ENHANCING STUDENTS’ LEARNING IN BASIC GENERAL MATHEMATICS

TOPICS THROUGH LECTURE APPROACH AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING

JEDIENE B. NARAGA
EMELOU F. ECALLA
EZSAM FAITH F. LAGO
Proponents

A Research Paper presented to

MR. DARWIN B. NARAGA
Senior High School Department, Nueva Vida National High School
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Subject
Research Project

APRIL 2025
 ii

BIOGRAPHICAL DATA

JEDIENE BONGGA NARAGA, a resident of Purok 7, Nueva Vida, M’lang,

was born on October 12, 2006 in Davao City. She is the second child among the four
children of Mr. and Mrs. Naraga. She finished her primary education at Nueva Vida
Central Elementary School where her mother, Judith B. Naraga, worked as a teacher
until as of this writing. Her father, Dan B. Naraga, was employed as a Purchasing
Officer at P.L. Sebastian Construction Incorporated in Davao del Sur. She is currently
a Grade 12 student at Nueva Vida National High School under the Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics strand. Since she was a child, she has
loved butterflies and became a firm believer that everybody has a beauty that only
others can see.

JEDIENE B. NARAGA
Researcher
 iii

BIOGRAPHICAL DATA

EMELOU FRADES ECALLA was born on July 2, 2006 at Malapatan,

Sarangani Province. She is the second daughter of Mr. Emerson L. Ecalla and Mrs.
Maria Luz F. Ecalla. She finished her primary education at Nueva Vida Central
Elementary School (S.Y. 2011-2018) at Nueva Vida, M'lang, North Cotabato. In her
secondary education, she was enrolled in Nueva Vida National High School since
Grade 7 up until now. At present, she is a Senior High School student under the
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics strand.

EMELOU F. ECALLA
Researcher
 iv

BIOGRAPHICAL DATA

EZSAM FAITH FERNANDO LAGO, 18 years old and a resident of Purok

Saranay, New Rizal, M'lang, North Cotabato, was born in December 9, 2006 in M'lang.
He is a lone son of Nenita Fernando Lago and Bonifacio Ventura Lago, who are both
businessmen. He is currently a Grade 12 student of Nueva Vida National High School
under the Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics strand. His favorite motto
is "Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift", which guides him
through his adventures in life.

EZSAM FAITH F. LAGO

Researcher
 v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We, the researchers, would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to everyone
who contributed to the success of our study. We are deeply thankful to our Creator for
guiding and protecting us throughout our venture. His prudence and morale had
helped us stay focused and determined in the course of our research project.

We also extend our heartfelt appreciation to Mr. Darwin B. Naraga, our

Research Project Teacher, for his invaluable guidance and assistance. His expertise
and recommendations had helped us enhance our work, and his encouragement
helped us stay committed to our goals.

We are grateful to our parents for their unwavering support and sacrifices. Their
emotional, noble, and budgetary support meant a lot to us, and we couldn't have done
it without them.

We thank also our respondents, the students who took part in our study, for
their cooperation and help. Their participation was crucial to the success of our study,
and we are grateful for their time and initiative to arrive on time to participate in the
interventions. At last, we thank everyone who believed in us and supported us
throughout this venture. Your emboldening and trust in us meant a lot, and we are
deeply grateful to have you by our side in the course of this study.

-The Researchers-
 vi

ABSTRACT

JEDIENE BONGGA NARAGA, EMELOU FRADES ECALLA, and EZSAM

FAITH FERNANDO LAGO (2025). " Enhancing Students’ Learning in Basic General
Mathematics Topics through Lecture Approach and Cooperative Learning". This study
is targeted at determining the effects of Lecture Approach and Cooperative Learning
to students’ learning in basic General Mathematics lessons. It intends to improve
students’ comprehension in solving mathematical problems by presenting two
teaching approaches, which can aid in enhancing their scores in activities as well as
their general understanding of the subject. Eight (8) participants from the Technical-
Vocational-Livelihood track in Grade 11 were selected through purposive sampling to
represent the strands offered by the school. The mixed method Explanatory
Sequential Design was applied in this study, wherein the paired t-test and Cohen’s d
formula were employed for the analysis of the quantitative data and the Generic
Thematic Analysis for the qualitative information. The results in the Lecture Approach
had shown an extremely statistically significant difference, having an initial mean of
3.88 (SD=1.13) increasing to 7.00 (SD=1.31, t=-5.12, p<0.001, d=2.55) after the
intervention. Moreover, a statistically significant difference was also observed in the
Cooperative Learning approach, where the initial mean of 4.13 (SD=1.36) elevated to
6.25 (SD=1.75, t=-2.71, p=0.008, d=1.35) after the application of the intervention.
Furthermore, the Lecture Approach depicted a large effect size of 2.55, while the latter
produced an effect size of 1.35. Upon the analysis of the qualitative data from the
respondents, it was found that the majority preferred the Lecture Approach because
the students can directly ask the instructor regarding their concerns about the
discussion. This was the opposite of Cooperative Learning, where socialization is
highly beneficial. Although this promotes engagement inside the classroom, students
find this disadvantageous in terms of their ability to interact with others. Generally, both
approaches in teaching are effective in improving the students’ learning, however,
Lecture Approach weighed more in the students’ preference.

Keywords: Teaching approaches, preference, students’ learning

 vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page……………………………………………………………………………………...i
Biographical Data…………………………………………………………..………………..ii
Acknowledgment …………………………………………………………..………………..v
Abstract……………………………………………………………………..………………..vi
Table of Contents……….………………………………………………………….……….vii

Chapter
1 INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study……………...………….………...………………..1
Statement of the Problem …………………………….….………………....2
Significance of the Study………..………………………….………………..3
Scope and Delimitation………..………………………….………………….3
Definition of Terms...……………………………………….…………………4

2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Related Literature and Studies…...…………...…………………………….5
Theoretical Framework…………………...…………………..………..........8
Conceptual Framework………………………………………………………9

3 METHODOLOGY
Research Method…………………………………………….……………..10
Participants……………………………………….………………………….11
Data Gathering.……………………………….………….……………...…..11
Ethical Considerations…………………...……………………..…………..13
Data Analysis Techniques….……………………………………………….14

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Raw scores before and after the interventions……………………..……16
 viii

Mean scores in each intervention……………….………………………...16

Significant difference in mean scores…..……………...………..……..…17
Impacts of the intervention………………..…………………………….….17
Students’ experiences in the interventions………………..…………..….19

5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary of Findings………………………………….……………...…….22
Implications…………..………………………………………………..…….23
Recommendations..……………………………………............................23

REFERENCES…………………………….……………………….……………………...24

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………...……27
 1

I. INTRODUCTION

Mathematics is a broad topic and covers a wide variety of general knowledge,

even having minor connection to other educational subjects. Findings of an
experimental study conducted by Ablian and Parangat (2022) reveal that there is a
positive high level of Mathematics anxiety among a sample of Senior High School
students in the Philippines, acknowledging it as one of the most complex and
challenging subjects taught in the country. Therefore, the need to develop teaching
strategies has become high and necessary in this field. Moreover, the teachers’ ability
to address the needs of the students with varying levels of intelligence may depend
on the learners’ preferences and opinions regarding scholastic techniques in
Mathematics (Ünal, 2017).

The role of a teacher is not only limited to instructing, but they are also
responsible for disciplining, planning classroom activities, and standing as a parent
who motivates and guides each student. Aside from this, teachers are also expected
to have modern management skills that will enable them to utilize teaching techniques
effectively and establish a better learning environment (Kahyaoğlu, Yangın, 2007).

As a solution to the rising concerns about the difficulty of students in absorbing

Mathematics lessons in Senior High School, the proponents search different
approaches in imparting basic General Mathematics lessons to assess its effects in
the understanding of the sample respondents. Two of the most common strategies
which are to be used in this study include the lecture method and cooperative learning.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

All aspects related to Mathematics have been considered challenging to

students, providing that calculating numbers involves critical thinking and a lot of stock
knowledge that they may have accumulated from their previous years of learning.
International studies also demonstrate the consistently poor performance of students
in Science and Mathematics, leading to having international assessment marks far
below the average point. According to Mazana, et al. (2019), there are several factors
 2

that affect students’ learning and performance in Mathematics, including students’

attitude towards the subject, teachers’ instructional practices, and school environment.

In the Philippines, it is one of the greatest challenges of a Filipino teacher to

make Mathematics easily-understandable for students, not to mention that some
students also struggle in comprehending the English language, which is used in
providing instructions and explanations. The research of Langoban (2020) showed
that among the three major themes, one cause of the difficulty of the students in
understanding Mathematics lessons is the style of delivery of instructions provided by
the teachers. Therefore, both teachers and students must be actively involved in the
process of education in order to ensure an effective learning integrity.

Locally, Senior High School learners of Nueva Vida National High School raise
their concerns with regards to the difficulty of General Mathematics lessons.
Therefore, teaching approaches can be of great purpose to address this gap, which
can further enhance the students’ understanding of mathematical concepts, develop
mathematical thinking, and improve their marks on the subject. Since this issue is
widely relevant in the school setting, the findings of this study can help not only the
students, but also the teachers and aspiring educators.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The study seeks to analyze the results of testing teaching approaches and
evaluate the perspective of the selected Senior High School - Technical-Vocational-
Livelihood students of Nueva Vida National High School regarding the different means
of transferring basic General Mathematics lessons, namely; a.) lecture approach and
b.) cooperative learning as measured by their scores in each assessment test, as well
as their response in the provided interview questions.

To answer the problems cited above, answers to the following questions will
be sought:

1. What are the mean scores of the students before and after each intervention
session?
a. Session 1: Lecture Approach?
b. Session 2: Cooperative Learning?
 3

2. Is there a significant difference on the mean scores of the students before

and after each intervention?
3. What is the impact of the two interventions on the students’ learning?
4. What are the experiences of the students in each of the two teaching
approaches?

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The results of this study can help raise awareness on which strategy poses a
higher effectiveness rate among students and will benefit the following:

Students: Through the implementation of different teaching strategies, the students

will be able to determine the approach that works effectively in imparting basic General
Mathematics lessons in the Senior High School. The sample students will be aware
about the factors that affect their learning comprehension in such subject and they will
be able to apply the tested learning approaches in their classes.

Teachers: They could help each other in creating different approaches that make
students understand General Mathematics lessons easier, which can also equip them
with critical thinking skills to lessen their responsibilities in teaching.

Parents and Guardians: Since parents and guardians uphold roles which include
guiding and assisting their children with their academic responsibilities, this study can
help them offload their duties in teaching, especially if the subject is not their expertise.

Future Researchers: The conducted study will further open doors for future
researchers to refine and expand studies in relation to teaching approaches in basic
General Mathematics concepts. This may also serve as a source of information about
what strategy can be used and which is more effective in teaching the subject to
students.

SCOPE AND DELIMITATION

This research studies the two common styles that may be used in imparting
basic General Mathematics topics, namely: a.) lecture approach and b.) cooperative
learning, and its effects on the understanding of students in terms of assessment
 4

scores and perspective toward the difficulty in comprehending the lessons, measured
through assessment tests and interviews, respectively. Moreover, the scope of the
lesson involves the addition and subtraction of polynomial functions, which are one of
the basic lessons in General Mathematics curriculum.

