Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
By
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
surfaced in the 1950s (King & Benson, 1999). This is in the context
that every pupil should begin formal education in his or her mother
language more quickly than those who initially are taught to read
simply knows how to read and write a particular script but applying
starting in Grade 3.
This bridge enables the learners to use both or all their languages
formation so they will be ready for school. This was so since the
considering that age five (5) is within the critical years where
rapidly and almost at its fullest. It is also the stage when self-
Basic Education Act of 2013,” approved on May 15, 2013, and which
Education (MTB-MLE) which starts from where the learners are and
from what they already know proceeding from the known to the
The use of English as its LOLI is also not justified by any of the
in the DepED Order; in fact, they would support the use of the
are getting harder each year. One of the hardest subject to cope
articulate their thoughts and add new concepts to what they already
know.
This study is not only for the students but also for the
teachers for they are the ones who impart knowledge on the
students. They can easily express what they are trying to say
learners.
a) Mother tongue
b) Trainings along MTB Instruction
c) Length of service in the school
d) Age
e) Sex
a) Lesson preparation
b) Visual aids
c) Assessment
d) Availability and adequacy
BSD and BND PUPILS. Pupils can gain insights from this study
concerning the same issue and topic that this time has tackled.
LGU of Bulan. The result of the study will lessen their work
District and Bulan North District Grade Three will be the place of
objectives:
transition years.
subjects teaching.
Definition of Terms
12 Curriculum.
employment.
13
has existed
They were the tested teachers for the conduct of this study.
four (4) years of Junior High School, and two (2) years of Senior
two years of Senior High School where students will pursue their
CHAPTER II
present study.
to solving the prior problem underlying the main focus of the study
3 Science”
Related Literature
it looks at how the first (L1) and second (L2) languages are
what to whom; e.g. the bunny pushed the frog (Rowland & Noble,
2010).
syllables and words out of the strings of sounds they hear, and to
influence.
example, when the child says ‘milk’ and the mother will smile and
give her some as a result, the child will find this outcome
19
Lieven, 2011).
argued that children will never acquire the tools needed for
(Libertan, 2013).
2011).
e.g. noun and verb, into phrases. The child’s task is just to
boy eats).
to the importance of the experience that the learner gets from the
language, being aware of them, and being able to talk about them
the learner should interact with the person or tutor who will teach
speakers.
with a slight effort, and which were slightly more advanced than
the native speaker (NS) makes sure that the non‐native speaker
what s/he knows about L2 and what the L2 really is and 2) The areas
25
Language Acquisition
forward over the years by different theorists and there has been
Americans psychologists.
need to know language wise (Chomsky, 1959). His studies led him to
Ellis (1997) argued that the second language is not only the
(Krashen, 1981). There are some reasons why people learn the second
28
but rather, the skills in learning other language varies for the
the streets and the community is where to acquire the informal way
of L2 (Baker, 2011).
(Sanchez, 2013).
(L1) and English (L2), the linguistic distance is wide between the
structures.
importance in SLA.
themselves.
acquisition will not occur even if with input at the right quantity
involved in interaction.
pointed out early in 1985 that only when learners are “obliged” to
try out form that he had not used before. However, prior to her
of producing what had previously been learned and the idea that
over for other purposes. For example, if one can handle the
communication process.
students were not willing to take risks, and they only answered
when they were asked by the teacher. He also noticed that there
students more often. They used this strategy to get the correct
experts are teachers while the novices are the learners who have
than the mother tongue, has begun to move away from this more
field.
the input.
here have examined the role that special genres such as ‘input-
Ellis, 1994; Long, 1981; Long, Inagaki, & Ortega, 1998; Long &
Robinson, 1998; Lyster, 1994; Lyster & Ranta, 1997; MacKay & Philp,
1998; Rutherford & Smith, 1988a, 1988b; van Patten, 1990, 1994;
learners, and between learners and native speaking peers, can play
(e.g., Crookes & Gass, 1993; Gass & Varonis, 1985; Pica, Kanagy &
Falodun, 1993; Yule, Powers, & Macdonald, 1992; and see Pica, 1994,
is with examining particular task types for the role they play in
language that they have not yet acquired fully. This strand of
aware of a gap between what they know and what they do not. The
communicative needs.
forms. Current research (e.g., Kowal & Swain, 1994; Polio & Gass,
(ZPD) (Aljaafreh & Lantolf, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978). The ZPD occurs
learning tasks that the student would not have been able to achieve
Brooks; 2009; Chen & Jiang, 2004; Nyikos & Hashimoto, 1997).
and Hashimoto (1997) examined the ZPD within the division of labor
for both the individual and the group was radically undermined"
(p. 516).
learning can hardly take place. Thus Freeman & Freeman (1994) and
sociocultural theory.
86).
47
skills.
more difficult than what they do alone, such that they will need
complete the same task individually next time, and through that
process, the learner’s ZPD for that particular task will have been
raised.
to the learners sometimes fall outside the ZPD that the learner
48
can already do, or tasks that the learner would not be able to do
even with help, for example trying to teach the average 10 year
tasks inside the ZPD which the learner cannot do by him or herself
As the learner accomplishes the task, his or her ZPD, or the gap
between what he or she can do on their own and what he or she can
development” (Vygotsky, 1978). Cole & Cole (2001) point out that
the term proximal indicates that the assistance provided goes just
is within this latter area that Vygotsky placed his ZPD by arguing
p.277).
can imitate only what lies within the zone of his intellectual
procedure, “we gain the potential for directly studying that which
118).
discover not how the learner came to be what he is, but how he can
1990).
they are also the words that link the technical terms (solute,
i.e., both the literal meaning and all the implications stemming
(Santiago, 2000).
2004).
and tool making. Thus humans, unlike lower animals, are able to
through language.
science. Given the fact that teaching and learning are mutual or
59
that learners may not understand the instructions, and that can
passively or, if the teacher is lucky, take their own notes. This,
writing, some not even in the room but in another part of the
talks to students some might benefit, but others might not (Elaydo,
the ways that people learn has not provided teachers with any
Language Literacy
One of the ways the government ensures that the achievement gap is
growth in any one of the factors, it does not meet AYP (Braden &
Tayrose, 2008).
years the necessary results have not been met (U.S. Department of
Education, 2003).
takeover” of the school are just two of the potential actions that
Chinn, & Ratleff, 2011); in 2004, when new No Child Left Behind
but we are also seeing a widening of the same achievement gap that
63
Nam, 2008).
In 2003, one study found that three out of every four third
dream” (Koelsch, 2006, p. 2). In fact, one study found that about
school courses, but they also need literacy for everyday social
literacy skills. One step school personnel and teachers can take
Social language takes around two years and academic language takes
English language learners may not gain the necessary skills and
U.S. schools for many years (It is important to note that the term
who are not yet proficient in the English language; 2007). Schools
and must give the students time to develop skills as well as give
Many studies have shown that the younger a child is when they
learners who did not use their native language frequently were
as the role specialized training for the educators and how these
ensures NASP's vision to “ensure that all children and youth attain
2.10 Literacy
Education For All (EFA) Report (2006), the regions with the lowest
literacy rates (around 60%) are sub-Saharan Africa, South and West
education system makes use of language(s) that are not well known
economic and social mobility are usually English and other colonial
their languages.
One of the ways the government ensures that the achievement gap is
growth in any one of the factors, it does not meet AYP (Braden &
Tayrose, 2008).
years the necessary results have not been met (U.S. Department of
Education, 2003).
takeover” of the school are just two of the potential actions that
Chinn, & Ratleff, 2011); in 2004, when new No Child Left Behind
71
but we are also seeing a widening of the same achievement gap that
Nam, 2008).
