THE IMPACT OF DIFFERENT TEACHING STYLES TO THE COGNITIVE

PERFORMANCE OF SHS STUDENTS OF NDMC

A Thesis Presented to the

Integrated Basic Education – Senior High School Department
Notre Dame of Midsayap College
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements of the Strand
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics

Dominic Anthony Jadulos

Geraldine Kathe Tamalla

Asnea Zacaria Balaiman

Marjorie Cantomayor

Shena Andrea Latada

Khenn Henrich Neri

Angelica Gatchalian

Arian Almazan

Dexter Agbona

Justine Pelayo
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The field of learning styles is becoming more and more significant in education,

impacting numerous aspects of the learning environment. Even when participating in the same

learning activities, they can anticipate how various students may process information and

approach learning challenges.

The cognitive learning of a student can be greatly impacted by a variety of teaching

methods. The demands of their students, their educational philosophy, and their personalities can

all have a significant impact on how these teaching methods differ from teacher to teacher. The

student can also learn which type of skill they are more proficient in by using a variety of

instructional methods.

Teaching and learning are the main aspects of learning activities that affect student

achievement. Damrongpanit (2013), stated that students' learning styles and teaching styles affect

the student's cognitive, affective, and psychomotor skills, which ultimately will affect learning

outcomes.

Different teaching styles cater to diverse learning preferences and cognitive abilities.

Understanding the impact of these styles on student learning outcomes, particularly cognitive

development, is critical for optimizing educational practices. Learning styles are an increasingly

important area in education, affecting different aspects of the learning arena. They can predict
how students might process information and solve learning problems differently even when

engaged in the same learning activities (Al-Roomy, 2023).

Teaching styles refer to teachers’ distinct methods and strategies to facilitate student

learning. These teaching styles can vary drastically from one educator to another, influenced by

their personality, educational philosophy, and the needs of their students (Dan, 2023). Using a

range of teaching techniques, the student can also discover what kind of talent they are best

suited for. This research investigates the impact of different teaching styles on the cognitive

performance of senior high school students at Notre Dame of Midsayap College. Senior high

school students are at a crucial stage of their academic journey, preparing for higher education

and future careers. Cognitive skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity are

essential for their success. Effective teaching can significantly enhance these cognitive skills,

empowering students to navigate the complexities of the world. In general, a multitude of factors

influence the intricate relationship between diverse teaching approaches and cognitive

development. On the other hand, research indicates that problem-solving, constructivist, and

interactive learning approaches are typically more successful in fostering in-depth

comprehension, critical thinking, and long-term memory retention. As a result, the researchers

are determined to know more about the impact of different teaching styles to the cognitive

performance of senior high school students at Notre Dame of Midsayap College.

Statement of the Problem

This research aims to determine the impact of different teaching styles in Notre Dame of

Midsayap College senior high school students.

 Specifically, this study aims to determine:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of sex and strand?

2. What are the different teaching styles perceived by the students?

3. What is the cognitive performance of the students?

4. Is there a significant difference in the teaching styles perceived by the students when they

are grouped by sex?

5. Is there a significant difference in the teaching styles perceived by the students when they

are grouped by strand?

6. Is there a significant difference in the cognitive performance of the students when they

are grouped by sex?

7. Is there a significant difference in the cognitive performance of the students when they

are grouped by strand?

8. Is there a significant relationship between the teaching styles perceived by the students

and their cognitive performance?

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will be beneficial to the following individuals and institutions:

Students. The results of the study would provide the students understanding on how they

can learn best. Students stand to benefit directly from the study as it seeks to identify teaching

styles that optimize the cognitive performance. This study empowers students to actively engage

in their education and potentially enhance their academic performance.

 Teachers. This research will assist teachers in better understanding their teaching styles

and will motivate them to participate in professional development and training programs that

result in effective teaching styles. The findings of the research will improve both the overall

quality of education delivered and job satisfaction.

Notre Dame of Midsayap College. The results of this study will assist the school in

raising the standard of instruction. Their interest in conducting a program that focuses on the

teaching styles of the school's teachers will be captured by the results of the research.

Scope and Limitations

This study aims to investigate the impact of different teaching styles on the cognitive

performance of senior high school students enrolled in Notre Dame of Midsayap College. The

study will analyze the effectiveness of various teaching methods in enhancing the cognitive

abilities of the students. However, several limitations should be considered. Firstly, the sample

size may be limited, potentially affecting the generalizability of the findings. Secondly, time

constraints may limit the depth and breadth of the research. Thirdly, external factors such as

socio-economic background, personal circumstances, and prior knowledge of the students may

influence their cognitive performance but may not be fully controlled in this study. Subjective

assessments of cognitive performance may introduce researcher bias, and caution should be

exercised when generalizing the findings to other educational settings or grade levels. Finally,

the study may face limitations in controlling all variables that impact the cognitive performance,

including classroom environment, teaching experience, and individual teaching styles. These

limitations should be acknowledged to ensure the interpretation of the study's findings is

appropriate and to provide insights for future research.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined according to how they are being used in the research.