The respondents of this study are limited to Grade 11 students of Nueva Vida
National High School under the Technical-Vocational-Livelihood track, who have taken
the General Mathematics subject in their first semester in the school year 2024-2025.
Physical activities including the intervention sessions and interviews are held within
the premises of the school.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

• Assessment test – judgment, evaluation, or measurement of a person’s

knowledge through a standardized way such as quizzes and verbal reasoning.
• Curriculum – a subject under a specific course of study in a school.
• Instructional practices - methods and strategies used by teachers to help
students learn and engage in the learning process. This includes planning,
assessments, and classroom management.
• Intervention – a change or treatment being applied to subjects to study its
effects. This is essentially used to determine which strategy works best on
something.
• Learning environment – a physical or virtual place where learning happens.
• Strategies – a careful plan of action designed to achieve a specific goal.
• Teaching methodologies - principles and practices that teachers use to help
students learn.
 5

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

According to the latest study of Usmonov (2024), Mathematics is one of the

oldest sciences, often referred back then as “The Science of Knowledge” which then
evolved to “The Science of Arithmetic”, with it being related to numbers. In the current
generation, it is already a mandatory and major subject taught in all schools worldwide.
General Mathematics is a subject taken by Senior High School students in the
Philippines as a course to develop skills in the application of mathematical concepts
in real life scenarios. This course covers a wide range of topics, which include algebra,
sequences, trigonometry, world geometry, finance, networks, and decision
mathematics.

Teaching the Mathematics subject requires an ability mastered through

experiences, and it is not just an inborn gift to teachers. Students prefer the application
of teaching styles in order to cope with the lessons of this complex subject. As
concluded by the findings of Alija and Snopce’s (2015) study, teachers must use
creative methods and styles of teaching in order to catch the interest of students to
learn this subject. Hence, the proponents of this study suggest two common
techniques that can be utilized in teaching General Mathematics, which include: the
lecture approach and cooperative learning. These methodologies provide varying
differences in the performance of students with regard to the ways of teaching applied
to them.

Teacher-centered learning, which was considered as one of the earliest

pedagogical approaches, involves the instructor in a point-blank situation, as stated
by Smith, J. (2018). Lecture method is an example of a teacher-centered approach to
teaching. Consequently, this puts responsibility and obligation in the hands of the
teacher to actively impart knowledge to his students. Rosenshine and Stevens (1986)
observed the key instructional behaviors of teachers through their empirical
experiments. They found out that effective teachers in this approach open lessons
through recaps, provide statement of goals, give clear and detailed instructions,
provide systematic feedback and corrections, and attend to inappropriate student
behavior. Their research supported the conclusion that this instructional way is
 6

effective in a classroom setting and is applicable in teaching both Social Sciences and
Mathematics.

However, an opposing conclusion from the related study of Prince (2004)

degrades kids as non-critical thinkers in this situation, pointing out that it places them
in a passive learning environment. He affirmed that this style limits the flexibility in
meeting the demands of each student and various learning strategies, which are
becoming more and more crucial in contemporary higher education.

This process is reversed in the learner-centered approach of learning, a broad

framework where cooperative learning is classified. This approach places students at
the center of their educational journey and pays particular attention to fostering their
engagement and autonomy (Jones & Brown 2019). This strategy encourages
collaboration, independence, and experiential learning through challenging activities
that generate learners’ curiosity and creativity. Constructivist theory is strongly related
to this approach, which means that students actively engage in the process of
acquiring knowledge. This empowers students to learn by getting them to think
critically, explore, and solve problems on their own. It is especially appealing to a
teacher who wants to help students develop their critical thinking, creativity, and
problem-solving abilities (Treve, 2024).

The study of Ali et al. (2021) has put emphasis that letting students work
through well-crafted Mathematics problems independently results in deep and
meaningful student learning that connects to both mathematical content knowledge
and socioemotional skills. Additionally, Mackrell and Pratt (2017) have demonstrated
that when students participate in well-designed and successfully executed open
pedagogical tasks, they acquire a broad spectrum of arithmetic abilities and
knowledge. Student-centered pedagogical approaches provide the framework
required for students to acquire deep, conceptual understandings of mathematics
beyond procedural knowledge by requesting that they create their own solution
process rather than demonstrating how to solve a given problem.

Meanwhile, Johnson and Johnson (1986) support the notion that so-called
"cooperative learning" benefits students' motivation, classroom socialization, self-
confidence in their ability to learn, and attitude toward the subject matter in general, in
addition to their performance. The five pillars of collaboration—positive
 7

interdependence, individual accountability, explicit social skills training, promotive

interaction, and group processing—are the foundation of the cooperative learning
paradigm (Johnson et al., 1993). Capar and Tarim (2015) conducted a meta-analysis
of studies on cooperative learning and mathematics and found that using these
principles for cooperation improves students' overall math achievement scores by
0.59.

Over the years, the comparative analysis between the teacher-centered

(lecturing) and learner-centered (cooperative learning) approaches evidently produces
varying outcomes. Because it offers a structured framework for the teacher to transmit
information, traditional classroom learning (teacher-centered) is frequently seen as a
more effective method of material delivery in higher education (Vanderbilt University
Center for Teaching 2018). On the other hand, student-centered learning like
cooperative learning, which starts with collaboration and moves into experiential
learning, places an emphasis on student engagement and interaction, making it an
effective method in transmitting both numerical and textual information to the learners
(Prince, 2004).

The study of teaching mathematical problem-solving techniques has advanced

significantly in the last few decades. However, more research is still needed to
determine how teachers might help their students complete this challenging task
(Lester and Cai, 2016). In terms of Mathematics, the Philippines came in second to
last in the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).
Approximately 20% of Filipino pupils achieved the bare minimum of competency, and
over 50% attained scores below Level 1. With an average score of 353 points, Filipino
students fell short of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) average of 489 points. With this international status, the country continuously
improves both teaching and learning strategies in Mathematics through research and
experiments on methodologies in almost all aspects of this academic field.

Concludingly, the current generation needs to highlight the development of

mathematics education by stressing the significance of successful teaching
approaches such as the lecture approach and cooperative learning. These teaching
approaches will be a relevant aid in promoting an organized knowledge transfer,
socialization, numerical proficiency, creativity, and learning integrity among the
 8

selected Senior High School students as well as create an easier and more efficient
teaching technique in basic General Mathematics lessons.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The Theory of Constructivism in Psychology will be used to guide the

researchers in conducting this experimental study. Proposed by Jean Piaget, this
theory suggests that people can acquire greater knowledge through their interaction
with their experiences and ideas. This belief states that humans construct new
knowledge and meaning from their experiences, so the more curious an individual is,
the more he will understand the world (Bada & Olusegun, 2015).

This theory can be applied in the cooperative learning approach, which focuses
on student engagement and participation. Serin (2018) concluded that the
constructivist and democratic principles are the main bases of student-centered
pedagogy, stating that by engaging in a classroom environment, students develop their
critical thinking skills and sense of responsibility to learn. In this method, students are
given the chance to engage in planning, assessments, and implementations, taking
more responsibility than the teachers, thus also learning independently along the
process. On another note, cooperative learning also involves a lot of intervention to
make learning as effective as possible. The teacher may impose activities like “think-
pair-share” and “jigsaw”, where learners will be able to assimilate concepts and share
it to others based on their own understanding. This can help the students to partake
in different views and perspectives on a given topic, acknowledging different ideas
apart from their own.

Another theory to be of great purpose in this study is the Behaviorist Theory by

John B. Watson and Burrhus Frederic Skinner. Behaviorist theory believes that
external stimuli cause behavior changes (Serin, 2018). Teachers act as facilitators, the
external stimuli, who are expected to explain concepts and assign individual or group
activities so that students will be encouraged to learn. Since behaviorists hold that a
reaction to a particular stimulus is what causes learning to occur, its implication to
education would mean that teachers are responsible for providing specific instructions
to elicit desired responses from the students (Chen, 2005). However, provided that the
teacher is in charge of instruction and has the final say, students do not have enough
 9

opportunities to practice critical thinking and problem-solving techniques in this

approach.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Dependent Independent Dependent

Variable Variable Variable

Pre-assessment Post-assessment
Lecture Approach
scores \ scores

Pre-assessment Cooperative Post-assessment

scores Learning scores
 10

III. METHODOLOGY

This chapter addresses the methodologies that will be used in determining the
study’s respondents, sampling techniques, and data gathering approaches. These are
the guides to be followed by the researchers upon achieving the set goals and
objectives of this study.

a. Research Method

The explanatory sequential design will be utilized in this mixed methods

research. To provide a description regarding the mixed methods type of
gathering data, Almeida (2018) remarked that “mixed methods research is an
approach that combines both quantitative and qualitative methods into a single
study in order to provide a broader and more complete vision of a problem”.
Mixed methods research provides an in-depth evaluation of the respondents’
experiences and performance. Combining both quantitative and qualitative data
allows the researchers to dive more into the respondents’ perspectives rather
than only relying on the numerical data garnered.

Explanatory Sequential Design (ESD) is a research method wherein the

quantitative data is collected first before the acquisition of qualitative data. The
qualitative data serves as support to the analysis of the quantitative data, and
it is especially used to further explain and interpret unexpected findings with
qualitative information.

In this case, the respondents’ scores in pre-assessment and post-

assessment quizzes in the interventions will be quantified, and they will also
describe their experiences in the interview to be conducted at the end of the
second intervention session. The responses accumulated from the interview
will be used to affirm the quantitative results taken from the assessment tests,
enhancing the validity of the conclusion drawn from the data.
 11

b. Participants

The sample size of 10 students will be obtained from five (5) sections in
Grade 11 Technical-Vocational-Livelihood track of Nueva Vida National High
School. General Mathematics advisers of each section are identified to give
suggestions on the possible respondents of the study. Two students will be
taken from each section through purposive sampling, and they will be
representatives of their respective strand. The chosen participants must satisfy
the following criteria:

Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria

Grade 11 TVL students of Nueva Students enrolled in the Academic
Vida National High School in the Track (STEM and HUMSS strands)
academic year 2024-2025
Students who participate well in Students who are frequently absent or
General Mathematics class inactive during their classes
Students selected by their General Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM)
Mathematics teachers learners
Students under the Agriculture, Students who have major health
Beauty Care, Carpentry, Cookery, complications that may interfere with
and Electrical Installation and their performance during the
Maintenance (EIM) strands intervention sessions

Grade 11 TVL students fit a specific specialization required in this study,

having taken the General Mathematics subject in their previous semester. For
the intervention to be effective, the respondents must have both prior
knowledge and further queries related to the academic area.

c. Data Gathering

This study aims to improve the teaching strategies in General

Mathematics by determining whether the selected Senior High School students
at Nueva Vida National High School prefer the lecture approach or cooperative
 12

learning strategy in teaching the basic General Mathematics topics of the

school year 2024–2025.

The proponents of this study will conduct two (2) intervention sessions
to showcase the different teaching practices in teaching basic General
Mathematics lessons. Session 1 will be using the lecture approach, while
Session 2 will make use of the cooperative learning approach. Each session
will require both pre-assessment and post-assessment tests.

