A Comparative Study On The Level of Mathematics Performance On Online Learning Between St. Camillus and St. Ferdinand III Students
A Comparative Study On The Level of Mathematics Performance On Online Learning Between St. Camillus and St. Ferdinand III Students
A Comparative Study On The Level of Mathematics Performance On Online Learning Between St. Camillus and St. Ferdinand III Students
Sampling Design The two sampling techniques that the researchers will use are
Quota Sampling and Convenience sampling, both of which are
nonprobability sampling. In quota sampling, the researchers start by
identifying quotas, which are predefined control categories such as
age, gender, education, or religion. In this study, Quota Sampling
came into part wherein the research will be using two sections from
the STEM strand. They will set a quota which is 50% of the population
from St. Camillus and St. Ferdinand III. Since there are 44 students
from St. Camillus and there are 43 students from St. Ferdinand III, this
means the researchers are getting 22 students each from the two
sections. Thereafter, convenience sampling will be utilized.
Convenience Sampling also called haphazard sampling, is carried out
as a matter of convenience. The google form link will be sent on the
group chat of the two particular sections, which then will be answered
by those who are available at that time. This method is quick, easy,
inexpensive, fewer rules to follow, and convenient.
Prior to conducting the survey, consent will be asked from the
participants. They have the right to remain anonymous to protect their
privacy. The researchers will give them an assurance that all answers
will be kept confidential. If any chance the participants have questions,
researchers will quickly respond. All the data that will be gathered will
be used for educational purposes and only the researchers will have
the access to the google forms. Furthermore, the google forms that
were used will be firmly stored.
References:
Dzakira, H. & Idrus, R. M. (2003). Teacher-learner interactions in distance education: A case of two
Malaysian universities. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 4(3), 1-13
Glass, J. & Sue, V. (2008). Student preferences, satisfaction, and perceived learning in an online
mathematics class. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 325-338.
Karal, H., Kokoc, M., Colak, C., & Yalcin, Y. (2013). Using pen-based technology in online mathematics
course: An evaluation study. European Journal of Open, Distance and eLearning, 16(2), 152.
Moreno-Ger, P., Burgos, D., Martínez-Ortiz, I., Sierra, J.L., & Fernández-Manjón, B. (2008).
Educational game design for online education. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2530-2540.
Offir, B., Lev, Y., & Bezalel, R. (2008). Surface and deep learning processes in distance education:
Synchronous versus asynchronous systems. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1172-1183.
Shing, W. L., Voon, B. W., & Marhana, S. (2014, September). Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272092661_Online_Mathematics_Learning_in_Tertia
ry_Education_A_Study_on_Students'_Behavior?fbclid=IwAR1-
vXy0dvo2P9MMxKJgti03kcOrHXaX-w4_QC3iBohrbax9cleVOA0LAbw
Watson, S. (2010). Increasing online interaction in a distance education MBA: Exploring students'
attitudes towards change. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 63-84.