The Effect of Time Schedule on the Students’

Performance in Mathematics

Andrea Celina B. Dinglasan

Jowie G. Espaldon

May 2018
 Chapter I

Background of the Study

Increasing productivity and efficiency in the educational

system requires targeted application of resources and better
understanding of the time-of-day effects on the learning
process. A large body of research on educational production
functions considers how educational resources, including both
school and non-school inputs are transformed into academic
outcomes. An important simplifying assumption is no
heterogeneity in the school input effects for an individual
student. Emerging evidence from new studies2 demonstrates that
a heterogeneous response to school inputs complicatesthe
identification of these effects. In the context of time-of-day
effects, students may not be able to maximize their learning
opportunities and would absorb the same educational inputs in
a different way, depending on varying productivity for
academic tasks during the day and the constraints the school
schedules impose on them.

A growing number of recent studies have considered how

the time-of-day may affect learning, but there is remaining
ambiguity. While the school start times literature has
highlighted that later start and even afternoon classes may
have a positive impact on student performance3, studies of
double-shift schooling4 point to lower academic achievement
for later-in-the-day classes versus morning classes for some
subjects and inconclusive evidence for others Lusher and
Yasenov (2016); Pope (2016). Time-ofdayeffects have been
subject to research in psychology and neuroscience: to
determine how human physiological and cognitive performance
varies at different times of the day and how it depends on the
circadian rhythm, a person’s chronobiology and the effects of
the light-dark cycle5. It has been widely accepted now that
sleep deprivation can significantly impair memory and the
acquisition of skills (e.g. Cardinali, 2008).

The literature is in agreement that sufficient sleep is a

necessary prerequisite for performing well in cognitive tasks.
In education, later secondary school start times have gained
momentum with a number of medical and educational institutions
urging schools to abandon early school start times. At the
same time, double-shift school schedules are also popular
educational policies. Currently, over 45 countries use some
system of alternation between morning and afternoon classes6.
In an extensive review Bray (2008) argues that the supply of
school places can be increased by alternating school places,
making better use of school resources and making a significant
contribution to the provisions of universal primary and
secondary education. Less is known, however, on how
substantial delays in start times can affect the quality of
educational inputs, including the way teachers deliver and how
students perceive learning in different times of the day.

Estimating time-of-day effects on cognitive achievement

follows significant progress in the educational production and
school quality literature. Growing body of research has
accumulated evidence on the impact of class size7, teacher
quality, and value-added8 and school quality more generally9.
Beyond the traditional school inputs, recent research looks
into what makes effective schools beside thetraditional
resource inputs. School characteristics, instruction length
and school organization explain a large part of the variation
in test scores (Angrist et al., 2013; Dobbie and Fryer, 2013).

Identification in educational production and educational

quality has established several better research design
principles, which have become part of modeling academic
achievement, including the value-added specifications and the
use of long panels (or siblings and twins), which enable
differencing of individual-specific heterogeneities. Outcomes
acquired in one period tend to persist into future periods,
which reflect the technology of skills as self-reinforcing,
augmenting the skills produced in later stages (Cunha and
Heckman, 2007). Given the historical school and family inputs
into the educational production, model specifications have to
account for learning as a cumulative process (Cunha et al.,
2010; Meghir and Rivkin, 2011; Todd and Wolpin, 2003).

Studying the causal impact of educational inputs - how

variations in educational quality may determine different
returns to education - is often impeded by endogenous choices
and unobserved heterogeneities. Without random assignment,
self-selection into preferred course times would challenge
uncovering the true parameter of interest (Dills and
Hernandez-Julian, 2008; Pope, 2016). Synchrony effects between
chronobiology type10 and capacity for cognitive achievement
during a particular time of the day would further complicate
identification of the time-of-the-day effects (Goldstein et
al., 2007).

When President Bush signed No Child Left behind (NCLB) into

law in January 2002, he intended to introduce a program to
help every child succeed academically. NCLB test results are
used to evaluate children, teachers, and schools. In
California, student scores on the Standardized Testing and
Reporting (STAR) test given in the spring are used to
determine if ​adequate yearly progress ​(AYP) has been made. AYP
is used each year to determine that achievement of each school
district and school. Unfortunately, these new tests of
accountability set “fanciful AYP expectations regarding
students’ performances on those tests” (Popham, 2003, p. 3).
These are the new rules with which teachers and administrators
need to comply. The stakes are high; schools that do not make
their pre-determined AYP “may suffer sanctions that include
loss of federal funding, termination of staff, and dissolving
the school district” (Rose, 2004, p. 121).

