1

Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

There is a worldwide consensus that positive classroom environment is one of the

most important factors that affect student learning. Simply put, students learn better when

they view the learning environment as positive and supportive (Dorman, Aldridge and

Fraser, 2016). A positive environment does not only espouse feelings of safety,

belongingness and trust but should also drive the students to tackle challenges, take risks

and ask questions.

Modern learning philosophies (Wong, 2012) characterizes classroom management

that is focused on learning groups as having shared administrations, group building, and a

harmony between the requirements of the teacher and students. In this view, the learners

are adapting together in the same classrooms with teachers being considered responsible

for every individual students’ achievement.

Simply put, classroom management is defined as the general daily maintenance of

the classroom, which comprises on classroom rules for student input during instructional

time and the types of reward systems used (Martin & Sass, 2010). Classroom management

is concerned with a course of action of teachers’ behavior and activities that are basically

anticipated that would develop student cooperation and consideration in classroom. The

way classrooms are managed affects the students’ goal achievements. Classrooms

structures, their management and facilities provided enhance different patterns of

motivations.
 2

There are numerous classroom management models that a teacher can employ.

There is no universal solution for organizing a positive classroom since students are diverse

and have different behaviors, attitudes and societal norms. Thus, it is the teachers’ job to

employ a classroom management model that will best fit the classroom environment taking

into consideration the learners’ differences.

In the Philippines, the issue of discipline in the classroom continues to surface as

one of the most challenging problems in education today. Schools are not typically

equipped to deal with moderate to severe behavioral problem, and many teachers feel

unprepared to address the myriad challenges students bring to class. Today’s classrooms

are much more complicated than in years past because some students do not respect

teachers, more students come to school with behavioral problems than ever before and

teachers are not sufficiently trained to deal with today’s behavioral problems. Teachers,

experienced nor inexperienced, have problems in handling classroom behavior. Researches

confirmed that teachers fail to deal with classroom management either because they lack

basic training and theoretical framework in classroom management or strategies that would

help them deal with behavior problems.

The necessity of classroom management is an inevitable task that teachers will have

to acquire if they intend to have well-managed classrooms free from disruptions. Teachers

need to understand that the basis teaching depends on effectively managing the classroom

and ensuring that lessons are presented smoothly. To continue teaching without attending

to disruptive behavior is a purposeless teaching discourse since no effective learning is

possible. Effective teaching and learning cannot take place in a poorly managed classroom.

If students are disorderly and disrespectful, and no apparent rules and procedures guide
 3

behavior, the classroom will be full of complete chaos. In these situations, both teachers

and students suffer. Teachers struggle to teach, and students most likely learn much less

than they should. Well-managed classrooms provide an environment in which teaching,

and learning can flourish. But since the traditional methods of classroom management in

somewhat ineffective to students nowadays a new method must be presented alleviate the

problems encountered by classroom teachers which in turn will greatly benefit the students.

The emergence of classroom management tools are the newest trends in classroom

management methods. Classroom management tools are software or applications that helps

the teachers to keep track and be aware of each of their student’s progress, to help them get

the students more actively involved in class, to better plan and create their lessons.

Applications such as Class DOJO, Google Classroom, Socrative, Plickers and many others

are now being utilized by teachers to facilitate classroom management from basic task such

as grading and checking attendance and to the more complex task such as generating

student data, monitoring students’ behavior, facilitating note taking, and assessments.

Khan (2016) stated that such applications can keep students' attention, guiding them

through lessons, and making sure the classroom environment is respectful, supportive, and

productive in a way that it can be time-saving, helping the teachers instantly deliver and

assess learning, create seating charts, improve students' behavior, and set timed tasks to

make your classroom run like a well-oiled machine.

One of the newest classroom management applications that can be downloaded in

Google Play Store and the Apple Store is TeacherKit developed by ITWORX Inc. The

application is a classroom management tool that five features which includes class
 4

management, student management, attendance and assessment, monitoring behavior and

gradebook. It has also the capability generate and print reports.

TeacherKit is a good option for keeping track of grades and attendance, as well as

managing behavior issues and seating charts. To maximize the benefit to students, it would

be best to set up regular distribution of reports, as these are not available on-demand. Also,

given that the built-in reporting is purely quantitative, the result would be much effective

if it is coupled with a narrative feedback. Teachers can also use this to follow class and

individual trends to make meaningful decisions about lesson planning, pacing, and review.

Magal (2011) found out in her study that when students can monitor their own

progress, they take ownership of their learning, and are more likely to persevere in the face

of challenges and take steps to proactively meet their goals. Tracking their progress

empowers students to be independent and successful, which will not only benefit them in

school but in any future endeavor. A student must understand how they learn, and have the

ability to articulate, create, or ask for the resources necessary to meet their learning needs.

Students with these attributes take responsibility for and ownership of their learning by

reflecting on successes and failures and creating action steps to positively progress forward

in reaching their goals. When students track their progress, it means that they have set a

goal and know how to measure where they are in the process of achieving it. Students

regularly analyze and update their goals using concrete evidence—which can be anything.

Students should reflect often on what is working and what’s not and figure out what they

need to do to make progress with their goals.

The aforementioned information was one of the features of TeacherKit in which

the researchers deemed important. Another aspect of the application which drives the
 5

researcher to conduct the experiment is the feature of the application for collaborative

learning through Kahoot and its chat feature as well as its ability to store and retrieve

previously discussed topics which will be beneficial to students who wants to review

certain portions of the topics discussed. Thus, TeacherKit does not only serves as an

organizer for teachers but as an instructional tool as well.

