Sei sulla pagina 1di 62

Philippine Christian Gospel School

Junquera St. Ext., Brgy. San Antonio, Cebu City 6000

THE INFLUENCE OF BILINGUALISM IN THE COGNITIVE STYLES AMONG THE


GRADE 12 STUDENTS OF PCGS

A Research Study Presented to the


Senior High School Faculty
of Philippine Christian Gospel School

Researchers:
ELIJAH PSALM CAÑETE
KENNY EDWINSON KAW
AMANDA LEE SHARPE
CHARLOTTE BEATRIZ TAN

Research Adviser:
BEA YAP MARTINEZ
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The completion of this research paper is not possible without the participation and assistance of

members of the group: Elijah Psalm Cañete, Kenny Edwinson Kaw, Amanda Lee Sharpe, and Charlotte

Beatriz Tan. Their contributions are sincerely appreciated and acknowledged. However, the group

wishes to express their deep appreciation and appreciation in particular as follows:

Ms. Bea Martinez, the research adviser, for her wisdom and guidance until the end of this work,

for her patience on paper reading, her support for this research, and to make this paper possible.

Mdm. Raquel Barril, coordinator of the high school Department of the Philippine Christian

Gospel School, for approval of our research and authorizing researchers to conduct study and

experimentation in the institution.

Ms. May Valenzuela, the previous research adviser, for her kindness and willingness to guide

and help the researchers in their data treatment—especially in Chapter 4.

And above all, to the great Almighty God for His guidance and for all the blessings He has given.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 2
CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE .................................................................................................... 5
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 5
Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................................................ 6
Statement of Null Hypothesis ................................................................................................................... 6
Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................................... 6
Scope and Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 7
Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ....................................... 9
Related Literature ..................................................................................................................................... 9
Linguistic Brain ...................................................................................................................................... 9
Effects of Bilingualism ......................................................................................................................... 10
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................................... 11
Cognitive Styles: Convergent and Divergent ....................................................................................... 13
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 15
Research Environment ............................................................................................................................ 15
Research Respondents ............................................................................................................................ 15
Research Instrument ............................................................................................................................... 15
Research Procedure ................................................................................................................................ 16
Gathering of Data................................................................................................................................ 16
Treatment of Data............................................................................................................................... 16
Conceptual Framework ........................................................................................................................... 18
Ethical Considerations............................................................................................................................. 18
CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA ................................................ 19
Language Proficiency of Grade 12 Students ........................................................................................... 19
Language Proficiency and Convergent Cognitive Style Scores ............................................................. 20
One-way ANOVA .................................................................................................................................... 21
Language Proficiency and Divergent Cognitive Style Scores .................................................................. 22
CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................... 25
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... 25
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 25
CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................... 26
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 26
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 27
Books ....................................................................................................................................................... 27
Articles .................................................................................................................................................... 27
Webpages ............................................................................................................................................... 28
CURRICULUM VITAE .................................................................................................................................... 53
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction

