ENHANCING UNDERSTANDING OF RADICAL OF GRADE 9 LEARNERS

THROUGH COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ACTIVITIES

I. Profile of the students

Table 1 shows the distribution of the students in terms of age. Twenty-seven students or 57.45 percent
are age 14 while there are 18 or 38.3 percent of the students age 15. More so, two or 4.25 percent are
having an age of 16. The mean age is 14.47 with a standard deviation of 0.58. This finding means that
most of the students of Saint Paul of Aparri are on their ideal age as grade 9 learners. This finding implies
that they have undergone regular duration of studying basic education.

Table 1. Distribution of respondents in terms of Age

Age Frequency (n=47) Percentage

14 27 57.45
15 18 38.30
16 2 4.25
Mean = 14.47 SD = 0.58

Table 2 reveals the distribution of students in terms of sex. Twenty-eight or 59.57 percent
are female while 19 or 40.43 percent are male. This finding means that respondents of the study
are female dominated. This conclusion is also supported by the school enrollment system
showing that there are more female enrolled than male. This is evident in the observation that
most male preferred to help their family than studying.

Table 2. Distribution of students in terms of Sex

Sex Frequency (n=47) Percentage

Male 19 40.43
Female 28 59.57
 Apparent in table 3 is the distribution of student-respondents in terms of their parent’s
highest educational attainment. Thirty or 63.83 percent of the fathers are college graduate while
1 or 2.13 percent are with doctoral degree. The same table shows that thirty-one or 65.96 percent
of the mothers are college graduate and 1 or 2.13 percent are with doctoral degree. This shows
that most of the parents have relatively high educational attainment which indicate that they
could enter on jobs that requires educational attainment. This further implies that parents of both
father and mother could extend their support in their children’s academic study like in doing their
homework and problem set in grade 9 mathematics.
Similar on the finding of Hammer (2003), the home environment is as important as what
goes on in the school. In other word learner’s achievement is not only about what goes on once
learners get into the classroom. It is also about what happens to them before and after school.
The result of the study of Wang et. al. (2006) indicate that parent education and encouragement
are strongly related to improve learner achievement.
Table 3. Distribution of respondents in terms of their parent’s highest educational attainment.

Father Mother
Educational Attainment
Frequency (n=47) Percentage Frequency (n=47) Percentage
12 25.53 College Level 9 19.15
30 63.83 College Graduate 31 65.96
4 8.51 With Masters 6 12.76
1 2.13 With Doctoral 1 2.13

Apparent in table 4 is the distribution of student-respondents in terms of their grade in

mathematics. Thirty or 63.83 percent has grades 90 and above while only 4 or 8.51 percent has
grades 79 and below. The mean grade is 89.26 with a standard deviation of 6.26. This finding
means that grade of the respondents is relatively high. This implies that the depth of knowledge
and understanding of the students are considered acceptable.
This contradicts the study of Tan (2008) as cited by Sy (2012) where Filipino
students have consistently obtained scores below the national average in Math. They have also
faired-poor in national achievement tests. Students Ability to think conceptually, logically and
spatially is weak.

Table 4. Distribution of respondents in terms of grade in Math

Grade in Math Frequency (n=47) Percentage

79 and below 4 8.51
80 - 84 8 17.02
85 - 89 5 10.64
90 and above 30 63.83
Mean = 89.26 SD = 6.26
 Shown in table 5 is the distribution of respondents in terms of the learning materials
available at their home. Both books and gadgets like cellphone, tablets and iPad are ranked
highest with a frequency of 47 while PC and laptop computer are rand 4 with a frequency of 18.
This means that most of the respondents are using books and gadgets as their learning materials.
Table 5. Distribution of respondents in terms of the learning materials available at their home

Learning Materials Frequency Rank

books 47 1.5
cellphone/tablet/iPad 47 1.5
calculator 43 3
pc/laptop 18 4

Assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning materials for collaborative

learning activities

Table 6 shows the assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning

materials in terms of content. Evaluators assessed that the materials used as “very satisfactory”. It
has the potential to arouse interest of target reader (4.0, Very Satisfactory) because it contributes to the
achievement of specific objectives of the subject area and grade for which it is intended (3.80, Very
Satisfactory), it also provides development of higher cognitive skills to the learners such as critical
thinking, creativity, learning by doing, inquiry, problem solving (3.80, Very Satisfactory).
The overall weighted mean of the assessed learning materials in terms of content is 3.83 with a
descriptive value of very satisfactory.

Table 6. Assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning materials in terms of

content
Students
Content
WM DV
1. Content is suitable to the student's level of development. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
2. Material contributes to the achievement of specific objectives of the
3.80 Very Satisfactory
subject area and grade/year level for which it is intended.
3. Material provides for the development of higher cognitive skills such
as critical thinking, creativity, learning by doing, inquiry, problem 3.80 Very Satisfactory
solving, etc.
4. Material is free of ideological, cultural, religious, racial, and gender
biases and prejudices. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
5. Material has the potential to arouse interest of target reader. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
6. Adequate warning/cautionary notes are provided in topics and
3.80 Very Satisfactory
activities where safety and health are of concern.
Overall Weighted Mean 3.83 Very Satisfactory
 Legend:
Weighted Mean Descriptive value
3.25 - 4.00 Very satisfactory
2.50 - 3.24 Satisfactory
1.75 - 2.49 Poor
1.00 - 1.74 Not satisfactory

Table 7 reveals the assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning

materials in terms of its format. Teacher-evaluators measured the prints from the materials as
“very satisfactory” because the font used is easy to read (4.0), the font size of letters is also
appropriate to the intended user (4.0) and the spaces used between letter and words also
facilitates reading (4.0). Illustrations used are also described as “very satisfactory”, as they are
simple and easy to recognize (4.0), they also clarify and supplement the text (4.0). The design
and lay-out are also “very satisfactory” because they are simple (4.0) and adequate (4.0) in the
sense that they do not distract the attention of the readers. In terms of paper and binding rated as
“very satisfactory”, materials are durable to withstand frequent use (3.80) and they are easy to
handle (4.0).
The reckoned overall weighted mean is 3.95 with a descriptive value of very satisfactory.

