CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter is about presenting and analyzing the gathered data to determine
what artificial used by Junior High students in Bayawang Integrated School and how
it affects to their academic performance .The data were presented in tables or
tabular and textual formats, and the discussion was organized according to the
sequence of the stated problems.
TABLE 1
AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS
AGE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE RANK
11-12 years old 14 15.73% 3
13-14 years old 38 42.67% 1
15-16 above 37 41.57% 2
TOTAL 89 100%
In Table 1, the distribution of respondents based on their age is shown. The
majority of the respondents belong to the 13-14 years old age group, with 38
students making up 42.67% of the total. This is followed by the 15-16 years old
group, consisting of 37 students or 41.57%. Meanwhile, the youngest group, 11-12
years old, has the fewest respondents, totaling 14 students or 15.73%. The total
number of respondents is 89, representing 100% of the surveyed population.
Table 1 shows that most respondents are aged 13 to 16 years, suggesting that
artificial intelligence use in academics is more common in this group. The lower
number of 11- to 12-year-old respondents may indicate less exposure to artificial
intelligence tools.
TABLE 2
GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS
GENDER FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE RANK
MALE 52 58.43% 1
FEMALE 37 41.57% 2
TOTAL 89 100%
In Table 2, the distribution of respondents based on gender is shown. The majority
of the respondents are male, with 52 students, making up 58.43% of the total.
Meanwhile, female respondents account for 37 students, representing 41.57%. The
total number of respondents is 89, covering 100% of the surveyed population.
Table 2 indicates that there are more male respondents than female respondents,
suggesting that the participation of male students in the study is higher. This
distribution provides insights into how artificial intelligence usage in academics may
vary between genders.
TABLE 3
Grade Level of the Respondents
GRADE LEVEL FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE RANK
Grade 7 30 33.71% 1
Grade 8 17 19.10% 3
Grade 9 16 17.98% 4
Grade 10 26 29.21% 2
TOTAL 89 100%
In Table 3, the distribution of respondents based on their grade level is shown. The
majority of the respondents are from Grade 7, with 30 students, making up 33.71%
of the total. This is followed by Grade 10, consisting of 26 students or 29.21%.
Meanwhile, Grade 8 has 17 students (19.10%), and Grade 9 has the fewest
respondents, totaling 16 students (17.98%). The total number of respondents is 89,
representing 100% of the surveyed population.
Table 3 indicates that most respondents are in the lower grade levels, particularly
in Grade 7, suggesting that younger students have more participation in the study.
The variation in numbers across grade levels provides insight into how artificial
intelligence usage may differ depending on the academic level of students.
TABLE 4
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE APPLICATION
STATEMENT WEIGHTED MEAN VERBAL RANK
INTERPRETIO
N
1. ChatGPT 3.15 Agree 2
2. Google Scholar 2.65 Agree 5
3. Canva 2.85 Agree 4
4. Cici 2.68 Agree 6
5. [Link] 2.27 Disagree 9
6. Brainly 2.92 Agree 3
9. Google 3.40 Strongly Agree 1
10 Copilot 2.12 Disagree 10
.
11 Pinterest 2.44 Disagree 8
.
12 Merriam-Webster 2.53 Agree 7
.
TOTAL 2.70 Agree
In Table 4,the data indicates that junior high school students at Bayawang
Integrated School generally agree (overall weighted mean: 2.70) on the usefulness
of AI applications in their academic performance.
Google (3.40, Strongly Agree) ranks the highest, showing that students rely on it
the most for quick and comprehensive information retrieval. ChatGPT (3.15, Agree)
follows in second place, suggesting that students find it helpful in generating
explanations, answering questions, and assisting with their English studies. Brainly
(2.92, Agree) ranks third, indicating that students value peer-assisted learning for
academic support.
In the mid-ranked category, Canva (2.85, Agree) is used for visual content
creation, which may be beneficial for presentations and projects. Cici (2.68, Agree)
and Google Scholar (2.65, Agree) show moderate usage, implying that while
students find them useful, they may not be as accessible or easy to navigate as
Google. Merriam-Webster (2.53, Agree) ranks seventh, meaning students use it for
vocabulary building but not as frequently as other tools.
The lowest-ranked AI tools are [Link] (2.27, Disagree), Pinterest (2.44, Disagree),
and Copilot (2.12, Disagree). This suggests that students do not frequently use AI
for content generation, creative inspiration, or coding assistance, possibly due to a
lack of familiarity or perceived relevance in their studies.
