the

number of sampling units in that stratum (Glasgow, 2005). After applying both

methods, the outcomes revealed a total of thirty (30) students from Ganymede,

Titan, Callisto, and Io, while there's a total of twenty-nine (29) students from Luna.

Strand Grade 11 Senior Population (N) Number of

High School Respondents (n)
Sections

Ganymede 48 30

Titan 47 30
STEM 11
Callisto 48 30

Io 48 30

Luna 46 29

Total N = 237 n = 149

Table 1. Distribution of Respondents

44
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

The researchers will gather the necessary data through conducting an

online survey among Senior High School Students of Mindanao State University.

The questionnaires that the researchers will use is the VARK questionnaire

(version 8.01) and the recommended instrument for measuring motivation that the

researchers acquired from the study, A Rapid Measure of Student Motivation-

Using an Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of Motivation to Understand Student

Achievement and Future Interest in STEM Classrooms (Getty, Barron, Hulleman,

& Ruzek, 2018), which will be modified to seek both motivation levels in learning

Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus.

Part I. Learning Styles Questionnaire. The VARK questionnaire consists

of 16 questions with multiple choices. The purpose of this questionnaire is to

determine the respondents’/students’ learning styles. Once the students finished

answering the following questions, the researchers would then use the scoring

chart to determine which learning styles that the students use frequently.

According to a study conducted by Khongpit et al. (2018), here are the steps in

calculating one’s learning style. We must first calculate the total VARK scores, in

order to determine the required stepping distance. Shown below is how to calculate

the stepping distance in relation to the sum of the four VARK scores.

Total of the four VARK scores Stepping distance (s)

14-21 1

22-27 2

28-32 3

45
 32+ 4

The VARK points are then sorted from maximum to minimum. Use n1, n2,

n3, and n4 appropriately. If n1-n2 > s, then the learner has a single preference of

learning style. If the result becomes false, proceed to the next comparison. If n2-

n3 > s, then the learner has a bimodal preference. If the result becomes false

again, proceed to the final comparison. If n3-n4 > s, then the learner has a trimodal

preference. If the result is false, it means the learner has quad modal preference.

Part II. Level of Motivation. The questionnaire that the researchers will

use to acquire the necessary data to measure the students’ motivation is adopted

from the study, A Rapid Measure of Student Motivation-Using an Expectancy-

value-cost Model of Motivation to Understand Student Achievement and Future

Interest in STEM Classrooms by Steve Getty, Kenneth E. Barron, Chris Hulleman,

And Arik Anthony Ruzek (July, 2018). The modified questionnaire consists of 20

survey items, which is divided into two portions, each of which contains ten items:

level of motivation towards Pre-calculus and level of motivation towards Basic

Calculus. The researchers will use a 5-point Likert scale to measure the students’

motivation. The students will answer the following statements by selecting on the

scale of 1-5, for 1 being “Very Low”, 2 being “Low”, 3 being “Moderate”, 4 being

“High”, and 5 being “Very High”.

Scale Verbal Interpretation

5 Very High

4 High

46
 3 Moderate

2 Low

1 Very Low

DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE

For gathering data information, the researchers will gather information using

the following procedure:

Figure 5. Data Gathering Procedure

47
Adoption of Questionnaires

Firstly, the researchers adopted a questionnaire from the study of Getty,

Hulleman, Barron, Ruzek, Flake, & Foley (2017), entitled “A Rapid Measure of

Student Motivation – Using an Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of Motivation to

Understand Student Achievement and Future Interest in STEM Classrooms” for

measuring the level of students’ motivation in learning and the VARK questionnaire

for determining the students’ preferred learning style.

Identifying the Respondents

Math-specialized STEM subjects, Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus, are for

Grade 11 students who are in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and

Mathematics (STEM) strand. The researchers collected the required data for each

Grade 11 STEM section that will be used during the initial survey. The researchers

will conduct an initial survey of senior high school students at Mindanao State

University to find out the significant difference between learning styles and their

level of motivation in learning math-specialized STEM subjects.

Creation of Online Versions of the Adapted Questionnaires

The researchers will create an online version of the questionnaire on

Google Forms, which will be checked by their research adviser.

Formulation of Letters of Approval and Consent

After identifying the specific respondents, the researchers will proceed to

the formulation of letters of approval and consent, which will be forwarded to the

research teacher and senior high school director for approval.

48
Distribution of Consent Form and Online Questionnaires

The letter of approval from the director and the letter of consent will be sent

to the selected senior high school students who were identified as respondents for

the study, as well as the online questionnaire. Before answering the questionnaire,

the respondents will give their consent through the survey platform. The adopted

questionnaire in online Google Forms will be sent to the selected respondents

through links either via email or Messenger.

Data Gathering and Statistical Analysis

Finally, the data that will be gathered will be organized for analysis and

interpretation.

STATISTICAL TREATMENT

For the purpose of providing answers to the problems presented by the

study, the researchers will use the following statistical methods:

In sub-problem 1, frequency count and percentage will be used to determine

the learning styles of each student. According to Yellapu (2018), absolute

frequency is the number of times a certain value appears in the data, whereas

relative frequency, is the proportion of a value's absolute frequency to the total

number of values for that variable. Relative frequencies can be represented in

ratios, rates, proportions, and percentages. A percentage is expressed as a

proportion as a fraction of a hundred. A dataset's overall percentage should always

add up to a hundred percent (100%) (Yellapu, 2018).

49
 In sub-problem 2, weighted mean will be used to determine the level of

motivation in learning math-specialized STEM subjects. A weighted average, also

called as the weighted mean, is a calculation that takes into account the various

levels of significance of the values in the data set. To calculate for the weighted

mean, each value in the data set is multiplied by a predefined weight before the

result is calculated (Ganti, 2023). Presented below is the scale that will be used to

interpret the weighted mean.

