49

CHAPTER IV-RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter enumerates the different results and discusses the results that were

yielded from the treatment of the data that was gathered in this study. The following

tabular presentations and discussions will further characterized of the data and

information gathered from forty (40) respondents from Grade 10 at Lumban National

High School and forty (40) from Pedro Guevara Memorial National High School. Its

Findings were based on the data gathered through the researchers-made questionnaire and

survey questionnaire retrieved from the respondents. Those data were analyzed to be

presented, discussed, and interpreted according to the parameters of this research to

answer the problem sought for this study.

Table 1. Level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of Gender-Neutral

Language.
STATEMENTS MEAN SD REMARKS
1. The teacher considers using nonbiased Agree
4.20 0.77
language when teaching.
2. The teacher practices nonbinary Agree
3.96 0.89
language in addressing the students.
3. The teacher promotes respecting all Strongly Agree
4.61 0.67
genders through polite communication.
4. The teacher educates the students about Strongly Agree
the importance of gender-neutral 4.36 0.75
language.
5. The teacher shares their ideas on how Strongly Agree
4.33 0.85
to speak non-sexist language.
Weighted Mean 4.29
SD 0.56
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 1 illustrates the level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of
Gender-Neutral Language
From the statements above, “The teacher promotes respecting all genders

through polite communication” yielded the highest mean score (M=4.61, SD=0.67) and

was remarked as Strongly Agree. On the other hand, the statement “The teacher practices
 50

no binary language in addressing the students” received the lowest mean score of

responses with (M=3.96, SD=0.89) yet was also remarked Agree.

The level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of Gender-Neutral

Language attained a weighted mean score of 4.29 and a standard deviation of 0.56 and

was Very High among the respondents. This means that teachers reinforce gender-neutral

language in communicating with other people, especially the students.

The account of Lomotey (2017), states that teachers expressed a willingness to

understand anti-sexist language and accept changes that will promote equality in the

classroom and even outside. In simple words, by reinforcing gender-neutral language in

the classroom the students will be able to feel respected through non-biased

communication.

Table 2. Level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of Instructional

Materials

STATEMENTS MEAN SD REMARKS

1. The teacher provides instructional Strongly Agree
4.44 0.71
materials that are not biased.
2. The teacher uses different platforms that Strongly Agree
4.44 0.61
encourage inclusivity.
3. The teacher expounds on different Agree
learning materials that are crucial for the 4.08 0.81
students.
4. The teacher teaches students the Strongly Agree
positive effects of inclusive learning 4.43 0.74
materials.
5. The teacher imparts her ideas with the Strongly Agree
4.51 0.57
proper usage of instructional materials.
Weighted Mean 4.38
SD 0.48
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 2 illustrates the level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of
Instructional Materials
 51

From the statements above, “The teacher imparts her ideas with the proper usage

of instructional materials.” yielded the highest mean score (M=4.51, SD=0.57) and was

remarked as Strongly Agree. On the other hand, the statement “The teacher expounds on

different learning materials that are crucial for the students.” received the lowest mean

score of responses with (M=4.08, SD=0.81) yet was also remarked Agree.

The level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of Instructional Materials

attained a weighted mean score of 4.38 and a standard deviation of 0.48 and was Very

High among the respondents. This means that teachers use instructional materials that are

highly relevant and non-biased.

Bombani (2015), asserts that most of the instructional materials in schools have

insensitive use of language in such ways; the textbooks, modules, learning handouts, and

other learning types of equipment indeed represent gender-biased language that creates

misconceptions and mistreatment among the learners. Thus, considering the result,

instructional materials are used properly by the teachers.

Table 3. Level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of Classroom

Activities
STATEMENTS MEAN SD REMARKS
1. The teacher allows the students to Agree
3.48 1.08
choose their group mates.
2. The teacher includes both genders in Strongly Agree
4.63 0.60
groupings.
3. The teacher provides various kinds of Strongly Agree
4.41 0.72
activities that encourage inclusivity.
4. The teacher explains very well the Strongly Agree
4.55 0.69
given tasks to the students.
5. The teacher manages the given tasks Strongly Agree
4.60 0.61
fairly.
Weighted Mean 4.33
SD 0.47
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 3 illustrates the level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of
Instructional Materials
 52

From the statements above, “The teacher includes both genders in groupings.”

yielded the highest mean score (M=4.63, SD=0.60) and was remarked as Strongly Agree.

On the other hand, the statement “The teacher allows the students to choose their

groupmates.” received the lowest mean score of responses with (M=3,48, SD=1.08) yet

was also remarked Agree.