A standardized curriculum creates the expectation at the

school or district level that all students will receive
instruction in the same curricular areas in the same grade,
regardless of teacher or school. Marzano indicates, “Without a
standardized curriculum, public education has little chance of
significant improvement” (2002, p. 6). However, as it
presently stands, the standards that have been produced are
“bloated and poorly written standards that almost no one can
realistically teach to or ever hope to adequately assess”
(Schmoker&Marzano, 1999, p. 19). Thus each school year,
educators are under pressure to cover the standards before the
NCLB assessments in the spring. Teachers must do what they can
to define and teach the essential standards in the limited
time that they have with their students each school year.

The advent of NCLB and the adoption of a standards-based

curriculum have led some educators to declare that there is
simply not enough time to address all of the standards, and to
wonder if lengthening the school day or school year is a
solution. Budget crisis, the cost of adding more school days
is not a viable option, nor is it necessarily a good solution.

Some say that additional classroom time does not necessarily

lead to additional academic learning time (WestEd, 2001).
Perhaps it is not the quantity of time, but the quality of
time that matters. By using class time effectively, perhaps
teachers can begin to increase student academic learning time
and, therefore, increase student learning and achievement.

Caine and Caine (1998) have suggested that in order to change

the way educators teach, teachers need to become
introspective. That is, we must examine educational beliefs
and be willing to challenge them. Time of day when curricular
subjects are taught is just one of many things components that
need research. Teacher lunchroom conversation often seems to
include laments about teaching anything academic in the
afternoon.

Traditionally, in self-contained elementary classrooms, core

subjects such as reading and mathematics have been taught in
the morning, when students are perceived to be alert. However,
teaching these core subjects only in the morning session does
not provide enough instructional or practice time to
effectively teach the essential standards as prescribed by
law. Indeed, more and more teachers are finding it necessary
to extend the learning time of core subjects into the
afternoon hours. The impetus for conducting this research
project is a desire to discover how best to use time-of-day
influences in an academic setting.

Many years ago, researchers started investigating whether

factory workers were able to perform their job accurately at
different times of the day. Later, other researchers looked
into how the body and brain function at different times of the
day to see if there is any correlation as to why some tasks
are performed better than others at certain times of the day.
Brain researchers found that short-term memory is better in
the morning and long-term memory is better in the afternoon.
So, how does that relate to regular classroom practice? More
specifically, applying this finding to classroom practice may
help teachers teach and students learn more effectively.

Bringing brain research into the classroom has been a slow

process. The limited practical research in this area helps
answer some questions about time-of-day influences on
attention, memory, and scholastic student achievement, but
leaves other questions unanswered.

Zephaniah Davis (1987a) administered a yearlong study

examining time-of-day influences on student achievement and it
was found that students instructed in reading during the last
period of the day had more gains than those instructed in
reading during the first period of the day. In a similar
study, Davis (1987b) found that the above result was not the
same for math, which the overall yearly math achievement of
the students was not determined by whether they had math
instruction in the morning or the afternoon.

It seems that one study about mathematics and time-of-day

influences is not sufficient and that more research along this
line of inquiry could lead to more useful conclusions. The
Davis (1987b) study examined different groups of eighth grade
students who were instructed at different times of the day.
This study contributes to this literature by examining a
single group of third grade students to see if they perform
differently in math at different times of the day.

Theoretical Framework

In order to understand how the brain's memory may

function differently at different times of the day, it is
important to understand how the brain processes and stores
data. One way the brain's different memory types are
classified is by short-term memory and long-term memory.
Short-term memory is broken down into immediate memory and
working memory. Immediate memory will hold data for a short
amount of time and then drop it if the brain registers that it
is unimportant. Working memory is the conscious memory.
Pre-adolescents are able to hold an average of five items in
their working memory for a finite amount of time before
fatigue sets in (Sousa, 2001, p. 45). In order for the brain
to continue processing this information in the working memory,
the information must be dealt with in a new or different way.
Information taken in during the day will be encoded in the
brain during deep sleep. If information is not put into
long-term storage, it will be lost within the next 24 hours.
Therefore, testing to see if information is in long-term
storage is effective after 24 hours or more have passed
(Sousa, 2001, pp. 49-50).