Weighted Mean
Verbal Interpretation Quantitative Description
Interval

4.21 - 5.00 Very High Very High Level of Motivation in

Learning Math-Specialized STEM
Subjects

3.41 - 4.20 High High Level of Motivation in Learning

Math-Specialized STEM Subjects

2.61 - 3.40 Moderate Moderate Level of Motivation in Learning

Math-Specialized STEM Subjects

1.81 - 2.60 Low Low Level of Motivation in Learning

Math-Specialized STEM Subjects

1 - 1.80 Very Low Very Low Level of Motivation in Learning

Math-Specialized STEM Subjects

In sub-problem 3 and 4, the researchers will use one-way Analysis of

Variance (ANOVA) and Post Hoc analysis to determine if there is a significant

difference between visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners

with regard to their level of motivation in learning math-specialized STEM subjects:

50
Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus. A statistical tool called one-way ANOVA is used

to compare or analyze the difference between the means of more than two groups

(Bevans, 2022). Frost (2021) states that since the results of the ANOVA do not

specify whether specific changes between pairs of means are significant,

researchers must use post hoc tests to investigate these changes. In essence,

post hoc analysis “refers to a type of statistical analysis that is conducted following

the rejection of an omnibus null hypothesis (Frey, 2018)”.

51
 CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of the

data gathered in this study. The various results are presented in the succeeding

tables with corresponding discussions and explanations. It also answers specific

problems stated in the previous chapter.

Table 2

The Learning Style of the Grade 11 STEM Students in Mindanao State

University

Learning Style f %
Visual 6 4.11%
Aural 12 8.22%
Read/Write 5 3.42%
Kinesthetic 49 33.56%
Multimodal 74 50.68%
a. Bimodal 31
b. Trimodal 18
c. Quad modal 25
Total 146 100%

Table 2 presents the learning style of the Grade 11 STEM students in

Mindanao State University. The result shows that 50.68% of the respondents are

multimodal, 33.56% are kinesthetic and 8.22% are aural. Few others (4.11%) are

visual and only 3.42% are read/write. This implies that the majority of the

respondents engage in multiple learning styles: visual, aural, read/write, and

kinesthetic and are classified into bimodal, trimodal, or quad modal. This is

followed by those students who utilize hands-on experience to better absorb

information.
52
 Table 3

The Level of Students’ Motivation in their Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus

Subjects
Pre-Calculus Basic Calculus
Indicator WM Description Interpretation WM Description Interpretation
A. Expectancy
1. Knowing I can learn the moderate moderate
3.10 moderate 3.03 moderate
material on this subject. level level
2. Believing that I can be moderate moderate
2.88 moderate 2.76 moderate
successful on this subject. level level
3. Understanding the
moderate moderate
material on this subject 2.81 moderate 2.71 moderate
level level
confidently.
moderate
Mean 2.93 moderate 2.81 neutral moderate
level
B. Value
1. Thinking that this moderate
3.42 high high level 3.30 moderate
subject is important. level
moderate moderate
2. Valuing this subject. 3.08 moderate 3.05 moderate
level level
3. Thinking that this moderate moderate
3.13 moderate 3.14 moderate
subject is useful. level level
moderate
Mean 3.21 moderate 3.15 neutral moderate
level
C. Cost
1. Not requiring too much
moderate moderate
time in the subject's 2.99 moderate 2.97 moderate
level level
schoolwork.
2. Being able to put in the
moderate moderate
time needed to do well in 3.00 moderate 2.96 moderate
level level
this subject.
3. Not having to give up
moderate moderate
too much to do well in this 2.95 moderate 2.99 moderate
level level
subject.
4. Having time to put into
moderate moderate
this subject despite 2.95 moderate 2.99 moderate
level level
having other things to do.
moderate moderate
Mean 2.97 moderate 2.96 moderate
level level
moderate moderate
Overall Mean 3.04 moderate 2.97 moderate
level level

Table 3 presents the level of motivation towards Pre-calculus and Basic

Calculus subjects. This is described in terms of expectancy, value and cost. In

terms of expectancy in Pre-calculus, the students have moderate level of

motivation in knowing they can learn the material in this subject (𝑀 = 3.10) and in

being confident that they can understand the material in this subject (𝑀 = 2.81).

The mean of 2.93 is described as moderate. This means that the level of

53
motivation of the students in Pre-calculus in terms of expectancy is on the average

level.

Moreover, in terms of value in Pre-calculus, the students have high level

of motivation in thinking that this subject is important (𝑀 = 3.42) and moderate in

valuing this subject (𝑀 = 3.08). The mean of 3.21 is described as moderate. This

implies that the students are moderately motivated in terms of value towards Pre-

calculus.

Furthermore, in terms of cost, the students have moderate level of

motivation in being able to put in the time needed to do well in this subject

(𝑀 = 3.00), not having to give up too much to do well in this subject (𝑀 = 2.95)

and having time to put into this subject despite having other things to do

(𝑀 = 2.95). The mean of 2.97 is described as moderate. This implies that the level

of motivation of the students towards Pre-calculus in terms of cost is on the

average level.

On the other hand, motivation towards Basic Calculus, relative to

expectancy, the students moderately motivated in knowing that they can learn the

material in this subject (𝑀 = 3.03) and in being confident that they can understand

the material in this subject (𝑀 = 2.71). The mean of 2.81 is described as

moderate. This means that the students have an average level of motivation

towards Basic calculus in terms of expectancy.

In terms of value, the students have moderate level of motivation towards

Basic Calculus in thinking that this subject is important (𝑀 = 3.30) and valuing this

54
subject (𝑀 = 3.05). The mean of 3.15 is described as moderate. This means that

the motivation of the students towards Basic Calculus is on the average level in

terms of value. Furthermore, in terms of cost, the students have moderate level

of motivation towards Basic Calculus in having time to put into this subject despite

having other things to do (𝑀 = 2.99) and not having to give up too much to do well

in this subject (𝑀 = 2.99). The mean of 2.96 is described as moderate. This

means that the students have an average level of motivation towards Basic

Calculus in terms of cost.

Generally, the overall mean of 3.04 and 2.97 described as moderate

indicates that students have moderate level of motivation towards Pre-calculus

and Basic Calculus, respectively. This suggests that students have the desires to

study more about Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus, but they find it challenging.