The level of Gender-Fair Language Approach in terms of Classroom Activities

attained a weighted mean score of 4.33 and a standard deviation of 0.47 and was Very

High among the respondents. This means that teachers provide classroom activities that

cater to all the students.

In connection with that, New Zealand Post Primary Teachers' Association (2017),

cited by McIlroy (2017), concluded that creating inclusive activities and learning

materials is a crucial step in fostering a safe and supportive environment for all students,

including those who are sexual and gender diverse. Therefore, the inclusion of both

genders in group activities is needed to further develop the students in learning.

Table 4. Composite table of Gender-Fair Language Approach

INDICATORS WM SD REMARKS
1. Gender-Neutral Language 4.29 0.56 Strongly Agree
2. Instructional Materials 4.38 0.48 Strongly Agree
3. Classroom Activities 4.33 0.47 Strongly Agree
Overall Mean 4.33
SD 0.50
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 4 verifies the composite table of the Gender-Fair Language Approach

From the indicators above, “Instructional Materials” yielded the highest weighted

mean score (M=4.38, SD=0.48) and was remarked as Strongly Agree. This is followed

by “Classroom Activities” with a weighted mean score (M=4.33, SD=0.47) and was also

remarked as Strongly Agree. On the other hand, the indicator “Gender-Neutral

 53

Language” received the lowest weighted mean score of responses with (M=4.29,

SD=0.56) yet was also remarked Strongly Agree.

The level of Gender-Fair Language Approach attained an overall mean score of

4.33 and a standard deviation of 0.50 and was Very High among the respondents. This

indicates that the gender-fair language approach has a vital role in teaching and

promoting non-biased school settings for students that they are valuable regardless of

their gender.

Table 5. Level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of Practices

STATEMENTS MEAN SD REMARKS
1. The teacher introduces school practices Always
4.35 0.71
to students to become comfortable.
2. The teacher involves both genders in Always
4.50 0.71
school practices.
3. The teacher offers various kinds of Always
school practices that encourage 4.35 0.75
inclusivity.
4. The teacher shows the students the Always
importance of inclusivity in school 4.38 0.70
practices.
5. The teacher exemplifies the practices of Always
4.44 0.67
school among the students.
Weighted Mean 4.40
SD 0.52
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 5 illustrates the level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of Practices

From the statements above, “The teacher involves both genders in school

practices.” yielded the highest mean score (M=4.50, SD=0.71) and was remarked as

Always. On the other hand, the statement “The teacher offers various kinds of school

practices that encourage inclusivity.” received the lowest mean score of responses with

(M=4.35, SD=0.75) yet was also remarked Always.

The level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of Practices attained a

weighted mean score of 4.40 and a standard deviation of 0.52 and was Very High among
 54

the respondents. The result indicates that the learners are involved in every practice that

the school has.

Sumadsad & Tuazon (2016), stated that schools should be incorporating their

awareness of gender as they are having GAD mainstreaming into pedagogical practices

rather than in-depth interpretation of it. Therefore, the result showed how important and

relevant to include the learners in different practices in the school.

Table 6. Level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of Opportunities

STATEMENTS MEAN SD REMARKS
1. The teacher makes sure the students Always
access all the opportunities to know more 4.36 0.70
about gender-fair language.
2. The teacher aspires for both genders to Always
4.48 0.71
access opportunities.
3. The teacher showcases new Always
opportunities that encourage inclusivity of 4.46 0.73
both genders.
4. The teacher executes the opportunities Always
4.45 0.78
fairly among all the students.
5. The teacher assures the students to Always
engage in given opportunities without 4.48 0.80
bias.
Weighted Mean 4.45
SD 0.58
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 6 illustrates the level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of
Opportunities
From the statements above, “The teacher aspires for both genders to access

opportunities.” and “The teacher assures the students to engage in given opportunities

without bias.” yielded the highest mean score (M=4.48, SD=0.71) and (M=4.48,

SD=0.80) and was remarked as Always. On the other hand, the statement “The teacher

makes sure the students access all the opportunities to know more about gender-fair

language.” received the lowest mean score of responses with (M=4.36, SD=0.70) yet

was also remarked Always.

 55

The level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of Opportunities attained a

weighted mean score of 4.45 and a standard deviation of 0.58 and was Very High among

the respondents. Thus, it showed that students can access opportunities fairly and without

bias.

As stated by Barber et al., (2013), students can learn the importance of gender-fair

language by giving them opportunities to learn about it. With this, making opportunities

to learn new things will be beneficial to the learners, allowing them to learn freely and

creatively.