The abovementioned features of the TeacherKit application prompted the

researchers to determine its effects on student achievement.

Statement of the Problem

This experimental study aims to determine the effectiveness of TeacherKit as a

classroom management application and as an instructional device in teaching selected

topics in geometry to first year Bachelor of Secondary Education mathematics students of

Tarlac State University during the second semester, academic year 2018-2019.

Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. How can the performance of the experimental and control group be described during

the pre-test?

2. Is there a significant difference between the mean pre-test score of the experimental

and control group?

3. How can the performance of the experimental and control group be described during

the post-test?

4. Is there a significant difference between the mean post-test score of experimental and

control group be described during the post-test?

5. Is there a significant difference between the mean pre-test scores and mean post-test

scores of the experimental group?

 6

6. What problems are encountered in using TeacherKit?

7. What is the implication of the study to mathematics education?

Research Hypothesis

Aside from the abovementioned questions, the researchers will also test the

following null hypothesis using a two-tailed test with a 5% level of significance:

1. There is no significant difference between the mean pre-test score of the experimental

and control group.

2. There is no significant difference between the mean post-test score of experimental and

control group be described during the post-test.

3. There is no significant difference between the mean pre-test scores and mean post-test

scores of the experimental group.

Significance of the Study

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of TeacherKit as a classroom

management tool and an instructional tool in teaching selected topics in Geometry over the

use of the traditional method of teaching.

The findings of this study will greatly benefit the teachers since it will give them a

viable option to use as a classroom management tool and an instructional tool. With the

help of this tool they will now have a more flexible and manageable classroom and teaching

tool. They can provide instant individualize feedback after assessment as well as providing

students with lectures notes that they can look into when studying or preparing for a test.

The students will also be benefitted from the findings of this study since they will

get to appreciate and have a fun experience in learning mathematical concepts specially in
 7

Geometry with the help of TeacherKit. They will enjoy collaborating with their friend in

doing homework and assessment task. This will help alleviate their fear of solving math

problems and can provide them with necessary teacher support instantly through its chat

feature.

Parents will also be benefitted from the findings of this study since this will

provide them the necessary information that will help them assist their children’s learning.

This application can help build a teacher-parent network through chat and parents can

receive feedbacks and information regarding what is being thought in school and their

respective children’s behavior.

Future researcher can use the findings of this study in conducting research of the

same kind. This will give them insight regarding the effects of different application of

electronic tools in classroom management and instructional management.

Scope and Delimitation

This study aims to determine the effect of TeacherKit as a classroom and

instructional management tool in teaching selected topics in Geometry. The method used

was experimental research.

The samples were taken from two sections of first year Bachelor of Secondary

Education mathematics students of Tarlac State University during the second semester,

academic year 2018-2019. Simple random sampling was used to determine the

experimental and control group.

 8

Definition of Terms

The following terms and phrases are defined to have better understanding of the

study:

Application. Application is defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as a computer

program that is designed for a particular purpose. In this study TeacherKit is often referred

as application.

Implication. It is the conclusion that can be drawn from something although it is

not explicitly stated.

Mathematics education. It is the practice of teaching and learning mathematics,

along with the associated scholarly research.

Performance. The Dictionary of Education (2014) defines performance as the

ability to perform a particular task or set of tasks with a certain degree of competence. In

this study performance is defined as the ability of the students to answer items in a pre-

defined test regarding selected topics in geometry.

Post-test Score. Post-test score is defined as the scores after the completion of an

instructional program which will determine the program’s effectiveness. In this study post-

test scores were defined as the scores of the students in the controlled group after the

duration of the experiment as well as the scores of the students in the experimental group

after the implementation of the instructional intervention.

Pre-test Score. Pre-test score is defined as the scores gained by the students which

will be used to determine their baseline knowledge on particular competencies. In this

study the pre-test scores were defined as the baseline skills of the control group in selected
 9

topics in Geometry as well as the baseline skills of the experimental group prior to the

implementation of the intervention.

 10

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the literature and studies that have some similarity on this

research undertaking. Some issues, problems and the development of classroom

management in integration of computer-aided instruction are discussed.

Related literature

Technology nowadays slowly invades our world which leads to changes. One of

the changes is to develop the instructional tool that can be use in conquering student and

teacher difficulties inside the classroom. That is why the CAI or Computer-Aided

Instruction was born it refers to the use of computers in teaching. It does not involve

teaching about computer, but rather, using computers as an aid in the classroom instruction

of a particular subject matter. Computer-Aided Instruction is designed to be a more

effective method for teaching and learning than the traditional approach.

Leung (2001) found that the curricula in the East Asian countries are content

oriented and examination driven. Teaching is very traditional and old fashioned. Teachers

in these countries seems to be ignorant about the latest methods of teaching and think that

competence in mathematics alone is sufficient for an effective teaching of the subject CAI

can dramatically increase a student’s access to information. The program can adapt to the

abilities and preferences of the individual student and increase the amount of personalized

instruction a student receives. Many students benefit from the immediate responsiveness

of computer interactions and appreciate the self-paced and private learning environment.

Moreover, computer-learning experiences often engage the interest of students, motivating

them to learn increasing independence and personal responsibility for education. Software
 11

programs might not be integrated to support best teaching practices instruction (Ertmer &

Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010) when teachers have limited accessibility to software (Wachira

& Keengwe, 2011), limited experience with the use of the software (Almekhlafi &

Almeqdadi, 2011), inadequate professional development on software (Hartsell, Herron,

Fang, & Rathod, 2009; Lagrange & Erdogan, 2009; Schonfeld, 2011), and different

perceptions of the use of software in the classrooms (Guzman &Nussbaum, 2009). Barriers

to integrating software into the math curriculum have been well-documented (Bellamy &

Mativo, 2010; Chamberlin, 2010; Wilcox & Monroe, 2011).