In 2003, one study found that three out of every four third
dream” (Koelsch, 2006, p. 2). In fact, one study found that about
school courses, but they also need literacy for everyday social
literacy skills. One step school personnel and teachers can take
Social language takes around two years and academic language takes
English language learners may not gain the necessary skills and
74
U.S. schools for many years (It is important to note that the term
who are not yet proficient in the English language; 2007). Schools
and must give the students time to develop skills as well as give
Many studies have shown that the younger a child is when they
learners who did not use their native language frequently were
ensures NASP's vision to “ensure that all children and youth attain
while the processes that include mental and physical skills are
This implies that for learners to make meaning and apply what
they have learnt, they should have understood the language used to
2007). Good, Hafner and Pebbles (2000) indicated that one possible
literacy, Laugksch (2000, p.71) submitted that since the first use
issues that leaders of the European Union and the United States
2002:6). That is, all teaching and learning in the Natural Sciences
environment.
81
similar. This leads some to assume that these topics are treated
more impact for society than any others (see Fraley & Ledoux,
(Manriza, 2005).
terms are used to name the resulting disciplines. But only those
For example, the most common mystically based search for water
does not. The phrase natural science applies to any subject matter
and a social science (Orpilla, 2004). For example, the sub area of
(Nepz, 2001).
and on where to put disciplines that deal with people issues (“the
of the mind, (and not those of the body) in order to gain useful
and practical knowledge (RNCS, 2002). This view implies that humans
are always curious to learn new things and skills needed to acquire
useful knowledge.
ideas with evidence gained from the natural and physical world.
hand. This means that our understanding of the universe has changed
with the wider world and as they try to validate new explanations.
technologies that have been discovered we can now tell how warm or
cold it will be for the next week, we will know when a tornado,
occur before they actually happen. This also helps out all
smaller and smaller and more useful. Science will definitely make
everywhere; you always see it in everyday life. Like when you get
a ride to school from your parents, watch TV, talk on the phone,
and listen to music, that’s using science. When you pass buildings
teachers must explain what they are doing and students need to ask
learning.
2011).
92
every day words attain new meanings. They become science words
(Foota, 2000).
Some words like “define” and “explain” are used in place of “say”,
are also confused when a word that means one thing in everyday
very small pieces” (Gorospe, 2010). Even children who speak English
reason that even learners who speak the language of learning and
94
claims that the developed countries have made better progress than
the other hand, the 128 developing countries are faced with
their local languages are not used as vehicles for the expression
and (cooking) skills that still made sense to him later in his
science classes, limited language skills were barriers for her and
(Daez, 2000).
2014).
98
learner does not get enough exposure to the language being learnt,
in a different language.
set that they take with them into formal education, and research
tells us that any skills and concepts gained in the learner’s home
language.
be overstated.
particular field.
English.
Related Studies
medium for teaching science; however, the present study deals with
102
hand, the present study does not only tackle a specific learning
area but Science as a whole for Grade three pupils in Bulan South
Central School.
More than 10 years later, in 1994, Acuña argued for the use
discussion, not just for the elementary level but all the way to
fourth year high school. Aside from the mandate of the 1987
Elementary and High school level was a big match for the present
years.
efforts. Boonroj’s study shows how great the impact would as his
world, but on the other hand, the present study tackles and
action-research.
third languages.
1994 study of Acuña argued for the use of Filipino for science
elementary level but all the way to fourth year high school. But
efforts. But on the other hand, is does not have what the present
Science subjects.
109
Walter and Chuo (2012) on their study tells that when learners
1994 study of Acuña argued for the use of Filipino for science
elementary level but all the way to fourth year high school. But
efforts. But on the other hand, is does not have what the present
Science subjects.
study is scoped within the grade three elementary pupils only who
The only gap is that this study is a comparative type while the
present study only examines the grade three elementary pupils. The
113
to native Filipinos.
of Science education.
Walter and Chuo (2012) on their study tells that when learners
the classroom and strengthening learning” (p. 4). The gap in the
Conceptual Framework
the output of the study has been made. It is important for the
and so forth.
116
Conceptual Paradigm
1. profile of
Grade 3 teachers
in terms of:
Lengua franca
Trainings along
MTB Instruction
a.Length of
b.service in the
school
c.Age
d.Sex
difficulties
encountered by
Grade 3 teachers
in teaching
Survey 1. Training design in
Science using
MTB-MLE along making Instructional
instructional Materials in teaching
materials in grade III Science
terms of:
a.Lesson
preparation
b.Visual aids
c.Assessment
d.Availability
and adequacy
difficulties
encountered by
Grade 3 teachers
in teaching
Science in terms
of oral and
written MTB
communication
(Suggestion and
Recommendations)
117
Hypothesis
118
CHAPTER III
Research Design
utilized to gather the needed data. The results were analyzed and
The Sample
of 33 teachers.
119
The Instruments
1989:185)
respondents.
its content.
121
CHAPTER IV
presentation of data.
output.
Table 2A
From the table above, it can be inferred that the most common
speak the Bikol Irosin, Bikol Sta Magdalena, Bikol Gubat and Bikol
Sorsogon. Then there are two respondents who can speak the Bikol
Matnog and Bikol Prieto Diaz. Meanwhile, few teachers can speak
assigned station.
station.
only by these means that though they can understand some of the
words being used doesn’t mean that they can utilized well the
town.
Table 2B
Level f %
National 1 2
Regional 6 10
Division 26 43
District 6 10
None 21 35
Total 60 100
Table 2C
Length of service
Length of service f %
10 years and below 26 43
11 to 20 years 22 37
21 to 30 years 9 15
31 to 40 years 2 3
41 years and above 1 2
Total 60 100
Table 2D
Age group f %
25 years old and below 7 12
26 to 35 years old 11 18
36 to 45 years old 25 42
46 to 54 years old 9 15
55 years old and above 8 13
Total 60 100
Table 2E
Sex f %
Male 15 25
Female 45 75
Total 60 100
126
Table 3A
as frequently.
aids..
129
Table 3B
It means that the results vividly show that the teachers are
because only old people can provide the equivalent mother tongue
dialect that are being used is not the same the native dialect of
This implies that all the components of visual aids had been
Table 3C.
Table 3C
shows that the newly incorporated use of the native dialect as the
system. The first three issues had not as big an effect as the
the subject who are mostly natives of the place designs the
the learners.
learning.
Table 3D
prior to the needs of the teachers and pupils that will cater the
teaching-learning process.
Table 4A
place still there are some words that are hard to achieve the
certain place does not guarantee that he can express idea fully.
Table 4B
Table 5A.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Lesson Visual aids Availability
Bases preparation Assessment and adequacy
Degree of 9 9 9 9
freedom
variables.
Table 5A.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 9 9
related.
Table 5B.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Lesson Visual aids Assessment Availability
Bases preparation and adequacy
Degree of
freedom 12 8 12 12
identified variables.
contextualization.
Table 5B.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 12 8
than the 2 critical value of 21.03 [df = 12, = 0.05]. Hence the
communication.
they can apply the acquired the knowledge when they return to
related.
Table 5C.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Lesson Visual aids Assessment Availability
Bases preparation and adequacy
Degree of 12 8 12 12
freedom
Decision on
H0 Accept Ho Accept Ho Accept Ho Accept Ho
147
mentioned variables.
has been serving for a long time his or her needs in terms of the
Table 5C.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 12 8
hypothesis.
Table 5D.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Lesson Visual aids Availability
Bases preparation Assessment and adequacy
Degree of 12 8 12 12
freedom
Conclusion
150
variables.