In a culture-rich country like the Philippines, it is inevitable to hear a dialect or two in just a
walk down the street. Although Tagalog Filipino is acknowledged as the national language, a fairly huge
amount of Filipino people can eloquently speak English. This is reflected in the newly imposed K-12
curriculum of Philippines that exposes its students to more Filipino and English courses. For example,
one of the core subjects required in the K-12 curriculum is Pagbasa at Pagsusuri ng Iba’t Ibang Teksto
Tungo sa Pananaliksik, which is an advanced Filipino course where students are required to submit a
complete research in Tagalog; another example would be the course, English for Academic and
Professional Purposes, wherein the students learn the standard English and correct grammar necessary
for formal situations. Thus, such exposure in culture and education resulted in bilingualism. In fact,
many Filipinos claim to speak more than one language.
According to Mangahas (2016), in a survey conducted by local pollster Social Weather Station, it
said that three-fourths of Filipino adults (76%) say they understand spoken English; 75 percent say they
read English; three out of five (61%) say they're comfortable writing in English; close to half (46%) say
they speak English; about two-fifths (38%) say they think in English; while 8 percent say they are not
competent in any way when it comes to the English language. Additionally, another survey by the same
pollster also found 85 percent of the Filipinos nationwide claim to read and understand spoken
Filipino, but only 45 percent said they made full use of Filipino, whereas 36 percent made fair use, and
19 percent made partial or very little use, of it. The full users were 87 percent in NCR, 60 percent in the
Balance of Luzon, 16 percent in the Visayas, and 9 percent in Mindanao. As the percentages in English
and Tagalog fluency are both surprisingly high, it can be assumed that these percentages overlap
indicating that most of the Filipinos are bilingual.
Moreover, bilingualism is commonly assumed to improve creativity but the mechanisms
underlying creative acts, and the way these mechanisms are affected by bilingualism, are not very well
understood (Hommel, Colzato, Fischer, & Christoffels, 2011). Furthermore, creativity as a whole would
be too abstract, thus two tasks that are likely to represent relatively process-pure measures of
components of creativity—the two cognitive styles: divergent cognitive style and convergent cognitive
style.

Statement of the Problem

The objective of the research is to determine the cognitive style that is dominant among bilingual
students from the Grade 12 class of S.Y. 2017-2018. Particularly, the study has the following sub-
objectives:
1. To determine the level of language proficiency among the grade 12 students:
a. Bilingual students who obtained high proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog;
b. Bilingual students who obtained a high proficiency score in either English or Tagalog;
c. Bilingual students who obtained low proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog;
2. To determine whether there is a correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism
and the convergent cognitive style of the students;
3. To determine whether there is a correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism
and the divergent cognitive style of the students;
4. To create a creative infographic poster summarizing the research findings;

Statement of Null Hypothesis

𝐇𝟎 : There is a weak or no correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the
cognitive styles of the Grade 12 students at the Philippine Christian Gospel School.

𝐇𝟏 : There is a strong correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the
cognitive styles of the Grade 12 students at the Philippine Christian Gospel School.

Significance of the Study

The objective of the research is to determine the cognitive style that is dominant among bilingual
students from the Grade 12 class of S.Y. 2017-2018:
Students. Students are encouraged to learn other languages to improve their cognitive styles,
especially the nation’s mother tongue, Tagalog.
Teachers. Teachers will appreciate diverse students, and this research will help them plan
creative ways to teach future lessons.
Parents. Parents are encouraged to teach their children their tongues, especially those with
foreign languages.
Other Researchers. This research can guide the future researchers in their data gathering.

Scope and Limitations

Bilingualism is the ability to speak two languages fluently, the Associated Press (2001) reports
that up to 66 percent of the world’s children are raised bilingual. Since the Philippines is known for
fluent English speakers despite English not being its first language, encouraged the researchers to
investigate. This is why the researchers will conduct their research at Philippine Christian Gospel School
in Cebu city. The participants of this study will be the Grade 12 students, which consist of 36 students
(researchers excluded). To determine whether the students are bilingual or not, the pupils must
undergo an proficiency test both in the languages of Tagalog and English. Once the students are
categorized as monolingual or bilingual, they must undergo an assessment to determine whether their
brains’ dominant cognitive style is either convergent or divergent. Since the proficiency test is solely a
written exam, some students may not be able to answer properly despite knowing how to speak the
language due to certain standards like spelling and punctuation. Additionally, the assessment test has a
set time to complete; some students may not perform as well as they can due to the lack of time,
resulting to the possibility of categorizing them in the wrong area. With these uncontrollable
situations, it can be assumed that some variables cannot be controlled. There is a possibility that some
students are able to understand bits of Tagalog, but are not fluent in the language or the same goes for
English. Lastly, this research will cover the English and Tagalog languages only, not Bisaya, Chinese and
etc.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are conceptually and operationally defined for better understanding of the
readers.
Bilingualism – the ability to speak, read, and write two languages; literacy in two languages
Proficiency Level – the degree based on how well a person can speak, read, or write a certain language
Cognitive Style – the way of processing information
Convergent Cognitive Style – a cognitive style used to find the single best solution or answer to
a certain problem.
Divergent Cognitive Style – a cognitive style used to generate creative ideas by exploring as
many solutions as possible.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Related Literature
The link between bilingualism and enhanced cognitive functions is currently a debated issue in
the literature. Increasing evidence suggests that speaking more than one language does not only
improve one’s verbal skills but also more general, non-linguistic cognitive abilities (Hommel et al,
2011). The enhanced creativity of bilinguals is believed to be a result from prolonged constant
cognitive monitoring of changing language systems which, over time, enhances cognitive flexibility and
creativity (Storme, Celik, Camargo, A., Formthmann, B., Holling, H., & Lubart, 2017).