Although technology is already contributes a lot in our society or in any field, sad

to say there are still teachers who are still doesn’t have enough knowledge about it. That is

why the barrier between traditional and modern way of teaching is still present.

Bitter and Harfield (2003) emphasized that teachers must be aware of the quality

of available software and supplemental materials in order to fully utilize CAI.

Unfortunately, most teachers lack of time to adequately evaluate and develop methods

incorporating CAI in classroom.

Teachers are expected to acquire skill and knowledge about innovating the

classroom setting, then teachers must be knowledgeably enough when in comes to CAI

since basically this is what teachers need to engage the 21st century students.

Computer-aided instruction (CAI) refers to instruction or remediation presented on

a computer. Many educational computer programs are available online and from computer

stores and textbook companies. They enhance teacher instruction in several ways.
 12

Technology is essential in teaching and learning mathematics; it influences the

mathematics that is taught and enhances students’ learning (National Council of Teachers

in Mathematics, 2000)

Perez (2002) pointed out that integrating technology into education could be

challenging, frustrating and expensive. Likewise integrating a discipline within another

discipline is not really the ideal thing to do but it seems that this is what is going on to

happen to the educational system. New technologies can also change the teaching methods

of all disciplines. Most of the technology-based research on students achievement scores

has been conducted with computer-based education or videodisc programs employ drill

and practice or tutorial strategies.

In the study conducted by Rodrigo (2009), it was revealed that 71％ of private

elementary schools use computers for teaching while 7％ of public elementary schools

have ICT resources intended for teaching. Moreover, 31％ of all the schools in the

Philippines integrated ICT in teaching mathematics, science, and other major subject. But

it was also said that CAI can dramatically increase a student’s access to information. The

program can adapt to the abilities and preferences of the individual student and increase

the amount of personalized instruction a student receives. Many students benefit from the

immediate responsiveness of computer interaction and appreciate the self-paces and private

learning environment. Moreover, computer-learning experiences often engage the interest

of the students, motivating them to learn and increasing independence and personal

responsibility for education (Arnold, 2000).

Technology is transforming the teaching process into one that is more interactive

as well. Instead of waiting to see how much a student knows at the end of a term, progress
 13

can be measured in real time - and adjustments can be made. We have seen a lot of

advancement in education technology designed for the classroom, and to be effective,

educators need to stay abreast of these new technology and trends. (Matthew, 2016)

Ariola (2009) Most discipline problems are created by students. In one study it was

found out that about 55％ were related to talking and noise; 26％ were related to tardiness,

incomplete assignment, and moving around, and leaving without teachers permission; and

16％ were related to completing other assignments of other teacher, reading other books

or other periodicals while the class was going on; 2％ texting; and 1％ dreaming and

absent-mindedness.

Related studies

A. Foreign

In the study of Diković (2009), “Applications GeoGebra into Teaching Some

Topics of Mathematics at the College Level”, he represents the new technology and

learning through the use of GeoGebra especially for the development of e-learning for

College mathematics. The result of his study showed the effect of GeoGebra to the students

to visualize adequate math process. This kind of technology allows the students to explore

and to connect symbolic representations to visual representations.

Bukova-Güzel (2010) conducted a study about “Integrating Technology into

Mathematics Education: A Case Study from Primary Mathematics Students Teachers”. He

found four major themes out of the views of primary mathematics teachers about using

technological tools in math class. The first theme was the necessity of the technology in

mathematics education. The second theme was the positive sides of the instructional

technological tools. The third theme was the preparing instructional technological tools.
 14

The fourth theme was the pre-service teachers’ thoughts about the prepared instructional

technological tools. out from his findings, he then recommended that teachers must submit

themselves to learning programs about the use of technological programs.

Hashim and colleague (2011) introduced a Java m-learning application tool to

review and revise course materials. This application can be used either on-line or off-line.

The on-line feature helped users to access learning content via the application, which had

been installed on their mobile devices. This application mainly focused on three subject

areas: Science, English, and Mathematics. Learners could use the application to review

course materials before exams or quizzes.

Philip, et. al. (2011) conducted a study in Kenyan secondary school in mathematics.

The study focuses on the effect of computer assisted instruction on the attitude and

performance of the Kenyan students. The result of the study indicated the educators to

provide opportunities to all students to engage with CAI. The study does not suggest that

in every topic in mathematics, there should be an integration of CAI; however mathematics

educators are encouraged to recognize the benefits and effectiveness of CAI as an

alternative tool in teaching mathematics.

Alqahtani & Mohammad (2015) made a study on Mobile Applications’ Impact on

Student Performance and Satisfaction. This research aims to study the relationships of

behavioral factors and perceived usefulness of using the mobile application “Say Quran”

for learning Quran on students’ perceived performance, satisfaction and behavior. In this

research a group of 118 students of the Computer Sciences and Information Systems

College at A1 Imam Muhammed Bin Saud Islamic University who are studying the Holy

Quran course had been asked to use the application to help them on studying the Quran,
 15

then a survey had been distributed in order to collect the data. The results from this study

provide evidence that there is a positive relationship between mobile application “Say

Quran" and students’ perceived performance, satisfaction and behavior while engaged in

studying the Holy Quran.