Also, the 2 computed value for visual aids that is 8.35 does
Age and oral and written MTB communication. Table 5D.2 presents
Table 5D.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 12 8
than the 2 critical value of 21.03 [df = 12, = 0.05]. Hence the
related to the age of the teachers because somehow the teacher may
be forgetful.
are their native place regardless of the age still they can use
Bicol Bulan.
Table 5E.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Lesson Visual aids Assessment Availability
Bases preparation and adequacy
Degree of 3 2 3 3
freedom
2 computed
value
variables.
It means that the sex of the teachers does not affect the
Sex and oral and written MTB communication. Table 5E.2 presents
Table 5E.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 3 2
communication.
III teachers.
157
Department of Education
Region V
Schools Division of Sorsogon
Bulan South District
FABRICA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Bulan
PROJECT PROPOSAL
II. TITLE:
Training for teachers in making Instructional Materials in
MTB-MLE in grade III Science.
III. DATE:
June 8, 2018
IV: VENUE:
BULAN SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL
V. THEME:
Transforming Teachers in Grade III Science to fit in to the
newly incorporated Curriculum
VI. RATIONALE:
In consonance with the implementation of The Department
of Education issued DepED Order No. 74, s. 2009,
“Institutionalizing Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education
(MLE)” in July 2009[1]. It had two enclosures: Enclosure No. 1
“Fundamental Requirements for a Strong Mother Tongue-Based
Multilingual Education (MLE)” and Enclosure No. 2 “MLE Bridging
Plan A (L1 MT, L2 Filipino, L3 English) and MLE Bridging Plan B
(L1 Filipino, L2 English, L3 Local Language, L4
Foreign).” Bridging Plan A is for pupils whose mother tongue is
not Filipino; Bridging Plan B is for those whose MT is Filipino.
Both plans provide for the use of English as the language of
learning and instruction (LOLI) for Science and Mathematics
starting in Grade 3.
This seminar will inspire the participants to realize their
teaching skills and potentials. Moreover, this training will
serve as an avenue to evaluate their current teaching practices
to suit in today’s curriculum.
With the above identified purposes, this training has been
conceptualized.
158
11:30AM- FORUM
11:45AM
11:45AM- LUNCH BREAK
1:00PM
1:00PM- ICE BREAKER
1:30PM
1:30PM- TOPIC 3 Transforming
3:30PM School Teachers
to Fit in to the
newly
incorporated
curriculum
3:30PM- FORUM
4:00PM
4:00PM- Distribution of Certificate to the Resource
4:20PM Speakers and Participants
4:20PM- Intermission N umber
4:30PM
4:30PM- Closing Menandro Triguero
4:40PM Remarks
4:40pm-5:00 HOME SWEET HOME
X. COOPERATING AGENCY
FABRICA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
BULAN SOUTH BULAN NORTH DISTRICT
TEACHING AND NON-TEACHING STAFF OF BULAN SOUTH AND BULAN
NORTH DISTRICT
160
WORKING COMMITTEES
VENUE/ROOM ASSIGNMENTS
SOUND
DOCUMENTATION
PROGRAM/CERTIFICATES
STAGE/HALL DECORATION
FOOD
REGISTRATION/ACCOMODATION
Prepared by:
Noted:
HERMINIGILDA S. TOLETE
ESP I of Fabrica Elementary School
MENANDRO TRIGUERO
District Araling Panlipunan Coordinator
JULIET B. TAMBOONG
Public Schools District Supervisor
Recommending Approval:
APPROVED:
CHAPTER V
Summary
communication?
Findings
sometimes.
165
interpreted as frequently.
instruction.
166
Conclusions
and sex.
instruction.
167
Recommendations
III.
instruction
CHAPTER IV
of AGE. Most of the teachers aged 26-35 which is on the 1st rank
on the 2nd rank with 125 frequencies, next on the rank are those
169
who are in the age 36-45 with 115 frequencies, then on the 4th rank
are those in the age of 46-54 with 58 frequencies and on the 5th
rank are those who are 55-above with 9 frequencies and a total of
545.
Table II-A
It means that ranges 26-35 got the highest rank and with
frequency of 238. These ages are from teachers who were served 5
statistically range from 26-35 years old. They served and thought
that almost 30 years old are those who thought mother tongue
dialect
428 and placed on the rank 1 while the Males has a frequency count
Table II-B
than male with frequency of 428 than 117 males. It is always proven
with some recent studies in most cases males are being outnumbered
count of 82 and placed on the 1st rank, followed by those who speak
2nd rank, then next are those who speak Bikol Pilar with a frequency
count of 68 and on the 3rd rank, while on the 4th rank are those
who speak Bikol Gubat with a frequency count of 52, then on the
5th rank are those who speak Bikol Dansol with 49 frequencies, then
on the 6th rank, then on the 7th rank are those who speak Bikol
171
Matnog with a frequeny count of 38, then on 8th rank are those who
Bulusan and Bikol Prieto Diaz with the same frequency count of 21
and on the last rank are those who speak Bikol Barcelona with 16
frequencies.
172
Table III-C
It can be deduced from the table Bikol Bulan got the highest
in the Bulan.
province of Sorsogon.
teachers are already teaching Grade III using Mother Tongue for 10
the 1st rank, while on the 2nd rank are those who are teaching for
frequencies, then on the 4th rank are those who are teaching for
Table II-D
the mother tongue and they were not be adjusted from native dialect
453 frequencies which is 83.1%, while others are those who attended
which is 20.6%, on the other hand are those who attended National
Table II-E
native language they do not have time to explore and discover some
Sorsogon.
attending trainings, many MTB teachers only attend those that are
under the district based brackets because they want first to focus
Table 3A
and 3.8 which are described as Always, while some of the problems
frequently.
other areas.
as frequently.
education.
Table 3B
shows that the newly incorporated use of the native dialect as the
system. The first three issues had not as big an effect as the
the subject who is mostly native of the place designs the rubrics,
the learners.
learning.
Table 3C
Table 4A
place still there are some words that are hard to achieve the
certain place does not guarantee that he can express idea fully.
Table 4B
localization;
The finding is the same with Perez (2018) claiming that the
Table 5A.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Visual aids Availability
Assessment and adequacy
Degree of freedom 9 9 9
of, 5.24, 8.25, and 8.07, respectively, are lower than the 2
This is partly the same with Sanchez (2015) stating that since
Table 5A.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 9 9
those who are not native to such languages. However, for those
who are native already to such languages they do not find any
related.
that since many native languages in the country do not have their
Table 5B.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Visual aids Assessment Availability
and adequacy
Degree of freedom
8 12 12
contextualization.
all teachers and students, trainings are really vital for them to
Table 5B.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 12 8
than the 2 critical value of 21.03 [df = 12, = 0.05]. Hence the
communication.
they can apply the acquired the knowledge when they return to
related.
Table 5C.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Visual aids Assessment Availability
and adequacy
Degree of freedom 8 12 12
Decision on H0
Accept Ho Accept Ho Accept Ho
has been serving for a long time his or her needs in terms of the
Table 5C.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 12 8
hypothesis.
subjects. The article posted on his journal shows that since the
Table 5D.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Visual aids Availability
Assessment and adequacy
Degree of freedom 8 12 12
Also, the 2 computed value for visual aids that is 9.35 does
Age and oral and written MTB communication. Table 5D.2 presents
Table 5D.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 12 8
than the 2 critical value of 21.03 [df = 12, = 0.05]. Hence the
related to the age of the teachers because somehow the teacher may
be forgetful.
are their native place regardless of the age still they can use
Bicol Bulan.
Table 5E.1
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Visual aids Assessment Availability
and adequacy
Degree of freedom 2 3 3
4.82, and 5.27, respectively, are lower than the 2 critical value
Thus, the acceptance of the null hypothesis which states that there
It means that the sex of the teachers does not affect the
Sex and oral and written MTB communication. Table 5E.2 presents
Table 5E.2
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Bases Oral MTB Written MTB
communication communication
Degree of freedom 3 2
communication.
