Mastery Level of Students Using Strategi

Accelerat ing t he world's research.
Abuda Full paper

Ben Fermin Abuda
Instabright.spakrly.com
Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 
Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles
Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 
Use of Supplement al Learning Mat erials (SLM's) in Improving St udent s' Achievement and At t i…
SAMSUDIN N ABDULLAH, PhD
Exploring fact ors of mat hemat ics achievement from st udent s' perspect ives
Lit o Larino
CONT EXT UALIZED ST RAT EGIC INT ERVENT ION MAT ERIALS IN GRADE 9 MAT HEMAT ICS
Aiko Adonis
INSTABRIGHT e-GAZETTE
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
Available online at www.instabrightgazette.strikingly.com
*********************************************************************************************************
MASTERY LEVEL OF STUDENTS USING STRATEGIC

INTERVENTION MATERIAL (SIM) IN TEACHING
MATHEMATICS: A QUASI EXPERIMENTAL
STUDY
BEN FERMIN Q. ABUDA
Eastern Samar State University
Graduate School
[email protected]
Abstract
This experiment focused on 11th Graders’ mastery level using Strategic Intervention
Material (SIM) based-instruction in General Mathematics least mastered competencies.
Pre/posttest Quasi-experimental research was employed with two classes of 11 th Graders
from the Technical, Vocational and Livelihood(TVL) track were taught via SIM-based
instruction and direct instruction, respectively. These learners took the subject amid the school
year 2018-2019 and were tagged non-numerates in their previous mathematics class. To
ensure proper maneuvering of the SIM and time-on-task, the teacher-researcher handled both
classes at the same venue and time frame. The learners’ pre/posttest mean scores served as
basis in determining learners’ mastery level while t-test analyses tested the pre-posttests’
difference of the comparison groups. Findings revealed the posttest mean scores of SIM-
group to be significantly greater than the DI-group, hence SIM-based instruction is an effectual
means in reaching mastery on least mastered competencies in General Mathematics. Hence,
it is recommended not to delimit Direct Instruction in upskilling least mastered competencies
alongside with SIM-based instruction. Furthermore, SIM-based instruction can be
implemented to other schools to supplement its effectiveness and to maximize its use in the
future, and that studies on the use of SIM-based remedial instruction in other learning areas,
be conducted to confirm the result of the experiment.
Keywords: Mastery Level, Strategic Intervention Material, Pre-test, Posttest
Introduction
Providing relevant approaches in molding the young minds is the primary goal of
teachers which, in turn, promote effective learning (Dacumos, 2016). With present educational
reform – the K to 12 Enhanced Basic Education Curriculum, Filipino learners are envisioned
to become globally competitive and at par with students in other countries. However, many
learners fail in completing relevant requirements thus getting low performances in academics,
logical and abstract related skills specially on science-related disciplines (Salviejo, 2014).
Over the years, poor performances are correlated with poor and wrong choice of teaching
materials and methods (Selçuk, Çalışkan, &Erol, 2008). The basic education sector proposed
a solution to that problem through the use contextualized Strategic Intervention Materials as
mandated in DepEd Order NO. 39, Series of 2012.
Ten years ago, the Department of Education released its National Achievement Test
(NAT) passing rate of 47.40%, a decreased achievement rate was seen the next school year,
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
Editor-in-Chief: Alvin B. Punongbayan Associate Editor: Camille P. Alicaway
Managing Editor: Katherine Joy P. Alicaway Web Editor: Nikko C. Panotes
Manuscript Editors / Reviewers: Pinky Jane A. Perez, Mary Jane B. Custodio, and Christopher DC. Francisco
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
with an average rate of 46.38%. Recently, the DepEd Eastern Samar division posted an
alarming 65.31% Mathematics MPS for the school year 2018-2019. This figure suggests that
there is a gap between the instructions provided to the students and that of learner’s interest
in the subject as they cannot meet the acceptable learners’ mastery and competence set by
the academe which is also true to the situation in the researcher’s classrooms at Dolores
National High School, where students find mathematical concepts too abstract and difficult to
solve due to lack of skills on the basic competencies required to understand higher
mathematics. Based on the item analyses conducted for school years 2016-2017 and 2017-
2018, a consistent least learned competencies were reported under conceptual and applied
understanding of Rational Functions in the course, General Mathematics
Given the aforementioned reasons and underlying concerns on learners’ declining
academic performance in General Mathematics and difficulty in understanding concepts on
Rational Functions, the researcher came up with Mathvengers War Against Rational
Equations, a Strategic Intervention Material aimed in increasing students’ mastery level on
Rational Functions (M11GM-1B-3).
Objectives of the Study