B. Local

Samson (2009) developed and validated a software on complex numbers. He

developed a module with eight (8) lessons and converted it into interactive CAI software.

The result of the study shows that the scores obtained from the post-test were higher than

those scores obtained in the pre-test, which means that the performance of the students in

solving complex numbers improved with the use of CAI as a toll in learning.

Nool (2009) conducted a study on the Development and Validation of Improvised

Manipulative Material as Remediation Device in Teaching Addition and Subtraction of

Integers among the freshmen students of the Tarlac State University. The study revealed

that the performance of the students in addition and subtraction of integers significantly

improved after the teaching sessions with the use of the improvised manipulative material.

Dela Cruz (2013) conducted a study on the Integration of Geogebra in Teaching

and Learning Quadratic and Polynomial Functions. This study used experimental design

to test the effectiveness of Geogebra software in quadratic and polynomial functions. Two

sections of 4th year Mathematics students of Capas High School were randomly selected.

A total of 64 students of Fourth Year High School of Capas High School, S.Y 2013-2014

were taken as subject of the study. Prior to the conduct of the study two groups were

identified using their first quarter grades which were ranked to identify the upper 32

students (high performing) and the bottom 32 students (low performing). The result of their
 16

posttest was higher than the pretest which shows the effectiveness of Geogebra in learning

the lesson. Findings revealed that Geogebra is an effective tool in improving the

performance of high performing group as well as the low performing group. Comparing

the mean gain of the two groups, the data revealed that there is no significant difference on

their performances. The use of Geogebra influenced the student’s motivation and the

student-centered learning of the two groups. Geogebra used the conduct of the study did

not support all the students in developing problem-solving as but it helped the students

develop conceptual understanding of the lesson.

Pillerva (2016) conducted a study on Social Media-Based Instruction in Teaching

Selected Topics in Geometry. The major thrust of the study was to determine the

effectiveness of social media-based instructions in teaching Geometry topics among grade

8 students of Tarlac National High School. The study employed an experimental design.

The researcher utilized two groups of students control and experimental. The study

identitied the utilization of social media-based instructions in teaching selected topics in

Geometry. The social media used were Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Google search.

The students in the control group were taught geometrical topics using traditional approach

of teaching, while the students in the experimental group were taught using the social

media-based instructions. It was found that the scores obtained by the students in the

experimental group in the posttest were higher than their scores obtained in the pretest,

which means that their performance improved by social mediabased instructions in selected

tcpics in geometry. The study recommended that the school administrators should allocate

funds for professional development and opportunities which are needed, as well as

workshops and trainings on the development of instructional materials, effective

 17

instructional materials, effective instructional strategies, and attendance to research for

conference for dissemination of research output and acquisition of new ideas.

The study of Cadiang et al. (2017) entitled “Development and Validation of

Interactive Instructional Material on Plane Coordinate Geometry ” concluded that there

was a significant difference between the gain scores of the control group and experimental

group. The experimental group got a higher gain score as compared to the gain scores of

the control group. This means that with the use of traditional way of teaching mathematics,

the level of performance of the students had increased but the students did more and

performed better when the interactive instructional material was used in teaching

Mathematics.

The previews studies are related to the present study as it is concerned with the

instructional tool that can be use in teaching mathematics

Conceptual Framework

This study anchored the premise of using Teacherkit in teaching selected topics in

geometry in first year college students of Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in

Mathematics. This study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of teacherkit as

meaningful learning in teaching first year college students.

This study determined the effectiveness of teacherkit in teaching selected topics in

geometry. The experimental method of research was utilized. The experimental group was

exposed to teacherkit while the control group was taught in the traditional way of teaching

the same subject. Students’ attitude towards mathematics and perception on using

teacherkit was also determined.

 18

Randomly Selected
Experimental Group
Skills in selected topics
Baseline skills in TeacherKit as an in Geometry after the
selected topics in Instructional implementation of the
Geometry base on the Intervention Tool intervention
pre-test result. base on the post-test
result.

Randomly Selected
Control Group
Skills in selected topics
Baseline skills in in Geometry after the
selected topics in implementation of the
Geometry base on the intervention
pre-test result. base on the post-test
result.

Comparison of Baseline Comparison of Post-test

Knowledge regarding scores to determine the
selected topics in effectiveness of
Geometry TeacherKit
 19

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter shows the methods and techniques used in the study, the population

and samples, the research instrument, the data gathering procedure and processing and the

statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

This study used the experimental research design with random assignment or

placement. According to Kesler (2015) the experimental design is the primary approach

used to investigate causal (cause-effect) relationship and to study the relationship between

one variable and another.

This study explored the effect of the TeacherKit software application as an

instructional device in the acquisition of learning concepts in Geometry in the experimental

group which will then be compared to the performance of a control group. The

experimental research was deemed suitable for this study because it will test the cause-

effect relationship between the performance of the experimental group in the pre-designed

test and the application. Furthermore, assignment of samples in the group were done

randomly and that initial test were conducted to ensure that the experimental and control

group has the same baseline knowledge in the learning concepts presented.

Research Locale

The study was conducted in Tarlac State University, Lucinda Campus. The locale

was chosen primarily because the researchers were currently enrolled as students in the
 20

said university and that selection and samples will be more convenient given the time

constraint.

Sampling Design

Probability sampling was conducted to determine the samples which will be the

experimental and the control group. Two sections were chosen and were initially tested

using the research instrument to determine if they have the same level of baseline

knowledge of the Geometry concepts. Once the pre-test results were compared the

researcher used the toss coin method to determine the group that will comprise the

experimental and control group.