Table 7. Level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of School Culture

STATEMENTS MEAN SD REMARKS
1. The teacher helps the students to cope Always
4.36 0.73
with the school culture.
2. The teacher boosts both genders in Always
4.51 0.67
exploring school culture.
3. The teacher discusses the school Always
culture with the students and encourages 4.23 0.90
inclusivity.
4. The teacher illustrates the importance Always
of school culture as a student to both 4.40 0.74
genders.
5. The teacher supports both genders so Always
they can further understand the school 4.50 0.69
culture.
Weighted Mean 4.40
SD 0.59
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 7 illustrates the level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of School Culture

From the statements above, “The teacher boosts both genders in exploring school

culture.” yielded the highest mean score (M=4.51, SD=0.67) and was remarked as

Always. On the other hand, the statement “The teacher discusses the school culture with

the students and encourages inclusivity.” received the lowest mean score of responses

with (M=4.23, SD=0.90) yet was also remarked Always.

 56

The level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity in terms of School Culture attained a

weighted mean score of 4.40 and a standard deviation of 0.59 and was Very High among

the respondents. Hence, it showed school culture also affects the students to better

understand and learn that school culture has something to do with them.

Department of Education DepEd (2017) cited that school culture must be

addressed and discussed more to avoid gender bias and gender stereotyping. To conclude,

teachers will always guide the students to deepen their understanding of school culture.

Table 8. Composite table of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity

INDICATORS WM SD REMARKS
1. Practice 4.40 0.52 Strongly Agree
2. Opportunity 4.45 0.58 Strongly Agree
3. School Culture 4.40 0.59 Strongly Agree
Overall Mean 4.42
SD 0.56
Verbal Interpretation Very High
Table 8 verifies the composite table of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity

From the indicators above, “Opportunities” yielded the highest weighted mean

score (M=4.45, SD=0.58) and was remarked as Strongly Agree. This is followed by

“School Culture” with a weighted mean score (M=4.40, SD=0.59) and was also

remarked as Strongly Agree. On the other hand, the indicator “Practices” received the

lowest weighted mean score of responses with (M=4.40, SD=0.52) yet was also

remarked Strongly Agree.

The level of Learner’s Gender Sensitivity attained an overall mean score of 4.42

and a standard deviation of 0.56 and was Very High among the respondents. This

indicates that the learner’s gender sensitivity has a vital role in teaching and promoting

non-biased school settings for students that they are valuable regardless of their gender.

Table 9. Significant relationship between the Teachers’ Use of Gender-Fair

Language and the Learner’s Gender-Sensitive Practices
 57

Opportuniti School
Practices es Culture
Gender-Neutral Pearson .372** .388* .472*
Language Correlation
Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000
tailed)
N 79 79 79

Strength Weak Weak Moderate

Analysis Significant Significant Significant

Instructional Pearson .378* .562* .368*

Materials Correlation
Sig. (2- .001 .000 .001
tailed)
N 79 79 79

Strength Weak Moderate Weak

Analysis Significant Significant Significant

Classroom Pearson .470* .322* .479*

Activities Correlation
Sig. (2- .000 .004 .000
tailed)
N 79 79 79

Strength Moderate Weak Moderate

Analysis Significant Significant Significant

Scale Strength
0.80 – 1.00 Very Strong
0.60 – 0.79 Strong
0.40 – 0.59 Moderate
0.20 – 0.39 Weak
0.00 – 0.19 Very Weak
Table 9 presents the significant relationship between the Teachers’ Use of
Gender-Fair Language and the Learner’s Gender-Sensitive Practices

The Gender-Neutral Language, Instructional Materials, and Classroom Activities

of the Teachers’ Use of Gender-Fair Language was observed to have a significant

 58

relationship to the Learner’s Gender-Sensitive Practices. This is based on the computed r

values obtained from the tests with weak to moderate relationships. Furthermore, the p-

values obtained were less than the significance alpha 0.05, hence there is a significance.

From the findings above, we can infer that at 0.05 level of significance, the null

hypothesis “There is no significant relationship between the Teachers’ Use of Gender-

Fair Language and the Learner’s Gender-Sensitive Practices” is rejected. Thus, the

alternative should be accepted which indicates that there is a significant relationship

between them.

Using a gender-fair language approach ultimately affects learning; it encompasses

different ways how to understand fully the needs of the learners to improve their

capabilities and potential to be a better learner. Upon helping the students, the teacher

will be able to see its effect on themselves. As a result, the students will grasp easily

what is being taught to them, while the teachers promote non-biased communication.