Table 4

Kruskal- Wallis Test Result on the Difference in the Level of Motivation

towards Pre-Calculus Across Learning Styles
Learning Styles
Read/Writ Kinestheti
Indicator Visual Aural Multimodal Chi-Square p-value Remark
c
(Mean (Mean e (Mean
Rank) Rank) (Mean Rank)
(Mean Rank)
Rank)
Expectancy 72.42 63.54 83.5 69.62 77.28 1.941 .747 Not Significant
129.6
48.21 80.38 52.76 86.69 34.261 .000 Significant
Value 7
Cost 82.17 70.92 52.75 71.20 75.89 1.663 .797 Not Significant
Overall 96.5 61.13 70.63 65.17 79.43 6.215 .184 Not Significant

It is presented in table 4 that there is no significant difference on the level

of motivation towards Pre-Calculus across learning styles. This result is supported

by the mean ranks of visual (𝑥̅ = 96.5), aural (𝑥̅ = 61.13), read/write (𝑥̅ = 70.63),

kinesthetic (𝑥̅ = 65.17), and multimodal (𝑥̅ = 79.43) learning styles in Grade 11

STEM students, the chi-square value of 6.215, and a p-value of .184 (p > .05).
55
Using the Kruskal Wallis test, the results reveals that the student’s level of

motivation towards Pre-Calculus do not differ across learning styles. This implies

that even when the students were grouped according to their learning styles, they

still have similar level of motivation towards Pre-Calculus.

Table 5

Kruskal- Wallis Test Result on the Difference in the Level of Motivation

towards Basic Calculus Across Learning Styles

Learning Styles
Indicator Visual Aural Chi-Square p-value Remark
Read/Write Kinesthetic Multimodal
(Mean (Mean
(Mean Rank) (Mean Rank) (Mean Rank)
Rank) Rank)
Expectancy 80.75 65.04 35.25 73.2 76.55 4.382 .357 Not Significant
Value 95.92 62.71 88.63 65.02 78.34 6.033 .197 Not Significant
Cost 76.33 67.88 87.5 74.72 72.6 .762 .943 Not Significant
Not
Overall 89.33 59.96 72.25 70 76.84 2.881 .578
Significant

Table 5 presents the Kruskal Wallis test result on the significant difference

in the level of motivation towards Basic Calculus among Grade 11 STEM students

across learning styles. It reveals that there is no significant difference on the

motivation across learning styles. This result is supported by the mean ranks of

visual (𝑥̅ = 89.33), aural (𝑥̅ = 59.96), read/write (𝑥̅ = 72.25), kinesthetic (𝑥̅ = 70),

and multimodal (𝑥̅ = 76.84) learning styles in Grade 11 STEM students, the chi-

square value of 2.881, and a p-value of .578 (p > .05). The results further reveals

that the student’s motivation do not differ across learning styles. This implies that

even when the students were grouped according to their learning styles, they still

have similar level of motivation towards Basic Calculus.

Based on the study’s results it can be deduced that there is no significant

difference in the level of motivation towards math-specialized STEM subjects,

56
namely Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus, among Grade 11 STEM students across

learning styles. This means that even if the students were divided accordingly to

their learning styles, they still have the same level of motivation towards Pre-

calculus and Basic Calculus. This goes in contrast to the study of Halif et al. (2020)

wherein the results of their data showed that student motivation differs across

learning styles, with visual learners showing higher levels of engagement than

aural and kinesthetic learners.

57
 CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of the whole study, the findings, and the

conclusions that were based from the results provided from the surveys conducted

by the researchers, and the recommendations that researchers would like to be

addressed.

SUMMARY

Generally, this study aimed to determine if there is a significant difference

in the level of motivation in learning math-specialized STEM among Grade 11

STEM students in Mindanao State University-General Santos City across their

learning styles. Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the learning style of the students given the categories listed below:

1.1. visual;

1.2. aural;

1.3. read/write;

1.4. kinesthetic; and

1.5. multimodal?

1.5.1. bimodal;

1.5.2. trimodal; or

1.5.3. quadmodal?

2. What is the level of students’ motivation in their Pre-calculus and Basic

Calculus subjects in terms of:

2.1. expectancy;

58
 2.2. value; and

2.3. cost?

3. Is there a significant difference in the level of motivation towards Pre-calculus

among visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners?

4. Is there a significant difference in the level of motivation towards Basic

Calculus among visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal

learners?

FINDINGS

This study aims to examine the learning styles and motivations of Grade 11

STEM students at Mindanao State University. The researchers selected 149

Grade 11 STEM students from various sections, namely Ganymede, Titan,

Callisto, Io, and Luna, using a random sampling method. Out of the 149 selected

respondents, the researchers were able to gather 146 (97.99%) responses. The

participants were asked to complete two survey questionnaires. The first

questionnaire utilized was the VARK Questionnaire, which consisted of 16

questions. The second questionnaire focused on measuring the students'

motivation levels and comprised 20 items divided into two parts: one part assessed

the students' motivation towards Pre-Calculus, while the other part measured the

students’ motivation towards Basic Calculus.

Based on the analysis of the gathered data regarding the learning style of

the students in terms of visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal

(bimodal, trimodal, and quad modal) and the level of students' motivation in their

59
Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus subjects in terms of expectancy, value, and cost,

the following findings were drawn:

1. The learning style of the students was the following: (1.1) 4.11% of students

prefer visual learning style; (1.2) then, 8.22% of them were aural learners;

(1.3) after that, only 3.42% of the students preferred the read/write learning

style; (1.4) moreover, 33.56% of them have a kinesthetic learning style;

(1.5) and lastly, 50.68% were multimodal learners. Overall, the multimodal

learning style is favored by half of the students.

2. The level of students' motivation in their Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus

subjects were in following: (2.1) In regards to expectancy in Pre-Calculus,

a moderate interpretation can be derived from the mean of 2.93; similar

Basic Calculus which also has a moderate interpretation derived from the

mean of 2.81; (2.2) moreover, in regards to value in Pre-Calculus, a

moderate interpretation can be derived from the mean of 3.21; the same

with Basic-Calculus which also has a moderate interpretation derived from

the mean of 3.15; (2.3) Furthermore, in regards to cost in Pre-Calculus, a

moderate interpretation can be derived from the mean of 2.97; along with

Basic calculus which also has a moderate interpretation derived from the

mean of 2.96. Lastly, the moderate levels of motivation among students

towards Pre-Calculus and Basic Calculus subjects can be inferred from the

overall mean of 3.04 and 2.97, respectively.