Automatic inclusion was also utilized to determine the number of samples in each

group. This sampling technique was used to allow all the students in each class as samples

in the study.

All-in-all, twenty-five (25) students were selected to be samples in the experimental

group and twenty-five (25) students were selected in the control group.

Table 1
Distribution of Samples

Group Number of Samples

Experimental 25
Control 25

Research Instrument

Two research instruments were developed by the researcher to gather pertinent data

that will be used establish answers to the problems presented in the first chapter.

The first instrument is a twenty-item option-type test which will determine the

students’ level of knowledge regarding selected geometry concepts. The test covers

concepts such as spatial figures, surface area and volume. A draft test consisting of 40-
 21

items was originally constructed and was used as an item pool. The draft test was then

administered to a group of students which are not included in the experimental or control

group for a dry-run. This was conducted to increase the validity of the test. After the initial

implementation of the draft test item, scores were collated and was item analyzed using the

UL 27% method. Items that are deemed “poor” were removed until the draft test was

reduced into a twenty-item test which are comprised of test items that are deemed “very

good” and “above very good”. This final form of the draft test was used as the test

instrument that will be utilized to determine the knowledge of the students in the selected

geometry concepts.

The second instrument used is a five-scale questionnaire in the Likert’s scale

format. This instrument was used to determine the problems that the students encountered

while using the TeacherKit application. The researchers constructed a draft questionnaire

then consulted their adviser for the revision. The questionnaire was submitted to the

researchers’ adviser for comments and suggestions as the basis for improving the items in

the questionnaire.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers first secured the permission of the Dean of the College of Education

to conduct the study. Having secured the permission, the researchers personally facilitated

the administration of the pre-test. The scores in the pre-test was then coded and collated to

a data processing software.

During the instructional phase the researchers distributed the TeacherKit

application to the teacher and the students in the experimental group. The teacher then

incorporated the application in his instructional endeavor. The teacher uses TeacherKit as
 22

a tool to distribute lesson snippets and assessment data during the duration of the

instructional phase. On the other hand, the students in the control group was taught using

the traditional method.

After two weeks the test was administrated again to the groups to determine the

post-test result.

A likert’s scale questionnaire was also answered by the group after the

implementation of the post-test. The questionnaire is composed of a five-item five-point

likert’s scale that presents statement where the students may agree or disagree depending

on the degree into which they have encountered the problems presented.

The scores of the samples during the post-test as well as the responses of the

samples in the experimental group on the questionnaire was then collated and coded in a

data processing software for statistical treatment and analysis.

Statistical Treatment

The researchers utilized different forms of statistical analysis to answer the

questions presented on the first chapter of this paper.

To determine the level of performance of the students during the pre-test and post-

test frequency counts and percentages was used. The table below was used to describe the

level of performance:

Table 2
Level of Performance

Limits of Index Description

17 - 20 Outstanding
13 – 16 Above Average
9 – 12 Average
5–8 Below Average
0–4 Poor
 23

An independent-samples t-test or student’s t-test was used to comparison of the

baseline knowledge between the experimental and control group. This test was utilized to

reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference

between the baseline knowledge of the geometry concept presented in the test between the

experimental and control group. The this will be conducted with a 5% degree of freedom

with an assumption that both groups have equal variances.

Additionally, it was also used to determine the difference between the mean

performance of the experimental and control group during the post-test or after the

intervention was facilitated. This statistical test was used to reject or fail to reject the null

hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference between the mean post-test

performance of the experimental and control group. The test was also conducted using a

5% degree of freedom and with an assumption that both groups have equal variances.

The formula for the student’s t-test is:

̅𝑥̅̅1̅ − ̅̅̅̅
𝑥2
𝑡= 1 1
𝑠𝑝 √ +
𝑛1 𝑛2

with

(𝑛1 −1)𝑠21 + (𝑛2 −1)𝑠22

𝑠𝑝 = √
𝑛1 + 𝑛2 − 2

where:

𝑥1 = mean of the first sample (experimental group)

̅̅̅

𝑥2 = mean of the second sample (control group)

̅̅̅

𝑛1 = number of samples in the experimental group

𝑛2 = number of samples in the control group

 24

𝑠1 = standard deviation of the experimental group

𝑠2 = standard deviation of the control group

To determine the statistical difference between the pre-test and post-test

performance of the experimental group a paired-sample t-test was utilized. This statistical

test will determine the mean gain thus measuring the effectiveness of the application. This

test will be used to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis which states that there is no

significant difference between the mean pre-test score and the mean post-test score of the

experimental group. The formula for the paired-sample t-test is:

̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑥𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 − 0
𝑡=
𝑠𝑥̅

with

𝑠𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓
𝑠𝑥̅ =
√𝑛

where:

𝑥
̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 = sample mean of the differences

𝑛 = sample size

𝑠𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 = sample standard deviation of the differences

𝑠𝑥̅ = estimated standard error of the mean

To determine the prevalent of the problems encountered by the experimental group

in using TeacherKit during the instructional phase the weighted mean was utilized by the

researchers. The weighted mean is a type of mean that is calculated by multiplying the

weight (or probability) associated with a particular event or outcome with its associated

quantitative outcome and then summing all the products together.

 25

The table below was used to determine the verbal interpretation of the value of the

weighted mean for each interval scale.

Table 3
Verbal Interpretation

Limits of Scale Verbal Interpretation

4.21 – 5.00 Very Much Prevalent
3.41 – 4.20 Very Prevalent
2.61 – 3.40 Prevalent
1.81 – 2.60 Somewhat Prevalent
1.00 – 1.80 Not Prevalent
 26

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the data gathered, the results of the statistical analysis done

and interpretation of findings. These are presented in tables following the sequence of the

specific research problem regarding the effectiveness of the TeacherKit application in

teaching selected topics in Geometry.