R E F E R E N C E S
207
A.Books
A. Published Materials
B. Unpublished Materials
C. Electronic Sources
http://www.traningmaking.com
http://instructionalmaking.net
(http://www.aaeteachers.org.)
210
A P P E N D I C E S
211
APPENDIX A
Madam:
Recommending Approval:
APPENDIX B
QUESTIONNAIRE-CHECKLIST
Respondent,
The researcher is currently conducting a research entitled “Mother Tongue Based-Multi Lingual Education
in Grade 3 Science”. In connection with this, I will be needing data about Grade Three Science Teachers’ Profile
and problems they encounter in teaching Science using MTB-MLE.
This questionnaire will help me gather information that I need and come up with a relevant
recommendations based on the responses that you will provide. Thank you.
Please answer these questions honestly. Take a few minutes to complete this survey. Your kind cooperation
is greatly appreciated.
_______________________________________________________________Researcher_____________________
Direction. Kindly put a check (/) mark and/or provide the requested data and information needed.
NAME:__________________________________________________optional____
AGE:
______ 25-BELOW
______ 26-35
______ 36-45
______ 46-54
______ 55-ABOVE
SEX;
______ MALE
______ FEMALE
Direction. Kindly put a check (/) the lingua franca that you can speak with fluency because you are a native of a
certain place.
BACCALAUREATE DEGREE:
______ NONE
214
Lesson Preparation 4 3 2 1
1. Scientific concept is difficult to explain in
Mother tongue
2. Problem in translating Science terms to Mother
tongue
3. Difficulty in using varied languages in the whole
duration of teaching to accommodate pupils who do
not speak in a particular language
4. Unpreparedness of the teacher in using Mother
tongue as medium of instruction
5. Dialect of a particular station is not the primary
language of the teacher assigned to handle the
subject
6. Lack of training of teachers to teach science using
mother tongue
7. Curriculum is prepared with the wrong presumption
that learners can express well in mother tongue
Visual Aids 4 3 2 1
1. Problem in making improvised instructional
materials written in Mother tongue
2. Problem in using improvised instructional materials
written in Mother tongue
3. Unavailability of video clips in science using
Mother tongue language
4. Unreliability of available audio materials in
science using mother tongue that are expected to
strengthen the listening skills of the learners
5. Unavailability of Science equipment
6. Scientific models and illustrations were not
labelled in Mother tongue
Assessment 4 3 2 1
1. Assessment of concepts are difficult to express in
mother tongue
2. Expected learning outcomes in the subject are not
suited to the level of the learners
3. Lack of provision of evaluation materials
4. Absence of reliable evaluation materials
5. Difficulty on formulating rubrics using Mother
tongue
215
Oral Communication 4 3 2 1
1. Non-fluency in speaking the dialect
2. Inhibition of the proper use of words
3. Inability to express oneself in mother tongue
4. Difficulty in communicating with learners who are
more exposed in technology who are used to
communicating using Filipino and English languages
5. Problem in using a dominant language/dialect of the
area as your first choice of medium of instruction
6. Difficulty in adapting the different lingua franca
Written Communication 4 3 2 1
1. Absence of our own orthography in Mother tongue
216
APPENDIX C
CALCULATIONS FOR WEIGHTED MEANS
LESSON PREPARATION
Problems 4 3 2 1 Total Mean Description
1. Scientific concept is
difficult to explain in 10 24 26 0 60 2.73 Frequently
Mother Tongue
2. Problem in
translating Science 14 26 19 1 60 2.88 Frequently
terms to Mother Tongue
3. Difficulty in using
varied languages in the
whole duration of
9 28 15 8 60 2.63 Frequently
teaching to accommodate
pupils who do not speak
in a particular
4. Unpreparedness of the
teacher in using Mother
2 17 29 12 60 2.15 Sometimes
Tongue as medium of
instruction.
5. Dialect of a
particular station is
not the primary
7 18 14 21 60 2.18 Sometimes
language of the teacher
assigned to handle the
subject.
6. Lack of training of
teachers to teach
20 21 16 3 60 2.97 Frequently
Science using the
Mother Tongue.
7. Curriculum is
prepared with the wrong
presumption that 8 25 21 6 60 2.58 Frequently
learners can express
well in Mother Tongue.
Average 2.59 Frequently
218
VISUAL AIDS
Problems 4 3 2 1 Total Mean Description
1. Problem in making
improvised
instructional materials 4 26 27 3 60 2.52 Frequently
written in Mother
Tongue.
2. Problem in using
improvised
5 26 26 3 60 2.55 Frequently
instructional materials
written in Mother
3. Unavailability of
video clips in Science
36 10 13 1 60 3.35 Frequently
using Mother Tongue
language.
4. Unreliability of
available audio
materials in Science
using Mother Tongue
28 21 9 2 60 3.25 Frequently
that are expected to
strengthen the
listening skills of the
learners.
5. Unavailability of
16 18 22 4 60 2.77 Frequently
Science equipment.
6. Scientific models and
illustrations were not
30 13 15 2 60 3.18 Frequently
labelled in Mother
Tongue.
Average 2.94 Frequently
219
Oral Communication
Problems 4 3 2 1 Total Mean Description
1. Non-fluency in
4 15 27 14 60 2.15 Sometimes
speaking the dialect.
2. Inhibition to express
oneself in Mother 3 19 34 4 60 2.35 Sometimes
Tongue.
3. Inability to express
oneself in Mother 7 16 26 11 60 2.32 Sometimes
Tongue.
4. Difficulty in
communicating with
learners who are more
exposed in technology
7 13 32 8 60 2.32 Sometimes
who are used to
communicating using
Filipino and English
languages.
5. Problem in using a
dominant
language/dialect of the
4 23 24 9 60 2.37 Sometimes
area as your first
choice of medium of
instruction.
6. Difficulty in
adapting the different 7 21 29 3 60 2.53 Frequently
lingua franca.
Average 2.34 Sometimes
221
Written Communication
Problems 4 3 2 1 Total Mean Description
1. Absence of our own
orthography in Mother 29 19 12 0 60 3.28 Frequently
Tongue.
2. Non-proficiency in
constructing sentence
9 21 23 7 60 2.53 Frequently
or paragraph in Mother
Tongue.
3. Insufficient
vocabulary in Mother 8 19 31 2 60 2.55 Frequently
Tongue.
4. Lack of grammar
awareness in Mother 8 18 32 2 60 2.53 Frequently
Tongue.
5. Difficulty in
spelling in Mother 6 25 27 2 60 2.58 Frequently
Tongue.
6. Inability to
understand profound 7 20 30 3 60 2.52 Frequently
Bicol terminologies.