Learning is the process by which we acquire new knowledge

and skills. Memory is the process by which we retain knowledge
and skills for the future” (Sousa, 2001, p.78). Sometimes
teachers focus on the learning aspect of teaching, but without
retention the learning is lost. A goal of effective teaching
is for students to retain the things they are learning.
Getting a student to learn more is not as simple as teaching
more. The brain needs time to process the new information. New
information is processed and reprocessed through rehearsal.
Rehearsal is necessary to transfer information from working
memory into long-term storage (Sousa, 2001, pp. 85-86).

Students learn best what information they hear during the

first part of a lesson and second best what they hear during
the last part of a lesson. The information in the middle is
often lost because the brain is busy processing what came
first (Jensen, 2000, pp. 224-225; Sousa, 2001, pp. 88-89).
​ as Sousa calls it, is the time when students
This ​down-time,
should be working independently with the new information that
was presented. This allows the brain a break from receiving
new input and allows for processing which will lead to
retention.

People give their focus and attention in varying amounts

depending on how they perceive a stimulus. Sousa (2001)
identified a hierarchy that can reveal why students sometimes
have difficulty paying attention. Stimulus affecting survival
gets immediate and undivided attention. Next in the hierarchy
is stimulus that generates an emotional response. Lastly,
stimulus that is novel and different will also gain attention
(Sousa, 2001, p.43). From this, it is easy to see that
students must feel safe and secure in the classroom before
they can attend to learning and also that new learning that is
made novel will get more attention than something mundane.
Moreover, unlike memory functions, teachers may have some
control over student attention.

Age is also a significant factor when it comes to

attention and time-of-day influences. Sousa (2001, p. 102)
points out, that ability to focus in pre-adolescents and
post-adolescents rises in the morning and then remains steady
until about mid-day when there is a significant drop. Focus
then increases again, but not to as high a degree as in the
morning. Focus then slowly tapers off throughout the remainder
of the day until sleep occurs. The dip for pre-adolescents and
post-adolescents is from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. It is
significant to note that this pattern for level of focus
shifts for adolescents. Their dip in focus occurs
approximately one hour later and lasts from about 1:00 p.m. to
4:00 p.m. So what may be true in studies involving adolescents
may not hold true for elementary-aged students. However,
according to Sousa (2001, p.102), the levels of focus
throughout the day for pre-adolescents and adults are the
same.

Early studies (Laird, 1925: Blake, 1967; Baddeley, Hatter,

Scott, and Snashell, 1970; Hockey, Davis, and Gray, 1972)
suggested that performance of a variety of tasks fluctuates
with time-of-day. Later, Blake related these fluctuations to
changes in body temperature (1971). He found that our basal
​ essentially, a measure of mental alertness) and
arousal level (
body temperature starts to increase upon waking and, with the
exception of a dip after noon, continues to rise until about
8:00 p.m. According to Blake, when body temperature is high,
so is arousal and high arousal may interfere with short-term
memory.

Because of the more recent definition of and findings

about long-term memory (Sousa, 2001, pp. 49-50), some of the
early studies attempting to look at long-term memory retrieval
in relation to time-of day appear to be flawed. If information
is in long-term memory only after at least 24 hours have
passed (Sousa, 2001, p. 50), then some of these early studies
that tested less than 24 hours following the introduction of
the new information did not truly test for long-term memory
retrieval. For one example, Laird (1925) tested recall only 40
minutes after the initial reading of the text.

Baddeley, Hatter, Scott, and Snashell (1970) found that

long-term memory was slightly better in the afternoon as
compared to the morning. They used a digit span test, but
counted the sequences that were repeated within the test as a
measure of long-term memory. It is unclear how much time
elapsed between the first hearing of the sequence and the
participants repeating of it, so perhaps not enough time
elapsed to truly test long-term memory retrieval.
Conceptual Framework

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the study on the effect of

the time schedule on the students’ performance in mathematics.