Description of Baseline Data

Baseline data are data on characteristics and experiences of experimental and

control group members, before the intervention occurs for the experimental and before the

comparable follow-up period begins for the control. Baseline data are critical to

nonexperimental evaluations, since they are needed to control for preexisting differences

between the two groups. In an experimental evaluation, random assignment ensures that

the experimental and control groups are the same, on average, in their background

characteristics, so controlling for background characteristics is not critical in obtaining

unbiased impact estimates.

In this study the baseline data was gathered through the use of a test instrument

constructed by the researchers. The pre-test result for both group was presented in the tables

below.
 27

Table 4
Experimental Group Pre-Test Result

Description Limits n %
Outstanding 17 - 20 0 0.00
Above Average 13 – 16 0 0.00
Average 9 – 12 10 40.00
Below Average 5–8 14 56.00
Poor 0–4 1 4.00
Total 25 100.00
Mean 7.12 Description Below Average

Table 4 shows the pre-test performance of the experimental group.

The data in the table shows that fourteen (14) out of 25 or 56.00% of the students

in the experimental group have a below average performance. It can be implied base on the

data that majority of the students in the experimental group have a below average

competencies in the selected Geometry topic presented in the test.

Additionally, ten (10) or 40.00% have an average performance while one (1) or

4.00% have a poor performance. No students gained a score of 13 to 16 and 17 to 20.

In general, the students in the experimental group have a below average

performance evidently shown by the mean of 7.12. It can be concluded that the

experimental group in general have a below average baseline knowledge in thes elected

Geometry topic presented in the test.

 28

Table 5
Control Group Pre-Test Result

Description Limits n %
Outstanding 17 - 20 0 0.00
Above Average 13 – 16 7 28.00
Average 9 – 12 6 24.00
Below Average 5–8 12 48.00
Poor 0–4 0 0.00
Total 25 100.00
Mean 9.68 Description Average

The data in Table 4 shows that twelve (12) or 48.00% of the samples in the control

group have a below average performance during the pre-test. This shows that most of the

students in the experimental group have a below average competencies in the selected

topics in Geometry presented.

Additional, seven (7) or 28.00% of the students in the control group have an above

average performance in the pre-test and six (6) or 24.00% have an average performance.

Furthermore, no student in the control group acquired a score of 0 to 4 and 17 to 20.

In general, the mean pre-test performance of the control group during the pre-test

is deemed as average with a mean of 9.68. This generally means that the students in control

group have an average baseline knowledge regarding the selected topics in Geometry

presented in the test.

Comparison of the Baseline Data

A statistical treatment was utilized to determine whether the two groups have the

same baseline knowledge on the item of the test. The researcher utilized an independent-

samples or students’ t-test to determine the statistical degree to which the performance of
 29

the experimental and the control group significantly differ. The result of the statistical test

was presented in the table below.

Table 6
Statistical Comparison of Pre-Test Performance*

Variables ̅
𝒙 t-value p-value Interpretation
Experimental 7.92
-3.04 0.004 Significant
Control 9.68
*Equal variances assumed

The data in the table shows that there is a significant difference between the mean

pre-test scores of the experimental (𝑥̅ = 7.68) and control group (𝑥̅ = 9.68); t = -3.04, p <

0.005. Base on this statistical result the null hypothesis which states that there is no

significant difference between the mean pre-test scores of the experimental and control

group is rejected. Thus, a significant difference exists between the performance of the

experimental and the control group during the pre-test.

The negative t-value (-3.04) further suggests that the performance of the control

group is higher compared to the performance of the experimental group. this result will

empower the findings regarding the effectiveness of the TeacherKit an as instructional tool.

Description of the Performance During the Post-Test

An ample time was given so that rote memorization will not be evident. The

experimental group was taught for two weeks and the lessons has coupled with ICT-

integration using TeacherKit while the control group was used using the traditional method.

After the instructional phase has been conducted, the two groups was the subjected to the

same test previously given during the pre-test.

The result of the post test was given in the succeeding tables.
 30

Table 7
Experimental Group Post-Test Result

Description Limits n %
Outstanding 17 - 20 22 88.00
Above Average 13 – 16 3 12.00
Average 9 – 12 0 0.00
Below Average 5–8 0 0.00
Poor 0–4 0 0.00
Total 25 100.00
Mean 17.16 Description Above Average

The data in Table 6 shows that majority of the students in the experimental group

(22 out of 25 or 88.00%) acquired an outstanding performance and three (3) or 12.00%

have an above average performance. This evidently shows that an improvement to the

previous test results.

Generally, the experimental group have a mean post-test score of 17.16 which is

interpreted as above average further suggesting that the students have an above average

grasp on the selected geometry concepts presented during the instructional phase.

Table 8
Control Group Post-Test Result

Description Limits n %
Outstanding 17 - 20 0 0.00
Above Average 13 – 16 0 0.00
Average 9 – 12 16 64.00
Below Average 5–8 7 28.00
Poor 0–4 2 8.00
Total 25 100.00
Mean 12.76 Description Average

The data in the table above shows that sixteen (16) or 64.00% of the students in the

control group acquired a score of 9 to 12 which is interpreted as average. This suggests an

increase in the performance compare to their pre-test scores.