Linguistic Brain
The human brain has a natural tendency to learn language in order to describe novel situations,
according to a book titled 30 Second Brain by Anil Seth (2014). Two specialized brain regions developed
in humans support this innate ability to learn and process language: Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area.
Broca’s area, found in the frontal lobe of the left hemisphere of the human brain, is thought to be
linked with processing of syntax, grammar, and sentence structure. It helps in activities required to
produce speech. When there is an issue in this area, a patient can understand the speech of others, but
would not be able to produce any speech by him or her own self, also known as Broca's aphasia.
Wernicke’s area, on the other hand, found in the temporal lobe of the left hemisphere, is believed to
be involved in the language comprehension. It helps in the interpretation of speech and having correct
usage of words to express ideas. When there is an issue in this area, a patient may be able to produce
speech, but cannot understand the speech of others, also known as Wernicke's aphasia.
Seth (2014) also stated that the first few years of a child’s life are critical for learning a first
language. Without exposure to a first language, children fail to develop full linguistic abilities, such as
reaching normal syntax level or correctly using tone for emphasis. Likewise, second languages learned
during the child’s first few years, according to Seth (2014), are also expected to be processed in the
same regions of Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area similar to the first language. If a second language is
learned after puberty, different regions of Broca’s area are used as well.
Effects of Bilingualism
With the rise of bilingual individuals in the world, researches have been very interested in the
benefits bilingualism has on the brain. The benefits associated with bilingualism to positively influence
attention and conflict management in infants as young as seven months. Children who grow up
bilingual can adjust quickly to environmental changes. While bilingual seniors can experience less
cognitive decline and maintains a state of “cognitive reserve.” Marian & Shook (2012) claimed that
cognitive reserve refers to the efficient utilization of brain networks to enhance brain function. The
benefits of bilingualism to the brain can be seen from early childhood to old age, being bilingual
enables your brain to process information more efficiently and prevent cognitive decline.
Prior to understanding the benefits of bilingualism, an explanation regarding the human brain
would be necessary. According to Sperry (1975), in his Left-brain, Right-brain dominance theory, the
human brain is divided into two hemispheres—the left and the right. In psychology, the theory is based
on the lateralization of brain function (Kendra, 2017). The left-side of the brain is considered to be
adept at tasks that involve logic, language, and analytical thinking. The left side of the brain is
described as being better at: Language, Logic, Critical thinking, Numbers, and Reasoning; and the right
side of the brain is described as being better at: Recognizing faces, Expressing emotions, Music,
Reading emotions, Color, Imagination, Intuition, and Creativity. Thus left-brain dominated people are
often considered convergent thinkers, while the right-brain dominated people are considered
divergent thinkers.
Oflaz (2011) conducted a research to test whether being right or left-brained had was an effect
on child’s language learning if the child was right or left brained. Left brained individuals were
analytical and sequential, while right-brained individuals were interpersonal and imaginative (Morris,
2005). Oflaz gave an assessment test to determine whether the students were left brained or right
brained. In determining the brain dominance of the students it was referred to a scoring procedure in
the Right Brain-Left Brain Dominance Answer Key (Education World, 2000). After computing their
scores and categorizing them into right brained, left brained or whole brained, she gave another
assessment test, regarding English. Right-brained students were good at responding demonstrating
instructions and visuals, showed a good performance in the vocabulary and writing portion of the
assessment test. While left brained students, who were good at problem solving by logic, did well in
the Use of English and Reading parts. Lastly, whole brained students did well in both portions of the
test. To conclude, there is a significant difference between left and right-brained individuals, adapting
to teaching in ways that would strengthen both sides of the brain would greatly benefit teachers when
teaching language to their students.
According to Marian & Shook (2012) the bilinguals show more activity on the dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), a part of the brain that focuses more on the executive functions such as
working, attention, set-shifting, motor planning, and reward evaluations. Due to the bilingualism their
brains tends to be more active, given that are familiar with two distinct languages with a different set
and pros of grammar and composition; thus exercising the DLPFC. In other words, bilinguals, by having
to make routine choices, strengthen their executive functioning. The more the brain has to make
choices, the better connected the wiring becomes. In an interview with New York Times, Ellen Bialystok
(2011) stated that if an individual has two languages and uses them both regularly, the way the brain’s
networks work every time he or she speak, both languages pop up and the executive control system
has to sort through everything and attend to what’s relevant in the moment with the usage of that
system more, and it’s that regular use that makes that system more efficient.
Theoretical Framework