1. Determine the level of mastery on Rational Functions of the Grade 11 students in terms
of the pretest result.
2. Determine the level of mastery on Rational Functions of the Grade 11 students in terms
of the posttest result.
3. Test the significant difference between the pretest mean scores of students in the
experimental and control groups.
4. Test the significant difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of
students exposed to Strategic Intervention Material (Experimental Group) and Direct
Instruction (Control Group).
5. Test the significant difference between the posttest mean scores of students in the
experimental and control groups.
6. Assess learning gain scores’ difference of the students in the experimental and Control
groups.
Methodology
Research Design
The researcher employed pretest-posttest quasi-experimental study which determined
the learners’ mastery level using Strategic Intervention Material to11 th Grade General
Mathematics classes, specifically focusing on the least mastered competencies on Rational
Functions. In this study, the subjects assigned in the experimental and control groups,
respectively were pretested prior to the conduct of the experiment, that assessed the mastery
level of the students relative to the learning contents that were discussed. Afterwards, the
participants were post-tested at the end of the experimental process that assessed how far
they have learned about the learning content discussion. In determining the effectiveness of
the Strategic Intervention Material, no teaching or any form of instruction coming from the
teacher regarding the subject was undertaken; the researcher handled both classes to
facilitate and guide the learners to the proper use of the material.
Locale of the Study
This experiment was implemented at Dolores National High School located at
Reynaldo St. Barangay 9 Dolores, Eastern Samar Philippines. The school was chosen
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
because it is one of the pilot schools who implemented the Senior High School, has a big
enrolment and of course, due to the proximity of its location to the researcher and on the kind
of education required.
Participants of the Study
Table 1. Distribution of Respondents per Class

Grade 11 TVL –HE 1A Grade 11 TVL HE-1B
Grade and
(Experimental Group) (Direct Instruction Group) Total
Section
N = 54 N = 60
Number of
Participants 30 30 60
Sampling Procedure
The researcher employed non-random purposive sampling. Total enumeration was
made in selecting participants for both the experimental and control group, due to a relatively
small population size. There were30 of participants in control group experimental groups,
respectively. Moreover, these participants were considered non-numerate students.
Research Instruments
The experiment made use of a Pre/Posttest instrument, and a Strategic Intervention
Material. The former, is a 40-item validated test instrument with fifty percent or twenty items
were easy (Knowledge skills), thirty percent or twelve items were moderate (Application skills)
and twenty percent of eight items were difficult (synthesis and evaluation skills). The
pre/posttest instrumentwas field out to the subjects under experimental and control groups,
prior to getting exposed to the instructions and after the experimentation phase.
Furthermore,the instrument utilized English as language medium.
The second instrument is the Strategic Intervention Material composed of learning
tasks intended to review concepts in determining the Least Common Multiple of some pairs of
numbers/ algebraic expressions, combining rational expressions, and that of solving linear
equation - all needed for the non-numerates to achieve the competencies successfully.
Data Analysis
Theresults of the pre/posttesting were calculated through mean score formula and
were described using the Mastery Descriptive Equivalence (DepEd Memo 160 S.2012). To
test whether the experimental and control groups’ mean scores were different during pre-test
and posttest,the t-test analysis for two independent samples were employed. In testing the
difference between the pre/posttest scores of the two groups, the researcher employed t-test
for dependent/paired samples. Furthermore, the researcher computed the Learning Gain
Scores (LGSs) of the paired students in which the data collated was treated usingindependent
t-test analysis that determined the significant difference of increase of the learners’
performance in the pretest and posttest results using the said material.
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
Results and Discussions

Level of Mastery On Rational Functions of the Grade 11 Students in Terms of the
Pretest Result
Table 2. Pre-test mean scores of the Grade 11 students

