Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Progress Report

    Uploaded by

    Gerald C. Bayarcal
    1) The document presents the results of a study on students' scholastic achievement and problem solving skills in mathematics using an open-ended approach versus a non-open-ended approach. 2) The pre-test scores of both groups of students failed to meet expectations, showing they were comparable at the start. 3) The post-test scores increased for both groups. Students in the open-ended approach group achieved higher mean scores, considered "very satisfactory", compared to the non-open-ended group who scored "fairly satisfactory". This indicates the open-ended approach improved academic achievement more.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Progress Report

    Uploaded by

    Gerald C. Bayarcal
    6 views3 pages
    1) The document presents the results of a study on students' scholastic achievement and problem solving skills in mathematics using an open-ended approach versus a non-open-ended approach. 2) The pre-test scores of both groups of students failed to meet expectations, showing they were comparable at the start. 3) The post-test scores increased for both groups. Students in the open-ended approach group achieved higher mean scores, considered "very satisfactory", compared to the non-open-ended group who scored "fairly satisfactory". This indicates the open-ended approach improved academic achievement more.

    Original Title

    PROGRESS REPORT

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The document presents the results of a study on students' scholastic achievement and problem solving skills in mathematics using an open-ended approach versus a non-open-ended approach. 2) The pre-test scores of both groups of students failed to meet expectations, showing they were comparable at the start. 3) The post-test scores increased for both groups. Students in the open-ended approach group achieved higher mean scores, considered "very satisfactory", compared to the non-open-ended group who scored "fairly satisfactory". This indicates the open-ended approach improved academic achievement more.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    6 views3 pages

    Progress Report

    Uploaded by

    Gerald C. Bayarcal
    1) The document presents the results of a study on students' scholastic achievement and problem solving skills in mathematics using an open-ended approach versus a non-open-ended approach. 2) The pre-test scores of both groups of students failed to meet expectations, showing they were comparable at the start. 3) The post-test scores increased for both groups. Students in the open-ended approach group achieved higher mean scores, considered "very satisfactory", compared to the non-open-ended group who scored "fairly satisfactory". This indicates the open-ended approach improved academic achievement more.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Republic of the Philippines

    Department of Education
    REGION X – NORTHERN MINDANAO
    SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE OF MISAMIS ORIENTAL
    BINUANGAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

    PROGRESS REPORT ON THE CONDUCT OF THE RESEARCH STUDY


    ENTITLED “STUDENTS’ SCHOLASTIC ACHIEVEMENT AND PERCEIVED
    PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS INVENTORY TOWARDS MATHEMATICS IN AN
    OPEN-ENDED APPROACH”

    Table 1. Students pre-test mean score


    OPEN-ENDED NON-OPEN-
    GRADING APPROACH ENDED DESCRIPTIVE
    SCALE APPROACH INTERPRETATION
    f % f %
    90-100 0 0 0 0 Outstanding
    80-89 0 0 0 0 Very Satisfactory
    70-79 0 0 0 0 Satisfactory
    60-69 0 0 0 0 Fairly Satisfactory
    59-below 26 100 27 100 Did not Meet
    Expectations
    TOTAL 26 100 27 100
    Mean Score 12.42 12.96
    MPS 24.85 25.92
    (Did not Meet (Did not meet
    Expectations) Expectations)
    Legend:
    Percentage Equivalent Descriptive Interpretation
    90-100 Outstanding
    80-89 Very Satisfactory
    70-79 Satisfactory
    60-69 Fairly Satisfactory
    59 - Below Did not Meet Expectations

    Table 1 presents the pre-test mean scores of the students exposed to open –
    ended approach and non – open – ended approach. It shows that the pre-test mean
    percentage score of students exposed to open – ended approach and non – open –
    ended approach are 24.85% and 25.92%, respectively indicating “Did not Meet
    Expectations”. This shows that the pretest scores of students exposed to open –
    ended approach and non – open – ended approach failed to meet the standards set
    by the Department of Education. This also implies that students in both groups were
    comparable. They need to have a content based knowledge and a deeper
    understanding of the lesson on the topics before receiving formal instructions
    through open – ended approach.

    Table 2. Students post-test mean score


    OPEN-ENDED NON-OPEN-ENDED DESCRIPTIVE
    GRADING
    APPROACH APPROACH INTERPRETATIO
    SCALE
    f % f % N
    90-100 9 34.62 1 3.70 Outstanding
    80-89 11 42.31 4 14.81 Very Satisfactory
    70-79 1 3.85 8 29.63 Satisfactory
    60-69 2 7.69 4 14.81 Fairly Satisfactory
    59-below 3 11.54 10 37.04 Did not Meet
    Expectations
    TOTAL 26 100 27 100
    Mean Score 40.11 31.81
    MPS 80.23 63.63
    (Very Satisfactory) (Fairly Satisfactory)
    Legend:
    Percentage Equivalent Descriptive Interpretation
    90-100 Outstanding
    80-89 Very Satisfactory
    70-79 Satisfactory
    60-69 Fairly Satisfactory
    59 - Below Did not Meet Expectations

    Table 2 shows students’ post test results when exposed to open-ended


    approach and non-open-ended approach. They have a mean percentage score of
    80.23% indicating “Very Satisfactory” and 63.63% indicating “Fairly satisfactory”,
    respectively.

    Interestingly, there was an increase on students’ mean percentage score


    (MPS) for both groups. For students exposed to open-ended approach, there were 9
    (34.62%) who were “Outstanding”, 11 (42.31%) reached “Very Satisfactory”, 1
    (3.85%) reached “Satisfactory”, 2 (7.69%) students got “Fairly Satisfactory” and there
    were 3 (11.54%) students who did not reach the 75% which means “Did not Meet
    Expectations”. The posttest overall mean percentage score (MPS) is 80.23% which
    indicates “Very Satisfactory”. This means that there was an increase on students’
    academic achievement after exposure to the strategy used.
    On the other hand, there was also an increase on the mean percentage score
    of students exposed to non-context based approach. There were 1 (3.70%) student
    who achieved “Outstanding”, 4 (14.81%) students were “Very Satisfactory”, 8
    (29.63%) students were “Satisfactory”, 4 (14.81%) students got “Fairly Satisfactory”
    and 10 (37.04%) did not reached 75% which means “Did not Meet Expectations”.
    The post-test overall mean percentage score (MPS) is 63.63% which indicates
    “Fairly Satisfactory”.

    Prepared by: Checked and Reviewed by:

    GERALD CRUDA BAYARCAL MIRAFLOR M. RANIDO


    Teacher I, MS-Mathematics Education Student Master Teacher I

    Attested by:

    FELICULO U. JAPONA JR., PhD


    School Principal II

    You might also like