instructional strategies, teaching performance and ... strategies in their teaching performance and...

ISSN 2309-0081 Guimalan (2019)

171

I

www.irss.academyirmbr.com April 2019

International Review of Social Sciences Vol. 7 Issue.4

R S S

Instructional Strategies, Teaching Performance and Academic

Achievement of Grade 8-10 Students in Mathematics

CHERLITA M. GUIMALAN Master Teacher I, Zamboanga City High School Main

Tetuan, Zamboanga City, Philippines

Email: [email protected]

Abstract

The study aimed to investigate the relationship of the teachers’ instructional strategies with their teaching

performance and Grade 8-10 students’ academic achievement in Mathematics. Descriptive design was used

to determine the relationship of teachers’ instructional strategy with their teaching performance and

students’ academic achievement in Mathematics. There were 367 student respondents and 39 teacher

respondents in this study. The findings revealed that(1) the preferred instructional strategies of the teacher

respondents are lecture discussion method followed by problem solving and the use of audio visual.

However, for the students, their preferred instructional strategies are the use of audio visual followed by

inquiry method and then lecture discussion method and cooperative learning; (2) the level of teaching

performance of Mathematics teachers handling Grades 8-10 classes based on the CB-PAST is satisfactory

where instructional competency got 1st followed by professional and personal characteristics and then,

punctuality and attendance; (3) majority of the Grades 8-10 students in Mathematics based on their 4th

grading grades in Math got basic knowledge to below basic; (4) there was no correlation between

teachers’ instructional strategies and their teaching performance which was statistically not significant; (5)

there is a moderate significant relationship in strength between teachers’ teaching performanceand

students’ academic achievement in Mathematics; and (6) the interventions that could be introduced to

improve Math academic achievement of students.

Keywords: Instructional Strategies, Teaching Performance, Problem Solving, Teaching Performance.

Introduction

Education is a very important human activity. It helps any society fashion and model individuals to function

well in their environment. Boit et al. (2012) pointed out the purpose of education is to equip the citizenry to

reshape their society and eliminate inequality. In particular, secondary education is an important sector in

national and individual development. On the other hand, Achoka et al. (2007) emphasized that it plays a

vital role in creating a country’s human resource base at a level higher than primary education.

According to UNESCO (2005), one of the indicators of quality of education being provided is the cognitive

achievement of learners. Academic achievement is determined by how well the students perform in

standardized and formative tests given by their teachers. Lewin et al. (2011) reported that academic

achievement of students at secondary level is not only a pointer of effectiveness of schools but also a major

determinant of the well-being of youths in particular and the nation in general.

In the Philippine Education System, Science and Mathematics are two of the core subjects in primary and

secondary levels. Teaching of modern Science and Mathematics have become strictly mandatory

throughout the country as to prepare the younger generation in dealing with the rapid changes brought

about by technological advancement and development as pointed out by Corpuz et al. (2006).

mailto:[email protected]


172

I



R S S

The underachievement in mathematics is an ongoing issue in schools across the Philippines. Many students,

beginning at the elementary level, are not motivated in mathematics and perform poorly as evidenced in the

NAT results. Moreover, the same results are evident in several school divisions. Part of the reason for this

problem may be due to poor attitudes towards Mathematics and poor teaching strategies in Mathematics. In

order to begin to remedy this problem of poor Mathematics motivation and achievement, teachers need to

be aware and implement the best teaching practices. Hence, study was conceptualized and will concentrate

on the instructional strategies preferred and used by the Mathematics teachers and the impact of those

strategies in their teaching performance and students’ academic achievement in Mathematics.

Theoretical Considerations

According to Ayeni (2011), teaching is a continuous process that involves bringing about desirable changes

in learners through use of appropriate instructional strategies. Adunola (2011) indicated that in order to

bring desirable changes in students, instructional strategies used by educators should be best for the subject

matter. As such, alignment of teaching methods with students’ needs and preferred learning influence

students’ academic attainments (Zeeb, 2004).

The primary purpose of teaching at any level of education is to bring a fundamental change in the learner

(Tebabal & Kahssay, 2011). To facilitate the process of knowledge transmission, teachers should apply

appropriate instructional strategies that best suit specific objectives and level exit outcomes. In the

traditional approach, many teaching practitioners widely applied teacher-centered instructional strategies to

impart knowledge to learners comparative to student-centered instructional strategies. Hightower et al.

(2011) stated that effectiveness of instructional strategies on student learning have consistently raised

considerable interest in the thematic field of educational research. Moreover, research on teaching and

learning constantly endeavor to examine the extent to which different teaching methods enhance growth in

student learning.

According to Adunola (2011), regular poor academic performance by the majority students is

fundamentally linked to application of ineffective teaching methods by teachers to impact knowledge to

learners. Substantial research on the effectiveness of instructional strategies indicates that the quality of

teaching is often reflected by the achievements of learners. Ayeni (2011) said that teaching is a process that

involves bringing about desirable changes in learners so as to achieve specific outcomes. In order for the

method used for teaching to be effective, Adunola (2011) maintained that teachers need to be conversant

with numerous teaching strategies that take recognition of the magnitude of complexity of the concepts to

be covered.

Under the teacher-centered instructional strategies, students simply obtain information from the teacher

without building their engagement level with the subject being taught. The approach is least practical, more

theoretical and memorizing (Teo & Wong, 2000). It does not apply activity based learning to encourage

students to learn real life problems based on applied knowledge. Since the teacher controls the transmission

and sharing of knowledge, the lecturer may attempt to maximize the delivery of information while

minimizing time and effort. As a result, both interest and understanding of students may get lost. To

address such shortfalls, Zakaria et al. (2010) specified that teaching should not merely focus on dispensing

rules, definitions and procedures for students to memorize, but should also actively engage students as

primary participants.