Session 1: Lecture approach

Session 2: Cooperative learning

At the end of the program intervention, an in-depth interview will be

conducted with the selected ten (10) participants. In accordance with the study
of Della Porta (2014), this procedure is an essential tool that extracts
observable knowledge from people about certain topics. This allows an
individual to share their understanding and interpretations of the world, while
the interviewers also get the chance to ask with the guidance of their research
objectives (Knott, 2022).

The following steps will be utilized upon gathering both quantitative and
qualitative data from the respondents:

Seeking permission from the institution. A request letter for the

implementation of this study will be presented to the Office of the School
Principal. The letter aims to seek approval for the execution of all activities
related to this study, to be signed by the school principal and recommended by
the Senior High School principal.

Preparation of instructional materials. Instructional materials like visual

aids, test papers, as well as the assessment quizzes will be constructed by the
researchers in preparation for the intervention sessions. The instructor will also
study the General Mathematics topics to be taught to the respondents, which
include the a.) addition of rational functions and b.) subtraction of rational
functions.
 13

Creating in-depth interview questionnaires. The researchers will

formulate the interview questions aimed at extracting the perspective and
experiences of the students toward each teaching approach. These interview
guides will be referred to research instrument validators to check if the prepared
questions align with the objectives of the study.

Conducting the intervention program. The intervention sessions will be

conducted in one classroom at Nueva Vida National High School during lunch
time. The intervention will consist of a 1-hour learning session with 10-minute
assessments before and after the program.

Gathering and recording quantitative data. The proponents will record

the data obtained from the pre-assessment and post-assessment tests of each
session and evaluate if there is a significant difference between their
performance prior to and after the intervention. These numerical data will be
represented by a table and the mean of the total scores will be calculated to
measure the central tendency of the statistical data.

Administering the in-depth interview. After the two intervention sessions,

an in-depth interview will be accomplished with each participant, one at a time
in one secluded place. The researchers will also ask permission from the
respondents for the voice recording of the entire interview, which will be helpful
as future reference and for analyzing more accurate data. The results will be
evaluated through a Generic Thematic Analysis to observe patterns in the
experiences and perspectives of the participants.

d. Ethical considerations

Hasan et al. (2021) stated that the most important and crucial content of
a research is the ethics. Research ethics establishes the standards for carrying
out a certain study, hence it must be upheld by all researchers during the course
of a research project.

The ethical practices to be considered by the researchers include the

informed consent, confidentiality, risk of harm, and transparency.
 14

Informed Consent. Participants will be informed of the research’s

purpose, procedures, and how the data they provide will be used only for
academic purposes. To secure written evidence of their participation, the
researchers prepared a letter of assent and letter of consent which will be given
to the students and their parents after the selection of respondents.

Confidentiality. The researchers will thoroughly explain how the data

gathered from the activities, interviews, and recordings will be handled with
utmost anonymity. The participants will also know that their personal
information will not be shared with the public or whoever is not directly involved
in the study.

Risk of harm. Gençten (2021) stressed that in order to comply with

ethical standards, the researcher must thoroughly assess the risk/harm
scenarios at the very beginning of the study and identify the preventative
measures that may be implemented. By taking these precautions, the safety of
both the researchers and respondents will be ensured.

Transparency and disposal of data. It is rest assured that the practice of

being accountable, open, and communicative will be taken by the researchers,
and they will be transparent about how they will collect the data and who will
have direct access to it throughout the conduct of the study. Moreover, all
related data and records will be disposed accordingly after the study.

e. Data Analysis Techniques

This portion entails the detailed process of analyzing the quantitative and
qualitative information gathered from the respondents.

In evaluating the quantitative data derived from the pre-assessment and

post-assessment tests, the researchers made use of descriptive statistics
analysis. A paired t-test was adapted to calculate the difference between the
means of scores before and after each of the intervention sessions. After
calculating the significance level of the a.) lecture approach and b.) cooperative
learning, the resulting data will be subjected to the Cohen’s d calculation in
order to determine the measure of effectiveness of each intervention.
 15

Qualitative data, on the other hand, requires the Generic Thematic

Analysis. This is a flexible technique in analyzing themes emerging from online
reviews, open-ended responses, and other qualitative information. Themes are
a wide range of ideas typically used by researchers to draw conclusions from
collected data. Ellis and Hart (2023) suggested that it is necessary to support
the decision to use a generic qualitative design in order to provide the
researchers with useful instructions and descriptions regarding the study
approach.

Upon assessing the themes of the qualitative details, the researchers

conformed to the following steps:

Acquainting with the recorded data. A transcript of records will be created

after interviewing all the student participants and teachers. After this, the
researchers will take note of important ideas spoken by the respondents which
will later be used in building relationships with other’s responses.

Generating codes. Manual code generation will be conducted by the

researchers to identify related phrases within the qualitative data at hand. This
can be done by reading and familiarizing with the transcript, searching for
relevant phrases or ideas, and assigning descriptive labels or codes to them.

Searching for themes. The researchers will carefully interpret and

organize the established codes by making groups and subgroups before
highlighting them.

Naming themes. Concise and descriptive themes are generated after

analyzing the grouped codes. The defined themes will be re-examined to
ensure their accuracy and relatedness with the others.

Generating final report. The final stage involves the creation of the
interconnected themes for discussion. This can be done by grouping and
ranking the frequencies of each code that may compose a theme, and then
synthesizing the insights gained from the analysis into a coherent summary that
addresses the research questions.
 16

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1: Raw scores of participants

Lecture Approach Cooperative Learning

Participant Pre-A Post-A Pre-A Post-A
Participant 1 6 9 5 7
Participant 2 4 5 6 7
Participant 3 3 8 3 5
Participant 4 3 6 4 5
Participant 5 3 7 2 8
Participant 6 3 6 5 8
Participant 7 4 8 5 7
Participant 8 5 7 3 3

Mean scores of the participants before and after the intervention sessions

Table 2: Summary of the mean scores

PAIRED SAMPLES STATISTICS

TEST MEAN N STD. STD. ERROR OF

DEVIATION MEAN

Lecture Pre-A 3.88 8 1.13 0.40

Approach Post-A 7.00 8 1.31 0.46
Cooperative Pre-A 4.13 8 1.36 0.48
Learning Post-A 6.25 8 1.75 0.62

It can be gleaned in the table above that there is a difference between the
students’ mean scores before and after the interventions. Before the application of the
Lecture approach, the mean score was 3.88 (SD=1.13) which then elevated to 7.00
 17

(SD=1.31) after the first intervention. The initial mean score in the Cooperative
Learning approach was 4.13 (SD=1.36), which increased to 6.25 (SD=1.75) after the
intervention.

Difference between the mean scores of the participants before and after the
intervention sessions

Table 3: Significant difference in the mean scores of students before and after each
intervention sessions
PAIRED SAMPLES TEST

MEAN t P-VALUE
Lecture Approach Pre-A - Post-A -3.12 -5.12 0.000078
Cooperative Learning Pre-A - Post-A -2.12 -2.71 0.008424

Table 3 indicates that the mean score of 3.88 gathered in the pre-assessment
test of the Lecture Approach increased by 3.12 after the application of the intervention.
By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically
significant. Consequently, the mean score of 6.25 in the post-assessment in the
Cooperative Learning is greater than the mean score in the pre-assessment by 2.12.
This produces a statistically significant difference, which means that the result is real
and is unlikely to be due to chance.

Impact of each intervention session on students’ learning

Table 4: Effect size of each intervention session

The results imply that both the interventions applied (Lecture Approach and
Cooperative Learning) have increased the mean scores of the respondents from the
pre-assessment test to the post-assessment test. In determining the effect of the
interventions, Cohen’s d formula was used with the specific interpretations shown in
the table below.
 18

EFFECT SIZE INTERPRETATION

0.20 – 0.50 Small
0.50 – 0.80 Medium
Greater than 0.80 Large

INTERVENTION t N d EFFECT SIZE

Session 1: Lecture Approach -5.12 8 | -2.55 | Large
Session 2: Cooperative Learning -2.71 8 | -1.35 | Large

With accordance to the resulting Cohen’s d measurements, the lecture

approach has a large effect size of -2.55, signifying that the lecture approach has
increased the understanding of the sample students of the basic General Mathematics
concepts. Similarly, cooperative learning also elevated the mean scores of the
respondents in the post-assessment test with a large effect size of -1.35.

To interpret the data shown above, Session 1: Lecture Approach has yielded
an extremely statistically significant difference, with the initial mean of 3.88 increasing
to 7.00 after the application of the intervention. On the other hand, Session 2:
Cooperative Learning produced a statistically significant difference, with the mean of
scores in pre-assessment test (4.13) increasing by a unit of 2.12 in the post-
assessment test (6.25). Moreover, the difference of the means in the first session has
a lower standard error of 0.441 than the difference of the means in the second session
involving cooperative learning, 0.639. This shows that the population mean is less
likely to be different from the sample mean in the first session. Lastly, the lecture
approach also generated a higher effect size of 2.55 than the effect size of cooperative
learning, 1.35.

Therefore, conforming with the differences in the mean scores, standard

deviation, significant difference, and effect size calculations, it can be suggested that
the lecture approach has produced higher effectivity in the understanding of the
sample students of the basic General Mathematics lessons compared to the
cooperative learning approach.
 19

Students’ experiences in lecture approach and cooperative learning approach

The teaching approaches utilized in this study aimed to improve the learning
and understanding of each student in solving basic problems in General Mathematics.
Applying the different teaching approaches in teaching has gained varying insights
from the selected respondents who experienced the two different processes in
acquiring basic mathematical information: lecturing and cooperative learning. Through
the guide questions generated, the researchers identified the participants’ perspective
regarding the processes involved in each of the intervention sessions, as well as their
preferences and the effects of teaching approaches in the academic performance of
learners.

Lecture approach focuses on the teacher delivering the instructions, which

fosters direct and immediate learning. In this situation, the instructor leads the
classroom, provides explanation about the topics, and addresses the students’
concerns, which is a huge factor in the learning of the students. It was evident in the
response of one respondent that one advantage of this approach is that the teacher
or the one who instructs the students can guide them in solving the problem step-by-
step, aside from discussing the lessons and setting sample problems for them to
practice. Participant 5 stated, “Ay, oo, sa first day kay ikaw jud mismo ang nagatudlo.
Ginatudluan mi nimo jud nga ikaw pud magkuan sa amoa, gina-guide mi nimo”,
indicating the importance of one-on-one and constant assistance in the students’
process of learning. This was backed up by Participant 2 who said that “Sa first day is
more on discussion. Didto ko ganahan kay matudluan jud mi kung unsa tong mga
nalisdan namo”.

On the next day, wherein cooperative learning was applied, they learned
another lesson through a group activity. They were given a paper containing a
mathematical problem and the procedures to solve it, then they discussed the whole
process of calculation within their group. This gave the learners a chance to interact
and collaborate with their groupmates. Despite that, Participant 2 raised his
frustrations in having the need to socialize by saying “…sa second day is more on
activities. Medyo lisod lang to siya kay need nako makipag-istorya sa uban”. Learning
is also difficult in this case, especially to those who need further explanation to
understand a topic. “Tapos sa second day kay ano, kanang uhm, more on activities
 20

na, tapos kanang kami na mag-answer”, this statement by Participant 5 affirms this
interpretation. To add, Participant 4 also expressed his experience regarding how he
coped with the activities on the second day of the intervention “…tapos sa second is
puro activity na lang. Nangutana nalang jud ko sa akong mga kauban kung unsaon
to”.