Teaching Style - Grasha (1994) identified five teaching styles: expert, formal authority,

personal model, facilitator, and delegator. Grasha (1996) defined each style, highlighting its

advantages and disadvantages. Teaching style includes strategies, methods, instructional

philosophy, and personality, with delegation, authoritative, demonstrative, and facilitative

teaching philosophies influencing it.

Teaching Methods - Gabora (2019) defines teaching as a strategic process where an

individual intentionally influences another's learning by providing information, feedback, or

guidance. Teaching methods include various techniques like talks, debates, group projects,

problem-solving exercises, and practical experiments. They support skill development,

knowledge retention, and student engagement.

Cognitive Learning - Cognitive Learning as explained by Malmstrom (2023), involves

the process of learning by absorbing, storing, retrieving, and processing information, rather than

just memorization. It involves understanding, reasoning, remembering, and perception, and

emphasizes the importance of actively engaging students in tasks that enhance higher-order

cognitive abilities.

Pedagogy - It stands to a process of imparting knowledge to students, utilizing resources

for comprehension and retention, and combining teaching and learning methods to create a

productive learning environment considering learners' needs and interests.

 Respondents – a person that will answer the questionnaire.

Researcher – is the person that conducts the study.

Reliability – it determines the reliability and validity of the questionnaire.

Statistical Tools – are the tools used to determine the differences and significance of

variables and groups.

Review of Related Literature

This chapter presents the related literature and studies from research journals, theses, and

dissertations here and abroad. This chapter also includes the presentation of the literature and

studies taken from the internet.

Teaching Styles

"Teaching style" describes how each teacher approaches the process of teaching and

learning, even though they all have the same general aim. Petrina (2007) claims that a teacher's

administration of instruction and teaching style are defined by the environment in the classroom.

It's critical to involve teachers in style to pique pupils' attention and stimulate their enthusiasm

for the lessons that will be provided by the instructor. As long as the pupils show a desire to

learn, they won't enjoy learning English but will only focus fully while the teacher is explaining

the content. Teachers' methods of education should be able to pique students' interest in learning

and persuade them to stray from the conventional approach. A teacher's behavior in the

classroom and method of instruction defines their teaching style, according to Bustos and

Espiritu (2000). Variations in teaching methods have a big impact on how well the learning

process is taught as well as how interested students are in the learning process.
Types of Teaching Styles

According to Grasha (2002), there are five different teaching styles; expert, formal

authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator.

Expert teaching style emphasizes teachers who have the necessary knowledge and skill in

the subject matter. This type of teacher constantly pushes their pupils to succeed and imparts

knowledge in great detail. Instructors who use this approach demand that their pupils be ready at

all times at (Shaari et al., 2014).

A Formal Authority type instructor has standing with students due to their expertise and

position as faculty members. He or she is in charge of setting expectations, standards of

behavior, and learning objectives for students, in addition to giving both positive and negative

feedback. Along with giving kids the structure they need to study, he or she is also concerned

with what is proper, appropriate, and standard (Mon et al., 2018).

Personal Model Teaching Style refers to teachers who teach based on their example.

Students will be personally guided by them and encouraged to imitate them. Teachers who use a

personal model teaching style serve as role models for how to think and act. In this sense,

teachers continually watch over, mentor, and teach their students by modeling their actions. By

doing this, teachers encourage their pupils to watch, copy, or consider the strategies and

techniques they use (Sim & Mohd Matore, 2022).

The Facilitator Teaching Style is known to help students gain the ability to take

autonomous action, initiative, and responsibility when their teacher asks probing questions,
considers options, offers alternatives, and helps them formulate criteria for making decisions

(Ghanizadeh & Jahedizadeh, 2016).

Lastly, the Delegator Teaching Style is a student-centered approach; the teacher passes

on the responsibility and authority to teach students. The teacher's focus is on increasing the

students' capacity to undertake self-directed work. The pupils work independently on plans or in

separate groups in this fashion (Sheikh & Mahmood, 2014). According to the study by Dilekli &

Tezci (2016), students who are studying with delegator teachers feel ignored and unsupported.

Facilitator teachers and delegator teachers share some common ground. Both of them make an

effort to provide their students with accountability for their education.

Cognitive Learning

There is a long history of research on how people learn and how learning might be effective. In

this discipline, several ideas and methods have been established, and they have had a significant

influence on learning initiatives. When it comes to learning theories, educators classify things

using three fundamental methods. These three approaches are constructivism, behaviorism, and

cognition (Çeliköz et al., 2019). Here, we will be focusing on the third approach, which is

cognition. Cognitive learning is an approach that focuses more on the effective use of the brain.

Understanding cognition is crucial to comprehending the process. The mental process of learning

and comprehending through the senses, experience, and thought is known as cognition. To

properly explain the various processes involved in learning, cognitive learning theory combines

cognition and learning (Herrity, J. 2023).