With the advent of the concept of discovery learning, many scholars today widely adopt more supple

student-centered instructional strategies to enhance active learning (Greitzer, 2002). Most teachers today

apply the student-centered approach to promote interest, analytical research, critical thinking and

enjoyment among students. The instructional strategy is regarded more effective since it does not centralize

the flow of knowledge from the lecturer to the student. The strategy also motivates goal-orientated


173

I



R S S

behaviour among students; hence the method is very effective in improving student achievement (Hesson &

Shad, 2007).

In light of the fact that learning is a process that involves investigating, formulating, reasoning and using

appropriate strategies to solve problems, teachers should realize that it becomes more effective if the

students are tasked to perform rather than just asked to remember some information. A typical learning

environment with a presentation from the course teacher accompanied by a lecture neither promotes

learners’ participation nor build the required level of reasoning among students. Students build a better

understanding of the main concepts more effectively when they are engaged to solve problems during class

activities (Ganyaupfu, 2013).

In a study conducted by Akinfe et al. (2012), the findings revealed that teachers’ instructional strategies

affect students’ academic performance. On the other hand, in the study conducted by Daso (2013) on

students’ academic achievement in Mathematics, results revealed that there is significant relationship

between the teachers’ method of teaching and students’ performance in Mathematics.

Literature Review

According to Zapalska and Dabb (2002) there is a need to understand that the way students learn improves

the selection of teaching strategies which are best suited to student learning. For students, this matching of

instructional strategies to their individual learning styles has “consistently evidenced positive results” in

empirical studies (Minotti, 2005). According to Bacha (2010), for a teacher to be effective in instructional

strategies that will help the students understand the concepts: the teachers must provide the student with

diverse, creative and dynamic teaching techniques for the children to become interested in their own health

conditions.

In this regard, some teachers believe that lessons should be teacher-centered, where the teacher is the expert

and the authority in presenting information (Ahmad & Aziz, 2009). Nevertheless, studies show that teacher-

centered strategies are associated with inadequate stimulation of students’ innovative capacities, intellectual

thinking, and memorization, cramming of facts, poor knowledge retention and high dependency among

graduates (Adeyemi, 2008; Tanner, 2009).

Moreover, some teachers adopt learner-centered approaches, in which their role is restricted to facilitation

of the teaching process according to Ahmad & Aziz (2009). Learner-centered strategies are associated with

imaginative, critical and creative skills; active participation of students in the learning process through

discussions and intellectual engagement; as well as higher learning achievement and effectiveness in

addressing problems of humanity (Dufresne et al., 2010). Although, teachers have the discretion to choose

strategies in delivering lessons to their students, it is observed that learner-centered pedagogy is a powerful

strategy for improving learning achievement in examinations and application of knowledge and skills

acquired (Chika, 2012).

On the other hand, according to Wood and Gentile (2003), the traditional methods (lecture, laboratory,

recitation) do not tend to foster critical thinking, creative thinking, and collaborative problem-solving. To

address such shortfalls, Zakaria et al. (2010) specified that teaching should not merely focus on dispensing

rules, definitions and procedures for students to memorize, but should also actively engage students as

primary participants.

With the advent of the concept of discovery learning, many scholars today widely adopt more supple

student-centered instructional strategies to enhance active learning (Greitzer, 2002). Most teachers today

apply the student-centered approach to promote interest, analytical research, critical thinking and

enjoyment among students. The instructional strategy is regarded more effective since it does not centralize

the flow of knowledge from the lecturer to the student. The strategy also motivates goal-orientated


174

I



R S S

behaviour among students; hence the method is very effective in improving student achievement (Hesson &

Shad, 2007).

Learner-centered instructional strategy actively engage students in the learning process for effective

mastery of the subject matter and promotion of a positive attitude towards the subject. In a learner-centered

class, students take a participative role by leading discussions and teachers become facilitators In this

regard, teachers facilitate student’s discussion and interject only when necessary, allowing students to put

the language to use and explore aesthetics of learning materials (Ahmad & Aziz, 2009).

According to Froyd (2007), the standard features of a learner-centered instructional strategy include

collaborative learning, connecting new information to previous knowledge and critical thinking. Some

scholars refer to learner-centered pedagogy as interactive learning. According to Dufresne et al. (2010),

interactive learning process within classrooms involves facilitating presentation of questions for small

group work. Interactive pedagogy may also include the use of media and involvement of students in

fieldwork activities. Furthermore, interactive teachers allow for diverse learning styles among their students

and encourage active involvement of all students, while helping them to improve in individual weaknesses

(Curtin, 2005). Students are also encouraged to ask questions, define problems and lead conversations

(Chika, 2012). Besides, methods connect students’ world with learning pursuits in the classroom (Bush,

2006; Kumar, 2006). However, it is not sufficient to have an experience, if such is not discussed and

shared, they may be forgotten rapidly. Sharing of experiences through group discussions improves the

application of acquired knowledge and skills (Kumar, 2006).

Learner-centered instructional strategies are advantageous in a number of ways, for instance, they promote

democratic participation in the learning process, encourages critical thinking, meets student’s

communication needs and improves performance (Cummins, 2007). The positive impact of such methods

have also been documented by Chika (2012), who indicate that interactive methods are more powerful in

enhancing learning achievement than teacher-centered pedagogy. Kumar (2006) also indicated that

interactive methods have higher impact in overall learning achievement than didactic classrooms. Learner-

centered instructional strategies can be used to teach complex academic materials and can help teachers

accomplish important social learning and human relations goals. Learner – centeredinstructional strategies

include demonstration and problem-solving method.

Duch (2002) described demonstration strategy as an instructional strategy that challenges students to “learn

how to learn,” working cooperatively in groups to seek solutions to real world problems. Prpic and

Hadgraft (2009) addressed the key ingredients of demonstration strategy and postulated that it should not be

confused with design projects or case studies where the focus is predominantly on the application of

existing knowledge and integration of what is already known. Demonstration strategy goes beyond this,

students will encounter some concepts for the first time and therefore they need strategies for acquiring this

new knowledge (Prpic & Hadgraft, 2009).