Groups Mean Scores Interpretation
Experimental 12.83 Low Mastery
Control 12.00 Low Mastery
Table 2 shows the mastery level in terms pre-test mean scores among Grade 11 TVL
classes of Dolores National High School. A mean score of 12.83 were attributed to the
experimental group while the control group obtained a mean score of 12.03. Results of the
data interpreted as of Low Mastery among both groups signify that they belong to low
performing students and that they are fairly distributed in terms of their final grades in their
10th Grade Simple Mathematics.
Level of Mastery On Rational Functions of the Grade 11 Students in Terms of the
Posttest Result
Table 3. Post-test mean scores of the Grade 11 students

Groups Mean Scores Interpretation
Experimental 22.37 Average Mastery

Control 20.40 Average Mastery
As shown in Table 3, a mean score of 22.37 were received by the experimental group
while the control group got 20.40. In terms of mean values, the data shows a consistency of
obtaining higher scores among students in the experimental group compared to the students
in the control group. Furthermore, both groups achieved an average mastery after using the
Strategic Intervention Material for the experimental group while Direct Instruction for the
control group. Similar results were found in the studies of Soberano (2010) and Gultiano
(2012)who both concluded that the use of strategic intervention material is an effective
instrument in mastering competency based-skill based on the posttest mean gain scores of
the experimental and control groups after the use of SIMs. These outcomes are highly
anticipated since the approach requires active involvement on the part of the students in
acquiring mastery of the concepts in a self-paced manner.
Difference between the Pretest Mean Scores of Students in the Experimental and
Control Groups
Table 4. Difference of pretest mean scores of the control and experimental groups
Mean Computed t-
Groups SD p-value Interpretation
Difference value
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
Experimental
2.29
(N=30)
0.83 1.32 0.0959 Not Significant
Control
2.59
(N=30)
Table 4 discloses a minimal difference of 0.83 on the pretest mean scores of students
in the experimental and control groups. Since the computed t value which is 1.32 at 0.05 level
of significance with 58 degree of freedom falls within the non-critical region and it falls below
the critical value of 1.672 and the computed significance value of 0.0959 is greater than the
p-value of 0.05. Hence, the pretest mean scores of students in the experimental and control
groups bears no significant difference. These findings imply a similar mastery level of the
students prior to the conduct of experimentation. These poor performances indicated that the
experimental and control groups were statistically equivalent and that there was a lack of
mastery and learning acquisition among students on some learning content standards in
General Mathematics for Grade 11.
Difference between the Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores of Students in the
Experimental and Control Groups
Table 5. Difference of pre/posttest mean scores of the students exposed to strategic

intervention material and direct instruction
Mean Computed t-
Groups Pretest Posttest Gained p value Interpretation
value
Experimental
SIM-Based 12.83 22.36 9.53 9.88 0.000 Significant
Instruction
Control
Direct 12 20.4 8.4 9.22 0.000 Significant
Instruction
Table 5 indicates that there is a significant increase between the pretest and posttest
mean gain scores of the two groups. The experimental group who were thought thru SIM-
based instruction accumulated a gain score of 9.53 from the 22.36 and 12.83 mean scores of
the posttest and pretest, respectively. Likewise, the control group taught using direct
instruction approach obtained a gain score of 8.4 from the 20.4 and 12 mean scores of the
posttest and pretest, respectively. Since the p-values of 0.000 for the experimental and control
groups were lesser as compared to the adopted level of significance of 0.05 it is safe to say
that the instructions used are effective in increasing mastery level of Grade 11 students in the
least mastered competencies. The data presented shows that the difference between the
posttest and pretest is significant for the two groups. Hence, confirmed that the experimental
and control groups performed and achieved better mastery when exposed to SIM-based
instruction and direct instruction, respectively. Similar findings were highlighted in the studies
conducted by Gatdula (2015) who attested that developed and validated SIM on rational
algebraic expressions was effective in improving the performance of students at Castillejos
National High School, San Roque CastillejosZambales, and Mercado and Tandog (2015) who
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
concluded that Conversational Strategic Intervention Materials (CSIM) Instruction was an