 According to the study of Çeliköz et al. (2019), the mental operations known as cognitive

processes facilitates the transfer of information between memories. These consist of operations

including attention, perception, repetition, coding, and retrieving. During the cognitive process,

the desired information is selected as stimulus, or raw, information among other information

using attention, and it is transformed into meaningful information by perception. Repetition helps

move information that is desired to be retained forever from processor memory to long-term

memory. The process of transferring information to long-term memory involves coding or the

creation of mental symbols for that knowledge. When knowledge is needed again, the retrieval

process (also known as remembering) kicks in. The desired information is located by searching

through the long-term memory and is then moved to the processor's memory for usage.

Cognitive Absorption

Keys & Wolfe (1990); Mathieu & Martineau (1997); Tannenbaum & Yukl (1992); and

Tharenou (2001) describe cognitive absorption as a state of engagement and involvement people

experience while performing an activity. By utilizing intrinsic motivation during learning

(Tharenou, 2001) and by improving their capacity to process complex and diverse information

(Ryan & Deci, 2000), this state of individuals helps them learn more from the activity (Druskat

& Kayes, 2000), learn more from the training (Tharenou, 2001), and generate more creative

ideas at work (Seo et al., 2015). Due to their enhanced capacity to process complex and varied

information (Ryan & Deci, 2000) and their ability to leverage intrinsic motivation during

learning (Tharenou, 2001), people in this state are better able to learn from the activity (Druskat

& Kayes, 2000), learn more from the training (Tharenou, 2001), and come up with more

innovative ideas at work (Seo et al., 2015). Deep involvement, a state in which people become
fully involved and begin to see an activity with intrinsic needs, personal, and keen interest, is

fundamental to cognitive absorption (Zaichkowsky, 1985). Scholars have contended that

engagement in an activity is arousal governed by the psychological states of an individual's

affective and cognitive motivation (Park & Mittal, 1985), thereby guaranteeing increased

intentions to make online purchases (Jiang et al., 2010).

Teacher Characteristics

In the words of Mugenda & Mugenda (1999), “Education is widely regarded as a basic

human right, a key to enlightenment, and a source of wealth and power,” as cited in Sanda, S.

2013). According to Sanda, S. (2013), teacher characteristics proved to have a significant effect

on the student’s academic achievement.

According to the study of Yüksel, M. (2019), due to the role that education and training

activities force upon teachers, there are a number of traits that result. The fact that the teaching

function includes a multifaceted behavior pattern explains why teachers differ from one another.

This is why teacher characteristics are being studied and researched in multiple subjects and

fields. Teacher characteristics are a decisive need for effective educational improvement. All

teachers should also possess qualities such as pedagogy, social, professional, and personality

(Sanda, S. 2013). According to Moorhead & Griffin (2010), organizational behavior has five

traits called the “Big Five Personality Traits.”. Which is agreeableness, conscientiousness,

negative emotionality, extraversion, and openness. Personality factors could not be ignored, as

these could lead to an improvement in the overall quality of education (Putrawan et al., 2012)
 In a study by Kose & Uzun (2018), they stated that a system's ability to function well is

directly correlated with the characteristics of its employees. Since education is a system that

governs the future of society (Akgun, Yildiz, & Kutluca-Canbulat, 2003), the effectiveness of the

education system, in particular the school organization, generally depends largely on the

qualifications of the teachers who will operate and implement the system (Blanton et al., 2003;

Eriken & Celikoz, 2003). In order to possess these traits, teachers must meet certain

requirements. These standards include teacher qualifications (Seferoglu, 2004) and effective

teaching qualities, which allow teachers to effectively demonstrate these skills.

Ronfeldt et al. (2013) stated that there is a lot of disagreement over the best ways to raise

the quality of instruction in K–12 classrooms, especially in underprivileged schools where there

are usually fewer highly educated teachers. At the other end of the spectrum, some have

completely disregarded teacher preparation as a barrier to admission. Instead of allocating

limited resources to a treatment that is frequently deemed ineffective (Labaree, 2004; Lortie,

1975), several propose focusing on recruitment. Relatively few large-scale studies have

examined the effects of recruitment in addition to preparation, despite the ongoing debate over

whether preservice preparation or recruiting should take precedence in order to increase K–12

instructional quality. Of the research that takes into account both, the majority focuses on just

one result (teacher retention, for example). However, it's crucial to take into account several

outcomes at once because teacher preparation may have a different impact on outcomes than

recruitment. One can incorrectly label preparation as insignificant if, for instance, teacher

preparation raises instructional quality but only retention is assessed.