Table 4 shows that junior high school students at Bayawang Integrated School
primarily use artificial intelligence applications for quick information retrieval and
academic support, with Google, Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer, and
Brainly being the most preferred, while research, content creation, and specialized
artificial intelligence tools are less utilized.
TABLE 5
PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS IN ENGLISH SUBJECT USING ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE
AVERAGE MALE FEMALE PERCENTAGE RANK
90-100 7 18 28.09% 1
85-89 14 9 25.84% 2
80-84 10 7 19.10% 4
75-79 17 3 22.47% 3
74 and below 4 0 4.49% 5
TOTAL 52 37 100%
The data shows that most students at Bayawang Integrated School performed
well in English while using artificial intelligence, with 28.09% scoring 90-100, where
females (18) outnumbered males (7). The second highest group (25.84%) scored
85-89, with more males (14) than females (9). The 80-84 range accounted for
19.10%, while 22.47% fell within 75-79, where males (17) significantly outnumbered
females (3). Only 4.49% of students, all males, scored 74 and below, indicating that
lower scores were more common among male students.
Table 5 shows that the majority of students performed well in English while using
artificial intelligence, with more females achieving higher scores, while lower scores
were more common among males.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY , CONCLUSION , and RECOMMENDATION
SUMMARY
This study aims to determine the Impact of Using Artificial Intelligence in English
Subject to the Academic Performance Among Junior High School Students at
Bayawang Integrated [Link] focus in this study is to known the Artificial
intelligence applications used by junior high school students and it’s effect in
academic performance of every students on Bayawang Integrated School. This
study address the following question:(1)What is the Demographic profile of the
respondent in terms of:(1.1) age;(1.2)sex; and(1.3)grade level(2)What are the
common Artificial Intelligence used by the Junior High Students at BIS?(3)What is
the level of academic performance of Junior High School student in English?(4)Is
there a significant relationship on the use of artificial Intelligence to the level of
academic performance of JHS students in English at BIS?
The respondent of this research are Junior High School Students at Bayawang
Integrated School, with a total of eighty nine(89) participants, this instrument will
be designed to gather detailed information, and which questionnaire distribute and
answer by junior high school students.
CONCLUSION
The findings reveal that students generally agree on the usefulness of artificial
intelligence applications in their academic performance, with a total weighted mean
of 2.70. Among the listed AI tools, Google ranked highest with a weighted mean of
3.40 (Strongly Agree), highlighting its essential role in students' learning. ChatGPT
(3.15) and Brainly (2.92) also received high rankings, indicating their significant
contribution to academic tasks. Other AI applications such as Canva (2.85), Google
Scholar (2.65), and Cici (2.68) were also recognized as helpful. However, tools like
[Link] (2.27), Copilot (2.12), and Pinterest (2.44) were rated lower, with a
"Disagree" interpretation, suggesting they are less commonly used for academic
purposes. Overall, the results suggest that students prefer AI applications that
provide direct assistance in research, writing, and learning, while other AI tools may
require further integration into their studies.
The results indicate that the use of artificial intelligence in learning English has
positively influenced students' academic performance. A significant 28.09% of
students achieved scores between 90-100, making it the highest-ranked category,
followed by 25.84% scoring between 85-89. Meanwhile, 22.47% of students fell
within the 75-79 range, and 19.10% scored between 80-84. Only 4.49% of students
scored 74 and below, indicating a relatively low number of struggling learners.
Additionally, male students outnumbered female students in all performance levels
except the 90-100 range, where more females excelled. Overall, the data suggests
that artificial intelligence applications contribute positively to students’ English
proficiency, with most learners achieving satisfactory to excellent grades.
RECOMMENDATIONS
For the Department of Education , policymakers should create clear guidelines
on the responsible use of artificial intelligence in schools. It should help students
learn better without replacing traditional education methods.
For School Administrators , schools should develop programs that teach both
teachers and students how to use artificial intelligence wisely. Providing training
and setting rules will help ensure that technology is used for learning, not as a
shortcut.
For English Teachers ,teachers should integrate artificial intelligence into
lessons in a way that enhances learning but does not make students dependent on
it. Encouraging critical thinking and creativity is key.
For Students ,students should use artificial intelligence as a tool to improve their
learning, not as a replacement for their own efforts. Understanding its benefits and
limits will help them use it wisely.
For Parents, parents should guide their children in using artificial intelligence
responsibly. Balancing technology with traditional study habits will help students
become independent learners.
For Future Researchers , they should know how to understand artificial
intelligence application and uses of it. and how AI tools might influence and effects
of every future researchers and to their academic studies.