Problem based learning, a method commonly used in teaching mathematics, is a model which centered on

students, develops active and motivated learning, problem solving skills and broad field knowledge, and

based on the deep understanding and problem solving. In those classrooms in which problem based

learning method is used for instructional process, the students take much more responsibility of their own

learning. They have become independent and long life learners, and can continue to learn in their whole life

(Major et al., 2000).

Evidence of poor performance in mathematics by elementary school students highlight the facts that the

most desired technological, scientific and business application for mathematics cannot be sustained. This

makes it paramount to seek for a strategy for teaching mathematics that aims at improving its understanding

and performance by students practically. Problem solving as a method of teaching may be used to

accomplish the instructional roles of learning basic facts, concepts, and procedure, as well as goals for

problem solving. Problem solving is a major part of Mathematics has many applications and often those


175

I



R S S

applications represent important problems in mathematics. Problem solving is incorporated in school

mathematics to stimulate the interest and enthusiasm of the students (Okigbo & Osuafor, 2008).

This teacher-student interactive approach applies the strategies used by both teacher-centered and student-

centered approaches. The subject information produced by the learners is remembered better than the same

information presented to the learners by the lecturer. The method encourages the students to search for

relevant knowledge rather than the lecturer monopolizing the transmission of information to the learners.

As such, research evidence on teaching approaches maintains that this teaching method is effective in

improving students’ academic performance (Ganyaupfu, 2013).

The study of Ariola (2012) concluded that demographic factors could also affect the teaching strategy of

teachers. The study found that age, educational attainment and length of teaching experience have highly

significant relationship with the choice of teaching strategies. On the other hand, sex and civil status of

teachers have nothing to do with the strategies preferred and used by the teachers in teaching Mathematics.

Bektas (2013) noted that a great majority of the school teachers intensely preferred the methods of lecture –

discussion in teaching their subject area. Furthermore, the study also revealed that teachers did not usually

prefer using instructional technologies (use of computer and other audio-visual media) in teaching.

The study of Ros et al. (2008) on new university students’ instructional preference found that preference

from multidirectional and multimodal teaching methods were significantly greater than preference from

autonomous or uni-modal instructional strategies. On the other hand, the study conducted by Rajaratnama

et al. (2013) revealed that majority of Biology students preferred to use only one sensory modality while

learning thus they had a uni-modal preference.

According to Peacock (2001) and Alkhasawneh et al. (2008), the lack of compatibility between the teaching

styles preference of most students and teaching style preference of the teachers adds to student frustration

and has a negative effect on learning. Educators should attempt to strike a balance of teaching strategies

rather than try to teach each student exclusively according to his/her preferences. Therefore, it is important

to harmonize the preferred learning styles to promote positive learning.

Students are most essential asset for any educational institute. The social and economic development of the

country is directly linked with student academic performance. The students’ performance (academic

achievement) plays an important role in producing the best quality graduates who will become great leader

and manpower for the country thus responsible for the country’s economic and social development (Ali et

al., 2009).

The report of Ogena et al. (2010) on the performance of Philippine high schools in 2008 Trends in

International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS-Advanced)showed that, in general, Philippines

performed least among ten (10) participating countries in Mathematics overall and as well as in specific

content areas and cognitive domains in terms of average scale score and percent correct responses.

Comparing the scale scores of the students with the benchmark levels, only 1% of the Filipino students

reached the Advanced level.

Jalmasco (2014) emphasized that the lack of education facilities is reflected on the poor quality of basic

Science and Math education seen by the low achievement scores of Filipino students in various tests.Based

on the NAT 2012 result, on the average, the fourth year students obtained an MPS of 46.37 % for

Mathematics which implied a decreased performance when compared with the previous year (47.82% in

2006 and 50.70% in 2005). On the other hand, there is a slight improvement in the performance of students

in Science. From an average rating of 39.49% in 2005, it increased into 40.53% in 2012. Despite the

government initiatives in improving the performance of Filipino students in five key areas, most specially

in Science and Mathematics, the NAT results still revealed that the students’ performance still did not reach

the seventy-five percent (75%) standard performance rating on the said examination. The students’


176

I



R S S

underachievement in Mathematics is not just a concern for a particular school but has also become the

national concern over the years (NETRC, 2012).

Espinosa in 2010 as cited by Lear (2018) expressed that instructional materials of any form are essential

tools in the development of learning. It does not only improve knowledge, thinking and problem-solving

abilities of learners' but also make it possible for them to achieve the learning objectives efficiently. Thus,

teachers are advised to be very creative in providing exciting ways to present visuals that enhance learning

inside the classroom.

A good match between students’ learning preferences and instructor’s teaching strategies has been

demonstrated to have positive effect on student's performance (Harb & El Shaarawi, 2006). Scholars, who

promote the learning preferences approach to learning, agree that effective instruction can only be

undertaken if the learner’s learning preferences are diagnosed and the instruction is tailored accordingly

(Pashler et al., 2008).

Omrod (2008) reported that some students seem to learn better when information is presented through

words (verbal learners), whereas others seem to learn better when it is presented in the form of pictures

(visual learners). Clearly in a class where only one instructional method is employed, there is a strong

possibility that a number of students will find the learning environment less optimal and this could affect

their academic performance. Mlambo (2011) established that alignment between students’ learning

preferences and an instructor’s teaching style leads to better recall and understanding. The findings also

supported by the study conducted by Daso (2013) which revealed that teachers’ instructional strategy is

highly related to students’ achievement in mathematics.