The schematic diagram shown below presents the theoretical framework to support the
rationale of this study, which is the Threshold Theory by James Cummins (1976).
This theory describes the relationship between cognition and level of bilingualism. The closer an
individual is to becoming a bilingual, the greater chances he or she has of acquiring cognitive
advantages.
The theory essentially has two thresholds. The first threshold is a minimum level for an
individual to reach in order to avoid the negative effects of bilingualism and limited competency in
both languages. Between the two thresholds, one is expected to be competent in one language, but is
not yet able to transfer skills between the two languages. Conversely, the lower the competency and
skills level in the first language, the harder it is to achieve bilingualism (Baker, 2011). A strong first
language can support the development of a second language. Above the second threshold allows for
the possibility of positive cognitive effects and advantages, in which, according to this theory, are what
a balanced bilingual possesses.
The researchers have decided to use Cummins’s Threshold Theory as a guide for
conceptualization and basis for the research problem. This decision has been made for two pivotal
reasons. Firstly, the rationale of this research is to determine the dominant cognitive style, whether
convergent or divergent, among bilingual students. The justification of the degree of convergent or
divergent cognition, as well as the degree of bilingualism, can be accomplished with the Threshold
Theory as its basis. The framework accompanies adequately as a guide for the researchers to validate
as to what degree of cognitive ability and bilingualism a Grade 12 student may have, rendered through
assessment and evaluation of bilingual skills and abilities. Secondly, the Threshold Theory suggests
heavily on the correlation between age and competence in language. Since the students being tested
on in this research are Grade 12 students studying in a private school offering Filipino subjects, who
have an average age ranging from 17-20 years old, and majority of these students have been taught
these subjects since the 1st grade, presumably having an average span of 11 years of Filipino education,
then it would be reasonable for the researchers to utilize the principles of the Threshold Theory
concerning age-appropriate competency in bilingualism to verify the level of bilingualism of the Grade
12 students.