The time of testing for information learned does not

appear to be as important as the time at which the learning
was achieved (Folkard, Monk, Bradbury and Rosenthall, 1977;
Peters, 1984). The Folkard et al. study-mentioned in the
previous paragraph, compared students for recall at the same
time-of-day as the initial presentation against recall at a
different time-of-day as the initial presentation. Folkard et
al. (1977) found that there was no significant difference in
when the students were tested for information recalled. Peters
(1984) examined the results from 131 students in first grade
through fifth grade taking the Stanford Achievement Test in
reading. She also found no significant difference in
time-of-day effects on test-taking. Both these studies
challenge the long-held assumption that testing students
during the morning hours is necessary to give an accurate
picture of what they know and support the null hypothesis.

Studies that truly looked at long-term memory retrieval—

that is after at least 24 hours from the time of initial
learning has passed— found that ability to retrieve
information stored was stronger later in the day (Folkard,
Monk, Bradbury and Rosenthall, 1977; Millar, Styles, &Wastell,
1995). Folkard et al. (1977) tested 12-year-old and
13-year-old students on delayed recall of a story heard seven
days earlier using a multiple-choice questionnaire. He found
that students who initially heard the story at 3:00 p.m. had
better recall than those students who initially heard the
story at 9:00 a.m. Millar, Styles and Wastell (1995) tested
fifty-four adults (mean age 38.5 years) in a semantic
classification on information that had originally been learned
long before the testing. There were three testing periods:
morning (9:15 a.m. or 10:00 a.m.), afternoon (2:15 p.m. or
3:00 p.m.) and evening (6:00 p.m. or 7:00 p.m.). Millar,
Styles and Wastell found that long-term memory retrieval
efficiency increased over the day.

Objectives

study will be conducted to find out the effects of the

time schedule of mathematics subject on the student’s
performance in class and how time schedule help them stimulate
learning on the subject.

Specifically, it aims the following:

1. Determine the boon of time schedule on the student’s

performance in mathematics.
2. Determine the bane of time schedule on the student’s
performance in mathematics.

3. Determine how time schedule of mathematics subject

influence the learning performance of the students.

4. Least conducive time for mathematics schedule.

5. Identify the most conducive time for mat​hematics schedule.

Statement of the Problem

A vast number of empirical studies analyze students’

academic performance in the context of an educational
production function, concentrating on the effect of
characteristics of educational institutions, such as
student-teacher ratio, class size, expenditure per student,
and on the contrast between public and private institutions
(for an overview, see Hanushek, 1997, 2003). Relatively little
is known about students’ time allocation and its effect on
students’ academic achievement. However, this could be of
importance for both the students themselves and the
educational institutions. For students, it is important to
know how to allocate their time most efficiently to maximize
high academic performance. The study would want to denote the
following questions:

1. What are the boons of time schedule on the student’s

performance in mathematics?

2. What are the banes of time schedule on the student’s

performance in mathematics?

3. How time schedule of mathematics subject influence the

learning performance of the students?

4. What is the least conducive time for mathematics schedule?

5. What is the most conducive time for mathematics schedule?

Scope and Limitations of the Study

The research entitled “The Effect of Time Schedule on the

Student’s Performance in Mathematics” is about the boons and
banes of the time schedule on the student’s performance in
class-how it affects their learning performance. The common
thoughts that everyone says is that mathematics is a boring
subject; it makes the classroom boredom. The study will also
find the least and most conducive time of the mathematics
subject. The respondents of the study will be the secondary
level which 40 third year students and 40 fourth year students
since they have already a wide range of experiences in terms
of mathematics subject in secondary level. The secondary
students who will serve as our variables in this is the
section A both students of fourth year and third year
department in Anuling National High School, Mendez, Cavite and
Tagaytay City Science National High School.

Significance of the Study

Researcher – The study will serve as a vital instrument for

the researchers as a future educator. This may widen their
awareness in setting up schedule of subjects as for student’s
means of preparation in acquiring various information.

Students – The study may help the students to in changing

their wrong perception about mathematics subject and may help
to boost their interest in this specific subject.
School –An institution gives a great impact on the student’s
teacher’s performance in the class. Through this study, an
institution may have the reference in setting up time schedule
on each implemented subject of the students together with the
preparatory activities of the teachers.

Teachers –The teacher is the vector of the students’

knowledge. This study may serve as reference for them in
understanding student’s perception and interests.

Definition of Terms

Effect –the change or changed state occurring as a direct

result of action by somebody or something else. It is also the
state of something happened through various factors that
result to empowerment.