Average 2.67 Frequently
APPENDIX D
MICROSOFT EXCEL
222
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Lesson preparation Calculations
Age 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
25 and below 0 4 2 0 6 -0.2 0.9 -0.3 -0.4
26 to 35 0 7 4 0 11 -0.36667 1.316667 -0.21667 -0.73333
36 to 45 1 10 10 3 24 0.2 -2.4 0.8 1.4
46 to 54 1 5 5 0 11 0.633333 -0.68333 0.783333 -0.73333
55 and above 0 5 2 1 8 -0.26667 0.866667 -1.06667 0.466667
Total 2 31 23 4 60
Expected Frequencies
Lesson preparation
Age 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
25 and below 0.2 3.1 2.3 0.4 6 0.2 0.26129 0.03913 0.4
26 to 35 0.366667 5.683333 4.216667 0.733333 11 0.366667 0.305034 0.011133 0.733333
36 to 45 0.8 12.4 9.2 1.6 24 0.05 0.464516 0.069565 1.225
46 to 54 0.366667 5.683333 4.216667 0.733333 11 1.093939 0.08216 0.14552 0.733333
55 and above 0.266667 4.133333 3.066667 0.533333 8 0.266667 0.18172 0.371014 0.408333
Total 2 31 23 4 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 7.408358
p -Value 0.829491
Do not reject the null hypothesis
223
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Visual aids Calculations
Age 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
25 and below 1 4 1 6 -0.2 0.3 -0.1
26 to 35 1 9 1 11 -1.2 2.216667 -1.01667
36 to 45 4 16 4 24 -0.8 1.2 -0.4
46 to 54 2 6 3 11 -0.2 -0.78333 0.983333
55 and above 4 2 2 8 2.4 -2.93333 0.533333
Total 12 37 11 60
Expected Frequencies
Visual aids
Age 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
25 and below 1.2 3.7 1.1 6 0.033333 0.024324 0.009091
26 to 35 2.2 6.783333 2.016667 11 0.654545 0.724365 0.512534
36 to 45 4.8 14.8 4.4 24 0.133333 0.097297 0.036364
46 to 54 2.2 6.783333 2.016667 11 0.018182 0.090459 0.479477
55 and above 1.6 4.933333 1.466667 8 3.6 1.744144 0.193939
Total 12 37 11 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 8
Results
Critical Value 15.50731
Chi-Square Test Statistic 8.351389
p -Value 0.39992
Do not reject the null hypothesis
224
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Lesson preparation Calculations
Age 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
25 and below 0 2 4 0 6 -0.2 -0.7 1.2 -0.3
26 to 35 0 7 4 0 11 -0.36667 2.05 -1.13333 -0.55
36 to 45 0 11 12 1 24 -0.8 0.2 0.8 -0.2
46 to 54 0 5 5 1 11 -0.36667 0.05 -0.13333 0.45
55 and above 2 2 3 1 8 1.733333 -1.6 -0.73333 0.6
Total 2 27 28 3 60
Expected Frequencies
Assessment
Age 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
25 and below 0.2 2.7 2.8 0.3 6 0.2 0.181481 0.514286 0.3
26 to 35 0.366667 4.95 5.133333 0.55 11 0.366667 0.84899 0.250216 0.55
36 to 45 0.8 10.8 11.2 1.2 24 0.8 0.003704 0.057143 0.033333
46 to 54 0.366667 4.95 5.133333 0.55 11 0.366667 0.000505 0.003463 0.368182
55 and above 0.266667 3.6 3.733333 0.4 8 11.26667 0.711111 0.144048 0.9
Total 2 27 28 3 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 17.86646
p -Value 0.119806
Do not reject the null hypothesis
225
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Availability and adequacy Calculations
Age 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
25 and below 1 3 2 0 6 -1.6 0.5 1.2 -0.1
26 to 35 5 6 0 0 11 0.233333 1.416667 -1.46667 -0.18333
36 to 45 8 13 1 1 23 -1.96667 3.416667 -2.06667 0.616667
46 to 54 7 2 3 0 12 1.8 -3 1.4 -0.2
55 and above 5 1 2 0 8 1.533333 -2.33333 0.933333 -0.13333
Total 26 25 8 1 60
Expected Frequencies
Availability and adequacy
Age 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
25 and below 2.6 2.5 0.8 0.1 6 0.984615 0.1 1.8 0.1
26 to 35 4.766667 4.583333 1.466667 0.183333 11 0.011422 0.437879 1.466667 0.183333
36 to 45 9.966667 9.583333 3.066667 0.383333 23 0.388071 1.218116 1.392754 0.992029
46 to 54 5.2 5 1.6 0.2 12 0.623077 1.8 1.225 0.2
55 and above 3.466667 3.333333 1.066667 0.133333 8 0.678205 1.633333 0.816667 0.133333
Total 26 25 8 1 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 16.1845
p -Value 0.182931
Do not reject the null hypothesis
226
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Oral communication Calculations
Age 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
25 and below 1 2 2 1 6 0.6 -0.1 -0.9 0.4
26 to 35 2 4 5 0 11 1.266667 0.15 -0.31667 -1.1
36 to 45 0 9 14 1 24 -1.6 0.6 2.4 -1.4
46 to 54 1 3 5 2 11 0.266667 -0.85 -0.31667 0.9
55 and above 0 3 3 2 8 -0.53333 0.2 -0.86667 1.2
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Expected Frequencies
Oral communication
Age 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
25 and below 0.4 2.1 2.9 0.6 6 0.9 0.004762 0.27931 0.266667
26 to 35 0.733333 3.85 5.316667 1.1 11 2.187879 0.005844 0.018861 1.1
36 to 45 1.6 8.4 11.6 2.4 24 1.6 0.042857 0.496552 0.816667
46 to 54 0.733333 3.85 5.316667 1.1 11 0.09697 0.187662 0.018861 0.736364
55 and above 0.533333 2.8 3.866667 0.8 8 0.533333 0.014286 0.194253 1.8
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 11.30113
p -Value 0.503304
Do not reject the null hypothesis
227
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Written communication Calculations
Age 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
25 and below 0 4 2 6 -0.8 0.9 -0.1
26 to 35 2 6 3 11 0.533333 0.316667 -0.85
36 to 45 0 15 9 24 -3.2 2.6 0.6
46 to 54 2 6 3 11 0.533333 0.316667 -0.85
55 and above 4 0 4 8 2.933333 -4.13333 1.2
Total 8 31 21 60
Expected Frequencies
Written communication
Age 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
25 and below 0.8 3.1 2.1 6 0.8 0.26129 0.004762
26 to 35 1.466667 5.683333 3.85 11 0.193939 0.017644 0.187662
36 to 45 3.2 12.4 8.4 24 3.2 0.545161 0.042857
46 to 54 1.466667 5.683333 3.85 11 0.193939 0.017644 0.187662
55 and above 1.066667 4.133333 2.8 8 8.066667 4.133333 0.514286
Total 8 31 21 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 8
Results
Critical Value 15.50731
Chi-Square Test Statistic 18.36685
p -Value 0.018638
Reject the null hypothesis
228
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Lesson preparation Calculations
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Male 1 7 7 0 15 0.75 -0.75 1 -1
Female 0 24 17 4 45 -0.75 0.75 -1 1
Total 1 31 24 4 60
Expected Frequencies
Lesson preparation
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Male 0.25 7.75 6 1 15 2.25 0.072581 0.166667 1
Female 0.75 23.25 18 3 45 0.75 0.024194 0.055556 0.333333
Total 1 31 24 4 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 2
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 3
Results
Critical Value 7.814728
Chi-Square Test Statistic 4.65233
p -Value 0.199099
Do not reject the null hypothesis
229
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Visual aids Calculations
Sex 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
Male 4 10 1 15 0.75 1.25 -2
Female 9 25 11 45 -0.75 -1.25 2
Total 13 35 12 60
Expected Frequencies
Visual aids
Sex 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Male 3.25 8.75 3 15 0.173077 0.178571 1.333333
Female 9.75 26.25 9 45 0.057692 0.059524 0.444444