Cognitive Styles: Convergent and Divergent


Creativity as a whole is too abstract to be measured. Thus, in order to assess one’s creative
ability, Guilford (1967) hypothesized that the very essence of creativity is divergent cognitivity.
According to Hommel (2011), divergent cognitivity can be defined as the process that allows people to
generate as many responses as possible based on relatively weak constraints. As an example, in
Guilford’s (1967) alternate uses task (AUT) people are presented with a simple object, such as a pen,
and asked to generate as many uses for that object they can think of. The results are commonly scored
regarding the number of responses (fluency), the number of different categories being used
(flexibility), the degree to which the responses differ from the standard or group mean (originality),
and the amount of detail (elaboration). Another example would be Duncker's (1945) candle problem,
which is still a divergent cognitive test, measures the influence of functional fixedness on a
participant's problem solving capabilities. In contrast to divergent cognition, convergent cognition can
be defined as a more strongly constrained process that searches for one possible outcome only
(Hommel et al, 2011). As an example, in Raven’s Progressive Matrices test, people are presented with
an unfinished figure patterns and are asked to complete it using the multiple choices given per pattern;
this is usually used in measuring abstract reasoning and regarded as a non-verbal estimate of fluid
intelligence in educational settings (“Raven's Progressive Matrices”, 2017). These cognitive styles
together contribute to the overall cognitive ability of an individual—in the creative process, the
relationship between cognition for divergence and cognition for convergence is not simplistic.
Convergent cognition and divergent cognition are both necessary for creativity but in different relative
amounts, depending on the creative domain (Kim, K. H., & Pierce, R. A., 2013).

This figure also refers to the model of Divergent and Convergent Cognitive Style by J. P. Guilford
(1956). The model on the left is the Convergent Cognitive Style model, while the model on the right is
the Divergent Cognitive Style model.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter explains the design of the research, the methods, the instruments, the
environments, the data retrieval and the treatment of the data.
Research Environment
The research was conducted in Philippine Christian Gospel School, a Filipino-Chinese private
school located in Junquera St., Brgy. San Antonio, Cebu City. Since the researchers are, as of this
writing, Grade 12 students of the said school, they would, therefore, have easier access to conduct
their research on the other students. Philippine Christian Gospel School offers English, Filipino, and
Chinese subjects, so students are expected to be bilingual, either fluent in their second language or
not. However, the researchers chose to test for English and Tagalog languages due to the fact that the
research subjects have had more exposure to studying Tagalog compared to Chinese during the course
of their time as Philippine Christian Gospel School students.
Research Respondents
This research was conducted on Grade 12 STEM and ABM students of the Philippine Christian
Gospel School consisting of 20 boys and 16 girls. We chose to conduct our research on the Grade
twelves because they are the eldest among the students in Philippine Christian Gospel School thus,
making them more experienced in the aspect of language; since they’ve been learning Tagalog and
English the longest. It is also more accessible for data to be gathered from the Grades twelves because
we have direct contact with them.
Research Instrument
Since bilingualism is a linguistic concept, the study will adopt both qualitative and quantitative
data gathering techniques. For the qualitative data, an English and Tagalog proficiency test will be
administered to assess the proficiency levels of the students.
For the quantitative data, a quiz assessing the dominant cognitive style of the bilingual speakers
will be administered to the students. The quiz will consist of two parts. The first part will contain
creativity problems—consisting of Guilford’s AUT test and Duncker’s (1945) Candle Problem to test the
divergent cognitive style of the students. The second part will contain Raven’s Progressive Matrices
test to assess the student’s convergent cognitive styles. To finalize, a statistical treatment will discern
the accumulated quantitative and qualitative data.

