CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presented the data collected based on the variables of the

study. The data presented were the profile of the parents, the level of parents'

involvement, the numeracy performance of the learners, the significant mean

difference of the numeracy performance of the learners, the significant

relationship between the level of the parents’ involvement and the numeracy

performance of the learners, and the challenges met by the teachers in

developing the numeracy performance of the learners. Thus, included the

presentation, analysis, interpretation and related readings.

PROFILE OF THE PARENTS

This section presented the profile of the parents in terms of their

highest educational attainment, combined monthly income; occupation; and

number of family members.

The profile of the parents was presented in a simple frequency

distribution and expressed in percentage equivalent. This data was presented

in the Table 2.

Highest Educational Attainment

Table 2 presented the profile of the parents in terms of their highest

educational attainment. The data revealed that majority of the parents were

high school graduates comprised of 45 or 48.39 percent, the second

 2

Table 2

Profile of the Parents (n= 93)

Frequency Percent
Indicators
(f) (%)

Highest Educational Attainment

College Graduate 7 7.53
College Level 15 16.13
High School Graduate 45 48.39
High School Level 10 10.75
Elementary Graduate 10 10.75
Elementary Level 6 6.45
Total 93 100.00

Combined monthly income

More than 30,000 5 5.38
25,001 - 30,000 5 5.38
20,001 - 25,000 15 16.13
15,001-20,000 20 21.51
10,001 - 15,000 35 37.63
Below 10,000 13 13.98
Total 93 100.00

Occupation
Businessman 18 19.35
Teaching 0 0.00
Trading 12 12.90
Unemployed 15 16.13
Others 48 51.61
Total 93 100.00

Number of family members

More than four children 16 17.20
Four children 29 31.18
Three children 25 26.88
Two Children 18 19.35
Only one child 5 5.38
Total 93 100.00
 3

highest was the number of the parents who were college level which was 15

or 16.13 percent, and the least number was the parents who were elementary

level which was six or 6.45 percent.

The finding implies that educational attainment of the parents played a

crucial role in a child’s education. Although, majority of the parents-

respondents are high school graduates, most of them put a hand in their

child’s education and spend more time attending their child in school. On the

other hand, this finding denotes that some parents who are college level show

competence in assisting their child’s academic work like doing homework and

school projects which further proves that the higher the educational attainment

of the parents, the more they can assist on their child’s education especially in

terms of academics which includes numeracy performance of the child.

Kintanar et al. (2021), has proven in their research “that students

whose parents have higher education, may have a greater appreciation for

learning more positive ability perspectives, and use more effective learning

techniques than students with lower-education parents” . This is also in

consonance with the claim of Apuada (2022) , who maintained that parents

who are highly educated put more emphasis on their child’s learning and

academic excellence.

Combined Monthly Income

Table 2 presented the profile of the parents in terms of their combined

monthly income. The data revealed that majority of the parents whose

combined monthly income ranged from 10,001 to 15,000 were 35 or 37.63

 4

percent. The second highest combine monthly income ranged from 15,001 to

20,000 were 20 or 21.51 percent, the third highest combined monthly income

ranged from 20,001 to 25,000 were 15 or 16.13 percent, and the least

combined monthly income ranged from 25,001 to 30,000 and more than

30,000 respectively were five or 5.38 percent.

This finding implies that most of the parents -respondents belong to the

low -income family, yet it does not stop them from sending their children to

school. This indicates that parents give importance to their children’s

education even if their financial resources are limited. However, due to the

limited financial resources, some parents are not able to provide their

children’s need in school on time. Further, the finding implies that monthly

income of the parents contributed also a significant factor in supporting their

children’s education.

According to Garcia (2022), “family income is an important predictor of

parents’ involvement, thus parents from the lower socioeconomic stratum may

not possess the appropriate social and cultural capital to feel comfortable

connecting with the school”. Likewise, Balarin and Santiago (2021), affirmed

that better-off families have more time and access to information that helped

them in providing their children’s needs in school.

Occupation

Interpretation

Implication

Relevant readings
 5

Number of Family Members

Interpretation

Implication

Relevant readings

LEVEL OF PARENTS’ INVOLVEMENT

This section presented the level of parents’ involvement as to

parenting,

communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and

collaboration with community.