Student –somebody who has studied or takes much interest in a

particular subject. A person who’s capable of doing everything
related to educational productivity and with ample knowledge.

Performance –the manner of functioning in which somebody does

a job, judged by its effectiveness

Learning – a relative permanent change in, or acquisition of,

knowledge, understanding, or behavior. A productive process in
acquiring information through someone understands of its
environment.
 Chapter II

Review of Related Literature and Studies

Understanding the technology of combining schooling

inputs to create educational achievement outcomes has been the
focus of research in recent years. A common framework to
investigate this productivity relationship is the educational
production function. Taking students’ educational achievement
as output, which is mostly measured by test scores, there
seems to be a consensus that family background, peer inputs,
and school inputs are important determinants.

Most of the research is focused on the input-output

relationship for school-age children. Yet, little is known
about the factors affecting student outcomes in higher
education. Additionally, in the discussion about the
determinants of educational, only little attention is paid to
student time allocation as an input factor. Becker (1965)
raised the problem of individuals’ time allocation assuming
that households are consumers and producers at the same time.
With respect to students, the time allocation problem can be
seen as the problem of maximizing the output (measured in
grades) by choosing the optimal input of time for different
(competing) activities. Classic Roman poet by the name of
Publius Vergilius Maro, more commonly known as Virgil, was
once quoted in his poetry saying: "They can... because they
think they can.” This idea is followed in athletics by
coaches, players, and fans to an almost religious level.
Coaches talk to their players about visualizing the catch,
hit, basket, or shot. Fans spend all day checking message
boards or blogs and talking about how their team will win no
matter who they are playing. No one questions this outlook on
athletics and the significance it plays in the success of
individuals and team alike. As a culture, why do we not apply
it to the classroom with the same vigor as the athletic field?

According to Ma and Kishor (1997), the variable

‘attitude’ is one of the most potent factors that relates to
achievement.

“The everyday notion of attitude refers to someone's basic

liking or disliking of a familiar target. A general overview
of the development of attitudes throughout school years is
documented through surveys and meta- analyses. These studies
have shown that, for example, girls tend to have more negative
attitudes towards mathematics than boys (Frost et al., 1994;
Leder, 1995), and that attitudes tend to become more negative
as pupils move from elementary to secondary school (McLeod,
1994).” Hannula (2002)

William James once said, “It is our attitude at the

beginning of a difficult task which, more than anything else,
will affect its successful outcome.” (Van Wagner, n.d.). This
idea crosses many different aspects of everyday life.
Businesses bring in motivational speakers to help inspire
their employees to help them have a more positive attitude to
help productivity. Businesses also do team building exercises
to help employees have a better outlook on their jobs and the
people they work with. Athletic coaches spend a significant
amount of practice time talking to their players about
“believing” and reminding players that any team can beat any
other team on any given day. If a team does not have a
positive outlook on an upcoming game, their chances of winning
the game are significantly lowered. Many athletic teams use
the phrase “believe and you can achieve” as their motto for a
successful season. This is idea is well known and accepted in
today’s society. This philosophy is no different in classrooms
than it is anywhere else in society. McCleod (1992) said that
attitude toward mathematics is related to mathematics success
in the classroom. Conversely, student’s achievement can
influence a student’s attitude as well. Thus, it is important
for teachers to improve student work to make a positive change
in their attitude toward mathematics (Ma & Xu, 2004). Hannula
stated that attitudes can change in a short period of time,
and sometimes dramatically (2002). Many students, especially
those that are younger and less established students, their
attitude toward a particular subject is proportional to their
recent success in the class. A good day can sway the attitude
to the positive side and conversely a bad day can swing the
attitude toward the negative side. Although, in Hannula’s
research, he found that once established, an attitude is
fairly stable and only minor changes occur based on successes
and failures (2002). This is where teachers can have a great
impact on the shaping of this attitude: “Teachers can
reinforce the idea that mathematics is an interesting subject,
used in other disciplines, and is an admission ticket for
colleges and careers.” (Anderson, 2007 p. 12).