Research Procedure

Gathering of Data
After the validation of the instrument, the researchers secured a written letter from the High
School department coordinator giving them permission to assess the proficiency levels of Grade 12
students in English and Tagalog. After explaining the purpose of the study to the selected respondents,
the researchers administered the test to assess the dominant cognitive styles of the respondents. The
first part of the exam, which consisted of creativity problems, tested them for divergent cognitive style
and the second part of the exam, which consisted of non-verbal intelligence tests, tested them for their
convergent cognitive style. After the respondents have taken the test, the researchers separated the
respondents into different categories according to their proficiency level. There were three categories:
(a) Bilingual students who obtained high proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog; (b) Bilingual
students who obtained a high proficiency score in either English or Tagalog; (c) Bilingual or
Monolingual students who obtained low proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog;

Treatment of Data
After administering all the tests, the researchers scored the language proficiency test by its
percentage, The research subjects were categorized into three groups: (a.) Bilingual students who
obtained high proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog; (b.) Bilingual students who obtained a
high proficiency score in either English or Tagalog; and (c.) Bilingual students who obtained low
proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog; based on the following scoring system:
Score Proficiency Level
61 above High Proficiency
40 – 60 Average Proficiency
39 below Low Proficiency
Table 1: Interpretation table for Language Proficiency level
Next, the researchers checked the divergent test based on Hommel’s (2011) scoring method
which considers the number of responses (fluency), the number of different categories being used
(flexibility), the degree to which the responses differ from the standard or group mean (originality),
and the amount of detail (elaboration). The highest score was then recorded and set as the perfect
score. In contrast, the convergent test, also known as Raven’s Progressive Matrices test, was checked
and scored normally, with 25 as the perfect score.
The exam testing the dominant cognitive style of the respondents were checked, tallied,
interpreted, and analysed with the ANOVA treatment. The results of the cognitive styles were
correlated with the three categories of proficiency levels to determine which cognitive style is
dominant in each category.
(∑ 𝑥)2
2
𝑆𝑆𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = ∑𝑥 −
𝑁

(∑ 𝑥1 )2 (∑ 𝑥2 )2 (∑ 𝑥𝑎𝑐 )2 (∑ 𝑥)2
𝑆𝑆𝐵𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 = + + ⋯+ −
𝑛1 𝑛2 𝑛𝑎𝑐 𝑁

𝑆𝑆𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛 = 𝑆𝑆𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 − 𝑆𝑆𝐵𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛

Legend:

SSTotal = Total Sum of Squares

SSBetween = Between Sum of Squares. Also sometimes called SSA or SS Treatment

SSWithin = Within sum of squares. Also called SS error, or SS Residual


Conceptual Framework

Grade 12 Students

Survey of Proficiency
Level in English and
Tagalog

High Proficiency in High Proficiency in Low Proficiency in


both English and either English or both English and
Tagalog Tagalog Tagalog Speaking

Assessment Test for the Dominant


Cognitive Style (Divergent and Convergent)

Results and Analysis of


Data

Conclusion &
Recommendation

Ethical Considerations
Before the research was conducted, the research teacher and department coordinator had to
give their approval. Moreover, before the researchers gave out the proficiency tests and
questionnaires, all the research subjects were informed with a letter promising to keep all the data
confidential.
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the data in relation to the problems of the study and their subsequent
analyses and interpretations.

Language Proficiency of Grade 12 Students


n %

Bilingual students who obtained high proficiency scores in both


1 10 27.78%
English and Tagalog;
Bilingual students who obtained a high proficiency score in
2 16 44.44%
either English or Tagalog;
Bilingual students who obtained low proficiency scores in both
3 10 27.78%
English and Tagalog;
Table 2: Level of Language Proficiency

The table above shows the classification of the 36 respondents according to their proficiency level based
on the proficiency test. Comprising about 45% of the population, most of the respondents are bilinguals who
have one high proficiency score. Based on the data gathered, most of these bilinguals scored high proficiency
scores in English implying these respondents are eloquent in English, but not so in Tagalog.
This is in accordance to Mangahas (2016) who, in a survey conducted by local pollster Social Weather
Station, said that three-fourths of Filipino adults (76%) say they understand spoken English; additionally, another
survey by the same pollster also found 85 percent of the Filipinos nationwide claim to read and understand
spoken Filipino, but 16 percent in the Visayas region were full users of the Tagalog language. These survey
results are roughly similar in ratio to the classifications of the respondents. Indeed, majority of the students are
fluent in the English language, yet only few mastered the Filipino language.
Language Proficiency and Convergent Cognitive Style Scores