The students also had their different perspectives on how teaching styles can
affect their learning process. Participant 8 noted that “Lahi-lahi man ang resulta kung
lahi pod ang pagtudlo sa amoa”, pointing out that using differing teaching approaches
would also lead to varying results and experiences for the learners. In the course of
the intervention, most participants revealed that they learned more easily on the first
day than on the second day, further demonstrating that learning is affected by how the
lessons are taught and that using different methods can also produce diverse results.
Participant 6 said that “Mas dali ko nakatuon sa first day… Tapos budlay tun-an tung
second day kay kailangan ko pagid sabton”, and this was corroborated by Participant
2 who mentioned that “Mas dali ko makatuon sa first day kay more on discussion. Sa
second day, medyo na-challenge ko didto kay nagpa-activity ka.” According to their
statements, some of the factors that affected how they learn were the need to
understand the lessons on their own (without the guidance of the teacher), as well as
their collaboration with other groupmates. “Sa first day… Kay dili ko sanay makipag-
interact sa ubang tao” – Participant 3.

The participants’ preferences were also identified based on how each teaching
style improved their scores and enhanced their understanding about the concepts
taught to them. The majority of them indicated that the lecture approach is more
preferable than cooperative learning because their queries are easily and directly
answered by the instructor in the lecture approach. “Kay na-explain man gud siyag
tarong. Tapos mura siyag kanang nagtudlo ka, mag-answer, tas magtudlo napud ka
kung unsaon.” remarked by Participant 2, which was supported by Participant 5 who
said, “kay gina-discuss og ginapasabot jud nimo sa amoa kung unsa na siya, kung
unsaon pag-solve, mao tung mas nakatuon ko atong sa first day”. Alternatively,
Participant 4 and Participant 7 had the opposite preference. According to them,
working with a team is of great help in attaining independence in learning mathematics
subjects. Participant 4 accentuated his stand by stating that “…katong groupings kay,
gi-tudluan ko sa akoang mga ka-team”, and this was attested by Participant 7 who
 21

said, “Mas dalian ko kay makapangutana lang ko dayon sa akong kauban tapos
makita pod nako gikan sa ilaha kung paano isolve to.”

Concludingly, this study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of different

teaching approaches on students’ learning outcomes. The lecture approach was found
to be preferable by most participants due to its clarity and effectiveness in explaining
complex concepts. Although cooperative learning has posed benefits to the students,
especially in social interactions, the ability of the teachers to convey ideas
comprehensively has contributed more in the learners’ progress.
 22

V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data revealed that the
application of Lecture Approach in teaching, which primarily involves discussions
delivered by an instructor and students being the “passive recipients” of information,
greatly affects the understanding of students in basic General Mathematics topics
compared to the Cooperative Learning Approach.

Differentiating the quantitative results in the assessment tests, the first

approach has increased the mean scores of students by 3.12, which is greater than
the mean scores difference of 2.12 in the cooperative learning. In the interviews, the
majority of the respondents also responded that they prefer the lecturing method in
imparting the basic General Mathematics concepts because they can directly ask for
further explanations from the instructor if they have concerns regarding the topic.
Conversely, cooperative learning also offers some advantages to the students,
including the students’ collaboration and interaction with their fellow learners during
the activities. Some admitted that it allowed them to share ideas with others on how to
solve the problem assigned to them. This enhanced the students’ social skills, thus
promoting an inclusive learning environment.

In conclusion, the importance of educators’ guidance in students’ learning was

highlighted in the results of this study. Students are considered to be actively engaged
individuals who continuously seek knowledge from the world around them. Therefore,
guidance and instructions from those who are knowledgeable in the field are highly
needed in order for them to transmit mathematical information in the easiest way
possible, provided that General Mathematics is not just a subject to learn, but a value
to earn. According to William Butler Yeats, “Education is not the filling of a pail, but
rather the lighting of a fire”, and this conveys the idea that learning is a continuous
process. It is not a matter of filling an empty pail, but keeping the fire burning to learn
for the rest of our lives.
 23

IMPLICATIONS

In general, the use of different teaching approaches has turned out to be

beneficial to the students’ learning of basic General Mathematics concepts. Students
who experienced these approaches have shown notable improvement in their
knowledge and skills in applying the lessons in solving the provided numerical
problems. Specifically, the lecture approach has shown a huge impact on the students
compared to the cooperative learning approach, thus it can be considered significantly
beneficial in enhancing their learning experiences and academic achievement in
General Mathematics.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In order to enhance the learning process, educators may apply various teaching
techniques, such as the cooperative learning and the lecture approach in imparting
basic General Mathematics topics. Specifically, lecture method was determined to
be more preferable in teaching, with the teacher being the provider and the
students being the recipient of information. Teachers should also provide regular
feedback and assessment to help students track their progress and identify areas
for improvement.

2. Parents should provide guidance and support to their children's learning in General
Mathematics subject through providing additional math practice and encouraging
active participation in their classes.

3. Future researchers are encouraged to conduct further studies, exploring the

effectiveness of different teaching methods, to validate or expand on the findings
of this research, ultimately enhancing the teaching and learning of basic General
Mathematics topics. This can include exploring the effectiveness of different
teaching methods, and the role of parental involvement in math learning.
 24

REFERENCES

Ablian, J. D., & Parangat, K. B. (2022). Mathematics Anxiety and Mathematics Self
Efficacy among Senior High School Students in Public Secondary
Schools. International Journal of Computer Engineering in Research
Trends, 9(2), 21-33.

Ali, D., Zubaidah Amir, M. Z., & Vebrianto, R. (2021). Literature Review: Mathematical
Creative Thinking Ability, and Students' Self Regulated Learning to Use an
Open Ended Approach. Malikussaleh Journal of Mathematics Learning, 4(1),
52-61.

Alija, S., & Snopçe, H. (2015). Preference Learning Style in Mathematics: Students
Perception. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 2,
74–80.

Almeida, F. (2018). Strategies to perform a mixed methods study. European Journal

of Education Studies.

Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for
teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66-
70.

Capar, G., and Tarim, K. (2015). Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on
mathematics achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis research. Educ. Sci-
theor Pract. 15 (2), 553–559. doi:10.12738/estp.2015.2.2098.

Chen, I. (2005). Behaviorism. In Encyclopedia of Distance Learning (pp. 127-147). IGI

Global.

Della Porta, D. (Ed.). (2014). Methodological practices in social movement research.

OUP Oxford.

Ellis, J. L., & Hart, D. L. (2023). Strengthening the Choice for a Generic Qualitative
Research Design. Qualitative Report, 28(6).

Gençten, V. Y. (2021). Minimizing Harm in the Context of Educational Research: An

Ethical Issue. Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 147-157.
 25

Hasan, N., Rana, R. U., Chowdhury, S., Dola, A. J., & Rony, M. K. K. (2021). Ethical
considerations in research. Journal of Nursing Research, Patient Safety and
Practise (JNRPSP), 1(01), 1-4.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Johnson Holubec, E. (1993). Cooperation in the
Classroom. Gurgaon: Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, R. T., and Johnson, D. W. (1986), “Action Research: Cooperative Learning

in the Science Classroom,” Science and Children, 24(2), 31-32.

Jones, R., & Brown, L. (2019). Student-cen-tered learning and its effects on academic
achievement. Higher Education Journal, 22(1), 74-89.

Kahyaoğlu, M. & Yangın, S. (2007). İlköğretim öğretmen adaylarının mesleki

özyeterliklerine ilişkin görüşleri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 15, 83.

Knott, E., Rao, A. H., Summers, K., & Teeger, C. (2022). Interviews in the social
sciences. Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 2(1), 73.

Langoban, M. A., & Langoban, M. A. (2020). What makes mathematics difficult as a

subject for most students in higher education. International Journal of English
and Education, 9(3), 214-220.

Lester, F. K., and Cai, J. (2016). “Can mathematical problem solving be taught?
Preliminary answers from 30 years of research,” in Posing and Solving
Mathematical Problems. Research in Mathematics Education.

Mackrell, K., & Pratt, D. (2017). Constructionism and the space of

reasons. Mathematics education research journal, 29, 419-435.

Mazana, Y. M., Suero Montero, C., & Olifage, C. R. (2019). Investigating students'
attitude towards learning mathematics.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of
Engi-neering Education, 93(3), 223-231

Rosenshine, B., Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching Functions. Handbook of Research on

Teaching. 376-391.
 26

Serin, H. (2018). A comparison of teacher-centered and student-centered approaches

in educational settings. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational
Studies, 5(1), 164-167.

Smith, J. (2018). The evolving landscape of higher education teaching methods.

Higher Education Review, 50(2), 32-47.

Treve, M. (2024). Comparative analysis of teacher-centered and student-centered

learning in the context of higher education: A co-word analysis. Iberoamerican
Journal of Science Measurement and Communication, 4(2), 1–12.

Ünal, M. (2017). Preferences of teaching methods and techniques in Mathematics with

reasons. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(2), 194-202.

Usmonov, M. (2024). General Concept of Mathematics and Its

History. INDEXING, 1(1), 71–75.

Vanderbilt University Center for Teach-ing. (2018). Teacher-centered learning and its
impact on student outcomes. Retrieved from
[Link]
 APPENDIX: Request Letter 27

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XII - SOCCSKSARGEN
Division of Cotabato
NUEVA VIDA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Nueva Vida, M’lang, North Cotabato

January 15, 2025

MARIA RHONDA D. LOBATON

Principal I
Nueva Vida National High School
Nueva Vida, Mlang, North Cotabato

Madam:

Greetings of peace!
We, the undersigned researchers from Grade 12 STEM - Dayrit of our institution, are
currently conducting a study entitled “Classroom Calculations: A Comparative
Experiment to Redefine Teaching Methodologies in General Mathematics
Curriculum”. The said undertaking aims to assess different teaching strategies in
General Mathematics subject by determining its effects on the learning process of the
students.
In view of this, we would like to respectfully request for your permission and approval
of our data gathering activities which are all intended to be carried out within the school
premises. We can ensure that we will find a great time to conduct these activities to
uphold the policy on the non-disruption of classes.

Thank you and God bless.