The level of parents’ involvement was presented using the four-Likert

scale and expressed in a weighted mean. The data was detailed in the Table

3.

Parenting

Table 3 provided the data on the level of parents’ involvement as to

parenting. The data revealed that the general weighted mean of all indicators

in parenting was 3.05 denoted as sometimes practiced. The highest among

the indicators in parenting stating “ I maintain clear rules at home that my

child should obey” was rated as always practiced with the weighted mean of

3.26, the second highest indicator stating “I control the amount of time my

child spends in watching TV programs” was rated as sometimes practiced with

the weighted mean of 3.20, the third highest indicator stating “ I keep a regular
 6

Table 3

Level of Parents’ Involvement; (n=93)

Indicators Weighted Mean Interpretation

Parenting
I maintain clear rules at home that my
3.26 AP
child should obey.
I pick up my child from school after class
2.91 SP
hours.
I assigned daily household chores for my
3.01 SP
child.
I provide a quiet place for my child to
2.76 SP
rest, think , and work alone.
I control the amount of time my child
3.2 SP
spends in watching TV programs.
I ask my child how was his/her day at
3.03 SP
school.
I keep a regular morning and bedtime
3.18 SP
schedule for my child.

General weighted mean 3.05

SP

Communicating
I communicate with school staff if I am
concerned on things my child tells me about 2.84 SP
school.
I talk to the teacher about my child’s
2.63 SP
performance in class.

I attend Parent-Teacher conference 3.16 SP

every time.
I talk to school staff about school and
2.54 SP
classroom rules.
General weighted mean 2.79 SP
 7

Table 3, Continued…

Volunteering
I participate in fundraising activities at
2.59 SP
my child’s school.
I volunteer at my child’s school. 2.33 SP
I let my child participate in community
2.98 SP
and school programs.
I let the child attend all school-related
3.13 SP
activities.
I report to the principal whatever school
2.84 SP
incident that might harm pupil’s safety.
I am willing to help the school through
3.81 AP
Brigada Eskwela.
General weighted mean 2.95 SP

Learning at Home
I provide assistance or check in with
3.11 SP
my child when he/she is doing homework.
I help my child with academic skills
2.91 SP
he/she is struggling with.
I spend time with my child working on
2.29 RP
numeracy skills.
I reinforce what the teacher has
2.98 SP
taught.
I use daily objects to illustrate
2.37 RP
numeracy concepts.
I look for videos, books, stories that
2.98 SP
can help my child understand the lesson.

General weighted mean 2.77 SP

Decision-making
I talk to the teacher about disciplinary
2.95 SP
problems.
I respect the school’s authority over
3.32 AP
my child’s welfare.
General weighted mean 3.14 SP

Collaborating with community

I participate in community and school
2.94 SP
social activities.
 8

Table 3, Continued…

I take my child places in the 3.38 AP

community to learn specific things (church,
plaza)
I meet with other families from my child’s 2.94 SP
classroom outside of school.
General weighted mean 3.09 SP

Overall weighted mean 2.97 SP

Legend
Weight Range Category
4 3.25-4.00 Always Practiced (AP)
3 2.50- 3.24 Sometimes Practiced (SP)
2 1.75- 2.49 Rarely Practiced (RP)
1 1.00- 1.74 Not Practiced (NP)

morning and bedtime schedule for my child” was rated as sometimes

practiced with the weighted mean of 3.18, and the lowest indicator stating“ I

provide a quiet place for my child to rest, think , and work alone” was rated as

sometimes practiced with the weighted mean of 2.76.

The finding implies that parents-respondents generally impose

discipline at home by setting clear rules that their children must obey,

assigning household chores to their children, and monitoring their children’s

morning and bedtime routine. Further, the finding indicates that “parenting” is

crucial in parents’ involvement. Hence, parenting in parents’ involvement does

not end in merely imposing discipline but it goes beyond, by also taking care

of the children’s physiological and socio-emotional needs.

 9

As maintained in the study of Cancino (2022), “parenting in parental

involvement is encouraging the child to believe that he or she can also

succeed in school and motivating the child to behave well not just in school

but also at home” . Also, Dangol and Shresta (2019), claimed that parenting is

stimulating the interests of the child since attitude is believed to the elemental

factors to learning. Thus, when the mindset is favorable, the joy and interest

for the child to learn follows intrinsically.