Respondents Convergent Scores Respondents Convergent Scores

Student A 32 Student B 64

Student A 36 Student B 56

Student A 32 Student B 32

Student A 36 Student B 36

Student A 20 Student B 56

Student A 28 Student B 48

Student A 72 Student B 64

Student A 48 Student B 56

Student A 40 Student C 32

Student A 40 Student C 28

Student B 40 Student C 36

Student B 52 Student C 32

Student B 44 Student C 32

Student B 36 Student C 32

Student B 36 Student C 28

Student B 36 Student C 36

Student B 40 Student C 32

Student B 52 Student C 32

Based on the table above, the bilingual students who are proficient in English and Filipino didn’t quite do
well; as seen in the table, only 1 out of 10 of the bilingual students was able to get a score of 72 than the others
who obtained scores ranging from 20 to 40, thus getting an average of 27.64. Next, the bilingual students who
are either proficient in English or Filipino only didn’t do better than the first group; out of the 16 bilingual
students, only one got a score of 64, with the remaining having a score ranging from 20 to 64 accumulating to an
average of 24.64. Lastly, among the 10 monolingual students, only 1 had a score higher than 50, which shows
that this last group performed the most poorly compared to the other two groups.

One-way ANOVA
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Convergent Between Groups 444.200 2 222.100 1.646 .208

Within Groups 4451.800 33 134.903

Total 4896.000 35
Table 3: Correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the convergent cognitive style
of the students

Based on the table above, the results showed an F-value of 1.646 (p-value= .208), where p-value is greater than
α, meaning there is a weak or no correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the cognitive
styles of the Grade 12 students at the Philippine Christian Gospel School. Seeing the poor performance of most
of the respondents, it is inevitable and understandable that this is the result. Moreover, these low scores could
be taken as a sign of an inchoate fluid intelligence and abstract reasoning in the respondents’ convergent
cognitive thinking.
Language Proficiency and Divergent Cognitive Style Scores

Respondents Divergent Scores Respondents Divergent Scores

Student A 92 Student B 42

Student A 95 Student B 72

Student A 100 Student B 65

Student A 82 Student B 69

Student A 95 Student B 70

Student A 60 Student B 75

Student A 77 Student B 55

Student A 75 Student B 32

Student A 75 Student C 82

Student A 80 Student C 32

Student B 92 Student C 42

Student B 100 Student C 70

Student B 67 Student C 22

Student B 50 Student C 55

Student B 75 Student C 47

Student B 100 Student C 77

Student B 87 Student C 47

Student B 40 Student C 45

Based on the table above the participants did significantly better in contrast to the convergent
test. The bilingual students who have high proficiency for both English and Tagalog performed
exceptionally well, with scores ranging from 100 to 60; thus acquiring an average score of 83.1.
Meanwhile, the bilingual students who have high proficiency for one language performed satisfactorily
with scores ranging from 100 to 32; thus obtaining an average score of 68.19. Lastly, the monolingual
students performed mediocrely with scores ranging from 82 to 22; thus obtaining an average of 51.9.
All participants scored fairly high compared to their results in the convergent test.

One-way ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Divergent Between
4871.401 2 2435.701 7.254 .002
Groups
Within Groups 11080.238 33 335.765
Total 15951.639 35
Table 4: Correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the divergent cognitive style
of the students
Based on the table above, the results showed an F-value of 7.254 (p-value of .002) where p-
value is less than α. There is a strong correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the
divergent styles of the Grade 12 students at the Philippine Christian Gospel School.
These statistical results are in line with the claims that speaking more than one language does
not only improve one’s verbal skills but also more general, non-linguistic cognitive abilities (Hommel et
al, 2011) and the enhanced creativity of bilinguals is a result from constant utilization of cognitive
flexibility and creativity (Storme et al, 2017). This non-linguistic cognitive abilities and creativity are
strongly linked to the divergent cognition of the brain, which proves to be the dominant cognitive style
among the bilinguals.
Furthermore, in a one-way ANOVA test, if there is a statistically significant difference group, it is
important to identify where the group differences lay. The differences that occurred between the
groups can be examined by running a posteriori test or simply known as a post hoc test. However,
based on the table below, the homogeneity of the variances has been violated.