From Hammouri’s study of attitudinal and motivational

variables and their relation to mathematics success he was
able to draw conclusions similar to those of previous studies.
He used the Third International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS) to look at 8th graders in Jordan. Jordanians have had
shown poor performance in the area of mathematics. He states:

“Attitude itself can affect level of energy input,

perseverance (Carroll, 1963), time on tasks (Love & McVevey,
2001), standard of achievement (Webster & Fisher, 2000) and
engagement in an activity (Middleton & Toluk, 1999).”
(Hammouri, 2004)

Chapter III

Research Methodology

The study will have both quantitative and qualitative

components. The development process for the questionnaire will
involve item construction, and reliability analysis of time
schedule that affect the students’ learning performance in
mathematics subject.

Research Design

The research will use both qualitative and quantitative

components to measure both the least and most conducive time
of mathematics subject that gives advantages on the learning
performance of the students, and the same with the
disadvantages that affects the student’s learning performance
through the time schedule of mathematics subject.

Research Environment

The research was designed to give the best information on

setting up time schedule of mathematics subject that will lead
to the good and better learning performance of the students.
The questionnaire was formulated based on the present
perceptions of the students on time schedule of the
mathematics subject and the same the previous studies that
provides information leading the study.

Research Procedure

The researchers were given the chance to formulate a research

problem related to the learning environment of the 21th
century learners, the title were formulated based on the
student’s perceptions of the mathematics subject to denote
perceptual. A checklist form of questionnaire was also
formulated to gather the exact information needed based on the
objectives of the study.

The Tagaytay City Science National High School and Anuling

National High School were chosen to conduct the study. A 20
third year students and 20 fourth year students from section A
on both schools will be the respondents.

Research Instrument

The study will use a checklist method of questionnaire to

gather exact and concrete information from the respondents to
make the research more reliable. The time schedule is listed
on the table together with the corresponding possible reasons
that will describe the student’s chosen time that affect their
learning performance in mathematics subject. (See Appendix A)

Data Gathering Technique

The researchers chose the two different public schools in

gather the data needed in the study. Twenty third year
students and twenty fourth year students from section A were
chosen to be the respondents on both different public school.
The checklist form of questionnaire will be given to the
respondents with the researchers instructions. The checklist
questionnaires are equipped with the time schedule of
mathematics subject together with the possible reasons that
may lead to the respondent’s description/s of the time
schedule they will choose. The data to be gathered will
undergo the process of tally, analysis, and interpretation
using statistical procedures that the researchers will apply
to formulate conclusions and recommendations.

Data Analysis

The following statistical methods and treatments are used

in the study to calculate the statistical data gathered during
the survey:

Frequency count along with the percentage will be used to

determine the distribution of the participants.

Percentage method will be used to which time schedule and

descriptions in both the advantage and disadvantage tables are
the least and most frequently answered by the respondents.
This will also be used in determining the profile of the
respondents. The following formula for percentage will be
used:

% = (f/n) x 100 Where:

f = frequency
n = sample population

Mean refers to the average data obtained by adding all

the number values in a set of data and then dividing that sum
by the number of values in the data set. The resulting means
will be the representative values of the respondents’ answers.
The following formula will be used in obtaining the mean of
data:
 X = Σхⁱ / n where:
X = mean
xⁱ = all values of x
n = total number of items in
the data

Standard deviation will be used to determine how much

the values are close to the mean value which will indicate the
reliability of the mean or the representative value of the
data gathered from the respondents’ answers. The following
formulas will be used to determine the standard deviation of
the data:

Where:
√
2
(x − X)
σ = n σ = standard deviation
x = each value in the data
set
X = mean of all the values in
the data set
n = number of values in the
data set

Pearson correlation or Pearson R test will also be

employed to determine the strength of the relationship of the
variables being used in the study. The following formula will
be used to determine the value of the Pearson correlation
coefficient:

N Σxy − (Σx)(Σy)
r = Where:
√[N Σx 2 ][N Σy 2 − (Σy)2 ] N = number of pairs of scores
Σxy= sum of products of
paired scores
Σx = sum of x scores
Σy = sum of y scores
 Σx 2 = sum of squared x scores
Σy 2 = sum of squared y scores

APPENDIX A

The survey checklist that denotes the respondents’ favorable

time for mathematics, advantages and disadvantages of such
schedule.

Name (Optional):______________________________________

Year Level: _________ Age: ______ Sex: _______

Time Schedule From Monday – Checklist of your favorable

Friday time

7:00 – 8:00

8:00 - 9:00

9:00 – 10:00

10:00 – 11:00

11:00 – 12:00

1:00 – 2:00

2:00 – 3:00

3:00 – 4:00

4:00 – 5:00
Descriptions/Advantages Checklist that
corresponds to
my favored time

1. I feel confident enough to ask questions in my

mathematics class.