effective strategy in teaching mathematics to improve students’ achievement and to enhance
retention and the students who were exposed to CSIM performed better than those who were
exposed to the conventional method of teaching.
Difference between the Posttest Mean Scores of Students in the Experimental and
Control Groups
Table 6. Difference of post-test mean scores of the students in the experimental and control
groups
Comparison Mean SD Computed p-value Interpretation
Group Difference t-value
Experimental
4.13
N = 30
1.97 1.90 0.0312 Significant
Control
3.88
N = 30
Table 6 shows the mean difference of students’ posttest scores equivalent to 1.97. On
one hand, the standard deviation results tell about the varied learning performances of the
groups. High clustered scores were noted form the experimental group. Since the computed
t-value of 1.90 at 0.05 alpha level with respect to 58 degree of freedom does not fall in the
critical region and the computed significance level of 0.0312 is lesser than the p-value of 0.05,
there is enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant
difference in the posttest scores between the experimental and control groups after getting
exposed to Strategic Intervention Material and Direct Instruction, respectively. Similar results
were found in the study of Dahar (2011) in which a computed t-value of 1.45 with respect to
64 degree of freedom at 0.05 alpha level showed a significant difference between the mean
scores in favor to the experimental group, and Anderson (2012) who revealed that an
intervention material assists learners of Quantitative Genetics in the improvement of their
performance and that using Strategic Intervention Materials (SIMs) among the experimental
participant bears significant change compared to the control group.
Learning Gain Scores of the Experimental and Control Groups
Table 7. Learning gain scores of the experimental and control groups
Learning Difference
Groups Gain in Learning SD t-test p-value Interpretation
Score Gain Scores
Experimental 34.29% 17.44%
5.04% 1.16 0.1269 Not Significant
Control 29.25% 16.40%
Tables 7 summarizes the results of the students’ performances in terms of the converted
learning gain score equivalent and standard deviation tested using the t-test for independent
samples at 0.05 alpha level. The experimental group who utilized Strategic Intervention
Material obtained an average learning gain score of 34.29% while the control group who went
through Direct Instruction had an average learning gain score of 29.25% respectively. The
findings confirm that both instructions assigned to the students enabled them to perform and
achieved a better understanding on the least mastered competencies. Furthermore, since the
computed t-value which is 1.16 at 0.05 alpha level with 58 degree of freedom fall in the critical
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
region and the computed significance level of 0.1269 is greater than the adopted p-value of
0.05, there is no enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis which states that there is no
significant difference between the learning gain scores’ difference between the experimental
and control groups after getting exposed to Strategic Intervention Material (SIM) –based
Instruction and Direct Instruction. Moreover, Escoreal (2012)established that the use of SIM
is capable in reducing a number of least mastered skills after the implementation of the
intervention material. Lastly, this finding strengthen Table 6 result that both instructions are
significant in teaching least mastered competencies in Mathematics. It is therefore a must to
implement a supportive environment and learning experiences which is hinged on carefully
planned scaffolded-learning to aide students in their becoming of a lifelong and independent
learners.
Summing up, the findings of this study show that the use of Strategic Intervention
Material has significantly improved the posttest mean score performance of Grade 11
Students. Also, the SIM improved students understanding in the least mastered
competencies. The SIM developed by the researcher does not only provide related concepts
and information about the competencies being studied but also meaningful activities that
encourage students to think and concretize abstract knowledge enabling them to reflect on
their own learning, related to the subject. Macdougall (2008) opined that the use of SIM
developed learners’ dependency of their capability and less from the teacher – autonomous
learning.
With regards to the use of SIM to improve performance it was observed that direct
instruction was in par with discovery learning since learners could easily manipulate and
interpret variables through guided practice compared to asking them to conduct the given task
on their own. It can be attributed to the deductive nature of the subject as it requires both
mastery and memorization. Vanlehn (2007) remarked that an explicit training in solving
problems is found out to be successful when there is an assistance provided to the students.
In addition to that, Sweller (2010) wrapped up that the superior effectiveness of direct
instruction is supported by empirical findings and cognitive theories most specially when
dealing with concept development.
The researcher observed instances wherein students experience misconceptions
basically on performing operations on rational expressions leading them to incorrect
responses both using the direct instruction and the SIM-approach. Lazaro(2018) explains that
most students do not use concepts and construct systematically and that misconceptions were
difficult to change even during regular instruction. It is hoped that with the use of SIM in regular
classroom instruction be a constant tool in correcting misconceptions incurred by students in
a particular topic.
This study revealed that the SIM can be used in a self-paced manner which is highly