A study conducted by Nafees et al. (2012) regarding the relationship of instructional strategies and

students’ academic achievement in General Science, the findings concluded that problem-based

instructional strategy seemed to improve the academic achievements of 9th grade students in basic general

science learning. Students taught through problem-based instructional strategy showed a higher

improvement in the understanding of general science concepts than the students taught through lecture-

based instructional strategy. The result was also supported by the study conducted by Ali (2010) on

teaching Mathematics which found out that students taught through problem solving method achieved

better than those taught by traditional method. There exists a significant difference in the achievement of

mathematics students taught through problem solving method and traditional method.

Olatoye and Adekoya (2010) reported that project-based strategy brought the most significant change in the

achievement of students. This might be due to the social interactions and friendliness that project-based

strategy provided for students. Students under this strategy were better motivated to learn; this might be as

a result of the discipline of having to and respect the opinion of others during the discussion having

discovered that knowledge does not belong to only one person.

Furthermore, Muraya and Kimano (2011) found that cooperative learning (learner-centered) approach

resulted in significantly higher mean achievement scores compared to regular teaching (teacher-centered)

method. The study concluded that learner-centered strategy was an effective teaching approach, which

should be adopted by biology teachers.

On the study conducted by Daso (2013), findings revealed that there is a significant relationship between

teachers’ instructional strategies and students’ achievement in mathematics. Ali (2010) pointed out that

problem solving is more effective method of instruction for teaching and learning mathematics as compared

to traditional (lecture) method of teaching. Therefore the teachers of mathematics should use problem

solving method to improve the academic achievements of the students.

According to Al-Hebaishi (2012), to teach and learn more effectively, instructors and learners need to better

understand and appreciate these individual differences and how they affect the learning process. It assists


177

I



R S S

them in planning their learning and developing strategies that cope with different learning situations in

order to make learning more meaningful and effective. Furthermore, it becomes one of the most important

responsibilities of instructors today is to identify how their students learn and discover factors affecting the

learning process in the classroom.

Methods

Descriptive design was used to determine the relationship of teachers’ instructional strategy with their

teaching performance and students’ academic achievement in Mathematics.

A questionnaire was used in determining the teachers’ instructional strategy on various instructional

strategies as well as students’ instructional strategy preference. The statements regarding the different

instructional strategies were obtained from the related literature gathered. On the other hand, the students’

rating in Mathematics during the 1st grading period were obtained as basis for examining their academic

achievement while teaching performance will be based on the teacher participants’ overall rating in

Competency-Based Performance Appraisal System for Teacher (CB-PAST).

The teachers’ and students’ survey questionnaire used the following scale (modified Likert’s scale): (5)

Highly preferred; (4) Much preferred; (3) Preferred; (2) Less preferred; and (1) Not preferred. The teaching

performance of teacher participants was based on the result of CB-PAST and were interpreted using the

following scales:5 – (4.50-5.00) Outstanding (O), 4 – (3.50-4.49) Very Satisfactory (VS), 3 – (2.50-3.49)

Satisfactory (S), 2 – (1.50-2.49) Unsatisfactory (US), and 1 – (below 1.49) Poor (P).

Items in part 2 and 3 of the questionnaire for teachers and students were based on Corpuz et al. (2006),

Terenzini et al. (2001) and Haas (2002). Item numbers 1, 8, 15, 22 and 29 pertains to lecture – discussion

method; numbers 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30 refers to demonstration method; numbers 3, 10, 17, 24 and 31 for

problem solving method; number 4, 11, 18, 25 and 32 for project method; numbers 5, 12, 19, 26 and 33 for

inquiry approach; number 6, 13, 20, 27 and 34 for cooperative learning approach and use of audio-visual

media refers to item number 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35. The questionnaire was subjected to content validation by

professional education experts and master teachers in the field of Mathematics.The researcher likewise

observed Math classes to validate the answers in the survey questionnaire.

The overall academic achievement of student participants was based on their average rating in Mathematics

during the last grading period were interpreted using the following scales: 90 and above outstanding, 89-

85% very satisfactory, 84-80% satisfactory, 75-79% basic, and below 74% below basic.

Results and Discussion

The teachers prefer lecture discussion (WM=4.18) and demonstration method as instructional strategies

(WM=4.08). On the other hand, the students preferred instructional strategies include the use of audio

visual (WM=4.26) and inquiry methods (WM=4.04).

The primary purpose of teaching at any level of education is to bring a fundamental change in the learner as

pointed out by Tebabal & Kahssay (2011). To facilitate the process of knowledge transmission, teachers

should apply appropriate teaching methods that best suit specific objectives and level exit outcomes. In the

traditional epoch, many teaching practitioners widely applied teacher-centered methods to impart

knowledge to learners comparative to student-centered methods. Until today, questions about the

effectiveness of teaching methods on student learning have consistently raised considerable interest in the

thematic field of educational research (Hightower et al., 2011).


178

I



R S S

Table 1. Summary of the Preferred Instructional Strategies of the Teachers and Students

InstructionalStrategies

Teachers’

N=39

Students’

N=367

WM Descriptive Ratings WM Descriptive Ratings

Lecture Discussion 4.18 Much Preferred 3.85 Much Preferred

Demonstration Method 4.08 Much Preferred 3.73 Much Preferred

Problem Solving 3.98 Much Preferred 3.84 Much Preferred

Project Method 3.85 Much Preferred 3.63 Much Preferred

Inquiry Method 3.70 Much Preferred 4.04 Much Preferred

Cooperative Learning 3.89 Much Preferred 3.85 Much Preferred

Use of Audio Visual 3.91 Much Preferred 4.26 Highly Preferred

Total Average WM 3.94 Much Preferred 3.89 Much Preferred

According to Ayeni (2011), teaching is a process that involves bringing about desirable changes in learners

so as to achieve specific outcomes. In order for the method used for teaching to be effective, Adunola

(2011) maintained that teachers need to be conversant with numerous teaching strategies that take

recognition of the magnitude of complexity of the concepts to be covered.