Total 13 35 12 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 2
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 2
Results
Critical Value 5.991465
Chi-Square Test Statistic 2.246642
p -Value 0.325198
Do not reject the null hypothesis
230
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Assessment Calculations
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Male 1 8 6 0 15 0.5 1.75 -1.5 -0.75
Female 1 17 24 3 45 -0.5 -1.75 1.5 0.75
Total 2 25 30 3 60
Expected Frequencies
Assessment
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Male 0.5 6.25 7.5 0.75 15 0.5 0.49 0.3 0.75
Female 1.5 18.75 22.5 2.25 45 0.166667 0.163333 0.1 0.25
Total 2 25 30 3 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 2
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 3
Results
Critical Value 7.814728
Chi-Square Test Statistic 2.72
p -Value 0.436839
Do not reject the null hypothesis
231
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Availability Calculations
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Male 6 6 2 0 14 0.166667 -0.06667 0.133333 -0.23333
Female 19 20 6 1 46 -0.16667 0.066667 -0.13333 0.233333
Total 25 26 8 1 60
Expected Frequencies
Availability
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Male 5.833333 6.066667 1.866667 0.233333 14 0.004762 0.000733 0.009524 0.233333
Female 19.16667 19.93333 6.133333 0.766667 46 0.001449 0.000223 0.002899 0.071014
Total 25 26 8 1 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 2
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 3
Results
Critical Value 7.814728
Chi-Square Test Statistic 0.323937
p -Value 0.955465
Do not reject the null hypothesis
232
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Oral communication Calculations
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Male 2 6 5 2 15 1 0.75 -2.25 0.5
Female 2 15 24 4 45 -1 -0.75 2.25 -0.5
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Expected Frequencies
Oral communication
Sex 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Male 1 5.25 7.25 1.5 15 1 0.107143 0.698276 0.166667
Female 3 15.75 21.75 4.5 45 0.333333 0.035714 0.232759 0.055556
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 2
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 3
Results
Critical Value 7.814728
Chi-Square Test Statistic 2.629447
p -Value 0.45235
Do not reject the null hypothesis
233
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Written communication Calculations
Sex 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
Male 3 7 5 15 1 -0.5 -0.5
Female 5 23 17 45 -1 0.5 0.5
Total 8 30 22 60
Expected Frequencies
Written communication
Sex 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Male 2 7.5 5.5 15 0.5 0.033333 0.045455
Female 6 22.5 16.5 45 0.166667 0.011111 0.015152
Total 8 30 22 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 2
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 2
Results
Critical Value 5.991465
Chi-Square Test Statistic 0.771717
p -Value 0.679867
Do not reject the null hypothesis
234
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Lesson preparation Calculations
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
10 yrs and below 0 16 9 1 26 -0.43333 2.566667 -1.4 -0.73333
11 to 20 years 1 10 9 2 22 0.633333 -1.36667 0.2 0.533333
21 to 30 years 0 4 5 0 9 -0.15 -0.65 1.4 -0.6
31 to 40 years 0 1 0 1 2 -0.03333 -0.03333 -0.8 0.866667
41 yrs and above 0 0 1 0 1 -0.01667 -0.51667 0.6 -0.06667
Total 1 31 24 4 60
Expected Frequencies
Lesson preparation
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
10 yrs and below 0.433333 13.43333 10.4 1.733333 26 0.433333 0.490405 0.188462 0.310256
11 to 20 years 0.366667 11.36667 8.8 1.466667 22 1.093939 0.164321 0.004545 0.193939
21 to 30 years 0.15 4.65 3.6 0.6 9 0.15 0.09086 0.544444 0.6
31 to 40 years 0.033333 1.033333 0.8 0.133333 2 0.033333 0.001075 0.8 5.633333
41 yrs and above 0.016667 0.516667 0.4 0.066667 1 0.016667 0.516667 0.9 0.066667
Total 1 31 24 4 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 12.23225
p -Value 0.427212
Do not reject the null hypothesis
235
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Visual aids Calculations
Length of service 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
10 yrs and below 6 17 3 26 0.366667 1.833333 -2.2
11 to 20 years 5 11 6 22 0.233333 -1.83333 1.6
21 to 30 years 1 6 2 9 -0.95 0.75 0.2
31 to 40 years 1 0 1 2 0.566667 -1.16667 0.6
41 yrs and above 0 1 0 1 -0.21667 0.416667 -0.2
Total 13 35 12 60
Expected Frequencies
Visual aids
Length of service 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
10 yrs and below 5.633333 15.16667 5.2 26 0.023866 0.221612 0.930769
11 to 20 years 4.766667 12.83333 4.4 22 0.011422 0.261905 0.581818
21 to 30 years 1.95 5.25 1.8 9 0.462821 0.107143 0.022222
31 to 40 years 0.433333 1.166667 0.4 2 0.741026 1.166667 0.9
41 yrs and above 0.216667 0.583333 0.2 1 0.216667 0.297619 0.2
Total 13 35 12 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 8
Results
Critical Value 15.50731
Chi-Square Test Statistic 6.145555
p -Value 0.630931
Do not reject the null hypothesis
236
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Assessment Calculations
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
10 yrs and below 1 11 14 0 26 0.133333 0.166667 1 -1.3
11 to 20 years 0 10 10 2 22 -0.73333 0.833333 -1 0.9
21 to 30 years 1 2 6 0 9 0.7 -1.75 1.5 -0.45
31 to 40 years 0 1 0 1 2 -0.06667 0.166667 -1 0.9
41 yrs and above 0 1 0 0 1 -0.03333 0.583333 -0.5 -0.05
Total 2 25 30 3 60
Expected Frequencies
Assessment
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
10 yrs and below 0.866667 10.83333 13 1.3 26 0.020513 0.002564 0.076923 1.3
11 to 20 years 0.733333 9.166667 11 1.1 22 0.733333 0.075758 0.090909 0.736364
21 to 30 years 0.3 3.75 4.5 0.45 9 1.633333 0.816667 0.5 0.45
31 to 40 years 0.066667 0.833333 1 0.1 2 0.066667 0.033333 1 8.1
41 yrs and above 0.033333 0.416667 0.5 0.05 1 0.033333 0.816667 0.5 0.05
Total 2 25 30 3 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 17.03636
p -Value 0.148235
Do not reject the null hypothesis
237
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Availability Calculations
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
10 yrs and below 11 13 2 0 26 0.166667 2.166667 -1.9 -0.43333
11 to 20 years 8 10 3 1 22 -1.16667 0.833333 -0.3 0.633333
21 to 30 years 4 1 4 0 9 0.25 -2.75 2.65 -0.15
31 to 40 years 2 0 0 0 2 1.166667 -0.83333 -0.3 -0.03333
41 yrs and above 0 1 0 0 1 -0.41667 0.583333 -0.15 -0.01667
Total 25 25 9 1 60
Expected Frequencies
Availability
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
10 yrs and below 10.83333 10.83333 3.9 0.433333 26 0.002564 0.433333 0.925641 0.433333
11 to 20 years 9.166667 9.166667 3.3 0.366667 22 0.148485 0.075758 0.027273 1.093939
21 to 30 years 3.75 3.75 1.35 0.15 9 0.016667 2.016667 5.201852 0.15
31 to 40 years 0.833333 0.833333 0.3 0.033333 2 1.633333 0.833333 0.3 0.033333