Communicating

Interpretation

Implication

Related readings

Volunteering

Interpretation

Implication

Related readings

Learning at Home

Interpretation

Implication

Related readings

Decision-making

Interpretation
 10

Implication

Related readings

Collaborating with Community

Interpretation

Implication

Related readings

NUMERACY PERFORMANCE OF THE LEARNERS IN RAPID

MATHEMATICS ASSESSMENT(RMA)

This section presented the numeracy performance of the learners in

Rapid Mathematics Assessment (RMA) in terms of BOSY and EOSY results.

The numeracy performance of the learners in Rapid Mathematics

Assessment (RMA) in terms of BOSY and EOSY results presented in a simple

frequency distribution and expressed in percentage equivalent. This data was

presented in the Table 4.

BOSY Results

This section presented the numeracy performance of the learners in

rapid mathematics assessment in term of BOSY results. The data revealed

that the highest number of learners obtained the numeracy performance were

39 or 41.94 percent categorized as nearly proficient, the second highest

number learners were 35 or 37.63 percent which was categorized as low

proficient, the third highest number of learners were 12 or 12.90 percent which
 11

was categorized as proficient, and the least number of learners were 3 or 3.23

percent which was categorized as not proficient.

Table 4
Numeracy performance of the learners in Rapid Mathematics Assessment
(RMA), (n =93)

BOSY Result EOSY Result

Category (f) (%) (f) (%)

Highly Proficient 4 4.30 37 39.78

Proficient 12 12.90 27 29.03
Nearly Proficient 39 41.94 23 24.73
Low Proficient 35 37.63 6 6.45
Not Proficient 3 3.23 0 0.00
Total 93 100.00 93 100.00

Legend
Range Category
85-100 Highly Proficient (HP)
75-84 Proficient (P)
50-74 Nearly Proficient (NP)
25-49 Low Proficient (LP)
1 - 24 Not Proficient (NP)

The finding implies that a greater number of the learners belong to the

nearly proficient, and the rest belongs to low proficient, and proficient. This

denotes further that learners need intervention programs in numeracy. And

since, learning does not end in school, teachers must also encourage the

parents to teach their children some numeracy concepts at home as part of

the intervention program. Thus, more strategic interventions are needed to

cater the diverse learners who are struggling in learning numeracy skills.
 12

Walberg’s theory assumes that academic performance of students

depends on socio-emotional influences, parental support often determined by

their social and economic status, student-teacher interaction, peer groups,

school culture and classroom climate (Asumadu & Bright (2021).

EOSY Results

Interpretation

Implication

Related readings

SIGNIFICANT MEAN DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMERACY PERFORMANCE

OF THE LEARNERS BETWEEN RMA BOSY AND EOSY RESULTS

This section presented the significant mean differences in the

numeracy performance of the learners between the RMA BOSY and EOSY

results. The data provided using the T-test statistical treatment for paired

variables at 0.05 level of significance. The data reflected herein such as the

scores of dependent samples, degree freedom (df) the T-value, critical value,

the decision and its interpretation. The data were presented in the Table 5.

Table 5 showed the the significant mean difference in the numeracy

performance of the learners between the RMA BOSY and EOSY results. The

data revealed that the computed t-value was 15.047 and the critical value

obtained from the table with degree of freedom of 92 at 0.05 degree of

significance was 1.986. Since, the computed t-value was greater than the

critical value, Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected.

 13

Table 5
Significant mean difference in the numeracy performance of the Learners
between RMA BOSY and EOSY Results; (n=93)

Scores df T-value Critical Value Decision Interpretation

RMA BOSY
and EOSY 92 15.047 1.986 Reject Ho Significant
Results

Table 5 showed the the significant mean difference in the numeracy

performance of the learners between the RMA BOSY and EOSY results. The

data revealed that the computed t-value was 15.047 and the critical value

obtained from the table with degree of freedom of 92 at 0.05 degree of

significance was 1.986. Since, the computed t-value was greater than the

critical value, Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected.