Nowadays, Information technologies have affected every aspect of human activity and have a potential role

to play in the field of education and training, specially, in distance education to transform it into an

innovative form of experience. The educative possibilities about ICT (information and communicative

technology) must be considered since two points of view: Its knowledge and adequate management.

Students are able to work in an interactive environment because it helps to every people to effort a critical

education furthermore the media presence into the social environment creates since early ages involvements

in cultural and educative facts.

Oketunji (2000) stressed that audio-visual materials when effectively used have these advantages. They

lessen major weakness of verbalism, humanize and vitalize subject matter, provide interesting approach to

new topics and give initial correct impressions, economic time in learning, supply concrete materials

needed, stimulate the initiative of the pupils.

On the other hand, Swank (2011). stressing the effectiveness of visual materials in leaning, estimated that

about 40% of our concepts are based upon visual experience, 25% upon auditory, 17% on tactile, 15% upon

miscellaneous organic sensation and 3% upon taste smell. With the above assertion, it becomes clearer why

audio-visual materials are important in the teaching and learning processes. This is because they bring the

different senses contributions together to get 100% clarity.

According to Martin (2009) “learning takes place effectively when the teacher sets out to provide learning

situation in which a child will learn because of his natural reactions of the provided materials.” During the

process of learning, the teacher has to provide the learning situation to satisfy the natural reaction of the

learner and this is through the use of instructional aids. The attention of the learner is caught and his interest

is also won and he is ready to learn.

The importance of audio-visual materials in the teaching and learning processes cannot be over

emphasized. Below are some of the roles of audio-visual materials: basing learning in sense experience,

extending experience, encouraging participation, stimulating interest, individualizes instructions, serves as

a source of information, and making leaning permanent.

The teaching performance of teacher participants was based on the result of Competency-Based

Performance Appraisal System for Teacher (CB-PAST) were interpreted using the following scales: 4-

outstanding, 3-very satisfactory, 2-satisfactory and 1-unsatisfactory.


179

I



R S S

The teacher respondents obtained satisfactory in all of the three (3) teaching performance wherein

instructional competency got the highest weighted mean (WM=3.25) followed by professional and personal

characteristics (WM=3.15), and punctuality and attendance (WM=2.99). The over-all weighted mean of

3.13 means a satisfactory rating in all the three categories.

Table 2.Teaching Performance of Math Teachers

Teaching Performance WM Verbal Description

Instructional Competency 3.25 Satisfactory

Professional and Personal Characteristics 3.15 Satisfactory

Punctuality and Attendance 2.99 Satisfactory

Overall Weighted Mean 3.13 Satisfactory

Teachers need to master two types of knowledge: content, also known as deep knowledge of the subject

itself, and knowledge of the curricular development. Content knowledge encompasses what Bruner, as cited

in Shulman (1992), calls the structure of knowledge - the theories, principles, and concepts of a particular

discipline (Ornstein, 2000).

According to the Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers (1997), a professional teacher is a licensed

professional who possesses dignity and reputation with high moral values as well as technical and

professional competence. He or she adheres to observe, and practice a set of ethical and moral principles,

standards and values. In connection to this, a teacher who is a keen observer of these practices should have

a high level of instructional competency. In general, teachers must not be in any way, negligent of the

instructional competencies that they must own so as to assure betterment and quality education on the

students’ part.

The teachers being central to the achievement of instructional goals and objectives should see to it that

effectiveness is assured and output is maximized. The success and failure of the school program rests

entirely on their hands. In them lies the future of the educational institution that they pledge to serve

enthusiastically and diligently, considered by all as a moral obligation and responsibility to the society

where they belong.

It could be gleaned from the table that there are more students from basic (118) to below basic (77) in

Mathematics compared to those above 79% or satisfactory up to outstanding (195).

Table 3. Academic Achievement of Grades 8-10 students in Mathematics

Variables Total

4th

Grading Grades in Math f %

Below

Basic 65%-69% 34 9

70%-74% 43 12

75%-79% 118 32 Basic

80%-84% 89 25 Satisfactory

85%-89% 48 13 Very Satisfactory

90-%94% 35 9 Outstanding

Total 367 100

As cited by Benito from the study of Cabatay et al. (2011) that mathematics is learned because of many

reasons. Firstly, the mastery of basic mathematical skills is needed in order to cope with the demand of life.

Such demands include being numerically literate, gaining tools for future employment, developing the

prerequisites for further education, and appreciating the relationship between mathematics and technology.

Secondly, mathematics is the language of the sciences, and many disciplines depend on this subject as a

symbolic means of communication. Thirdly, mathematics education can play an important part in

developing students’ general decision-making and problem solving skills. Academic performance refers to


180

I



R S S

how students deal with their studies and how they cope with or accomplish different tasks given to them by

their teachers. It is the ability to study and remember facts and the capability to communicate acquired

knowledge verbally or down on paper, which are commonly measured by means of grades. Academic

performance, which is measured by the examination results, is one of the major goals of the school. Schools

are established with the aim of imparting knowledge and skills to those who go through them and behind all

this is the idea of enhancing good academic performance.

Spearman rho was run to determine the relationship between teachers’ instructional strategies and their

teaching performance. There was no correlation between teachers’ instructional strategies and their

teaching performance which was statistically not significant (rs = .031, p = .839).

Table 4. Significant Relationship of the Teachers’ Instructional Strategies with their Teaching Performance

in Mathematics

Teachers’

Instructional

Strategies

Teaching

Performance

Spearman’s rho

Teachers’

Instructional

Strategies

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 .031

Sig 2 tailed .839

N 39 39

Teaching

Performance

Correlation

Coefficient

.031 1.000

Sig 2 tailed .839

N 39 39

This implies that the hypothesis which states that “there is no relationship of the teachers’ instructional

strategies with their teaching performance in Mathematics at Zamboanga City High School Main” is

therefore accepted.

Udoh (2003) reported a consistent significant relationship between instructional strategy

and teacher’s performance.