Very respectfully yours,

JEDIENE B. NARAGA EMELOU F. ECALLA EZSAM FAITH LAGO

Student Researcher Student Researcher Student Researcher

Checked by:
DARWIN B. NARAGA
Research Project Teacher

Recommending Approval:
ESTEPHANIE M. BETINOL
Assistant Principal

Approved:
MARIA RHONDA D. LOBATON
Principal I
 APPENDIX: Excuse Letter for the Participants 28

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XII - SOCCSKSARGEN
Division of Cotabato
NUEVA VIDA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Nueva Vida, M’lang, North Cotabato

February 24-26, 2025

To Whom It May Concern:

Greetings of peace!
We, the researchers from Grade 12 STEM - Dayrit, would like to excuse the
following students from your 1 PM class as they will be participating in an intervention
that we will be conducting in line with our study entitled “Classroom Calculations: A
Comparative Experiment to Redefine Teaching Methodologies in General
Mathematics Curriculum”. The said intervention will be carried out in the school’s
science laboratory during lunch time starting today until Wednesday. Attached
herewith is our request letter signed by the school principal and assistant principal,
should you need it for perusal.
Your utmost consideration would greatly contribute to accomplishing our
requirements as graduating students. Thank you very much and God bless.
Name Section Strand
1. Kenneth Mailem Lagmay Agriculture
2. Clark Vincent Orbita Lagmay Agriculture
3. Princess Bebs Estemar Campos Beauty Care (Hairdressing)
4. Vhonjane Jabinigay Campos Beauty Care (Hairdressing)
5. Reepy Jay Emboc Nuñeza Carpentry
6. George Ivan Subsuban Nuñeza Carpentry
7. Krizia Adolfo Gomez Cookery
8. Fe Ariane Mae Cabardo Gomez Cookery
9. Cris Delfin Agoncillo EIM
10. Arthur Dave Sarona Agoncillo EIM

Respectfully yours,

JEDIENE B. NARAGA EMELOU F. ECALLA EZSAM FAITH LAGO

Student Researcher Student Researcher Student Researcher

Checked by:

DARWIN B. NARAGA
Research Project Teacher
 APPENDIX: Letter of Assent 29

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XII - SOCCSKSARGEN
Division of Cotabato
NUEVA VIDA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Nueva Vida, M’lang, North Cotabato

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT

Ako si _______________________________ mula sa ikalabing-isang baitang

ng seksyon ____________ ng Technical-Vocational-Livelihood track. Sumasang-ayon
ako na makilahok sa pananaliksik na pinamagatang “Classroom Calculations: A
Comparative Experiment to Redefine Teaching Methodologies in General
Mathematics Curriculum” na siyang isasagawa nina Bb. Jediene B. Naraga, Bb.
Emelou F. Ecalla, at G. Ezsam Faith F. Lago, mga mag-aaral mula sa
ikalabindalawang baitang, seksyon STEM - Dayrit ng Nueva Vida National High
School.

Sa pamamagitan ng aking paglagda, ako ay nagbibigay ng permiso sa aking

boluntaryong pakikilahok sa mga aktibidad na inihanda ng mga mananaliksik. Ang
mga impormasyong makukuha mula sa aking partisipasyon ay mananatiling
kumpidensiyal at gagamitin lamang para sa nasabing pananaliksik.

Ako ay kusang makikilahok sa mga nailahad na aktibidad at kinukumpirma ko

na naunawaan ko ang mga impormasyon tungkol sa proyekto:

1. Interbensiyon (learning sessions) sa loob ng dalawang (2) araw

2. Interbyu sa ikatlong araw

Lagda: _________________________________
Pangalan: ______________________________
Petsa: _________________________________
 30
APPENDIX: Letter of Consent

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XII - SOCCSKSARGEN
Division of Cotabato
NUEVA VIDA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Nueva Vida, M’lang, North Cotabato

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT

Ako si ________________________________, nagbibigay pahintulot sa

partisipasyon ang aking anak sa gaganaping pananaliksik ng mga estudyante mula
sa ikalabindalawang baitang ng Nueva Vida National High School na pinamagatang
“Classroom Calculations: A Comparative Experiment to Redefine Teaching
Methodologies in General Mathematics Curriculum”. Kinokonsidera ko na ang
aking anak ay boluntaryong makikibahagi sa gagawing aktibidad na may kinalaman
sa kanilang programa at inaasahan kong ang mga impormasyong kaniyang
ipapahayag ay kumpidensiyal at gagamitin lamang para sa nasabing pananaliksik.

Kasabay ng aking paglagda ay ipinahihiwatig kong nabasa at naunawaan ko

ang mga impormasyon tungkol sa proyekto at ang papel ang aking anak bilang isang
respondent:

1. Kinakailangan ang paglaan ng panahon at partisipasyon upang maging

matagumpay ang bawat interbensiyon/sesyon na gaganapin sa loob ng dalawang (2)
araw.

2. Magkakaroon ng interbyu sa ikatlong araw.

Lagda ng magulang: _________________________________

Pangalan ng magulang: _______________________________
Petsa ng paglagda: __________________________________
 31

APPENDIX: Guide Questions for Data Gathering

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XII – SOCCSKSARGEN
Division of Cotabato
NUEVA VIDA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Nueva Vida, M’lang, North Cotabato

ENHANCING STUDENTS’ LEARNING IN BASIC GENERAL MATHEMATICS

TOPICS THROUGH LECTURE APPROACH AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING

1. What are the processes or practices involved in the lecture approach and cooperative
learning approach in teaching?

• Do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during each of the learning
sessions?
• What did you do in each of the intervention sessions?

2. How can the application of different teaching approaches affect the learning of the
students?

• Did the interventions help you understand the basic General Mathematics topics taught
to you?
• Do you think using different teaching approaches affects the way students learn,
specifically in basic General Mathematics topics? Why?
• After experiencing the approaches applied in the intervention, have you noticed any
difference in your understanding of the specific General Mathematics topics?

3. Which of the two (lecture approach and cooperative learning) is the preferred
teaching style of the students?

• Which strategy worked best for you with regards to your ease of comprehending the
lessons easily?
• What do you think are the factors that made you understand the lessons more clearly
and more easily?
 32
APPENDIX: List of Participants and their Strands

Participant Number Section Strand

Participant 1 Campos Beauty Care (Hairdressing)
Participant 2 Campos Beauty Care (Hairdressing)
Participant 3 Nuñeza Carpentry
Participant 4 Nuñeza Carpentry
Participant 5 Gomez Cookery
Participant 6 Gomez Cookery
Participant 7 Agoncillo Electrical Installation and Maintenance
Participant 8 Agoncillo Electrical Installation and Maintenance
Participant 9 (unavailable) Lagmay Agriculture
Participant 10 (unavailable) Lagmay Agriculture
 33

APPENDIX: Summary of Themes

MAIN MINOR SAMPLE QUOTATIONS DESCRIPTION

THEMES CATEGORIES
1. Nature or Discussion “Sa first day is more on Intervention
processes discussion. Didto ko ganahan Session 1: Lecture
involved in kay matudluan jud mi kung Approach was
lecture unsa tong mga nalisdan namo” composed mainly
approach – P2 of discussions
and delivered by the
cooperative “Ay, oo, sa first day kay ikaw instructor.
learning jud mismo ang nagatudlo.
Gina tudluan mi nimo jud nga
ikaw pud magkuan sa amoa,
gina-guide mi nimo” – P5

Activities “…sa second day is more on Intervention

activities. Medyo lisod lang to
Session 2:
siya kay need nako makipag- Cooperative
istorya sa uban” – P2 Learning involved
group activities
“…tapos sa second is puro where they learned
activity na lang. Nangutana the steps in solving
nalang jud ko sa akong mga a given problem
kauban kung unsaon to” – P4 with the help of
each other.
“Tapos sa second day kay ano,
kanang uhm, more on
activities na, tapos kanang
kami na mag-answer” – P5

2. Effects of Ease of “Mas dali ko nakatuon sa first The application of

applying the learning day kesa sa second day… kay lecture approach in
teaching ikaw mismo nagtudlo.” – P5 teaching has made
approaches it easier for the
on the “Mas dali ko nakatuon sa first students to answer
students’ day… Tapos budlay tun-an the assessment
learning tung second day kay kailangan quizzes.
ko pagid sabton” – P6
Challenges “Mas dali ko makatuon sa first Some students find
due to the day kay more on discussion. cooperative
need of social Sa second day, medyo na- learning
interaction challenge ko didto kay nagpa- challenging due to
activity ka.” – P2 their need to
 34

interact with others

“Dili ko sanay makipag-interact in order to answer
sa ubang tao” – P3 the given problem.
Students’ “Lahi-lahi man ang resulta Applying different
learning varies kung lahi pod ang pagtudlo sa teaching
with different amoa” – P8 approaches can
teaching affect how students
styles learn a certain
topic.
3. Lecture “Kay na-explain man gud siyag Majority of the
Preference method tarong. Tapos mura siyag participants chose
of students kanang nagtudlo ka, mag- the lecture
of the two answer, tas magtudlo napud approach because
teaching ka kung unsaon.” – P2 they tend to learn
approaches better if the
applied “Tung first day kay gi-discuss instructor is the one
mo siya kag gi explain mo pud who provides them
siya ka tarong.” – P6 with information.

Cooperative “…katong groupings kay, gi- Some participants

learning tudluan ko sa akoang mga ka- preferred the
team” – P4 cooperative
learning approach
“Mas dalian ko kay because it allowed
makapangutana lang ko dayon them to share their
sa akong kauban tapos makita insights as well as
pod nako gikan sa ilaha kung ask for guidance
paano isolve to.” – P7 from their
groupmates
 35

DOCUMENTATIONS: Participants

Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3

Participant 4 Participant 5 Participant 6

Participant 7 Participant 8
 36

DOCUMENTATIONS: Intervention Sessions

Session 1
Lecture Approach

Session 2
Cooperative Learning
 37

APPENDIX: Transcript of Records

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: Princess Bebs Estemar

Date of Interview: February 26, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P1 – Participant 1, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript in 00:00:01]

IN: Good afternoon sa imoha, Estemar, Princess Bebs. So, from section…?

P1: Campos.

IN: Campos, and strand?

P1: Hairdressing

IN: Hairdressing, under ba na siya sa Beauty Care?

P1: (nods)

IN: So base diri is, you are participant number 1. Naa koy five questions diri and I want you to
answer it genuinely, kung unsa lang jud ang na-experience nimo sa atoang interventions.

IN: So first question is, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during
each of the learning sessions? Sa mga sessions nga atong gi-undergo diri sa first day ug sa
second day, naa ba kay idea ato or nakabantay ba kag kalahian sa akong pagtudlo sa first
day og katong sa second day?

P1: Nakabantay, kay sa first day kay adding man to siya, addition. Tapos sa second day is…

IN: Uhm..., ang topic lahi pud to siya no? Pero ang akong pagtudlo sa inyoha, naa bay kalahian
para sa imoha ato?

P1: Wala man, kay tarong man ang imong pagtudlo, na-explain man nimo ug tarong sa amoa.

IN: Pero ang style, feeling nimo katong sa first day, unsa akong gihimo ato? Nagtudlo lang ba
ko or nagpa-activity sa second day?

P1: Sa first day kay nagtudlo ka, pero naa man gihapon kay assessment ato, lahi sa second
day nga halos assessment tanan.

IN: Puro activity sa second day? Pero sa first day?

P1: More on…

IN: Pagtudlo? So more on teaching sa first day, then sa second day kay daghan nag activities?

P1: (nods).