Student-Centered Learning

According to Arif S. (2021), there is a progressive teaching strategy known as "student-

centered learning" that emphasizes the goals, motivations, and preferred methods of learning for

each student (Rogers, 1983). Students might be in charge of deciding what they want to learn,

how fast and how they want to learn it, and how they will evaluate their own progress (Crumly et

al., 2014). The majority of classroom instruction today is guided by the principles of teacher-

centered learning, in which the instructor assumes complete accountability for the education of a

class of students and receives all of the students' attention. The teacher has complete control over

the classroom and activities while the students stay silent and pay attention. Student-centered

learning, as opposed to teacher-centered learning approaches, moves the emphasis of instruction

from the teacher to the student, enabling them to take an active role in their own education

(Johnson, 2013). Student-centered learning, which puts the interests of the students first, has

been demonstrated to increase students' autonomy, engagement, confidence, and capacity for

critical thought as well as to produce more meaningful learning experiences (McCombs &

Whistler, 1997; Jones, 2007; Young & Paterson, 2007).

In general, student-centered learning refers to instructional strategies that concentrate on

what and how students want to learn, moving the emphasis of instruction from the teacher to the

student. In addition to increasing learning, autonomy, and critical-thinking abilities, this

approach makes learning more meaningful for students and empowers them to take an active role

in their own education.

Assessment Methods
 According to Types of Assessment (n.d.), the goal of assessment is to ascertain as

precisely as possible the knowledge, skills, and abilities that students should possess. Assessment

in the differentiated classroom need s to give precise information about students' progress in

relation to the procedures, materials, and processes covered in class. This information helps

teachers make wise, informed decisions about the needs of their students and the direction their

instruction should take. Formative assessment takes place both before and during the learning

process, and summative assessment happens at the conclusion of the learning process or at

significant points in a learning cycle. These two main types of assessment happen at different

times during the learning process.

"Involves the gathering and analysis of assessment-elicited evidence for the purpose of

determining when and how to adjust instructional activities or learning tactics in order to achieve

learning goals," according to Popham (2011), is the process of formative assessment. Pre-

assessment and ongoing assessment are the two formative assessment methods used to

accomplish this goal. A type of formative assessment known as pre-assessment takes place prior

to the start of a unit of study. Pre-Assessments are never graded, whether they are official or

informal. Their purpose is solely diagnostic. Most people associate formative assessment with

ongoing assessment, which takes place at different points during the learning process. Its goal is

to determine how "with" the teacher's students are in terms of achieving learning objectives so

that classroom procedures, materials, and end products can be modified to better support student

development.

Summative evaluations are completed at the conclusion of the learning process and are

usually graded. Tests, projects, performances, presentations, and demonstrations are a few types

of summative assessments. Summative evaluations are meant to demonstrate to students how

well they have grasped the concepts, knowledge, and abilities covered in the unit. It is advised by

experts, like Wiggins and McTighe (2011), that summative exams be scheduled prior to

instruction. Following that, instruction is divided into structured chunks that allow students to

practice and gain mastery of the abilities, concepts, and knowledge needed to succeed on the

final exam (Types of Assessment, n.d.)

It is common knowledge in education that formative assessment improves student

outcomes, and there is a wealth of empirical evidence to support this claim. In actuality, there is

a paucity of empirical data with a scientific foundation that demonstrates the direct correlation

between formative assessment and successful educational outcomes. Formative assessments and

other diagnostic methods used in the classroom yield data that should support better instructional

outcomes and pedagogical practices (Dunn & Mulvenon, 2019).

Educational Technology

According to Januszewski & Molenda (2013), educational technology is the study and

the ethical practice of enhancing learning and improving performance through the development,

application, and management of appropriate technological processes and resources. It is a

systematic approach to conceptualizing and evaluating the educational process of learning and

teaching, and it helps in the implementation of modern educational teaching strategies.

According to Lazar (2015), Educational technology is used in three ways: as a tutor (the

computer delivers instructions and helps the user), as a teaching tool, and as a learning tool.

As we are able to observe in our environment, children are exposed to modern technological

devices from an early age (Gutnik et al., 2011; Rideout 2011), therefore the introduction of new
instructional technology at school will be effortless. The study of (Greenhow et al., 2009), states

that more students are using advanced technical equipment.

Educational technology is becoming increasingly common in the classroom. These new

technologies will play a key part in students learning and acquisition of diverse cognitive

knowledge. The use of educational technology improves skills and cognitive abilities. Kaufman

(2004) and Lee et al. (2008) conducted substantial research on the effects of instructional

technology on cognitive processes. With the help of modern technology, there is a surge in

learning and getting new knowledge, particularly on mobile devices.

Theoretical Framework

This study was anchored on the importance of cognitive load theory. assert that in order

to maximize learning, instructional strategies should avoid overloading human working memory,

which can only contain a certain quantity of knowledge at a time (Sweller, 1988).

This theory employs experience that we've all had in class when the instructor breezed

through the material, leaving us with little to retain. There have also been sessions where the

material is so intricate that we come away from them much more perplexed than when we

arrived. CLT helps to explain why this occurs as well as what teachers may do to maximize each

student's learning in the classroom.