41 yrs and above 0.416667 0.416667 0.15 0.016667 1 0.416667 0.816667 0.15 0.016667
Total 25 25 9 1 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 14.72551
p -Value 0.256792
Do not reject the null hypothesis
238
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Oral communication Calculations
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
10 yrs and below 2 9 14 1 26 0.266667 -0.1 1.433333 -1.6
11 to 20 years 2 10 6 4 22 0.533333 2.3 -4.63333 1.8
21 to 30 years 0 1 8 0 9 -0.6 -2.15 3.65 -0.9
31 to 40 years 0 1 0 1 2 -0.13333 0.3 -0.96667 0.8
41 yrs and above 0 0 1 0 1 -0.06667 -0.35 0.516667 -0.1
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Expected Frequencies
Oral communication
Length of service 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
10 yrs and below 1.733333 9.1 12.56667 2.6 26 0.041026 0.001099 0.163484 0.984615
11 to 20 years 1.466667 7.7 10.63333 2.2 22 0.193939 0.687013 2.018913 1.472727
21 to 30 years 0.6 3.15 4.35 0.9 9 0.6 1.46746 3.062644 0.9
31 to 40 years 0.133333 0.7 0.966667 0.2 2 0.133333 0.128571 0.966667 3.2
41 yrs and above 0.066667 0.35 0.483333 0.1 1 0.066667 0.35 0.552299 0.1
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 17.09046
p -Value 0.146226
Do not reject the null hypothesis
239
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Written communication Calculations
Length of service 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
10 yrs and below 3 15 8 26 -0.46667 2 -1.53333
11 to 20 years 2 11 9 22 -0.93333 0 0.933333
21 to 30 years 2 3 4 9 0.8 -1.5 0.7
31 to 40 years 1 0 1 2 0.733333 -1 0.266667
41 yrs and above 0 1 0 1 -0.13333 0.5 -0.36667
Total 8 30 22 60
Expected Frequencies
Written communication
Length of service 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
10 yrs and below 3.466667 13 9.533333 26 0.062821 0.307692 0.24662
11 to 20 years 2.933333 11 8.066667 22 0.29697 0 0.107989
21 to 30 years 1.2 4.5 3.3 9 0.533333 0.5 0.148485
31 to 40 years 0.266667 1 0.733333 2 2.016667 1 0.09697
41 yrs and above 0.133333 0.5 0.366667 1 0.133333 0.5 0.366667
Total 8 30 22 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 8
Results
Critical Value 15.50731
Chi-Square Test Statistic 6.317546
p -Value 0.611709
Do not reject the null hypothesis
240
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Lesson preparation Calculations
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
National 1 0 0 0 1 0.983333 -0.5 -0.41667 -0.06667
Regional 0 5 1 0 6 -0.1 2 -1.5 -0.4
Division 0 9 13 4 26 -0.43333 -4 2.166667 2.266667
District 0 2 4 0 6 -0.1 -1 1.5 -0.4
None 0 14 7 0 21 -0.35 3.5 -1.75 -1.4
Total 1 30 25 4 60
Expected Frequencies
Lesson preparation
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
National 0.016667 0.5 0.416667 0.066667 1 58.01667 0.5 0.416667 0.066667
Regional 0.1 3 2.5 0.4 6 0.1 1.333333 0.9 0.4
Division 0.433333 13 10.83333 1.733333 26 0.433333 1.230769 0.433333 2.964103
District 0.1 3 2.5 0.4 6 0.1 0.333333 0.9 0.4
None 0.35 10.5 8.75 1.4 21 0.35 1.166667 0.35 1.4
Total 1 30 25 4 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 71.79487
p -Value 1.48E-10
Reject the null hypothesis
241
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Visual aids Calculations
Trainings attended 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
National 1 0 0 1 0.783333 -0.56667 -0.21667
Regional 1 5 0 6 -0.3 1.6 -1.3
Division 4 15 7 26 -1.63333 0.266667 1.366667
District 0 4 2 6 -1.3 0.6 0.7
None 7 10 4 21 2.45 -1.9 -0.55
Total 13 34 13 60
Expected Frequencies
Visual aids
Trainings attended 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
National 0.216667 0.566667 0.216667 1 2.832051 0.566667 0.216667
Regional 1.3 3.4 1.3 6 0.069231 0.752941 1.3
Division 5.633333 14.73333 5.633333 26 0.47357 0.004827 0.331558
District 1.3 3.4 1.3 6 1.3 0.105882 0.376923
None 4.55 11.9 4.55 21 1.319231 0.303361 0.066484
Total 13 34 13 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 8
Results
Critical Value 15.50731
Chi-Square Test Statistic 10.01939
p -Value 0.263667
Do not reject the null hypothesis
242
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Assessment Calculations
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
National 0 1 0 0 1 -0.03333 0.583333 -0.5 -0.05
Regional 0 5 1 0 6 -0.2 2.5 -2 -0.3
Division 0 10 14 2 26 -0.86667 -0.83333 1 0.7
District 0 3 2 1 6 -0.2 0.5 -1 0.7
None 2 6 13 0 21 1.3 -2.75 2.5 -1.05
Total 2 25 30 3 60
Expected Frequencies
Assessment
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
National 0.033333 0.416667 0.5 0.05 1 0.033333 0.816667 0.5 0.05
Regional 0.2 2.5 3 0.3 6 0.2 2.5 1.333333 0.3
Division 0.866667 10.83333 13 1.3 26 0.866667 0.064103 0.076923 0.376923
District 0.2 2.5 3 0.3 6 0.2 0.1 0.333333 1.633333
None 0.7 8.75 10.5 1.05 21 2.414286 0.864286 0.595238 1.05
Total 2 25 30 3 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 14.30842
p -Value 0.281448
Do not reject the null hypothesis
243
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Availability Calculations
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
National 1 0 0 0 1 0.583333 -0.43333 -0.13333 -0.01667
Regional 1 4 1 0 6 -1.5 1.4 0.2 -0.1
Division 10 12 4 0 26 -0.83333 0.733333 0.533333 -0.43333
District 3 3 0 0 6 0.5 0.4 -0.8 -0.1
None 10 7 3 1 21 1.25 -2.1 0.2 0.65
Total 25 26 8 1 60
Expected Frequencies
Availability
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
National 0.416667 0.433333 0.133333 0.016667 1 0.816667 0.433333 0.133333 0.016667
Regional 2.5 2.6 0.8 0.1 6 0.9 0.753846 0.05 0.1
Division 10.83333 11.26667 3.466667 0.433333 26 0.064103 0.047732 0.082051 0.433333
District 2.5 2.6 0.8 0.1 6 0.1 0.061538 0.8 0.1
None 8.75 9.1 2.8 0.35 21 0.178571 0.484615 0.014286 1.207143
Total 25 26 8 1 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 6.777219
p -Value 0.871978
Do not reject the null hypothesis
244
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Oral Calculations
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
National 1 0 0 0 1 0.933333 -0.35 -0.48333 -0.1
Regional 0 6 0 0 6 -0.4 3.9 -2.9 -0.6
Division 1 7 14 4 26 -0.73333 -2.1 1.433333 1.4
District 0 1 4 1 6 -0.4 -1.1 1.1 0.4
None 2 7 11 1 21 0.6 -0.35 0.85 -1.1
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Expected Frequencies
Oral
Trainings attended 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
National 0.066667 0.35 0.483333 0.1 1 13.06667 0.35 0.483333 0.1
Regional 0.4 2.1 2.9 0.6 6 0.4 7.242857 2.9 0.6
Division 1.733333 9.1 12.56667 2.6 26 0.310256 0.484615 0.163484 0.753846
District 0.4 2.1 2.9 0.6 6 0.4 0.57619 0.417241 0.266667
None 1.4 7.35 10.15 2.1 21 0.257143 0.016667 0.071182 0.57619
Total 4 21 29 6 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 12
Results
Critical Value 21.02607
Chi-Square Test Statistic 29.43634
p -Value 0.003392
Reject the null hypothesis
245
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Written Calculations