2. I believe I can do well on a mathematics test. .

3. I believe I can complete all of the assignments in a

mathematics course.

4. I believe I am the kind of person who is good at

mathematics.

5. I believe I will be able to use mathematics in my

future career when needed.

6. I believe I can understand the content in a

mathematics course.

7. I believe I can get an “A” when I am in a

mathematics course.

8. I believe I can learn well in a mathematics course.

9. I feel confident when taking a mathematics test.

10. I believe I am the type of person who can do

mathematics.

11. I feel that I will be able to do well in future

mathematics courses.

12. I believe I can do the mathematics in a

mathematics course.

13. I feel confident when using mathematics outside

of school.
 14. I feel that it makes me at ease in solving
mathematical problems.

15. I feel energetics in every activity given.

16. I think positively that I can improve my skills in

mathematics.

17. I always feel the energy and preparation of my

teacher.

18. I think every lesson seems to be very easy.

19. I feel confident in helping classmates when they

find it difficult.

20. I make me more interested.

If your reason/description is none of the listed below, kindly specify.

___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________.

Time Schedule From Monday – Checklist of your favorable

Friday time

7:00 – 8:00

8:00 - 9:00

9:00 – 10:00

10:00 – 11:00
 11:00 – 12:00

1:00 – 2:00

2:00 – 3:00

3:00 – 4:00

4:00 – 5:00

Descriptions/Disadvantages Checklist
that
corresponds
to my
favored
time

1. I feel not enough confidence to ask

questions in my mathematics class.

2. I get tense when I prepare for a

mathematics test.

3. I get nervous when I have to use

mathematics outside of school.

4. I think the teacher is not prepared and

unable to deliver the lesson well.

5. I worry that I will not be able to use

mathematics in my future career when
needed.

6. I worry that I will not be able to get a

good grade in my mathematics course.
7. I worry that I will not be able to do
well on mathematics tests.

8. I feel stressed when listening to

mathematics instructors in class.

9. I get nervous when asking questions in

class.

10. Working on mathematics homework is

stressful for me.

11. I worry that I do not know enough

mathematics to do well in future
mathematics courses.

12. I worry that I will not be able to

complete every assignment in a
mathematics course.

13. I worry I will not be able to understand

the mathematics.

14. I believe I can do the mathematics in a

mathematics course.

15. I worry that I will not be able to get

an “A” in my mathematics course.

16. I worry that I will not be able to learn

well in my mathematics course.

17. I get nervous when taking a mathematics

test.
 18. I am afraid to give an incorrect answer
during my mathematics class.

19. I feel confident when using mathematics

outside of school.

20. I feel I can’t easily understand the

topics.

If your reason/description is none of the listed below, kindly specify.

___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________.

General average in mathematics in the last three academic quarters:

100-95

94-90

89-85

84-80

79-75

74-below
 APPENDIX B

The request letter for the study to be conducted in the chosen

schools by the researchers.

Republic of the Philippines

Cavite State University
(CvSU)
Don Severino De Las Alas Campus
Indang, Cavite

March ___, 2018

___________________

The Principal

Address

Greetings of Peace!

Sir/Ma’am,

The Teachers Certificate Program students would like to

conduct the study entitled “The Effect of Time Schedule on the
Students’ Learning Performance in Mathematics” in your
respective school to gather the information needed in their
students study as part of the requirements in their Principles
of Teaching subject. The prospective respondents on the study
are the 20 third year and 20 fourth year students from the
first section.

In connection on this regard, we would like to ask your

permission to allow the researchers to conduct the study. Rest
assured that the information will be gathered from the
students, will be treated with confidentiality, and will only
be used on the said study as reference material. If your
school may want a copy of the data that will be gathered from
the students in any future possibilities, the researchers are
willing to provide you the needed information.

We are looking forward that our request would merit your

approval.

Thank you and May God bless you, your school, and your family
always.

Truly yours,

JOWIE G. ESPALDON

ANDREA CELINA B. DINGLASAN

TCP Students, researchers

Noted:

RICHEL P. DIOKNO

Professor
JASON _____

TCP Coordinator

Approved:

Name or Principal

School Head