This theory suggests that different teaching approaches can help senior high school

students retain a lot of information and maximize individual learning in our classrooms. It also

suggests that senior high school students should activate prior knowledge before learning new

material. This is because our long-term memory is thought to contain a variety of organized
patterns of knowledge, or "schema." It is easier to manage a schema than a large amount of new,

isolated knowledge since each schema functions as a single item in working memory. By using

talks, visual aids, and tests to retrieve material from the long-term memory, senior high Students

are able to integrate new information to expand on what they already know by bringing

important information into working memory (Baddeley, 2003).

Conceptual Framework

The study's conceptual framework consists of three variables to define how to show the

relationship or what important between of the three variables of conceptual framework. The

Independent variable, the dependent variable and the moderating variable.

The independent variable is teaching style, as it causes the change that is manifested by

the dependent variable, which is the cognitive performacne of Grade 11 NDMC students. The

dependent variable and independent variable are moderated variables by the demographic profile

(sex and strand) of the students.

TEACHING COGNITIVE
STYLES PERFORMANCE

SEX AND
STRAND
 CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design, locale, and respondents of the study, sample

design, instrumentation, validity and reliability data gathering procedure, and statistical tools.

Quantitative research methods are research methods dealing with numbers and anything

measurable systematically to investigate phenomena and their relationships.

Research Design

This quantitative study utilized an descriptive-correlational design to determine the effect

of different teaching styles to the cognitive performance of Grade 11 and Grade 12 students at

Notre Dame of Midsayap College. It is designed to provide research information about what is

happening. In this kind of research, the researchers used the Descriptive-Correlational Survey

Research Design, which uses a survey questionnaire to get the data needed for the study. The

researchers' primary goal is to draw conclusions about the subject in terms of the data to

understand the variables that influence the cognitive performance of senior high school students.
The Respondents

The study respondents were 20 students from each strand and grade level of Notre Dame

of Midsayap College, Senior High School Department. There were (40) students from STEM,

(40) students from HUMSS, (40) students from ABM, and (40) students from TVL.

Locale of the Study

This study will be conducted to the Senior High School Department students of Notre

Dame of Midsayap College, located at Poblacion 5, Midsayap, Cotabato, for the second semester

of the Academic Year 2023-2024.

Data Sampling Method

This study utilized the stratified random sampling technique. The stratified random

sampling method makes clusters based on the characteristics of the respondents from the Senior

High School Students of Notre Dame of Midsayap College. The clusters are the strands.

Research Instrument

A researcher made survey questionnaire was utilized in this study. The researcher handed

out a survey to which the students responded and then assessed the information obtained. The

study used a researcher-made questionnaire as the primary tool for gathering data. Three

elements make up the questionnaire and test survey. The first part requests information about the

respondents (name, sex, age and strand). The second part asks what type of teaching style they

have experienced. The last part asks about the cognitive performance of the students. The Scale

had five options: 5- Strongly Agree, 4-Agree, 3- Moderately Agree, 2- Disagree, 1- Strongly
Disagree. It is a 5-point Likert Scale. The data required for the study was provided via the

questionnaires that were distributed to the respondents.

Data Gathering Procedures

The researchers began the data gathering by addressing a letter to the Assistant Principal

of the Senior High School Department and the Research Adviser to seek approval to conduct the

pilot testing for the study. Upon approval of their request, the initial interview proceeded to make

a final list of respondents. The survey will be conducted face-to-face to monitor the

questionnaire and ensure that the respondents understand the questions. Participants were also

ensured that their personal information would be suitably protected and would not be revealed to

anyone. After the approval, the distribution of the questionnaire to the students at the senior high

school began. The study respondents were one hundred sixty (160) students from the Senior

High School Department of Note Dame of Midsayap College. After the respondents were given

enough time to answer the given questions, the survey questionnaires were retrieved.

Validity and Reliability

The researcher-made questionnaire underwent content validity by the researcher's adviser

to assess the consistency and relevance to the objectives. To test the reliability of the tool, a

pilot-testing was conducted to thirty (30) selected Grade 10 students of Notre Dame of Midsayap

College. The selected students were not considered as actual participants of this study, the

reliability result was r = 0.913, therefore it was acceptable, which means that the questionnaire is

reliable.
Statistical Treatment of Data

The researchers compiled, sorted, organized, and tabulated the data as soon as they

collected it. They were statistically treated in order to answer the study's proposed questions. The

statistical tools used were the frequency and percentage distribution, mean and standard

deviation, T-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and pearson - r.

For problem 1, the frequency and percentage distribution were used to determine the

demographic profile of the respondents in terms of sex and strand. These were used to process

data by systematically categorizing and quantifying the distribution of respondents based on their

sex and academic strand.

For problems 2 and 3, the mean and standard deviation were used to determine the

student’s perceived teaching styles and the cognitive performance. Mean represents the average

perception of the teaching styles, while the standard deviation provides a measure of how much

the perceptions vary from the mean.