3. After investigating the data that the researchers gathered and after utilizing

the Kruskal-Wallis test, the statistics showed that there is no significant

60
 difference in the level of motivation towards Pre-Calculus across different

learning styles. This suggests that, even when considering their learning

styles, the students exhibit similar levels of motivation towards Pre-

Calculus.

4. Upon analyzing the collected data and employing the Kruskal-Wallis test,

the statistical analysis revealed that there is no significant difference in the

level of motivation towards Basic Calculus among various learning styles.

The results additionally indicate that there are no significant differences in

student motivation across different learning styles. This suggests that even

when students are categorized based on their learning styles, they exhibit

a similar level of motivation towards Basic Calculus.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study entitled “Learning Styles and Motivation in Learning

Math-specialized STEM Subjects Among Grade 11 STEM Students in Mindanao

State University-General Santos City” have led to the following conclusions:

1. According to the gathered data, the majority of Grade 11 STEM students of

Mindanao State University-General Santos City engage in multimodal

learning style, with over half of the respondents favoring this approach. The

read/write learning style was the least preferred, followed by visual and

aural styles. Kinesthetic learning style was chosen by a significant

proportion, indicating a preference for hands-on, experiential learning

methods. Overall, these results indicate that students prefer to learn through

a combination of different learning styles.

61
2. The study also revealed that the level of motivation among the Grade 11

STEM students in both Pre-Calculus and Basic Calculus subjects is

moderate. This can be inferred from the moderate interpretations derived

from the mean scores for expectancy, value, and cost in both subjects.

These results indicate a consistent pattern of moderate motivation to study

Pre-Calculus and Basic Calculus, indicating their interest in these subjects

but also perceive them as challenging.

3. Moreover, the analysis of the study's findings to determine whether a

significant difference exists in the level of motivation in learning Pre-calculus

of visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners, the study's

results revealed that there is no significant difference in the level of

motivation towards Pre-Calculus across different learning styles. Even

when learning styles are taken into consideration, the students' motivation

levels for Pre-calculus are similar. Thus, failing to reject the first null

hypotheses.

4. Upon examining whether there is a significant difference in the level of

motivation of visual, aural, read/write, kinesthetic, and multimodal learners,

the study's findings showed that there is no significant difference in the level

of motivation towards learning Basic Calculus among the different learning

styles. The findings also suggest that there are no significant differences in

student motivation across various learning styles. This implies that students

still show a similar level of motivation for Basic Calculus even when they

62
 are categorized according to their learning styles. Hence, failing to reject

the second null hypothesis.

RECOMMENDATIONS

After the researchers conducted the study, the following recommendations

were made based on the findings:

1. Future researchers can dive deeper into individual differences within each

learning style. It would be valuable to investigate how specific preferences

within multimodal, kinesthetic, or other learning styles may affect motivation

and academic performance. This can provide insights for tailoring

instructional approaches to meet individual needs.

2. Based on the results of the study, the overall level of motivation towards

Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus is described as moderate, it is important to

address the challenges that students face in these subjects. Educators can

provide additional support, such as tutoring sessions, extra practice

materials, or interactive learning activities, to help students overcome

difficulties and increase their motivation.

3. Future researchers can explore additional variables that may impact

motivation in math-specialized STEM subjects, such as self-efficacy,

teacher-student interactions, or classroom environment. Understanding

these factors can help develop more comprehensive strategies to enhance

student motivation.

4. The researchers recommended conducting longitudinal studies.

Conducting longitudinal studies can provide a deeper understanding of how

63
 motivation evolves over time. Tracking students' motivation from Grade 11

to subsequent years of their STEM education can shed light on the factors

that contribute to sustained motivation or potential declines. Longitudinal

studies can also explore the relationship between motivation and academic

achievement in math-specialized STEM subjects.

5. The researchers recommended that teachers could explore the use of

technology-enhanced learning approaches to enhance their students’

motivation in learning Pre-calculus and Basic Calculus. Virtual simulations,

educational games, and online platforms can be utilized to create interactive

and engaging learning experiences that cater to diverse learning styles and

promote intrinsic motivation.

6. With respect to the study’s findings, the researchers encourage educators

to modify and improve the implemented teaching strategies with multiple

methods that correlate with different learning styles, and avoid committing

to a singular teaching method. This will help the educators to achieve an

effective teaching procedure, and improve the students’ attitude and

performance towards the courses.

7. Moreover, the researchers are recommended to collaborate with educators

and stakeholders in the development and implementation of interventions

aimed at enhancing motivation in math-specialized STEM subjects. By

involving educators in the research process, findings can be translated into

practical strategies and interventions that can be easily incorporated into

the educational system.

64
 REFERENCES

Akçayır, M., & Okur, R. (2018). The effects of learning styles on academic
achievement in STEM education. Journal of Education and Practice, 9(3),
87-96. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1176895.pdf
Andersen, E. (2016). Managing Yourself Learning to Learn. Harvard Busıness
Revıew, 94(3)
Aventijado, K., Ignacio, A. N., Ramos, T. A., & Syguia, J. N. (2020). "The Journey
to Learning: Through the Learning Styles of the Senior High School
Academic Strand Students. . . ResearchGate.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10443.62240
Barron, K. E., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). Expectancy-Value-Cost Model of
Motivation. Elsevier eBooks, 503–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-
097086-8.26099-6
Bay Atlantic University. (2022, January 24). Show, don’t tell: What it means to be
a visual learner. Bay Atlantic University - Washington, D.C.
https://bau.edu/blog/visual-learner/
Bevans, R. (2022). One-way ANOVA | When and How to Use It (With Examples).
Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/one-way-anova/
Boatman, K., Courtney, R. J., & Lee, W. M. (2008). “See How They Learn”: The
Impact of Faculty and Student Learning Styles on Student Performance in
Introductory Economics. The American Economist, 52(1), 39–48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/056943450805200103
Bosman, A., & Schulze, S. (2018). Learning style preferences and Mathematics
achievement of secondary school learners. South African Journal of
Education, 38(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n1a1440
Borderless Charity, Inc (2018). How Motivation Affects Academic Performance -
Borderless Charity, Inc - Medium. Medium.
https://medium.com/@TheCharity/how-motivation-affects-academic-
performance-fcde79e8ef09
Blikstein, P. (2013). Multimodal learning analytics. Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2460296.2460316
Chakravarty, S., Khan, M., Singh, S., Bhushan, B., Jaiswal, G., Dwivedi, S., &
Pandey, A. (2022). A study of the different learning styles of the present first
professional MBBS students at United Institute of Medical Sciences, United
Medicity, Prayagraj, India. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and
Pharmacology, 12(12), 1.
https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2022.12.09441202204112022