suggested by the Department of Education specially designed to assist learners in improving
their performance and understanding in the least mastered topic in the subject even with
minimal intervention coming from the teacher, and that there is a need for SIM developers to
integrate simulation activities that would help students improve their performance on the least
learned competencies.
On an overall scale, the Strategic Intervention Material can be utilize in improving
learners’ academic performance and understanding on the least mastered competencies in
Grade 11 General Mathematics class.
Conclusions
Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn.
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************
ISSN: 2704-3010
Volume I, Issue I
August 2019
*********************************************************************************************************
1. The mastery level of the experimental and control groups prior to getting exposed to
the instructions were comparable based on the pretest results.
2. There was an increased level of mastery of the non-numerate students in experimental
group and control group based on their posttest results.
3. The experimental group showed a slight higher performance in the pretest compared
to the control group, however the difference was not significant. Therefore, allowing
these groups to a SIM-based Instruction is sound and reasonable.
4. Both experimental and control groups equally performed well in terms of the pretest
and posttest results in increasing their mastery level on the least mastered
competencies.
5. The experimental group showed significantly better achievement than the control
group as the result of their post-test were compared.
a. The general learning gains of the experimental group who received the strategic
intervention material bear a higher and significant difference compared to that of the
control group who received direct instruction. However, both groups performed well in
increasing their understanding on the least learned competencies.
References
Dahar. (2011). Effect of the availability and the use of Instructional Material on academic performance of students
in punjab (pakistan) pp. 2-3. Euro Journal.
Dacumos, L. P. (2016). Perspective of secondary teachers in the utilization of science strategic intervention material
(sim) in increasing learning proficiency of students in science education. AsTEN Journal of Teacher
Education , 2-3.
Gatdula, M. A. (2015). Strategic Intervention Material on Simplifying Rational Algebraic Expressions. Castillejos
National High School, San Roque, Castillejos, Zambales. www.simplifyingrationalalgebraicinterventions.
Date Retrieved: March 06, 2015
Madougall, M. (2008). Ten tips for promoting autonomous learning and effective engagement in the teaching of
statistics to undergraduate medical students involved in short-term research projects. Retrieved from
http://www. jaqm.ro/issues/volume-3,issue-3/pdfs/macdougall.pdf
Mercado K, TandogV (2015), Integrating MALMATH and DESMOS in Conversational Strategic Intervention
Material (CSIM) to Enhance Students’ Achievement in Mathematics; International Journal of Science and
Research (IJSR); Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines,
Plenos, J. (2014)Effectiveness of the Teachermade Science Strategic Intervention Material in Increasing the
Performance Level of Grade Six Pupils of Bacongco Elementary School in the Specified Competency.
Retrieved fromhttps://www.academia.edu/9985414/ (Accessed 9th May 2019)
Salviejo, E. I. et al. (2014) Strategic Intervention Material-Based Instruction, Learning Approach and
Students‘ Performance in Chemistry, International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational
Research Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 91-123, February 2014 Retrieved from
https://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter/article/view/10/17
Selçuk, G. S., Çalışkan, S., & Erol, M. (2008). The Effects of Problem Solving Instruction on Physics Achievement,
Problem Solving Performance and Strategy Use. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.669.3132&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Soberano, A. L. (2009). Strategic intervention materials in chemistry: development and effectiveness. Retrieved
from EDOC: https://edoc.site/strategic-intervention-materials-in-chemistry-pdf-free.html
Sweller, J. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of
constructivist, discover, problem based, experiential, and inquiry based teaching. New South Wales:
Educational Psychologist.
VanLehn, K. (2007). Problem solving and cognitive skill acquisition. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in
Education.
*********************************************************************************************************
Editorial Team
*********************************************************************************************************

Mastery Level of Students Using Strategi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mastery Level of Students Using Strategi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mastery Level of Students Using Strategi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Abuda Full paper

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

MASTERY LEVEL OF STUDENTS USING STRATEGIC

Keywords: Mastery Level, Strategic Intervention Material, Pre-test, Posttest

Objectives of the Study

Table 1. Distribution of Respondents per Class

Results and Discussions

Table 2. Pre-test mean scores of the Grade 11 students

Experimental 12.83 Low Mastery

Control 12.00 Low Mastery

Table 3. Post-test mean scores of the Grade 11 students

Experimental 22.37 Average Mastery

Table 5. Difference of pre/posttest mean scores of the students exposed to strategic

concluded that Conversational Strategic Intervention Materials (CSIM) Instruction was an

You might also like