IN: Okay so, second question, after experiencing the approaches, naa koy duha ka approach
gi gamit ato ah. Uhm…, after experiencing the approaches applied in the intervention, have
 38

you noticed any differences in your understanding about the specific General Mathematics
topics? So sa first day, naa koy isa ka topic and then ang akong gi gamit ato nga strategy kay
ako lang mismo nagtudlo sa inyoha, and then sa second day, lahi na pud to nga topic and
then lahi napud to nga strategy. So imong gi-mention ganiha nga murag sige nalang kog pa-
activity ato sa inyoha. Uhm..., para sa imoha, naa bay murag… lahi ba ang imong pagtuon sa
first day ug sa second day? Mas dali ba ka nakatuon sa first day or second day?

P1: Mas dali ko nakatuon sa first day.

IN: Sa first day? Ngano man?

P1: Kay na-explain jud to ug tarong, tapos masabtan gyud namog maayo.

IN: And then tung second day diay? Tung diba nagpa-activity man ko ato, unsay na feel nimo
ato?

P1: Murag nalisdan ko ato kay puro man activities.

IN: Okay, wala kaayo ka nakasabot since kamo-kamo lang ato? Pagpangutana nimo
saimohang kauban, dali lang ba nimo ma-catch up to nga lesson?

P1: Dali lang man, pero naa man toy time nga dili jud nako masabtan.

IN: Okay, so mas-gwapo nga ang teacher mismo magtudlo sa imoha?

P1: (nods).

IN: Okay, then proceed ta sa third, what do you think are the factors that made you understand
the lessons more clearly and more easily? So, kung ako ang teacher nimo? Unsay kailangan
nako para ma-matudlo nako ug tarong, mas-klaro o mas sayon ang lesson. Unsay kailangan
nako para mahimo na?

P1: I-explain lang jud nimo ug tarong, kung unsaon siya pagsabot sa topic.

IN: Okay, i-explain jud nako ug tarong. And then kailangan pa bag mga activities ana?

P1: Kailangan pagka-human, dili man pud as in nga kanang daghan nga activities, at least
naa kay nasabtan.

IN: Mmm..., okay, and then number four, which teaching strategy works best for you? Okay,
so, which teaching strategy worked best for you? Sa first day ba o sa second day?

P1: Sa first day.

IN: Sa first day? Kay ngano man?

P1: Kay, dali lang man jud siya sabton.

IN: Okay, mao to nga approach?

P1: (nods)

IN: Okay, so naa na ta sa last question, do you think using different teaching approaches
affects the way students/individuals learn, specifically in basic General Mathematics topics?
So sa akoang pagtudlo sa inyo…, naa lang toy duha ka style nga pagtudlo diba? And ang
gitudlo nako kay mga basic topics palang to siya sa General Mathematics. So para sa imoha,
maka-apekto ba ang style sa pagtudlo sa inyohang pagtuon?
 39

P1: Mmm..., hindi man siya makaapekto, kung mahinumduman jud nimo ang topic nga gitudlo
ug maexplain sa imoha ug tarong.

IN: Dili siya makaapekto para sa imo? Halimbawa, katung i-relate nato sa first day nga ako
mismo nagtudlo sa inyo, nga ingon ka nga mas sayon, tapos sa second day nakaingon ka
nga nalisdan ka. So makaapekto ba siya in terms of ato?

P1: Makaapekto kay, iba man pud to tung gitudlo nimo tung una, kaysa sa ikaduha, kay
nasanay man gud mi atong first day, kay mas lisod ang topic sa ikaduhang adlaw.

IN: Ah, mas budlay tung topic sa ika duha?

P1: (nods).

IN: Okay so walay problema ang ibang style sa pagtudlo?

P1: (shakes her head)

IN: So, na-answeran nimo tanan ang akong questions. Thank you kaayo sa imong
participation (smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:06:54]

 40

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: Vhonjane Jabinigay

Date of Interview: February 26, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P2 – Participant 2, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript in 00:00:01]

IN: So, once again, good afternoon sa imoha, Vhonjane Jabinigay, from section Campos,
strand…?

P2: Beauty Care

IN: So base diri, you are Participant Number 2. Naa koy 5 questions dinhi that you will answer
honestly.

IN: So, the first question is, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during
each of the learning sessions? So naa ba kay uhm… napansin sa teaching strategy nako sa
first day og sa second day?

P2: (nods) Sa first day is more on discussion. Didto ko ganahan kay matudluan jud mi kung
unsa tong mga nalisdan namo. Tapos sa second day is more on activities. Medyo lisod lang
to siya kay need nako makipag-istorya sa uban.

IN: Okay, so mao to imong nabantayan. And then for the next question, after experiencing the
approaches applied in the intervention, have you noticed any differences in your
understanding about the specific General Mathematics topics? So diba naka-experience man
mo og duha ka teaching approaches sa first day og sa second day. And then nakabantay ba
ka og differences sa imong pagtuon ato? Mas dali ba ka nakatuon sa first day, o mas dali ba
ka nakatuon sa second day?

P2: Mas dali ko makatuon sa first day kay more on discussion. Sa second day, medyo na-
challenge ko didto kay nagpa-activity ka.

IN: Uhm… ang challenge ba nimo is kanang (pauses) is related sa kung paano ka makig-
cooperate sa imong mga kauban? Lisod ba nga makig-work ka sa imong mga classmates
kaysa sa magpatudlo lang ka sa imong teacher?

P2: Mas better if… uhm… murag ka-partner sa imong mga unsa para mas maintindihan pa
jud nimo og maka-share og ideas kung paano siya kuhaon.

IN: Okay, so positive pod sa imoha no? Or mas ganahan pod ka nga naa kay kauban nga
student nga ga-collaborate sa imoha? And then, what do you think are the factors that made
you understand the lessons more clearly and more easily? So sa first day… nag-ingon ka diba
nga mas ganahan ka sa first day kay mas dali ka nakatuon? So ngano man to siya? Unsa ang
mga factors or mga nakaapekto nganong dali lang kayo ka nakatuon ato?

P2: Kay na-explain man gud siyag tarong. Tapos mura siyag kanang nagtudlo ka, mag-
answer, tas magtudlo napud ka kung unsaon.
 41

IN: Okay, so nagtudlo ko and then nagpa-answer tapos aside ana, nagtudlo napod ko?

P2: Oo.

IN: Okay, so more on discussion jud ka. And then the fourth question is, which strategy works
best for you? And do you think your assessment score align with such preference? So first
question, which strategy worked best for you? Sa first day ba or sa second day?

P2: First day (nodded).

IN: So Participant Number 2, check nako ha. Sa day 1, naa kay difference nga 1. Then sa day
2, naa pod kay difference nga 1. So even lang ang sa imoha. Pero base jud sa imong ano…
is preferred jud nimo ang day 1?

P2: (nods)

IN: Mas dali lang sa imo kung ikaw mismo ang tudluan?

P2: (nods)

IN: Okay, so move on ta sa fifth question, do you think using different teaching approaches
affects the way student learn, specifically in basic General Mathematics topics? So ang topics
nato ato is kanang mao jud to ang mga una nga ginatudlo sa General Mathematics. So
kumbaga basics pa to sa General Mathematics. So feeling nimo, kailangan pa ba or
importante pa ba ang mga paggamit og teaching strategies? If naa koy lahi nga style sa
pagtudlo sa imoha, tapos naa pod siyay lahi nga style, mas makapa-improve ba na siya sa
imong pagtuon?

P2: (nods). Oo, kay mas better man if katong sa first nimo nga pagtudlo nga more on
discussion. Tapos sa second day nimo is more on activities. So dapat much better siya nga
pantay nimo na siya nga buhaton.

IN: Okay, so meaning kay magdiscuss tapos naa pod dapat activity?

P2: (nods). Yes.

IN: Pero ano, sa inyong collaboration, unsay nabantayan nimo nga problema while working
with the team?

P2: Uhm… medyo nagka lisod lang mi kay na-confused man mi kung paano namo siya i-
pagkasunod-sunod ang mga… kung paano ang process. Tapos medyo okay napod kay
medyo nag kuan man pud mi sa groupings.

IN: So mao pod to ang thing or factor nga murag mas dali-dali lang pod sa imo nga
magtinabangay mo.

IN: Okay, so naansweran na nimo ang tanan nga questions, thank you sa imong participation
(smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:05:03]

 42

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: Reepy Jay Emboc

Date of Interview: February 27, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P3 – Participant 3, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript in 00:00:05]

IN: Good afternoon… (looks at list) Reepy Jay Emboc. You are from section Nuñeza, strand
Carpentry diba?

P3: (nods).

IN: So base diri, (looks at paper) you are participant number 3. Naa diay ko diri gi-prepare nga
five questions, and all of these kay about lang sa experiences Ninyo within two days. Gusto
ko nga mo-answer ka honestly, kung unsa lang jud imong mga natun-an, okay?

P3: (smiles).

IN: So first question is, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during
each of the learning sessions? So diba sa first palang, nag-ingon ko sa inyoha nga uhmm..,
nga kung unsa akong pagtudlo karon, lahi napud ni siya ugma. So naa ba kay nabantayan
nga kalahian sa akong pagtudlo sa inyoha sa first day ug katong sa second day?

P3: Mas lisod tong topic sa second day.

IN: So aside pud sa topic, unsa may nahibaloan nimo ato? Sa style sa akong pagtudlo?

P3: Sa first day is discussion, then sa second day is puro na activities.

IN: Okay sa first day is puro discussion, then sa second day is more on activities? Ika-duha,
after experiencing the approaches applied in the intervention, have you noticed any
differences in your understanding about the specific General Mathematics topics? So katong
gitudlo nako sa inyoha is duha to siya ka mga basic or pinakauna nga topic nga ginatudlo sa
Gen. Math., so nakaagi namo ato diba? So uhm…, naka-bantay ba ka nga lahi ang…, nay
kalahian sa imong pagtuon, kay lahi ang mga style nga gigamit nako sa inyo sa pagtudlo?

P3: Mmm…

IN: Naa siyay kalahian? Halimbawa, sa first day kay akong gigamit kanang murag nagtudlo
ko, more on discussion tung ingon nimo, then sa second day nagpa-activity ko. So, mas-dali
baka nakatuon sa first day or sa second day?

P3: Sa first.

IN: Ngano man?

P3: Kay mas-dali ko siya masabtan.

IN: Mmm…, so mas-dali lang nimo siya masabtan, and then ika-tulo, what do you think are
the factors that made you understand the lesson more clearly and more easily? Naka state ka
 43

diba nga, sa first day mas-dali ka nakatuon, so unsa sa palagay nimo ang rason nganong mas
dali ka nakatuon ato, kumpara sa second day?

P3: Mas dali ko maka catch-up sa lesson.

IN: Ang lesson? So ako may nagtudlo ato, and then unsay kalahihan diay if magpa-activity-
activity ko?

P3: Dili ko sanay makipag-interact sa ubang tao.

IN: Ahh…, okay so, maulaw ka making-interact sa imong mga kauban, okay so isa jud na siya
ka factor pud.

IN: Okay next, which strategy works best for you? So ang sa first day lahi to siya nga strategy
unya sa second day kay lahi pud, so aha nga strategy ang mas effective jud sa imohang
pagtuon?

P3: Sa first.