Implication

Revant readings

SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LEVEL OF PARENTS’

INVOLVEMENT AND THE NUMERACY PERFORMANCE OF THE

LEARNERS

This section presented the significant relationship between the level of

parents’ involvement and the numeracy performance of the learners. The data

provided using the Chi-square statistical treatment at 0.05 level of

significance. The data reflected herein such as the paired variables, the
 14

degree of freedom (df), the chi-square value, the critical value, the decision

and its interpretation. The data were presented in the Table 6.

Table 6
Significant Relationship Between the Level of Parents’ Involvement and the
Numeracy Performance of the Learners; (n=93)

Computed Critical
Paired Variable df Decision Interpretation
Value Value

Level of Parents’
Involvement and
Numeracy 9 37.67 16.92 Reject Ho Significant
Performance of
the Learners

Table 6 presented the significant relationship between the level of

parents’ involvement and the numeracy performance of the learners based on

RMA results. The data revealed that the chi square value was 37.67 and the

critical value was 16.92, then the decision was to reject the null hypothesis

(Ho), thus the interpretation was significant.

Implication

Relevant readings

CHALLENGES MET BY THE TEACHERS IN DEVELOPING THE

NUMERACY PERFORMANCE OF THE LEARNERS.

This section presented the challenges met by the teachers in

developing the numeracy performance of the learners. The data reflected

 15

using the four Likert scale and the weighted mean. The data were presented

in Table 7.

Table 7

Challenges Met by the Teachers in Developing the Numeracy Performance of

the Learners; (n=5)

Indicators Weighted Mean Interpretation

Readiness of the learners 3.80 HC

Inability of learners to relate to daily
3.40 HC
life
Lack of numeracy foundational skills 3.80 HC
Lack of attention 3.20 MC
Ability of learners to comprehend
4.00 HC
mathematical problem
Insufficiency of instructional
2.60 MC
materials
Parent intervention 3.60 HC
Inattentiveness during discussion 3.40 HC
Lack of motivation 2.80 MC
Curriculum intervention 2.80 MC
Social perception of numeracy and
2.60 MC
mathematics
General weighted mean 3.27 HC

Legend
Weight Range Category
4 3.25- 4.00 Highly Challenging (HC)
3 2.50- 3.24 Moderately Challenging (MC)
2 1.75 - 2.49 Slightly Challenging (SC)
1 1.00 - 1.74 Not Challenging at All (NCA)
 16

Table 7 showed the challenges met by the teachers in developing the

numeracy performance of the learners. The data revealed that six of the

challenges indicators were rated as highly challenging and five of the

indicators were rated as moderately challenging. The general weighted

mean was 3.27 rated as highly challenging. The highest among the

challenges indicator statement as stated “Ability of learners to comprehend

mathematical problem” was rated as highly challenging with the weighted

mean of 4.0, the second highest of the indicator statement as stated “

Readiness of the learners , and Lack of numeracy foundational skills” were

rated as highly challenging with the weighted mean of 3.8, the third highest of

the indicator statement as stated “Parent intervention” was rated as highly

challenging with the weighted mean of 3.60, and the least challenged among

the indicator statement as stated “ Parent Intervention, and Social perception

of numeracy and mathematics” were rated as moderately challenging with the

weighted mean of 2.60.

Implication

Related readings

Notes and guide for chapter 4:

1). First and foremost; comply the suggestions and recommendations from the

panel members

2). Secure the approval of the permit to conduct research from the head of the

office, in case of DepEd from SDS

 17

3) After gathering the data; consolidate, then consult the data to the official

statistician: c/o Dr. Pino and Dr. Mantos

4) Start writing the chapter 4 of your research work. Observe correct spacing;

paragraph spacing (double space); Centered spacing (triple before and after

the center statement); Standing side head spacing (triple before and double

space after the word or phrase). Spacing before and after the table

presentation is triple space..

5) In the presentation, follow the sequence of the statement of the problem,

main variables (centered all caps) refer to page 1 ( PROFILE OF THE

PARENTS); standing side head (Title case) refer to page 1 (Highest

Educational Attainment)

6) Sequence of the presentation; interpretation of data, followed another

paragraph by implication, then relevant reading in another paragraph..

paragraph spacing must be double space.

7) Output: intervention plan, action plan, developmental plan..etc.. use 10

columns. Parts of the output; Rationale, objectives, scheme of implementation

and matrix of implementation. These parts are also reflected in the table of

contents.,
18