For problems 4 to 7, the T-test and ANOVA were used to determine the differences of

the perceived teaching styles and cognitive performance when grouped by sex and strand. The T-

test can compare the average perceived teaching styles between two groups (e.g, male and

female students). ANOVA, on the other hand, can be used to determine the differences of two or

more groups and can provide a broader analysis. For example, the perceived teaching styles and

the cognitive performance across all strands and grade levels.

Lastly, for problem 8, to determine the significant relationship between the teaching styles and

the cognitive performance, the pearson - r was used. Pearson - r is a tool to determine the

strength and direction of the relationship between the two variables.

 CHAPTER III

RESULTS

Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Table 3.1. Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Variable Values Frequency (f) Percentage (%)
Sex Male 69 43.10
Female 91 56.90
Total 160 100.00
Strand STEM 40 25.00
HUMSS 40 25.00
ABM 40 25.00
TVL 40 25.00
Total 160 100.00

Table 3.1 shows the demographic profile of the respondents. It can be observed in the

table that 91 respondents, or 56.90%, are female compared to 69 respondents, or 43.10%, male

respondents.

All strands have an equal number of respondents, with 40 respondents from each strand,

namely STEM, HUMSS, ABM, and TVL.

Different Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students

(Kindly use this table format for the Likert scales…)

Table 3.2. Scale Range and Description Used for Interpretation

 Range Description
4.21 – 5.00 Strongly Agree
3.41 – 4.20 Agree
2.61 – 3.40 Moderately Agree
1.81 – 2.60 Disagree
1.00 – 1.80 Strongly Disagree

Table 3.3. Different Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students

Std.
Statements Mean Deviatio Description
n
1. My teacher emphasizes their knowledge of the 4.27 .592 Strongly Agree
subject matter in class.
2. My teacher’s expertise is the center of the class 4.24 .649 Strongly Agree
discussions..
‍

Descriptive Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation
ET1 160 4.2688 .59051
ET2 160 4.2375 .64902
ET3 160 4.2063 .59449
ET4 160 4.3563 .75525
ET5 160 4.4125 .69488
FAT1 160 4.2812 .72833
FAT2 160 4.4625 .69939
FAT3 160 3.9125 .95422
FAT4 160 4.0250 .76025
FAT5 160 4.0000 .80094
PMT1 160 4.2813 .71964
PMT2 160 4.1813 .79994
PMT3 160 4.0875 .84219
PMT4 160 4.1375 .78096
PMT5 160 3.9750 .87560
FT1 160 4.1250 .79898
FT2 160 4.2437 .72465
FT3 160 4.2562 .72030
FT4 160 4.2813 .65562
FT5 160 4.0875 .71275
DT1 160 4.1438 .68080
DT2 160 4.0625 .77450
DT3 160 4.0125 .71803
DT4 160 3.4062 .97965
DT5 160 3.4250 .90108
Valid N (listwise) 160

Table 3.4. Compare Means of Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students

(Gayahin ang table sa Table 3.3)

Cognitive Performance of the Students

(Gayahin ang table sa Table 3.3)

Table 3.5. Cognitive Performance of the Students

 Significant Difference in the Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students when they are
Grouped by Sex
Levene’s Test
for Equality of t – test for Equality of Means
Variances
95% Confidence
Sig.(2- Mean Std. Error Interval of the
Mean SD F Sig. T df
tailed) Difference Difference Difference
Lower Upper
DV Male 4.154 .414 .000 1.000 1.031 158 .304 .069 .067 -.063 .202
Female 4.085 .427 1.035 148.649 .302 .069 .067 -.063 .202
Table 3.6. Significant Difference in the Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students when they are Grouped by Sex

An independent sample t-test was conducted to compare the teaching styles perceived by the students
when they are grouped by sex. There were significant differences (t/(158) = 1.031, p = .304 in the scores, with the
mean score for male (M = 4.154, SD = 0.414) higher than female (M = 4.085, SD = 0.427). The magnitude of the
differences in the means (mean difference = 0.069, 95% CI=-0.063 to 0.202) was not significant. Hence, H o1 is
accepted.

Significant Difference in the Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students when they are
Grouped by Strand
 Table 3.7. Significant Difference in the Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students when they are
Grouped by Strand
Descriptives
Groups N Mean SD
STEM 40 4.11 .449
ABM 40 4.23 .327
HUMSS 40 4.17 .411
TVL 40 3.95 .449
ANOVA
Dependent Variable: Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students
Source of SS Df MS F P Value
Variation
Between Groups 1.723 3 .574 3.378 0.020
Within Groups 26.524 156 .179
‍
Total 28.247 159

The means of the teaching styles perceived by the students when they are grouped by
strand are the following: STEM M = 4.11 (SD = 0.449), ABM M = 4.23 (SD = .327), HUMSS
M = 4.17 (SD = .411), and TVL M = 3.95 (SD = .449). Since the p-value of 0.020 is less than the
significance level α of 0.05. Therefore, the analysis of variance showed that the difference
between groups was statistically significant. Hence, Ho2 is not accepted.