 31

Additionally, seven (7) or 28.00% have scores ranging from 5 to 8 and interpreted

as below average performance. Furthermore, it should be noted that during the previous

test there are seven (7) student who have an above average performance whereas during

the post-test no students have acquired an above average performance.

The performance of the control group during the post-test is generally described as

average evident in the mean post-test score of 12.76.

Comparison Between the Post-Test Performance

To determine the effectiveness of the TeacherKit as an instructional tool compared

to the traditional method of teaching an independent-samples or students’ t-test was utilized

by the researchers. The statistical result will be used by the researchers to test the null

hypothesis presented in the first chapter of this paper.

Below is the table which shows the result of the statistical test.

Table 9
Statistical Comparison of Post-Test Performance*

Variables ̅
𝒙 t-value p-value Interpretation
Experimental 17.60
10.30 0.000 Significant
Control 12.76
*Equal variances assumed

The statistical result shows that there is a significant difference between the mean

post-test score of the experimental and control group; t = 10.30, p < 0.000. This statistical

finding suggests that the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant difference

between the post-test score of the experimental and control group is rejected. Thus, a

statistical difference exists between the post-test performance of the experimental and the

control group.
 32

Furthermore, the high positive t-value (10.30) suggests that the performance of the

experimental group is higher compared to the post-test performance of the control group.

This suggests that the use of TeacherKit as an instructional tool is more effective

compared to that of the traditional method.

Comparison Between the Performance of the Experimental Group

To further validate the effectiveness of TeacherKit in bridging the acquisition of

the mathematical concept presented during the instructional phase of the experiment the

performance of the students in the experimental group during and after the implementation

phase must be compared.

For this statistical procedure, the researchers utilized a paired-sample t-test. The

result of the statistical test is given in the table below.

Table 10
Statistical Comparison of the Performance of the Experimental Group

Variables M MD t-value p-value Interpretation

Pre-Test 7.92
-9.68 31.84 0.000 Significant
Post-Test 17.60

The result of the paired-sample t-test shows that there is a significant difference

between the mean pre-test score (M = 7.92) and the mean post-test score (M = 17.60) of

the students in the experimental group; t = -31.84, p < 0.000. Base on this finding, the null

hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference between the mean pre-test

score and the mean post-test score of the students in the experimental group is rejected.

Additional it can be concluded that the intervention during the instructional phase

of the study using TeacherKit is effective in bridging the mathematical concepts presented.
 33

This conclusion can be further corroborated by the negatively high mean difference (-9.68)

and a high t-value (31.84).

The statistical findings suggest therefore the effectiveness of TeacherKit as an

instructional tool and that it can be used to help the acquisition of mathematical concepts

more effectively.

Problems Encountered

No teaching method is universally perfect, that is, no teaching method is free from

errors and shortcomings. Though the use of technology can be time efficient and is less

stressful, some students and even teachers still encounter problems regarding the use of it.

Although it has already been proven base on the statements above that TeacherKit

is effective in bridging instructional content it is not free from problems.

The following table shows the problems encountered by the students in the

experimental group during the instructional phase where they are immersed in the use of

the application.

Table 11
Problems Encountered

Problems wm Interpretation
1. I have a hard time familiarizing the application
3.36 Prevalent
because no manual or instruction was given.
2. I have issues with connectivity since the
3.48 Very Prevalent
application is an always-online application.
3. I encountered problems with device Somewhat
2.24
compatibility with lower generation phone. Prevalent
4. I have problem using the applications because it
3.04 Prevalent
was not comprehensively discussed.
5. I encountered technical problems such as
freezing and crashing that is due to software 1.72 Not Prevalent
compatibility.
 34

The data in Table 11 shows that the students in the experimental group generally

agree that connectivity issue is a very prevalent problem that they have encountered while

using the application since it is an always-online applications (wm = 3.48). Always-online

applications are applications that must always be connected to a network for it to perform

its function. The problem with online applications is that it consumes data which is a

problem for those who do not have unlimited internet connectivity. As a result of the

follow-up interview, one student detailed that he is hesitant to use to application because

he is afraid that it will consume his internet data. Another issue with this kind of

applications is network availability. When used in an area with no network coverage the

students would not be able to use it.

The students also generally agree that they had a hard time familiarizing the

applications because they are not given a instruction manual on how to use it. The students

in the experimental group viewed this as a prevalent problem; wm = 3.48. During the

follow-up interview some students stated that they watched online video tutorial on the use

of the software for them to be familiarize with it. Additionally, the students also generally

agree that they also encountered using the application since it was not comprehensively

discussed; wm = 3.04. The students viewed this as a prevalent issue.

The students in the experimental group also generally agree that compatibility issue

is a somewhat prevalent problem they have encountered when using the application; wm

= 2.24. Since the application is developed in the newest operating system (OS) smart

phones, students with devices that belongs to older generation OS encountered a problem

when installing and using the application. On the other hand, the students generally agree

that technical issues are problems that are not prevalent when they used the application;
 35

wm = 1.72. Some of the who encountered these problems simply updated their operating

system for them to use the applications without encountering technical issues.

Implication to Mathematics Education

Today, contemporary technology significantly affects the everyday life and,

therefore, the learning process. The tendency of technology integration in teaching is

unambiguous and there is a general consensus on the importance of such integration. The

research of the contemporary technology impact on the educational process has an

important role in the integrating process. For this purpose, the presented study was

conducted. The results of the study showed a positive effect of using contemporary

technology with respect to the results of the performance on selected topics in geometry.

The use of technology significantly reduces the time required to master new learning

materials.