65
Chapter one: WHAT IS VARK? (n.d.). Participativelearning.org. Retrieved May 20,
2023, from
https://participativelearning.org/pluginfile.php/537/mod_resource/content/3
/Fleming%20-%202001%20-%20What%20is%20Vark.pdf
Chouhan, N., Shan, R., Gupta, M., Rashid, S., & Manhas, M. (2022). Evaluation
of preferred learning styles among undergraduate students of Government
Medical College, Jammu. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and
Pharmacology, 0, 1.
https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2023.13.07372202209082022
Daoruang, B., Sintanakul, K., & Mingkhwan, A. (2019). The Study of Learning
Achievement of Learners Classified VARK Learning Style in Blended
Learning. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342827.3342839
Reese, D. (n.d.). Considering VARK Modalities to support personalized learning.
Definedlearning.com. Retrieved May 20, 2023, from
https://blog.definedlearning.com/blog/varkandpersonalizedlearning
Eads, A. (2022). Indeed.com. Retrieved May 20, 2023, from
https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/auditory-
learning-style
El-Rouby, R., & Mohammed, S. (2018). Investigating the relationship between
learning styles and students' motivation in learning mathematics in STEM
subjects. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 139-152.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322601450_Investigating_the_R
elationship_between_Learning_Styles_and_Students'_Motivation_in_Lear
ning_Mathematics_in_STEM_Subjects
Febrina, H., & Hali, F. (2020). Analysis of mathematical problem solving ability
viewed from student learning style. Journal of Mathematics Education, 5(1),
70–75. https://doi.org/10.31327/jme.v5i1.1757
Fleming, N., Educational Developer, & Baume, D. (n.d.). Learning Styles Again:
VARKing up the right tree! Vark-learn.com. Retrieved May 12, 2023, from
https://www.vark-learn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Educational-
Developments.pdf
Frey, B. B. (2018). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research,
Measurement, and Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Inc. eBooks.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139
Frost, J. (2021). Using Post Hoc Tests with ANOVA. Statistics by Jim.
https://statisticsbyjim.com/anova/post-hoc-tests-anova/
Ganti, A. (2023). Weighted Average: What Is It, How Is It Calculated and Used?
Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/weightedaverage.asp

66
Getty, S.G., Hulleman, C. S., Barron, K.E., Ruzek, E. R., Flake, J. K., & Foley, K.
(2017). Using the Expectancy-Value-Cost Theory of Motivation to
Understand Student Achievement and Future Interest in STEM Classrooms
[White paper].
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326354387_A_Rapid_Measure_
of_Student_Motivation-Using_an_Expectancy-Value-
Cost_Model_of_Motivation_to_Understand_Student_Achievement_and_F
uture_Interest_in_STEM_Classrooms
Halif, M. M., Hassan, N., Sumardi, N. A., Omar, A. S., Ali, S., Aziz, R. A., Majid, A.
A., & Salleh, N. Z. M. (2020). Moderating Effects of Student Motivation on
the Relationship between Learning Styles and Student Engagement. Asian
Journal of University Education, 16(2), 93.
https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v16i2.10301
Ishartono, N., Faiziyah, N., Sutarni, S., Putri, A. R., Fatmasari, L. W. S., Sayuti, M.,
Rahmaniati, R., & Yunus, M. M. (2021). Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic
Students: How They Solve PISA-Oriented Mathematics Problems? Journal
of Physics, 1720, 012012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1720/1/012012
Kalyar, M. N., Ahmad, B., & Kalyar, H. (2018). Влияет ли мотивация учителя на
мотивацию учащегося. Опосредующая роль профессионального
поведения педагога (пер. с англ.). Voprosy Obrazovaniâ, 3, 91–119.
https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2018-3-91-119 (Does Teacher
Motivation Lead to Student Motivation? The Mediating Role of Teaching
Behavior (translated in English).)
Khongpit, V., Sintanakul, K., & Nomphonkrang, T. (2018). The VARK Learning
Style of the University Student in Computer Course. International Journal of
Learning and Teaching, 102–106. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijlt.4.2.102-106
Kiliç, M. E., Kılıç, M., & Akan, D. (2021). Motivation in the classroom. Participatory
Educational Research, 8(2), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.28.8.2
Kusuma, A. C., Ekasari, S. R., & Weddakarti, E. (2022). Implementation of
Interactive Mathematics Teaching E-Modul To Improve Student Motivation
and Learning Outcomes. Hipotenusa: Journal of Mathematical Society,
4(1). https://doi.org/10.18326/hipotenusa.v4i1.7218
Magulod, G. C. (2019). Learning styles, study habits and academic performance
of Filipino University students in applied science courses: Implications for
instruction. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(2), 184.
https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.504
Marzuki, Asih, E., & Wahyudin. (2019). Creative thinking ability based on learning
styles reviewed from mathematical communication skills. Journal of
Physics, 1315(1), 012066. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1315/1/012066