Significant Difference in the Cognitive Performance of the Students when they are Grouped
by Sex
Levene’s Test
for Equality of t – test for Equality of Means
Variances
95% Confidence
Sig.(2- Mean Std. Error Interval of the
Mean SD F Sig. T df
tailed) Difference Difference Difference
Lower Upper
DV Male 4.168 .489 5.192 .024 .597 158 .551 .041 .069 -.096 .178
Female 4.125 .388 .579 126.767 .564 .041 .069 -.100 .183
Table 3.8. Significant Difference in the Cognitive Performance of the Students when they are Grouped by
Sex

An independent sample t-test was conducted to compare the teacher's affirmation when respondents are
grouped by grade level. There were significant differences (t/(126.767) = 0.579, p = 0.564 in the scores, with the
mean score for Male (M = 4.168, SD = 0.489) higher than Female (M = 4.125, SD = 0.388). The magnitude of the
differences in the means (mean difference = 0.041, 95% CI= -0.096 to 0.178) was not significant. Hence, Ho3 is
accepted.

Significant Difference in the Cognitive Performance of the Students when they are Grouped
by Strand
Table 3.9. Significant Difference in the Cognitive Performance of the Students when they are
Grouped by Strand
Descriptives
Groups N Mean SD
STEM 40 4.16 .373
ABM 40 4.26 .362
HUMSS 40 4.21 .410
TVL 40 3.94 .515
ANOVA
Dependent Variable: Cognitive Performance of the Students
Source of SS df MS F P Value
Variation
Between Groups 2.422 3 .807 4.587 .004
Within Groups 27.451 156 .176
‍
Total 29.872 159

The means of the cognitive performance of the students when they are grouped by strand
are the following: STEM M = 4.16 (SD = 0.373), ABM M = 4.26 (SD = .362), HUMSS M =
4.21 (SD = .410), and TVL M = 3.94 (SD = .515). Since the p-value of 0.004 is less than the
significance level α of 0.05. Therefore, the analysis of variance showed that the difference
between groups was statistically significant. Hence, Ho4 is not accepted.

Significant Relationship Between the Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students and their
Cognitive Performance

Table 3.10. Significant Relationship Between the Teaching Styles Perceived by the Students and
their Cognitive Performance
Teaching Styles Cognitive Performance
Teaching Styles Pearson Correlation 1 .719**
Sig. (2 - tailed) .000
N 160 160
Cognitive Performance Pearson Correlation .719** 1
Sig. (2 - tailed) .000
N 160 160
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 3.10 revealed that the teaching styles perceived by the students had a significantly strong
positive relationship with the respondents' cognitive performance (r=0.719, p<.01). Hence, Ho5 is not
accepted.
 References

Al-Roomy, M. A. (2023). The relationship among students’ learning styles, health

sciences colleges, and grade point average (GPA). Advances in Medical

Education and Practice, Volume 14, 203–213.

https://doi.org/10.2147/amep.s395720

Arif, S. (2021). Incorporating student-centered learning in an ecosystems course.

Journal of Col. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27133148

Buckley, S. (2016). Gender and sex differences in student participation, achievement

and engagement in mathematics.

https://research.acer.edu.au/learning_processes/18/?platform=hootsuite

Çeliköz, N., Erişen, Y., & Şahin, M., (2019). Cognitive Learning Theories With

Emphasis on Latent Learning, Gestalt and Information Processing Theories.

Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World , vol.9, no.3, 18-

33. https://avesis.yildiz.edu.tr/yayin/b7a5a4ef-a206-40a3-9d57-

24891a62903c/cognitive-learning-theories-with-emphasis-on-latent-learning-

gestalt-and-information-processing-theories

Damrongpanit, S & Auyporn, R. 2013. Matching of Learning Styles and Teaching

Styles: Advantage and Disadvantage on Ninth-Grade Students Academic

Achievements. Journal of Academic Journal Educational Research and Review. vol. 8.

No. 20

Dan. (2023, July 5). How teaching styles impact learning - the teaching couple. The

Teaching Couple. https://theteachingcouple.com/how-teaching-styles-impact-

 learning/

Dilekli, Y., & Tezci, E. (2016). The relationship among teachers’ classroom practices

for teaching thinking skills, teachers’ self-efficacy towards teaching thinking

skills and teachers’ teaching styles. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 144-

151. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S187118711630030X

Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2019). A critical review of research on formative

assessments: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative

assessments in education. Practical assessment, research, and evaluation,

14(1), 7. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/pare/vol14/iss1/7/

Ghanizadeh, A., & Jahedizadeh, S. (2016). EFL teachers’ teaching style, creativity,

and burnout: A path analysis approach. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1151997.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1151997

Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Web 2.0 and classroom research:

What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.

Gutnick, A.L., M. Robb, L. Takeuchi, & J. Kotler. (2011). Always Connected: The

New Digital Media Habits of Young Children. New York: The Joan Ganz Cooney

Center at Sesame Workshop.

www.ictliteracy.info/ rf.pdf/jgcc_alwaysconnected.pdf

Herrity, J. (2023). What Is Cognitive Learning? Definition, Benefits and Examples.

