Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter includes the research design, the sampling methods, the
respondents of the study, the research locale, the data gathering, the research
instrument and the statistical treatment of the data that will be used in order to carry out
systematic examination and to establish facts and reach the conclusion.

I. Research Design

The researcher will be using a qualitative, non-experimental study wherein

surveys and questionnaires will be given to a set of respondents. The results that will be
derived from the evaluations will be then used to describe the commonly used teaching
method in MINHS.

II. Sampling and Population

This study will be using a non-random sampling method, particularly convenience

sampling. According to Adi Bhat (n.d.), convenience sampling is a technique used to
create a sample in conformity of ease of access, the readiness of a respondent to be a
part of the sample and the availability of a respondent at a given time slot or any other
pragmatic specification of a particular element.

This method will be convenient to both the researcher and the respondents since
the study will be conducted during school hours.

III. Locale of the Study

This study will be carried out in Masaya Integrated National High, Bay Laguna.
The MINHS is located in the province of Laguna specifically, in Barangay Masaya,
Municipality of Bay.

IV. Respondents of the Study

As stated beforehand, the researcher will be using the convenience sampling

method in choosing the respondents from MINHS. A total of 30 students will be chosen
from the senior high school department.

Grade Level Number of Respondents

11 15
12 15
V. Data Gathering

The researcher will personally administer the data gathering to the respondents
of the study. The questionnaire and survey that will be distributed will also be retrieved
on the same day.

VI. Research Instrument

This study will be using the researcher-made questionnaire. The questionnaire

will consist of two parts containing the factors needed for the research problems. Part
one will entail the ratings for the independent variable while part two will compromise
the reactions of the respondents to the different independent variables.
 References

Bamne SN, Bamne AS. Comparative study of chalkboard teaching over PowerPoint teaching as

a teaching tool in undergraduate medical teaching. Int J Med Sci Public Health

2016;5:2585-2587.

Grainger, S., Kestell, C., Willis, C. (2011). Staff and student perceptions of the effective use of

contemporary lecture theatre technology. Paper presented at the Australasian

Association for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Freemantle, WA.

Shallcross DE, Harrison TG; Lectures: electronic Presentations versus chalk and talk – a

chemist’s View. ChemEduc Res Pract., 2007; 8 (1): 73-79.

S. Waheeda, K Sathiya Murthy, A comparative study of blackboard teaching with Powerpoint

teaching in 1 year medical students, National J of Basic Medical Sciences 2015;6(1).

Rokade S A, Bahetee B H, Shall we teach Anatomy with Chalk and Board or Power Point

Presentations?- An Analysis of Indian Students Perspectives and Performance, Sch. J.

App. Med. Sci., 2013; 1(6);837-842.

Race, P. (2001) Lecturer’s Toolkit: Learning, Teaching and Assessment:

London:Kogan Page Limited.

James, A. R., & Coolier, D. H.. Warm-Ups: The Key to the Beginning of a Great

Lesson. Strategies, September/October, 2011, 14- 15.

 Siwatu, K. O., Frazier, P., Osaghae, O. J., & Starker, T. V. From Maybe I Can to Yes

I Can: Developing Pre-service and In-service Teachers' Self-Efficacy to Teach African

American Students. The Journal of Negro Education, 80(3), 2011, 209-222.

Allen, P., Taleni, L. T., & Robertson, J. “In Order to Teach You, I Must Know You.”

The Pasifika Initiative: A Professional Development Project for Teachers. New Zealand

Journal of Education Studies, 44(2), 2009, 47-62.

Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. Revisiting the Conceptualisation of Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (PCK): PCK as a Conceptual Tool to Understand Teachers as

Professionals. Research in Science Education, 38, 2008, 261-284.

Shulman, L. S. Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard

Educational Review, 57(1), 1987, 1-22.

Gottfredson, D. C., & DiPietro, S. M. School Size, Social Capital, and Student

Victimization. Sociology of Education, 84(1), 2011, 69-89.

Daniels, M. L. The Three Fs of Classroom Management. Journal of Scholarship and

Practice, 6(3), 2009, 18-24.

Hue, M.-T. The Influence of Classic Chinese Philosophy of Confucianism, Taoism

and Legalism on Classroom Discipline in Hong Kong Junior Secondary Schools. British

Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 36(3), 2007, 303-316.

Weiner, L. Why Is Classroom Management So Vexing to Urban Teachers? Theory

Into Practice, 42(4), 2010 305-312.

 Hatlevik, O. E., & Arnseth, H. C. (2012). ICT, teaching and leadership: How do
teachers experience the importance of ICT-supportive school leaders. Nordic Journal of
Digital Literacy, 7(1), 55-69.

Rampersad, C. A. (2011). Teachers ‘perceptions of The Contribution Of Information

And Communication Technology To The Teaching of Modern Studies, Using An
Integrated System, In An Urban Secondary School (Doctoral dissertation, The
University of the West Indies).