67
Middleton, K., Ricks, E., & Wright, P. (2013). Examining the relationship between
learning style preferences and attitudes toward mathematics among
students in higher education. Auburn.edu.
Mokhtar, M. Z., Tarmizi, R. A., Ayub, A. F. M., & Nawawi, M. D. H. (2013).
Motivation and Performance in Learning Calculus through Problem-Based
Learning. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 3(9), 1999–2005.
https://archive.aessweb.com/index.php/5007/article/view/2556
Nugroho, A. A., Juniati, D., & Siswono, T. Y. E. (2020). Self-regulated learning of
prospective mathematics teachers with different learning styles. Beta:
Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 13(1), 81–103.
https://doi.org/10.20414/betajtm.v13i1.344
Othman, N., & Amiruddin, M. H. (2010). Different perspectives of learning styles
from VARK model. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7, 652–660.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.088
Punjabi, S. D., & Acharya, P. B. (2020). Learning Style On Mathematical Learning.
Vidhyayana, 5(5), 1–15. https://myvedant.com/wp-content/uploads/61-
Soniyaben-Punjabi.pdf
Sakinah, M., & Avip, B. P. (2021). An analysis of students’ mathematical literacy
skills assessed from students’ learning style. Journal of Physics, 1882(1),
012075. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012075
Selçuk, G. S., & Erol, M. (2019). The relationship between learning styles and
problem solving skills in STEM education. Journal of Education and
Learning, 8(3), 292-303. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1200899.pdf
Seyedaliyan, S. M., & Salehi, K. (2021). The effect of using educational aids and
information technology to improve mathematics learning in secondary
school students. Technology of Education Journal, 15(4), 683–694.
https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2021.6700.2450
Shah, K., Ahmed, J., Shenoy, N., & N, S. (2013). How different are students and
their learning styles? International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences,
1(3), 1. https://doi.org/10.5455/2320-6012.ijrms20130808
Sinaga, S. Z. (2022). The Effect of Motivation and Learning Style on Students’
Mathematics Learning Achievement. Jurnal Basicedu, 6(3), 3554–3562.
https://doi.org/10.31004/basicedu.v6i3.2669
Sumargiyani, Susandi, A. D., & Peni, N. R. N. (2022). Analysis of Students’
Learning Motivation in Calculus on the Usage of Learning Video Media
during the Covid-19 Pandemic. Mathematics Education Journals, 6(1), 1–
11. https://doi.org/10.22219/mej.v6i1.19547

68
Syofyan, R., & Siwi, M. K. (2018). The impact of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic
learning styles on economics education teaching. Proceedings of the First
Padang International Conference On Economics Education, Economics,
Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA
2018), 114–121. https://doi.org/ 10.2991/piceeba-18.2018.17
Tambaoan, R. & Gaylo, D. (2019). Differentiating Instruction in a Mathematics
Classroom: Its Effects on Senior High School Learners' Academic
Performance and Engagement in Basic Calculus. International Journal of
English and Education, 8(2), 272-286.
https://ijee.org/assets/docs/25darren.98141452.pdf
The Peak Performance Center. (2017). Types of Learning Style Models - The Peak
Performance Center. https://thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-
learning/learning/preferences/learning-styles/types-learning-style-
models/#:~:text=Fleming's%20VAK%20(Visual%2DAuditory%2D,explain
%20and%20understand%20learning%20styles.
VARK Learn Limited. (2023). The VARK Modalities: Visual, Aural, Read/write &
Kinesthetic. VARK - a Guide to Learning Styles. https://vark-
learn.com/introduction-to-vark/the-vark-modalities/
What is the VARK learning style Model? (2021, August 10). Harappa.
https://harappa.education/harappa-diaries/vark-learning-style/
Yellapu, V. (2018). Descriptive statistics. International Journal of Academic
Medicine. 4(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijam.ijam_7_18

69
 APPENDIX A

LETTER TO THE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL DIRECTOR

70
 APPENDIX B

LETTER TO THE RESPONDENTS

71
 APPENDIX C

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Part I. Learning Styles Questionnaire

This VARK Questionnaire for determining the learning styles of Grade 11 STEM students consists of sixteen
(16) items. Encircle the answer(s) which best explains your preference and select the letter(s) next to it. Please
select more than one if a single answer does not match your perception. Leave blank any question that does
not apply.

1. I need to find the way to a shop that a friend has recommended. I would:
a. find out where the shop is in relation to somewhere I know.
b. ask my friend to tell me the directions.
c. write down the street directions I need to remember.
d. use a map.
2. A website has a video showing how to make a special graph or chart. There is a person speaking,
some lists and words describing what to do and some diagrams. I would learn most from:
a. seeing the diagrams.
b. listening.
c. reading the words.
d. watching the actions.
3. I want to find out more about a tour that I am going on. I would:
a. look at details about the highlights and activities on the tour.
b. use a map and see where the places are.
c. read about the tour on the itinerary.
d. talk with the person who planned the tour or others who are going on the tour.
4. When choosing a career or area of study, these are important for me:
a. Applying my knowledge in real situations.
b. Communicating with others through discussion.
c. Working with designs, maps or charts.
d. Using words well in written communications.
5. When I am learning I:
a. like to talk things through.
b. see patterns in things.
c. use examples and applications.
d. read books, articles and handouts.
6. I want to save more money and to decide between a range of options. I would:
a. consider examples of each option using my financial information.
b. read a print brochure that describes the options in detail.
c. use graphs showing different options for different time periods.
d. talk with an expert about the options.
7. I want to learn how to play a new board game or card game. I would:
a. watch others play the game before joining in.
b. listen to somebody explaining it and ask questions.
c. use the diagrams that explain the various stages, moves and strategies in the game.

72
 d. read the instructions.
8. I have a problem with my heart. I would prefer that the doctor:
a. gave me something to read to explain what was wrong.
b. used a plastic model to show me what was wrong.
c. described what was wrong.
d. showed me a diagram of what was wrong.
9. I want to learn to do something new on a computer. I would:
a. read the written instructions that came with the program.
b. talk with people who know about the program.
c. start using it and learn by trial and error.
d. follow the diagrams in a book.
10. When learning from the Internet I like:
a. videos showing how to do or make things.
b. interesting design and visual features.
c. interesting written descriptions, lists and explanations.
d. audio channels where I can listen to podcasts or interviews.
11. I want to learn about a new project. I would ask for:
a. diagrams to show the project stages with charts of benefits and costs.
b. a written report describing the main features of the project.
c. an opportunity to discuss the project.
d. examples where the project has been used successfully.
12. I want to learn how to take better photos. I would:
a. ask questions and talk about the camera and its features.
b. use the written instructions about what to do.
c. use diagrams showing the camera and what each part does.
d. use examples of good and poor photos showing how to improve them.
13. I prefer a presenter or a teacher who uses:
a. demonstrations, models or practical sessions.
b. question and answer, talk, group discussion, or guest speakers.
c. handouts, books, or readings.
d. diagrams, charts, maps or graphs.
14. I have finished a competition or test and I would like some feedback. I would like to have feedback:
a. using examples from what I have done.
b. using a written description of my results.
c. from somebody who talks it through with me.
d. using graphs showing what I achieved.
15. I want to find out about a house or an apartment. Before visiting it I would want:
a. to view a video of the property.
b. a discussion with the owner.
c. a printed description of the rooms and features.
d. a plan showing the rooms and a map of the area.
16. I want to assemble a wooden table that came in parts (kitset). I would learn best from:
a. diagrams showing each stage of the assembly.
b. advice from someone who has done it before.
c. written instructions that came with the parts for the table.