IN: Sa first day jud? Kay ang pag-discuss jud. So last question, last nalang jud, do you think
using teaching approaches affects the way student/Individual learn, specifically in basic
General Mathematics topics? Feeling nimo, makaapekto ba ang style sa pagtudlo sa isa ka
teacher? Dili lang ako ha? Sa professional teacher jud mismo, kung lahi ang iyahang style sa
pagtudlo, makaapekto ba na siya sai mohang pagtuon?

P3: Hmm…,

IN: Diba sa first day nagdiscuss-discuss ni siya, and then sa second day dige namo ug activity-
activity, maka-apekto bani siya sa imoha?

P3: Dili.

IN: Okay, mao na to siya ang last question, thank you kayo (smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:03:09]

 44

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: George Ivan Subsuban

Date of Interview: February 27, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P4 – Participant 4, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript 00:00:29]

IN: Okay, good afternoon. So you are George Ivan Subsuban diba?

P4: Yes po.

IN: Gikan ka sa section Nuñeza and your strand is Carpentry. Then base diri, ang imohang
number, ang gi-assign nga number sa imoha, is participant number 4. So naa koy 5 questions
diri and gusto nako nga answeran nimo siya as honest as possible (smiles). Kung unsa jud
ang imohang na-experience during the interventions in two days.

IN: So, the first question is, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during
each of the learning sessions? So sa first day pa lang, nag-ingon ko sa inyoha nga uhm…,
the way ko nga magtudlo karon, lahi na pud ni siya ugma. So nakakita ba ka ug difference o
kalahian sa akong pagtudlo sa first day og sa second day?

P4: Naa, tung first day is imong gitudlo sa amo tung gamit ang uhm…, manila paper, tapos sa
second is puro activity na lang. Nangutana nalang jud ko sa akong mga kauban kung unsaon
to (laughs).

IN: Mmm…, okay very good. So, ang imohang nabantayan sa akong pagtudlo sa first day is
murag, ga-discuss and sa second day is puro activity na lang ang gihatag nako sa inyoha?

P4: (nods and smiles).

IN: Sige so second question is, after experiencing the approaches applied in the intervention,
have you noticed any difference in your understanding about the specific General Mathematics
topics? So diba naka-experience man jud ka atong duha ka adlaw no? Nakabantay ba ka ug
kalahian sa imong pagtuon during the first day and sa second day? Mas dali ba ka nakatuon
sa first day, o sa second day?

P4: Sa first day is kanang mmm..., murag sayon-sayon ra, tapos sa second kay medyo
nalisodan.

IN: Nalisdan, ngano man?

P4: Kay like (smiles), murag bag-o pa sa akoa ba.

IN: Ah, so ang topic jud lisod pud siya?

P4: (nods)

IN: Okay, nalisodan ka, pero naa kay chance nga makapatudlo pud sa imohang mga
groupmates?
 45

P4: (nods)

IN: So third question, what do you think are the factors that made you understand the lessons
more clearly and more easily? So diba nakaingon ka ganiha nga mas nakatuon ka during sa
first day? So unsa ang feeling nimo uhm..., unsa man ang mga rason nga dali ka nakatuon
ato nga time?

P4: Uhm, gina-ano, gina… (thinks deeply), kanang gina-explain jud sa imoha ug tarong. Unya
kanang ginatudluan ug tarong pud, sa first day.

IN: So kung, kung naa kay mga pangutana, tapos tubagon nako imohang mga pangutana no,
so maka tuon dayon kag diretso.

P4: (nods)

IN: Okay, fourth question, which strategy works best for you?... Okay kani na lang, which
strategy works best for you? So ang first day ato lahi to siya nga strategy, strategy 1 to. Then
second day is strategy 2, so feeling nimo, asa nga strategy ato ang nag-work jud sa imoha?

P4: Katong uh..., katong groupings kay, gi-tudluan ko sa akoang mga ka-team.

IN: Uh..., okay so, uhm…, sa imoha asa jud? Kanang, mas makatuon ka sa groupings?

P4: Oo (nods).

IN: Kaysa sa?

P4: Katong gi-ingon mo lang.

IN: Okay so, sa groupings ang sa imoha nga mas prefer, okay.

IN: Pero base jud sa imoha, asa jud ka mas dali nakatuon?

P4: Sa groupings pero, medyo ano, medyo…

IN: Uhmm., sa unsa nga approach or kanang sa, the way ka naka kat-on katung nakipag-
cooperate ka sa uban, mas dali jud to siya? Pero ang lesson is?

P4: Medyo lisod-lisod.

IN: Lisod na?

P4: (nods).

IN: So ang sa first ano, sa first approach is dali-dali lang to kay addition and then sa second
day is?

P4: Nalibugan nako ato.

IN: Okay, pero mas napadali siya tungod sa interaction sa imong mga ka-groupmates?

P4: Oo (nods).

IN: Okay, for the last question, do you think using different teaching approaches affects the
way students/individuals learn, specifically in basic General Mathematics topics? So ang
akong gipangtudlo sa inyoha is mao to siya ang first topics nga ginatudlo jud sa General
Mathematics. So nakaagi namo ato diba? Murag gina-refresh nalang nako sa inyoha tong
 46

akong gipangtudlo. So, feeling nimo, makaapekto ba ang mga styles sa akoang pagtudlo, sa
inyohang pagtuon?

P4: Opo.

IN: Kung lahi ang akong style sa pagtudlo karon, lahi napud ugma. Naay kalahian ana sa
inyohang pagtuon pud?

P4: (smiles and nods).

IN: Uhm…, unsa jud dapat ang ano, feeling nimo unsa dapat ang mas-makapadali sa imong
pagtuon?

P4: Kung tudluan jud ka ug tarong, ug i-explain kung paano i-solve.

IN: Okay, naansweran na nimo tanan ang akong questions. Thank you sa imohang time and
participation (smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:05:28]

 47

Inteviewee: Krizia Adolfo

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Date of Interview: February 26, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory

List of Acronyms: P5 – Participant 5, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript at 00:00:01]

IN: Good afternoon, Krizia Adolfo. From asa gani nga section?

P5: Grade 11 Gomez.

IN: Gomez, Cookery. Sige, you are participant number 5 diba?

P5: Oo.

IN: So I have here five questions nga tubagon nimo honestly, so kung unsa lang jud ang
experience nimo, okay. About lang ni siya sa intervention nato. So, ang first question is…, by
the way unsa man prefer nimo nga i-question nako sa imo? Mag-english ba ko or mag-
binisaya or inilonggo?

P5: Uhm, mag-bisaya lang.

IN: Bisaya lang, Ilonggo ka? Ilongga?

P5: Dili, Bisaya.

IN: Okay, Bisaya. Basahon lang nako siya in English pero answeran lang nimog Bisaya.
Number one, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during each of the
learning sessions? So katong mga… naa ba kay idea sa mga strategies nga gi-apply nako
during sa first session, katong first day, and then katong second session, tung second day?

P5: Uhm... hm… (nods).

IN: Unsay kuan nimo ato, idea nimo ato?

P5: Kay ang idea nako?

IN: Uhm… feeling nimo, unsay mga gipanggamit nako nga ano ato? Nag unsa man ko ato?
Unsa akong gihimo ato?

P5: Sa first discussion kay ang gigamit nimo nga idea kay… ang first question nimo kay,
adding...

IN: I mean ang, in terms of pagtudlo nako sa inyoha, uhm..., Sa akong gigamit nga pagtudlo
sa inyoha, sa first day nag focus ba ko more on… ako mismo nag istorya-istorya sa inyoha?
Then second day nag pa-activity ba ko? Mga ing-ana?

P5: Ay, oo, sa first day kay ikaw jud mismo ang nagatudlo. Gina tudluan mi nimo jud nga ikaw
pud magkuan sa amoa, gina-guide mi nimo. Tapos sa second day kay ano, kanang uhm, more
on activities na, tapos kanang kami na mag-answer…
 48

IN: Hmm... sige. So question number two, after experiencing the approaches applied in the
intervention, have you noticed any differences in your understanding about the specific
General Mathematics topics? So, sa first day ug sa second day since naa man jud ka ato sa
first day, lahi pud ang second day. After nimo to na-experience, naka… nakabantay baka ug
kalahian sa pagtuon nimo, in the first day and then sa pagtuon napud nimo sa second day?

P5: Oo, sa first day kay ano… (thinks deeply). Kanang (thinks again deeply and mumbles
something).

IN: Feeling nimo mas dali ba ka nakatuon sa first day or katung sa second day?

P5: Mas dali ko nakatuon sa first day kesa sa second day, kay mas lisod ang topic sa second
day kaysa sa first day.

IN: Mas lisod ang topic? Okay. Pero sa… sa approach nga akong gigamit sa inyoha, diba first
day kay imong giingon nga ako mismo ang nagtudlo sa inyoha, then second day kamo na sa
inyohang mga classmates ang nagtinabangay. So, unsay kuan nimo ato, asa ang mas feeling
nimo mas dali ato?

P5: Katong sa first day.

IN: Katong sa first day nga ako mismo ang nagtudlo? Sige, what do you think are the factors
that made you understand the lessons more clearly and more easily? Karon sa pagtudlo sa
imoha. Unsay feeling nimo ang mga kailangan? Halimbawa ako kay murag nag act man ko
as a teacher. Unsay kailangan nako nga (coughs), unsay kailangan nako para mas ma-impart
nako ang akong lessons sa inyoha? Kailangan ba nako nga, always maghatag og activities
sa inyoha? O kailangan ba nga ako jud mismo ang magtudlo sa inyoha?

P5: Kailangan ano, kanang ikaw jud mismo magtudlo.

IN: Ako jud mismo ang magtudlo? So…, feeling nimo kung papilion ka, aha mas dali sa imoha
nga pagtuon? Tung sa first day ba or sa second day?

P5: Sa first day, kay gina-discuss og ginapasabot jud nimo sa amoa kung unsa na siya, kung
unsaon pag-solve, mao tung mas nakatuon ko atong sa first day.

IN: Okay sa first day. Ngano man? Unsay idea nimo ato? Nganong mas dali ka nakatuon ato?

P5: Kay ikaw mismo ang nagatudlo tapos, ano…, gina…, ma-explain jud nimo siyag tarong
kanang ma-ano jud nimo siya kanang (thinks deeply and mumbles something), kanang…

IN: Ma-express?

P5: Oo. Ma-express jud nimo ang mga lesson sa amoa.

IN: Sige, so ang last question is, do you think using different teaching approaches affects the
way students/individuals learn, specifically in basic General Mathematics topics? So, feeling
nimo ang paggamit sa mga different teaching approaches kay…, naggamit diba ako ato sa
first day, lahi pud tong sa second day. Uhm…, makaapekto ba na siya sa imohang pagtuon?
Kung halimbawa, ang topic nako karon is addition of fractions and then lahi nga teaching
approach akoang gi-apply, then tomorrow napud addition of fractions gihapon pero lahi napud
nga teaching approach. Maka-affect ba na siya kung paano ka makatuon?

P5: Oo.
 49

IN: Paano man?

P5: Kay kanang…, ma-ano siya…, ma-apektohan siya kay lahi-lahi ang iyang stra-strategy
nga pagtudlo...