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/cognitive-

earning#:~:text=Cognitive%20learning%20is%20an%20immersive,the%20me

mory%20and%20retention%20capacity.
Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (Eds.). (2013). Educational technology:

A definition with commentary. Routledge.

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=JO3Yc0UuK74C&oi=fnd&pg=

PP2&dq=+educational+technology&ots=aCv0U9kKKl&sig=kPCCRMeJczXjPx

iJ8Eb48HZ3ynk

Kauffman, D. F. (2004). Self-regulated learning in web-based environments:

Instructional tools designed to facilitate cognitive strategy use, meta-cognitive

processing, and motivational beliefs.

Kile, N. C., (2019). What Are the Two Main Types of Assessment?

https://www.continued.com/early-childhood-education/ask-the-experts/what-t wo-

main-types-assessment-23749

Kose, A., & Uzun, M. (2018). Prospective Teachers' Views on Effective Teacher

Characteristics and Their Occupational Self-efficacy Perceptions in terms of

These Characteristics. Educational Process: International Journal, 60+.

https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A615911349/AONE?u=phndmc&sid=bookmark

-AONE&xid=3b25b4f

Lazar, S. (2015). The importance of educational technology in teaching. International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 3(1),

111-114. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/the-importance-of-educational-technology-in-

teaching
Lee, H. W., Lim, K. Y., & Grabowski, B. L. (2008). Generative learning: Principles and

implications for making meaning. In M. J. Spector, D. M. Merrill, J. van

Merrienboer & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research and educational

communications and technology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis

Group.

Mon, S. H., & Wai, T. (2018). A Study of the Teaching Styles of Trained and

Untrained Primary Assistant Teachers (Doctoral dissertation, MERAL Portal).

https://meral.edu.mm/records/5372

MUHAMMAD NAUFAL, R. Z. (2023). EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF MR.

KEATING’S TEACHING STYLE ON STUDENTS INTEREST PORTRAYED

IN DEAD POETS SOCIETY FILM BY PETER WEIR” (Doctoral dissertation,

Universitas Mataram).

http://eprints.unram.ac.id/42937/2/Muhammad%20Naufal%20Razan%20Zhaf ran

%2C%20Artikel%20Thesis%20%28Repaired%29.pdf

Rideout, V. (2011). Zero to Eight: Children's Media Use in America. San Francisco,

CA: Common Sense Media. Retrieved from www.commonsenseme-

dia.org/sites/default/files/research/zerotoeightfi-nal2011.pdf

Ronfeldt, M., Reininger, M., & Kwok, A. (2013). Recruitment or preparation?

Investigating the effects of teacher characteristics and student teaching.

Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 319+.

https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A343364224/AONE?u=phndmc&sid=bookmark

-AONE&xid=36e29074

Sanda, S. (2013). Influence Of Teacher Characteristics On Students' Academic

 Achievement Among Senior High Schools In Ogan Komering Ulu. Journal of

English and Education (JEE), 7(2).

https://journal.uii.ac.id/JEE/article/view/4474

Shaari, A. S., Yusoff, N. M., Ghazali, I. M., Osman, R. H., & Dzahir, N. F. M. (2014).

The relationship between lecturers’ teaching style and students’ academic engagement.

Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 10-20.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814015328

Sheikh, A., & Mahmood, N. (2014). Effect of different teaching styles on students’

motivation towards English language learning at secondary level. Sci. Int (Lahore),

26(20), 825-830.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nasir-Mahmood-

17/publication/334626377_EFFECT_OF_DIFFERENT_TEACHING_STYLES

_ON_STUDENTS'_MOTIVATION_TOWARDSENGLISH_LANGUAGE_LEAR

NING_AT_SECONDARY_LEVEL/links/5d36dd084585153e59199d5c/EFFEC

T-OF-DIFFERENT-TEACHING-STYLES-ON-STUDENTS-MOTIVATION-

TOWARDS-ENGLISH-LANGUAGE-LEARNING-AT-SECONDARY-

LEVEL.pdf

Sim, S. H., & Mohd Matore, M. E. E. (2022). The relationship of Grasha–Riechmann

Teaching Styles with teaching experience of National-Type Chinese Primary Schools

Mathematics Teacher. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1028145.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1028145/full

Types of Assessment. (n.d.) pdo.ascd.org.

 https://pdo.ascd.org/lmscourses/PD11OC117/media/DI-

Assessment_M1_Reading_Assessment.pdf

Yüksel, M. (2019). Evaluating Chemistry Teachers Within the Context of Teacher

Characteristics. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(11).

https://avesis.gazi.edu.tr/yayin/442312b8-53d4-47df-ab0a-

c0f17967b60c/evaluating-chemistry-teachers-within-the-context-of-teacher-

characteristics/document.pdf