Oyetunji (1998), Williams (1991) and Ajala (2010) reported that instructional strategy

has significant influence on teacher’s attitude to work. The authors submit that teacher’s educational

factors have significant relationship with teaching effectiveness.

Spearman rho analysis was used to examine whether there is a relationship between the teachers’ teaching

performance and students’ academic achievement in Mathematics. The results revealed a significant and

positive relationship (r =.432, N = 39; 367, p = .003). The correlation was moderate significant relationship

in strength. Higher extent of teachers’ teaching performanceaffected students’ academic achievement in

Mathematics.

Table 5. Significant relationship in the teaching performance and Grades 8-10 students’ academic

achievement in Mathematics

Teaching

Performance

Academic

Achievement

Spearman’s

rho

Teaching

Performance

Correlation

Coefficient

1.000 .432

Sig 2 tailed .003

N 39 367

Academic

Achievement

Correlation

Coefficient

.432 1.000

Sig 2 tailed .003


181

I



R S S

This implies that the hypothesis which states that “there is no relationship of the teachers’ instructional

strategies with their teaching performance and Grades 8-10 students’ academic achievement in

Mathematics” is therefore rejected.

Teachers’ method and style of teaching and their personality factors as they affect student’s academic

performance require investigation since the two concepts are necessary part of growth of the students.

Personality of individual refers to supreme realization of disposition as a living being, and

embraces the attitudinal characteristics of human personinto constellation of either extroversion or intro-

ersion (Babalola, 2003). Research findings have revealed that

personality of the teacher has impacted students’ academic achievement in science (Eagly, 2005).

Instructional strategy is the global approach to teaching a particular lesson. Stella (2000) submits

that the methodology set the objectives of the lesson; act as the students’motivator and consist of patterned

behavior that are definite step by which the teacher influence learning and academic performance of

the students.

Conclusion

Based on the research findings, the following conclusions are made:

1) The preferred instructional strategies of the teacher respondents are lecture discussion method followed

by problem solving and the use of audio visual. However, for the students, their preferred instructional

strategies are the use of audio visual followed by inquiry method and then lecture discussion method

and cooperative learning.

2) The level of teaching performance of Mathematics teachers handling Grades 8-10 classes based on the

CB-PAST is satisfactory where instructional competency got 1st followed byprofessional and personal

characteristics and then, punctuality and attendance.

3) Majority of the Grades 8-10 students in Mathematics based on their 4th

grading grades in Math got

basic knowledge to below basic.

4) There was no correlation between teachers’ instructional strategies and their teaching performance

which was statistically not significant.

5) There is a moderate significant relationship in strength between teachers’ teaching performanceand

students’ academic achievement in Mathematics.

6) The interventions that could be introduced to improve Math academic achievement of students

includes the following (a) mathematics content standards should be coherent, focused, demanding

program with connections to real world; (b) differentiated classroom instruction, flexible grouping; (c)

Teacher collaboration, within and across grade levels, acknowledges the importance of year to year

continuity in mathematics instruction and professional development; (d) the quality of math teachers,

particularly with regard to their content knowledge of mathematics is critically important; (e)

assessment should be given importance too; and (f) there should be student support such as early

intervention, frequent parent-teacher conferences, home strategies, extended day programs, tutoring,

and summer math workshops.

Recommendations

As a result of the findings and conclusion of this study, the following are hereby recommended:

1) Secondary school teachers should be discouraged from the continuous use of conventional lecture

method in the teaching of Mathematics as the method make students performed poorly but instead

utilize other instructional strategies that will fit the preferred styles of the students so that learning and

teaching will be an enriching activity in the classroom.


182

I



R S S

2) Curriculum designers should ensure that mathematics curriculum is based on challenging content and

that it is standards-based. Identify clearly the skills, concepts and knowledge to be mastered and make

certain that mathematics curriculum is vertically and horizontally articulated.

3) School administrators should provide professional development which focuses on

knowing/understanding standards; using standards as a basis for instructional planning; teaching using

best practices; and multiple approaches to assessment.

4) DepEd Officials should provide instructional support materials such as curriculum maps and pacing

guides and establish math leadership teams and provide math coaches.

5) DepEd Officials and school administrators should provide professional development on the use of

instructional technology tools so they could provide student access to a variety of technology tools and

integrating the use of technology across all mathematics curricula andcourses.

6) National and local governments and other professional bodies should further research on the

effectiveness of the different instructional strategies. Similarly, such professional bodies should

organize conferences, workshops and seminars on the importance of teaching and learning approaches

and all technicalities involved in the method as a way of widening the horizons of teachers.

7) Teachers should create an atmosphere conducive to learning in order to enhance the development of

students’ learning experiences. Moreover, teachers should also increase their knowledge of various

instructional strategies in order to keep students engaged and motivated throughout the learning

process.

8) Students should build a better understanding of the main concepts more effectively when they are

engaged to solve problems during math class activities.

9) Future researchers could substantiate the existence of differences in learning and teaching styles and

clarify some important ways in which onecan evaluate these processes.

References

Achoka, J.S.K., Odebero, S., Maiyo, J.K. & Mualoko, N.J. (2007). Access to basic education in Kenya:

Inherent concerns. Educational Research and Review, 2(10), 275-284

Adeyemi, B.A. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning and problem solving strategies on junior secondary

school students’ achievement in social studies.Journal of Research in Education Psychology, 16(3),

691-708.

Adunola O. (2011). The Impact of Teachers’ Teaching Methods on the Academic Performance of Primary

School Pupils in IJEBU-ODE Local Government Area of Ogun State.Ego Booster Books, Ogun State,

Nigeria.

Ahmad, F., & Aziz, J. (2009). Students’ Perceptions of the Teachers’ Teaching of Literature

Communicating and Understanding Through the Eyes of the Audience. European Journal of Social

Sciences, 7(3), 17-39.