Findings from this study have a significant impact on mathematics instructions. In

conclusion, the very first stage of technology implementation must be effective to make

sure that, teachers and students are able to make the best use of it. Thus, preparations of a

technology-based teaching and learning begin with proper implementation and supports by

the school top management. If the implementation process of technology integration in

schools take place appropriately from the very beginning stage and the continuous

maintenance are adequately provided, technology integration in schools will result in a

huge success and benefits for both teachers and students. The use of technology especially

in teaching and learning is more about practicality as compared to theories and that is why

teachers must be given time to learn and explore it, face the “trial-and-error” phase before
 36

they are completely comfortable with its usage and able to make use of it for teaching and

learning.

Finally, the integration of ICT in classroom needs serious consideration in order to

increase the competency of the country’s education system. This will help in increasing the

world ranking of the national education and produce the better future work force. In order

to enhance the use of technology in classroom, the government needs to improve and

change the teachers’ belief about the integration of technology in classroom. As the

teachers’ role is the key role in making any of the new policy to be implemented efficiently

and successfully. The changes that is taking place is driven by advanced technology and

communication devices that should be available to students wherever they are either at

school or home. In addition , the needs for teachers to be literate and have good skills and

knowledge in using technology to improve their teaching methods and approach is desired

to promote effective learning as well as to meet the demand of the 21st century teaching

skills.
 37

Chapter 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings of the study undertaken, the

conclusion drawn, and the recommendations made as an outgrowth of this study.

Summary of Findings

The following are the salient findings of the study:

1. The study revealed that 56.00% of the students in the experimental group have a below

average performance during the pre-test, while 40.00% have an average performance

while one (1) or 4.00% have a poor performance. In general, the mean pre-test score of

the students in the experimental group is 7.12 which is described as below average. On

the one hand, 48.00% of the samples in the control group have a below average

performance during the pre-test. Additional, 28.00% have an above average

performance in the pre-test while 24.00% have an average performance. The general

performance of the control group was described as average with a mean of 9.68.

2. Statistical findings revealed that there is a significant difference between the mean pre-

test scores of the experimental and control group (t = -3.04, p < 0.005). Also,the

statistical test revealed that the performance of the control group is higher compared to

the performance of the experimental group base on the negative value of t which is -

3.04.

3. After the instructional phase of the study it was found out that 88.00% of the students

in the experimental group acquired an outstanding performance and 12.00% have an

above average performance. The mean post-test score of the experimental group have

is 17.16 which is interpreted as above average. Comparatively, only 64.00% of the

 38

students in the control group acquired a score of 9 to 12 which is interpreted as an

average performance while 28.00% have scores ranging from 5 to 8 and interpreted as

below average performance.

4. The statistical comparison between the post-test performance of the experimental and

control group revealed that there is a significant difference between the mean post-test

score of the experimental and control group (t = 10.30, p < 0.000). Furthermore, the

high positive t-value (10.30) suggests that the performance of the experimental group

is higher compared to the post-test performance of the control group.

5. The paired-sample t-test between the pre-test and post-test performance of the

experimental group revealed a significant difference between the mean scores (t = -

31.84, p < 0.000).

6. It was also revealed that the very prevalent problems that the students encountered

while using the TeacherKit application during the instructional phase is connectivity

issue (wm = 3.48). Also, findings revealed that the students had a hard time

familiarizing the applications because they are not given a instruction manual on how

to use the application (wm = 3.48) which is viewed as a prevalent problem. It was also

revealed that the students had a hard time using the application because its use was not

comprehensively discussed to them by the researchers (wm = 3.04).

Conclusion

Based on the abovementioned findings the following conclusion was formulated.

1. The students in the experimental group have a generally below average prior to the

implementation of the intervention while the students in the control group have a

generally average performance.

 39

2. There is a statistical difference between the baseline knowledge of the students in the

selected Geometry lessons presented in the pre-test. The control group have a higher

level of performance compared to the performance of the experimental group.

3. After the instructional phase the experimental group acquired an above average

performance which is higher than their previous performance. Consequently, the

students in the control group retained their average performance.

4. There is a significant difference between the post-test scores of the experimental group

and the control group. Furthermore, the performance of the experimental group during

the post-test is higher than that of the control group. It can be therefore concluded that

the use of TeacherKit as an instructional tool is more effective than the traditional

method.

5. There is a significant difference between the pre-test and post-test performance of the

experimental group. The high mean difference shows that, taking other factors aside,

the use of TeacherKit is effective in bridging instructional gap on the presented topics

during the instructional phase.

6. Connectivity issue is the most prevalent problems that the students in the experimental

group encountered while they also generally agree that the lack of instructional manual

and comprehensive discussions regarding the application’s use are prevalent problems

that hinders them in using the application effectively.

Recommendation

Base on the summary of findings and the conclusions mentioned above, the

following suggestions were formulated:

 40

1. Since the effect of TeacherKit has been established it is recommended that teachers

should employ the application not only as a classroom management tool but as an

instructional tool as well.

2. Since TeacherKit is a pad application which requires monthly or yearly subscription,

school administrators should devise a financial plan which could help the teacher in

purchasing the application.

3. The school should also provide free internet access to every classroom which could

help address connectivity issue when using not only the application presented but other

ICT teaching tools as well.

4. The inclusion of a clear instructional manual should be presented and given to students

prior to using not only the application presented but other teaching-related technology

as well.

5. A clear demonstration of the use of the application should be presented prior to its use

to give the students a clear understanding of the purpose of the tool.

6. The effectiveness of TeacherKit should also be tested on difference learning areas.

 41

INSERT BIBLIOGRAPHY HERE