73
 d. watching a video of a person assembling a similar table.

Part II. Level of Motivation

This questionnaire for the level of motivation in learning math-specialized STEM subjects has two parts: one
for measuring the level of motivation in learning Pre-calculus, and another one for Basic Calculus, which totals
into twenty (20) items. Each part consists of ten (10) items: three (3) items for expectancy, three (3) items for
value, and four (4) items for cost. Please select how high your level of motivation with each of the following
statements on a scale of 1 to 5. Where, 1 - Very Low, 2 – Low, 3 – Moderate, 4 – High, and 5 - Very High

A. Motivation in Learning Pre-calculus

Motivation in learning Pre-

VL L M H VH
Calculus

Expectancy

1. Knowing I can learn the material

1 2 3 4 5
on this subject.

2. Believing that I can be

1 2 3 4 5
successful on this subject.

3. Understanding the material on

1 2 3 4 5
this subject confidently.

Value

1. Thinking that this subject is

1 2 3 4 5
important.

2. Valuing this subject. 1 2 3 4 5

3. Thinking that this subject is

1 2 3 4 5
useful.

Cost

1. Not requiring too much time in

1 2 3 4 5
the subject's schoolwork.

2. Being able to put in the time

1 2 3 4 5
needed to do well in this subject.

3. Not having to give up too much

1 2 3 4 5
to do well in this subject.

74
 4. Having time to put into this
subject despite having other things 1 2 3 4 5
to do.

B. Motivation in Learning Basic Calculus

Motivation in learning Basic

VL L M H VH
Calculus

Expectancy

1. Knowing I can learn the material

1 2 3 4 5
on this subject.

2. Believing that I can be

1 2 3 4 5
successful on this subject.

3. Understanding the material on

1 2 3 4 5
this subject confidently.

Value

1. Thinking that this subject is

1 2 3 4 5
important.

2. Valuing this subject. 1 2 3 4 5

3. Thinking that this subject is

1 2 3 4 5
useful.

Cost

1. Not requiring too much time in

1 2 3 4 5
the subject's schoolwork.

2. Being able to put in the time

1 2 3 4 5
needed to do well in this subject.

3. Not having to give up too much

1 2 3 4 5
to do well in this subject.

75
4. Having time to put into this
subject despite having other things 1 2 3 4 5
to do.

76
APPENDIX D

77
 APPENDIX E

FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES FOR THE LEVEL OF MOTIVATION IN

LEARNING MATH-SPECIALIZED STEM SUBJECTS

A. Motivation in learning Pre-calculus

Indicator 1 2 3 4 5
A. Expectancy
1. Knowing I can learn the material on this subject. 7 23 71 37 8
2. Believing that I can be successful on this
10 42 56 31 7
subject.
3. Understanding the material on this subject
10 47 54 30 5
confidently.
B. Value
1. Thinking that this subject is important. 6 29 39 42 30
2. Valuing this subject. 11 31 49 44 11
3. Thinking that this subject is useful. 7 42 37 44 16
C. Cost
1. Not requiring too much time in the subject's
20 38 29 41 18
schoolwork.
2. Being able to put in the time needed to do well
11 35 52 39 9
in this subject.
3. Not having to give up too much to do well in this
14 39 44 39 10
subject.
4. Having time to put into this subject despite
9 45 47 34 11
having other things to do.

B. Motivation in learning Basic Calculus

Indicator 1 2 3 4 5
A. Expectancy
1. Knowing I can learn the material on this subject. 10 40 43 46 7
2. Believing that I can be successful on this
16 43 55 27 5
subject.
3. Understanding the material on this subject
16 45 56 26 3
confidently.

78
B. Value
1. Thinking that this subject is important. 10 27 44 41 24
2. Valuing this subject. 13 31 52 37 13
3. Thinking that this subject is useful. 11 31 45 45 14
C. Cost
1. Not requiring too much time in the subject's
14 41 43 33 15
schoolwork.
2. Being able to put in the time needed to do well
14 37 49 37 9
in this subject.
3. Not having to give up too much to do well in this
14 35 50 34 13
subject.
4. Having time to put into this subject despite
11 41 46 36 12
having other things to do.

79
 APPENDIX F

STATISTICAL COMPUTATIONS

Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
pre_cal_expectancy .101 146 .001 .975 146 .010
pre_cal_value .083 146 .015 .988 146 .263
pre_cal_cost .094 146 .003 .986 146 .140
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
bacal_expectancy .091 146 .005 .981 146 .041
bacal_value .095 146 .002 .976 146 .011
bacal_cost .097 146 .002 .977 146 .015
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
pre_cal_expectancy 146 1.00 5.00 2.9268 .78470
pre_cal_value 146 2.28 4.39 3.2141 .39362
pre_cal_cost 146 1.00 5.00 2.9692 .77454
bacal_expectancy 146 1.00 5.00 2.8060 .84429
bacal_value 146 1.00 5.00 3.1507 .96314
bacal_cost 146 1.00 5.00 2.9555 .84521
overall_precal 146 1.69 4.16 3.0371 .44949
overall_bacal 146 1.11 4.83 2.9708 .62266
Valid N (listwise) 146

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 96.50
aural 12 61.13
readandwrite 4 70.63
overall_precal
kinesthetic 50 65.17
multimodal 74 79.43
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
overall_precal
Chi-Square 6.215
df 4