Akinfe E., Olofinniyi, O.E., &Fashiku, C.O. (2012).Teachers’ quality as correlates of students’ academic

performance in Biology in senior secondary schools of Ondo State, Nigeria. Department of

Educational Administration and Planning, Obafemi Awolowo University. Online Journal of

Educational Research. ISSN 2277-0860, 1(6), 108-114

Al-Hebaishi, S.M. (2012). Investigating the relationship between learning styles, strategies and academic

performance of Saudi English Majors.Taibah University. International Interdisciplinary Journal of

Education, 1(8).

Ali, N., Jusoff, K., Ali, Syukriah, M., &Azni S.A. (2009).The Factors Influencing Students’ Performance at

Universiti Teknologi MARA Kedah, Malaysia. Canadian Research & Development Center of Sciences

and Cultures, 3(4).

Ali, R. (2010). Effect of Using Problem Solving Method in Teaching Mathematics on The Achievement of

Mathematics Students. Institute of Education & Research University of Science & Technology, Bannu,

(NWFP) Pakistan.Asian Social Science, 6(2).

Ajala, O.L. (2010). Teacher`s Quality and Personality Traits as Predictors of Students’ Success in Science

Education. Journal of Education and Development, 2, 24-33.


183

I



R S S

Alkhasawneh, I.M., Mrayyan, M.T., Docherty, C. Alashram, S., &Yousef, H.Y. (2008). Problem-based

learning (PBL): Assessing students’ learning preferences using VARK. Nurse Education Today

Ariola, A.M. (2012). Learners’ Preferences and Teaching Strategies in Teaching Mathematics of fourth

year high school students at Mabitac, Laguna. College of Education, Laguna State Polytechnic

University.

Ayeni, A.J. (2011). Teacher’s Professional Development and Quality Assurance in Nigerian Secondary

Schools.World Journal of Education, 1(2),143-149.

Bacha, E.M. (2010). The Effectiveness of Mathematics Games as a Strategy in Teaching Mathematics to

First Year High School Students.

Babalola, O.O. (2003). Self Concept and Locus of Control as Correlates of Workers Performance

Effectiveness in Industrial Organizations.Journal of Applied Psychology.18,116-123.

Bektas, M. (2013).An examination of elementary school teachers’ preferred teaching methods and

instructional technologies in terms of various variables in life study lesson.Sakarya University, Faculty

of Education, Sakarya, Turkey. International Online Journal of Education Sciences. 5(3), 551-561

Boit, M., Njok, A. & Chang’ach, J. K. (2012). The influence of examination on stated curriculum goals.

American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(2), 179-182

Bush, G. (2006). Learning about learning: From theories to trends. Teacher Librarian, 34(2), 14-19.

Cabatay, Henry I. et al. (2011). Predictors of Academic Success and Achievement for College

Algebra.Philippine: Hindawi Publishing

Chika, P.O. (2012). The extent of students’ responses in the classroom.International Journal of Academic

Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2 (1), 22-37.

Corpuz, B.B., Salandanan, G.G., & Rigor, D.V. (2006).Principles of Teaching 2.Lorimar Publishing Inc.

pp. 114-196.

Cummins, J. (2007). Pedagogies for the Poor: Realigning Reading Instruction for Low-Income Students

with Scientifically Based Reading Research. Educational Researcher, 36 (9), 564-573.

Curtin, E. (2005). Instructional styles used by regular classroom teachers while teaching recently

mainstreamed ESL students: Six urban middle school teachers in Texas share their experiences and

perceptions. Multicultural Education, 12(4), 36-42.

Daso, P. (2013). Teacher’s variables and senior secondary students’ achievement in Mathematics in River

State, Nigeria. Department Of Technical Education Ignatius Ajuru University Of Education, Port

Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. European Scientific Journal, 9(10), 1857-7881.

Duch, B. (2002). Problem-based Learning. Published by University of Delaware, Retrieved on 15th

January, 2010

Dufresne, J.R., Gerace, J.W., Leonard, W.J., Mestre, J. P. &Wenk, L. (2010).Classroom talk: A classroom

communication system for active learning, Journal of Computing in Higher Education,7(2), 3-27

Eagly, L. J. (2005).Leadership education and Instructional Strategy in Schools.Journal of Education

Management.2, 126-138.

Froyd, J.E. (2007). Evidence for the Efficacy of Student-Active Learning Pedagogies.Retrieved from

http://cte.tamu.edu/programs/flc.php on 22/9/2012.

Ganyaupfu, E.M. (2013). Teaching methods and students’ academic performance.Internal Journal on

Humanities and Social Science Invention. 2(9), 29-35

Greitzer, F.A. (2002). Cognitive approach to student-centered e-learning, human factors and society. 46th

Annual Meeting, Sept 30 – Oct 4.

Harb, N. and El-Shaarawi, A. (2006).Factors affecting student performance. Munich Personal RePEc

Achieve Paper No. 13621

Hesson, M. and Shad, K.F. (2007).A student-centered learning model.American Journal of Applied

Sciences, 628-636.

Hiebert, J. and Grouws, D.A. (2007).The effect of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning.In

F. K. J. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning.

Hightower, A.M. (2011). Improving student learning by supporting quality teaching: Key issues, effective

strategies.Editorial Projects in Education.

Jalmasco, N. M. (2014). Science Education Realities. The Manila Times

Kumar, M. (2006).Constructivist’s epistemology in action.Journal of Educational Thought, 40(3), 246-262.

http://cte.tamu.edu/programs/flc.php%20on%2022/9/2012


184

I



R S S

Lear, M. (2018).Acceptability of the Big Book Alphabet Primer in Sinama for Kindergarten

Pupil.International Review of Social Sciences (IRSS). 6(3), 104-110. Retrieved from

irss.academyirmbr.com/papers/1518413760.pdf

Lewin, K.M., Wasanga, P., Wanderi, E., & Somerset, A. (2011).Participation and performance in

Education in sub-Saharahan Africa with specified reference to Kenya: Improving policy and practice,

create pathways to access. University of Sussex

Major, C.H., Baden, M.S. & Mackinnon, M. (2000). Issues in problem based leaning: A message from

guest editors. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, USA, Web Edition, 11, 3.