IN: Okay, so, sige-sige. Mao lang tong questions namo. Thank you kaayo sa imohang time
ang effort sap ag-answer (smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:06:33]

 50

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: Fe Ariane Mae Cabardo

Date of Interview: February 26, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P6 – Participant 6, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript in 00:00:01]

IN: Good afternoon sa imoha, Fe Ariane Mae Cabardo. You are from section…?

P6: Gomez

IN: And strand is?

P6: Cookery

IN: So base diri, (looks at paper) you are participant number 6. So naa ko diri gi-prepare nga
five questions, related lang siya sa mga experiences ninyo during sa two days nato nga
intervention. And gusto ko nga mo-answer ka honestly kung unsa imong mga natun-an.

IN: So first question is, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during
each of the learning sessions? So diba sa first palang, nag-ingon ko sa inyoha nga uhmm..,
nga kung unsa akong pagtudlo karon, lahi napud ni siya ugma. So naa ba kay nabantayan
nga kalahian sa akong pagtudlo sa inyoha sa first day ug katong sa second day?

P6: Ood, kay tung una-una kay gi-discuss lang, tapos tung ika-duha kay gipa-activity mo kami.

IN: Activity? Okay. So sa first day is less activity to no?

P6: (nods)

IN: So, uhm..., nakabantay ba ka ug kalahian sa imong pagtuon ato? Mas dali ba ka nakatuon
sa second day? Or mas dali ba ka nakatuon sa first day?

P6: Mmmm, mas dali ko nakatuon sa first day.

IN: Sa first day?

P6: Tapos budlay tun-an tung second day kay kailangan ko pagid sabton.

IN: Okay, kay kailangan mo pa jud sabton?

P6: (nods)

IN: Kay ngano man to siya? Diba kay ang activity nato ato is gitagaan tamo og papel lang,
then wala tamo gi-tudluan diba?

P6: Oo. (nods)

IN: So kamo na bahala atong solving ato. Mao tung nalisdan nimo?
 51

P6: (nods)

IN: What do you think are the factors that made you understand the lessons more clearly and
more easily? So nag ingon ka sa first day is mas dali ka nakatuon. So, unsa ang naka-tabang
sa imoha ato? Nga mas dali ka nakatuon ato?

P6: Tung first day kay gi-discuss mo siya kag gi explain mo pud siya ka tarong.

IN: Okay, so akoang gina-explain ang gina-discuss. So para sa imoha mas dako ang effect
ato nga strategy sa pagtudlo sa imoha?

P6: (nods).

IN: And then, unsay idea nimo kung… kung mag work mo as a team nga naa kay mga kauban
diha? Lisod ba siya?

P6: Oo (smiles).

IN: Ngano man? Kanang maulaw ba ka?

P6: Dili man jud (smiles nervously).

IN: Kay unsa jud diay ang dahilan? (smiles)

P6: Kay ano, kailangan jud sabton.

IN: Okay, kay kailangan jud nimo siya sabton.

IN: So next question is, which strategy works best for you? Para sa imoha, asa ang mas
effective nga strategy ato? Ang first day or ang sa second day?

P6: Tung first day, kay gi-explain jud.

IN: Okay, so, kay na-explain jud nako ug tarong sa first day.

IN: Next question, do think using different teaching approaches affectss the way
students/individuals learn, specifically in General Mathematics topics? So diba naka-ano…
diba naggamit ko ug duha ka teaching approaches. Lahi sa day one, lahi pud sa day two. And
feeling nimo, maka-apekto ba ang paggamit nako sa kana nga teaching approaches or style
nako sa pagtudlo sa imohang pagtuon?

P6: Oo kay (smiles), uhm…, una-una kay tung, diba gi-discuss mo to sa amon, tapos kung
masabtan mo siya, tapos ikaduha kay gi-explain, tapos kailangan mo intindihon jud tung sa
day two.

IN: Okay, so na-answeran mo ang tanan nako nga question. Thank you kayo sa imoha
(smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:05:06]

 52

Inteviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: Cris Delfin

Date of Interview: February 27, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P7 – Participant 7, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript in 00:00:02]

IN: Hello, Cris Delfin diba? From strand of EIM and then ang section is Agoncillo. Base diri
ang imohang number is… you are number 7. So naa koy lima ka questions diri and I want you
to answer as genuine as possible.

P7: (nods).

IN: So first question is, do you have any idea about the teaching strategies applied during
each of the learning sessions? Diba ingon ko sa inyoha sa first day pa lang nga ang akong
pagtudlo karon, lahi napud ni siya ugma. So naa ba kay nakita nga difference sa akoang
pagtudlo sa first day ug sa second day?

P7: Opo kay, ang una-una kay, murag adding? Adding kay tung pagka-next day is subtraction.

IN: Okay, so aside sa topic nga addition ang first and then second is subtraction. Uhm, sa
akong way nga pagtudlo, ang sa style nga akong pagtudlo sa inyoha.

P7: Uhm..., daw magkaiba tung una kay medyo dali lang man, kag tung ika-duha kay medyo
lisod.

IN: Uhmm...., naka remember ba kag mga, kung unsa akong gihimo tung first day ug sa
second day? Sa first day nagpa-activity ba ko or sa second day?

P7: Tung una-una is wala pa nagpa-activity and then tung sa second day kay nagpa-activity
naka.

IN: Sa first day is murag, nagtudlo lang ko, mao na?

P7: (nods).

IN: Okay, sige, so second question, after experiencing the approaches applied in the
intervention, have you noticed any differences in your understanding about the specific
General Mathematics topics? So diba na-experience man diba nimo tung duha ka intervention
no? Sa first day ug sa second day? Naka-bantay ba kag kalahian sa imong pagtuon ato? Mas
dali ka ba nakatuon sa first or tung sa second day?

P7: Uhm, mas dali tung sa ikalawang day po.

IN: Mas dali ka nakatuon sa second day?

P7: Yes, kay medyo, kay nag-group activity kami, then ga step by step nga pagtudlo
(unaudible).
 53

IN: Ahh., so para sa imo, mas dali ka makatuon kung makig-collaborate ka sa imohang mga
kauban? So mas na emphasize nimo to nga style tung step 1, step 2, ana?

P7: (nods).

IN: Question number three, what do you think are the factors that made you understand the
lesson more clearly and more easily? So diba nakaingon ka nga uhm, mas makatuon ka pag
makig-cooperate ka sa imohang mga kauban. So during second day nga pagtudlo nako sa
inyoha, kay didto jud ka mas nakakat-on ato. So unsa man ang mga rason, nganong mas
nakatuon ka atong second day?

P7: Uhm., kay tung una-una is daw, murag gina-discuss, daw medyo nabudlayan kami kay,
daw hindi kami murag, magkaano gud (thinks deeply), magkaintindihanay. Then ikaduha kay
(unaudible).

IN: (nods), So para sa imoha, uhm, mas makatuon ka if kamo mismo magbasa ato ug mag
sabot, and then makatabang pud mo sa inyohang ka-grupo?

P7: (nods). Mas dalian ko kay makapangutana lang ko dayon sa akong kauban tapos makita
pod nako gikan sa ilaha kung paano isolve to.

IN: Okay, so fourth question, which strategy works best for you? Para sa imoha, asa ka mas
nakatuon? Sa first day ba or sa second day nga strategy?

P7: Sa second day po.

IN: Okay, so number five, do you think using different teaching approaches affects the way
individuals/students learn, specifically in basic General Mathematics topics? So akong gi
tackle sainyoha is, mao to sila ang mga basic or ang pinakauna nga ginatudlo sa General
Mathematics. So feeling nimo, ang paggamit ba ug mga, halimbawa, dili lang ni about sa akoa
as an acting teacher ha? Kung sa professional jud nga teacher, feeling nimo, kung maggamit
sila ug mga styles sa pagtudlo sa inyoha, makaapekto ba na sa inyohang pagtuon?

P7: Opo kay, uhm..., para ma gets pud namo ang mga ginatudlo (inaudible).

IN: Uhm, kung lahi ang akoang style sa pagtudlo karon and then lahi napud ugma, naa ba
silay kalahian ato?

P7: Uhm, (inaudible), murag wala naman (smiles).

IN: Okay so, mao lang tung mga questions, thank you kayo sa pagtubag (smiles).

[End of Transcript 00:05:58]

 54

Interviewer: Jediene B. Naraga

Interviewee: Arthur Dave Sarona

Date of Interview: February 28, 2025

Location of Interview: Science Laboratory, Nueva Vida National High School

List of Acronyms: P8 – Participant 8, IN - Interviewer

[Begin Transcript in 00:00:03]

IN: Good afternoon, Arthur Dave Sarona. You are from section unsa gani?

P8: Agoncillo

IN: And strand is?

P8: EIM

IN: Ang assigned number nimo diri is participant number 6. So naa diay ko diri gi-prepare nga
five questions, related lang siya sa mga experiences ninyo during the interventions nga gi-
conduct nako sa inyoha. What I want you to do is to answer genuinely lang ha, kung unsa
lang jud ang experiences ninyo. So, ready na ba?

P8: Opo (smiles).

IN: Okay, so here is the first question. Do you have any idea about the teaching strategies
applied during each of the learning sessions?

P8: May idea ate, kay kailangan nimo matun-an kung paano siya himuon og answeran.

IN: Pero in terms of… akong pagtudlo sa inyoha, naa ba kay nabantayan nga kalahian ato sa
first day then sa second day?

P8: (nods). Ay, oo diay. Katong first kay… ikaw jud nagatudlo sa amoa tapos sa second day
kay akong classmate na akong kauban mag-answer.

IN: After experiencing the approaches applied in the intervention, have you noticed any
differences in your understanding about the specific General Mathematics topics?

P8: Ahh…, Oo, napansin nako nga (thinks deeply), lisod ang inyong gitudlo sa amoa (smiles),
maong naglibog pod ko kung paano siya i-solve og answeran.

IN: What do you think are the factors that made you understand the lessons more clearly and
more easily?

P8: Nakaapekto ang pagtudlo sa teacher sa amoa para mag-improve ang among learning ug
pano ang pagsolve sa problem.

IN: Which strategy works best for you?

P8: Sa una nga adlaw, kay mas dalian ko sa pagtubag ato kesa sa ikaduha nga adlaw.

IN: Ngano man to siya? Unsa ang mga issues nga napansin nimo nga nagkalisod ka sa
second day?
 55

P8: Kuan ate… Kanang… Dili man gud ko ganahan mag-istorya sa uban ba (laughs). Wala
ko naanad jud.

IN: Ay, okay. So diba sa second day, ma-answeran lang to nimo ang problems through
pakigsalamuha sa uban, kay giingnan man tamo ato nga magpatabang sa inyong groupmates
diba?

P8: Oo. Tapos wala kaayo ko nakasabay sa akong mga kauban.

IN: Okay, I see. So isa jud to sa mga challenges pod nimo sa second day.

IN: Let us move on with our next question. Do you think using different teaching approaches
affects the way students learn, specifically in basic General Mathematics topics?

P8: Oo, makaapekto jod siya kay…, kay lahi-lahi man ang resulta nga amoang makuha kung
lahi pod ang pagtudlo pagkasunod adlaw. Unya makatabang pod ning among natun-an, para
sunod kung magtrabaho mi sa Mechanical Engineering.

[End of Transcript 00:02:51]