Table 7. Assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning materials in terms of its
format

Students
Format
WM DV
1. Prints
a. Size of letters is appropriate to the intended user 4.00 Very Satisfactory
b. Spaces between letters and words facilitate reading. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
c. Font is easy to read. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
d. Printing is of good quality (i.e., no broken letters, even
density, correct alignment, properly placed screen 4.00 Very Satisfactory
registration).
2. Illustrations
a. Simple and easily recognizable. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
b. Clarify and supplement the text 4.00 Very Satisfactory
c. Properly labelled or captioned (if applicable 4.00 Very Satisfactory
d. Realistic / appropriate colors. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
e. Attractive and appealing 3.80 Very Satisfactory
f. Culturally relevant. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
3. Design and Layout
a. Attractive and pleasing to look at. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
b. Simple (i.e., does not distract the attention of the
4.00 Very Satisfactory
reader)
c. Adequate illustration in relation to text. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
d. Harmonious blending of elements (e.g., illustrations and 4.00 Very Satisfactory
 text)
4. Paper and Binding
a. Paper used contributes to easy reading. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
b. Durable binding to withstand frequent use. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
c. Size and Weight of Resource 4.00 Very Satisfactory
d. Easy to handle. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
e. Relatively light. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
Overall Weighted Mean 3.95 Very Satisfactory

Legend:
Weighted Mean Descriptive value
3.25 – 4.00 Very satisfactory
2.50 – 3.24 Satisfactory
1.75 – 2.49 Poor
1.00 – 1.74 Not satisfactory

Table 8 shows the assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning

materials in terms of presentation and organization. Teachers rated the presentation and
organization of the learning materials as “very satisfactory” because the vocabulary level is
adapted to target reader’s experience and level of understanding (4.0), sentences and paragraph
structures are varied and interesting to the target reader (3.8) and the presentation is engaging,
interesting, and understandable (3.8). The overall weighted mean is 3.88 with a descriptive value
of very satisfactory.
Table 8. Assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning materials in terms of
presentation and organization

Presentation and Organization Students

WM DV
1. Presentation is engaging, interesting, and understandable. 3.80 Very Satisfactory
2. There is logical and smooth flow of ideas 3.80 Very Satisfactory
3. Vocabulary level is adapted to target reader's likely
4.00 Very Satisfactory
experience and level of understanding.
4. Length of sentences is suited to the comprehension level of the
4.00 Very Satisfactory
target reader.
5. Sentences and paragraph structures are varied and
3.80 Very Satisfactory
interesting to the target reader.
Overall Weighted Mean 3.88 Very Satisfactory

Legend:
 Weighted Mean Descriptive value
3.25 - 4.00 Very satisfactory
2.50 - 3.24 Satisfactory
1.75 - 2.49 Poor
1.00 - 1.74 Not satisfactory

Table 9. Assessment of the teacher-evaluators on the developed learning materials in terms of

accuracy and up-to-datedness of information

Students
Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of Information
WM DV
1. Conceptual errors 4.00 Very Satisfactory
2. Factual errors. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
3. Grammatical errors. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
4. Computational errors. 4.00 Very Satisfactory
5. Obsolete information 4.00 Very Satisfactory
6. Typographical and other minor errors (e.g., inappropriate or
4.00 Very Satisfactory
unclear illustrations, missing labels, wrong captions, etc.)
Overall Weighted Mean 4.00 Very Satisfactory

Legend:
Weighted Mean Descriptive value
3.25 - 4.00 Very satisfactory
2.50 - 3.24 Satisfactory
1.75 - 2.49 Poor
1.00 - 1.74 Not satisfactory

Table 10. Distribution of respondents in term of Individual Learning Activities (ILA)

Individual Learning Activities Frequency (n=47) Percentage

5–9 4 8.51
10 – 14 16 34.04
15 - 19 9 19.15
20 – 24 9 19.15
25 and above 9 19.15
Mean = 16.89 SD = 6.47

Table 11. Distribution of respondents in term of Collaborative Learning Activities (CLA)

 Collaborative Learning Activities Frequency (n=47) Percentage
25 – 27 1 2.13
28 – 30 2 4.25
31 – 33 2 4.25
34 – 36 36 76.6
37 and above 6 12.77
Mean = 34.64 SD = 2.15

Table 12. Results of difference tests between the performance of the learners after ILA and CLA

Variables Mean t-value Prob. Statistical Inference

Performance of the learners
16.893
Individual Learning Activities (ILA)
6
-20.124 0.0000 Highly Significant
Collaborative Learning Activities (CLA) 34.638
3
*Tested using paired sample t-test at 0.05 level of significance

Table 13. Correlation results between the learner’s performance after learning through CLA and
their profile variable.
Attitude towards Mathematics
Independent Variables Statistical Inference
r-value Prob.
Students’ profile
a. age 0.241 0.102 Not Significant
b. sex -0.308 0.035 Significant
c. parent’s educational attainment 0.325 0.026 Significant
d. grade in math 0.279 0.058 Not Significant
e. materials 0.115 0.443 Not Significant
*Tested at 0.05 level of significance