Martin, K. (2009) Audio-Visual Materials: Collection Development Policy, Rod Library University of

Northern lowa.

Minotti, J.L. (2005). Effects of learning style based homework prescriptions on the achievement and

attitudes of middle school students. NASSP Bulletin, 89 (642).

Mlambo, V. (2011). An analysis of some factors affecting student academic performance in an introductory

biochemistry course at the University of the West Indies. Carribean Teaching Scholar. 1, 79-92

Muraya, D.N. and Kimamo, G. (2011). Effects of cooperative learning approach on biology mean

achievement scores of secondary school students’ in Machakos District, Kenya. EducationalResearch

and Reviews, 6(12), 726-745.

Nafees, M., Farooq, G., Tahirkheli, S. A. and Akhtar, M. (2012).Effects of instructional strategies on

academic achievement in high school general science class.International Journal of Business and

Social Science.3(5).

National Education Testing and Research Center (2012).The performance of fourth year students in the

NAT. Department of Education-Philippines.

Ogena, E.B., Lana, R.D. &Sasota, R.S. (2010).Performance of Philippine High Schools with Special

Science curriculum in the 2008 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS-

Advanced).Depart of Science and Technology-Philippines

Oketunji, I. (2000), Application for Information Technologies in Nigerian Libraries: Probles and Prospects

in I.K :Nwalo (ed); Information Technology in Library and Information Technology Education in

Nigeria. National Association of Library and Information Sceience Education NALISE

Ornstein, A.C., Thomas, J., &Lasley, I. (2000).Strategies for effective teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill

Okigbo, E.C., &Osuafor, A.M. (2008).Effect of using Mathematics laboratory in teaching Mathematics on

the achievement of mathematics students.Educational Research and Review, 3(8), 257-261.

OlatoyeR.A.,&Adekoya Y.M. (2010). Effect of demonstration, peer-tutoring, and lecture teaching

strategies on senior secondary school students’ schievement in an aspect of agricultural science.

Department of Science, Technology, and Mathematics Education, College of Education, Ipetu-Ijesa

Campus, Osun State University, Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria

Omrod, J.E. (2008). Educational psychology: developing learners. Sixth Edition. Upper Saddle River, New

Jersey. Pearson Education.

Oyetunji, J.O. (1998). An evaluation of Students` Performance Examination in Accounting. Unpublished

B.Ed. Project, Ogun State University, Ago Iwoye. pp. 34-38.

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: concepts and evidence.

Psychological Science in the Public Internet, 9 (13), 106-119.

Peacock, M. (2001). Match or mismatch? Learning styles and teaching styles in EFL. International Journal

in Applied Linguist

Prpic, J.K., & Hadgraft, R.G. (2009).What is problem-based learning?. Retrieved on 3rd December, 2009

at http://www.dlsbweb.rmit.edu.au/eng/ beng0001/learning/strategy

Rajaratnam, N., Suganthi, V., &D’Cruz, S.M. (2013).Learning preference of students studying Physiology

in South India.Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences. 7(1), 15-19

Ros, R. G., Perez, F., &Talaya, I. (2008). New university students’ instructional preferences and how these

relate to learning style and motivational strategies. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational

Psychology. 6(16), 547-570

Shulman, L.S. (1992). Ways of seeing, ways of knowing, ways of teaching, ways of learning about

teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, 393-396.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwigo_mi_tfgAhVdwosBHXIOD0oQFjAAegQIChAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Firss.academyirmbr.com%2Fpapers%2F1518413760.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3LyCZaycSFIHf6uGMg_xHf

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwigo_mi_tfgAhVdwosBHXIOD0oQFjAAegQIChAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Firss.academyirmbr.com%2Fpapers%2F1518413760.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3LyCZaycSFIHf6uGMg_xHf


185

I



R S S

Swank, R.C (2011).The Educational Function of University Library.

http://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitestream/handle/2142/5455/librarytrend

Tanner, K. (2009). Approaches to Life Sciences Teaching and Learning.Retrieved from

http://www.lifescied.org/cgi/content/full/8/2/89 on 20/9/2012.

Tebabal, A., & Kahssay, G. (2011).The effects of student-centered approach in improving students’

graphical interpretation skills and conceptual understanding of kinematical motion.Lat. Am. J. Phy.

Edu, 5(2), 374-381.

Teo, R., & Wong, A. (2000). Does problem based learning create a better student: A reflection paper

presented at the 2nd Asia Pacific Conference on Problem Based Learning: Education Across

Disciplines, December 4-7, Singapore.

Udoh, A.A (2003).Teachers` Perspective Assessment of Secondary School Students` Academic

Performance in Financial Accounting.Journal of Educational Research.6, 36-44.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2005).

Williams, D. Z. (1991).The Challenges of Change in Accounting Education.Accounting Education Series.

1, 76-85.

Wood, W.B., & Gentile, J.M. (2003).Teaching in a research context.Science.302, 1510.

Zakaria, E., Chin, C.L. &Daud, Y. (2010).The effect of cooperative learning on student mathematics

achievements and attitude towards mathematics, Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 272-275.

Zapalska, A., &Dabb, H. (2002).Learning styles.Journal of teaching in international business. Retrieved

from Education Research complete database

Zeeb, M.S. (2004). Improving student success through matching learning and teaching styles. Research

project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in

Education. University of Phoenix.

http://www.lifescied.org/cgi/content/full/8/2/89%20on%2020/9/2012

instructional strategies, teaching performance and ... strategies in their teaching performance and...

Documents