Trainings attended 4 3 2 Total fo-fe
National 1 0 0 1 0.866667 -0.5 -0.36667
Regional 1 5 0 6 0.2 2 -2.2
Division 1 12 13 26 -2.46667 -1 3.466667
District 1 3 2 6 0.2 0 -0.2
None 4 10 7 21 1.2 -0.5 -0.7
Total 8 30 22 60
Expected Frequencies
Written
Trainings attended 4 3 2 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
National 0.133333 0.5 0.366667 1 5.633333 0.5 0.366667
Regional 0.8 3 2.2 6 0.05 1.333333 2.2
Division 3.466667 13 9.533333 26 1.755128 0.076923 1.260606
District 0.8 3 2.2 6 0.05 0 0.018182
None 2.8 10.5 7.7 21 0.514286 0.02381 0.063636
Total 8 30 22 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 5
Number of Columns 3
Degrees of Freedom 8
Results
Critical Value 15.50731
Chi-Square Test Statistic 13.8459
p -Value 0.085871
Do not reject the null hypothesis
246
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Lesson preparation Calculations
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Bulan 12 33 5 3 53 0.516667 2.083333 -2.06667 -0.53333
Irosin 1 1 1 1 4 0.133333 -1.33333 0.466667 0.733333
Matnog 0 1 1 0 2 -0.43333 -0.16667 0.733333 -0.13333
Juban 0 0 1 0 1 -0.21667 -0.58333 0.866667 -0.06667
Total 13 35 8 4 60
Expected Frequencies
Lesson preparation
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Bulan 11.48333 30.91667 7.066667 3.533333 53 0.023246 0.140386 0.604403 0.080503
Irosin 0.866667 2.333333 0.533333 0.266667 4 0.020513 0.761905 0.408333 2.016667
Matnog 0.433333 1.166667 0.266667 0.133333 2 0.433333 0.02381 2.016667 0.133333
Juban 0.216667 0.583333 0.133333 0.066667 1 0.216667 0.583333 5.633333 0.066667
Total 13 35 8 4 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 4
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 9
Results
Critical Value 16.91898
Chi-Square Test Statistic 13.1631
p -Value 0.155364
Do not reject the null hypothesis
247
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Visual aids Calculations
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Bulan 6 32 12 3 53 -0.18333 1.083333 -0.36667 -0.53333
Irosin 1 1 1 1 4 0.533333 -1.33333 0.066667 0.733333
Matnog 0 1 1 0 2 -0.23333 -0.16667 0.533333 -0.13333
Juban 0 1 0 0 1 -0.11667 0.416667 -0.23333 -0.06667
Total 7 35 14 4 60
Expected Frequencies
Visual aids
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Bulan 6.183333 30.91667 12.36667 3.533333 53 0.005436 0.03796 0.010872 0.080503
Irosin 0.466667 2.333333 0.933333 0.266667 4 0.609524 0.761905 0.004762 2.016667
Matnog 0.233333 1.166667 0.466667 0.133333 2 0.233333 0.02381 0.609524 0.133333
Juban 0.116667 0.583333 0.233333 0.066667 1 0.116667 0.297619 0.233333 0.066667
Total 7 35 14 4 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 4
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 9
Results
Critical Value 16.91898
Chi-Square Test Statistic 5.241914
p -Value 0.812731
Do not reject the null hypothesis
248
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Assessment Calculations
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Bulan 8 31 12 2 53 0.05 1.85 -1.25 -0.65
Irosin 1 1 1 1 4 0.4 -1.2 0 0.8
Matnog 0 1 1 0 2 -0.3 -0.1 0.5 -0.1
Juban 0 0 1 0 1 -0.15 -0.55 0.75 -0.05
Total 9 33 15 3 60
Expected Frequencies
Assessment
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Bulan 7.95 29.15 13.25 2.65 53 0.000314 0.11741 0.117925 0.159434
Irosin 0.6 2.2 1 0.2 4 0.266667 0.654545 0 3.2
Matnog 0.3 1.1 0.5 0.1 2 0.3 0.009091 0.5 0.1
Juban 0.15 0.55 0.25 0.05 1 0.15 0.55 2.25 0.05
Total 9 33 15 3 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 4
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 9
Results
Critical Value 16.91898
Chi-Square Test Statistic 8.425386
0.49191
Do not reject the null hypothesis
249
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Availability Calculations
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Bulan 7 33 12 1 53 0.816667 1.2 -2.13333 0.116667
Irosin 0 2 2 0 4 -0.46667 -0.4 0.933333 -0.06667
Matnog 0 0 2 0 2 -0.23333 -1.2 1.466667 -0.03333
Juban 0 1 0 0 1 -0.11667 0.4 -0.26667 -0.01667
Total 7 36 16 1 60
Expected Frequencies
Availability
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Bulan 6.183333 31.8 14.13333 0.883333 53 0.107862 0.045283 0.322013 0.015409
Irosin 0.466667 2.4 1.066667 0.066667 4 0.466667 0.066667 0.816667 0.066667
Matnog 0.233333 1.2 0.533333 0.033333 2 0.233333 1.2 4.033333 0.033333
Juban 0.116667 0.6 0.266667 0.016667 1 0.116667 0.266667 0.266667 0.016667
Total 7 36 16 1 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 4
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 9
Results
Critical Value 16.91898
Chi-Square Test Statistic 8.073899
p -Value 0.526716
Do not reject the null hypothesis
250
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Oral Calculations
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Bulan 13 25 15 0 53 1.516667 -1.5 0.866667 -0.88333
Irosin 0 3 1 0 4 -0.86667 1 -0.06667 -0.06667
Matnog 0 1 0 1 2 -0.43333 0 -0.53333 0.966667
Juban 0 1 0 0 1 -0.21667 0.5 -0.26667 -0.01667
Total 13 30 16 1 60
Expected Frequencies
Oral
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Bulan 11.48333 26.5 14.13333 0.883333 53 0.200314 0.084906 0.053145 0.883333
Irosin 0.866667 2 1.066667 0.066667 4 0.866667 0.5 0.004167 0.066667
Matnog 0.433333 1 0.533333 0.033333 2 0.433333 0 0.533333 28.03333
Juban 0.216667 0.5 0.266667 0.016667 1 0.216667 0.5 0.266667 0.016667
Total 13 30 16 1 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 4
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 9
Results
Critical Value 16.91898
Chi-Square Test Statistic 32.6592
p -Value 0.000153
Reject the null hypothesis
251
Chi-Square Test
Observed Frequencies
Written Calculations
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total fo-fe
Bulan 12 26 11 4 53 0.516667 -0.5 0.4 -0.41667
Irosin 1 1 1 1 4 0.133333 -1 0.2 0.666667
Matnog 0 2 0 0 2 -0.43333 1 -0.4 -0.16667
Juban 0 1 0 0 1 -0.21667 0.5 -0.2 -0.08333
Total 13 30 12 5 60
Expected Frequencies
Written
Lengua franca 4 3 2 1 Total (fo-fe)^2/fe
Bulan 11.48333 26.5 10.6 4.416667 53 0.023246 0.009434 0.015094 0.039308
Irosin 0.866667 2 0.8 0.333333 4 0.020513 0.5 0.05 1.333333
Matnog 0.433333 1 0.4 0.166667 2 0.433333 1 0.4 0.166667
Juban 0.216667 0.5 0.2 0.083333 1 0.216667 0.5 0.2 0.083333
Total 13 30 12 5 60
Data
Level of Significance 0.05
Number of Rows 4
Number of Columns 4
Degrees of Freedom 9
Results
Critical Value 16.91898
Chi-Square Test Statistic 4.990929
p -Value 0.835098
Do not reject the null hypothesis
252
C U R R I C U L U M V I T A E
PERSONAL DATA
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
ELIGIBILITY
WORK EXPERIENCE
June 1, 2012-
March 30, 2014 : Teacher
Immaculate Conception Academy
of Bulan
Brgy. Pawa, Bulan Sorsogon
June 1, 2014-
March 30, 2015 : Teacher
A. G. Villaroya Technological
Foundation Institute
Brgy. Managa-naga, Bulan,
Sorsogon
June 1, 2014-
March 30, 2016 : Instructor
R. G. de Castro Colleges
Zone-3,Bulan, Sorsogon