80
 Asymp. Sig. .184
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 82.17
aural 12 70.92
readandwrite 4 52.75
pre_cal_cost
kinesthetic 50 71.20
multimodal 74 75.89
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
pre_cal_cost
Chi-Square 1.663
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .797
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 129.67
aural 12 48.21
readandwrite 4 80.38
pre_cal_value
kinesthetic 50 52.76
multimodal 74 86.69
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
pre_cal_value
Chi-Square 34.261
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks

81
 learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 72.42
aural 12 63.54
readandwrite 4 83.50
pre_cal_expectancy
kinesthetic 50 69.62
multimodal 74 77.28
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
pre_cal_expecta
ncy
Chi-Square 1.941
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .747
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 89.33
aural 12 59.96
readandwrite 4 72.25
overall_bacal
kinesthetic 50 70.00
multimodal 74 76.84
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
overall_bacal
Chi-Square 2.881
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .578
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 76.33
aural 12 67.88
bacal_cost readandwrite 4 87.50
kinesthetic 50 74.72
multimodal 74 72.60

82
 Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
bacal_cost
Chi-Square .762
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .943
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 95.92
aural 12 62.71
readandwrite 4 88.63
bacal_value
kinesthetic 50 65.02
multimodal 74 78.34
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
bacal_value
Chi-Square 6.033
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .197
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 80.75
aural 12 65.04
readandwrite 4 35.25
bacal_expectancy
kinesthetic 50 73.20
multimodal 74 76.55
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
bacal_expectanc
y

83
 Chi-Square 4.382
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .357
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 89.33
aural 12 59.96
readandwrite 4 72.25
overall_bacal
kinesthetic 50 70.00
multimodal 74 76.84
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
overall_bacal
Chi-Square 2.881
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .578
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 76.33
aural 12 67.88
readandwrite 4 87.50
bacal_cost
kinesthetic 50 74.72
multimodal 74 72.60
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
bacal_cost
Chi-Square .762
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .943
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

84
 Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 95.92
aural 12 62.71
readandwrite 4 88.63
bacal_value
kinesthetic 50 65.02
multimodal 74 78.34
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
bacal_value
Chi-Square 6.033
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .197
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

Ranks
learning_style N Mean Rank
visual 6 80.75
aural 12 65.04
readandwrite 4 35.25
bacal_expectancy
kinesthetic 50 73.20
multimodal 74 76.55
Total 146

Test Statisticsa,b
bacal_expectanc
y
Chi-Square 4.382
df 4
Asymp. Sig. .357
a. Kruskal Wallis Test
b. Grouping Variable:
learning_style

85
 APPENDIX G

DOCUMENTATION

Research Title Defense last March 23, 2023

86
Research Proposal Defense last May 22, 2023

87
 CURRICULUM VITAE

CLYNTH FELIX G. DELFINO

Zone 11 Block 4, Brgy. Fatima,
General Santos City
+639052208211
clynthfelix.delfino@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 17
Date of Birth: October 19, 2005
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Male
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 157 cm
Weight: 54 kg
Religion: Roman Catholic

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Brgy Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School General Santos City National High School
Brgy Calumpang, General Santos City
2018-2022
Elementary FVR Village Elementary School
Brgy 39.5, Fatima, General Santos City
2012-2018

88
 CURRICULUM VITAE

BERNADETTE DIANE A. DURIAS

NLSA Road Ext., Purok Masagana,
Brgy. San Isidro, General Santos City
+639123456789
bernadettediane.durias@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 17
Date of Birth: December 13, 2005
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Female
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 152 cm
Weight: 45 kg
Religion: Roman Catholic

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School General Santos City National School Secondary of
Arts and Trades
Tiongson St. General Santos City
2018-2022
Elementary Jose C. Catolico Sr. Elementary School
Tiongson St. General Santos City
2012-2018

89
 CURRICULUM VITAE

ANIKA SOPHIA A. MILLADO

Purok Naval, Brgy. San Isidro,
General Santos City
+639770379888
anikasophia.millado@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 17
Date of Birth: October 28, 2005
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Female
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 152 cm
Weight: 38.8 kg
Religion: Roman Catholic

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School Alabel National Science High School
Alabel, Sarangani
2018-2022
Elementary Dadiangas West Central Elementary School
Ramon Magsaysay Ave, General Santos City
2012-2018

90
 CURRICULUM VITAE

CRESARDO L. III MORENO

Diamond Valley, Tambler,
General Santos City
+639758939557
cresardolll.moreno@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 16
Date of Birth: August 9, 2006
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Male
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 152 cm
Weight: 50 kg
Religion: Roman Catholic

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School Banisil National High School
Tambler, General Santos City
2017-2022
Elementary Banisil Central Elementary School
Tambler, General Santos City
2010-2017

91
 CURRICULUM VITAE

JEDRICK J. RELATOR
Blk 9 Lot 19, Purok Greenville,
Brgy. Calumpang, General Santos City
+639195360400
jedrick.relator@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 17
Date of Birth: December 31, 2005
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Male
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 162 cm
Weight: 75 kg
Religion: Roman Catholic

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School GSC National High School
Barangay Calumpang, General Santos City
2018-2022
Elementary H.N. Cahilsot Central Elemenetary School
Barangay Calumpang, General Santos City
2012-2018

92
 CURRICULUM VITAE

ANNA FAYE M. SAULON

007 Chico St., Brgy. Dadiangas North,
General Santos City
+639494242971
annafaye.saulon@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 17
Date of Birth: September 16, 2005
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Female
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 164 cm
Weight: 47 kg
Religion: Roman Catholic

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School Holy Trinity College of General Santos City
Fiscal Daproza Avenue, General Santos City
2018-2022
Elementary Shalom Crest Wizard Academy
Salvani Street, City Heights, General Santos City
2012-2018

93
 CURRICULUM VITAE

RANIA S. ZACARIA
Zone 9-A, Purok 4, Brgy. Fatima,
General Santos City
+639205046977
rania.zacaria@msugensan.edu.ph

__
Personal Data
Age: 16
Date of Birth: August 11, 2006
Birthplace: General Santos City
Gender: Female
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Height: 156 cm
Weight: 48 kg
Religion: Islam

Educational Attainment:

Senior High School Mindanao State University - General Santos City

Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2022 – Present
Junior High School General Santos City National High School
Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2018-2022
Elementary Upper Tambler Central Elementary School
Barangay Fatima, General Santos City
2012-2018

94