Test of Homogeneity of Variances


Divergent
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

1.024 2 33 .370

Based on the table above, Levene's test showed that the variances for the bilingual students were
equal, for F(2,33) = 1.024 p = 0.370. Thus, the Tukey’s honest significant difference (HSD) post hoc test
was chosen for this case.

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Shapiro-Wilk

Group Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Score 1.00 .165 10 .200* .938 10 .536

2.00 .126 16 .200* .959 16 .644

3.00 .200 10 .200* .949 10 .662

*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

Based on the table above, all the groups: (1) Bilingual students who obtained high proficiency scores in
both English and Tagalog; (2) Bilingual students who obtained a high proficiency score in either English
or Tagalog; and (3) Bilingual or Monolingual students who obtained low proficiency scores in both
English and Tagalog; had a p > 0.05, which means there is no statistically significant difference among
the groups. The differences between the groups’ Means are likely due to chance or sampling and not
likely due to the manipulation of the Independent Variable.

Although the difference among the proficiency levels was vague and irretrievable due to the
insufficient data gathered, it can still be concluded that the bilingual students with either one or two
language mastery have the divergent cognitive style as the more dominant thinking style. This is in
accordance to Sperry’s (1975) claims that the right-brain dominant people who are considered as
divergent thinkers displayed a better performance in their Imagination, Intuition, and Creativity as
seen in the divergent test results. The bilingual students are more inclined to their right-brain, making
them more dominant in the divergent cognitive style.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary, conclusion, and recommendations.

SUMMARY
The objective of the research is to determine the cognitive style that is dominant among
bilingual students from the Grade 12 class of S.Y. 2017-2018. Particularly, the study has the following
sub-objectives: Firstly, to determine the level of language proficiency among the Grade 12 students,
and categorize them into groups: (a.) Bilingual students who obtained high proficiency scores in both
English and Tagalog; (b.) Bilingual students who obtained a high proficiency score in either English or
Tagalog; and (c.) Bilingual students who obtained low proficiency scores in both English and Tagalog.
Secondly, to determine whether there is a correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism
and the convergent cognitive style of the students and the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the
divergent cognitive style of the students, the one-way ANOVA test statistic was used. Lastly, to present
the results, the researchers created a creative infographic poster summarizing the research findings.

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

1. Most of the respondents are bilinguals. 16 of the respondents are highly proficient in either
English or Tagalog, which makes up 44.44% of the sample population. On the other hand,
bilinguals with high proficiency in one language and low proficiency in another consisted of
10 respondents each, comprising 27.78% of the population for each group. This clearly
reflects the survey by Mangahas (2016) wherein majority of the Filipinos are fluent in the
English language, yet in the Visayas region, only few mastered the Filipino language.
2. There is a weak or no correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the
convergent cognitive styles of the Grade 12 students at Philippine Christian Gospel School.
Most of the students, including the bilingual ones, displayed a poor performance in the
convergent thinking test, indicating an inchoate fluid intelligence and abstract reasoning in
their convergent cognitive style.
3. There is a strong correlation between the proficiency levels in bilingualism and the divergent
cognitive styles of the Grade 12 students at Philippine Christian Gospel School. Although, the
difference among the proficiency levels was vague and irretrievable due to the insufficient
data gathered, it can still be concluded that the bilingual students with either one or two
language mastery have the divergent cognitive style as the more dominant thinking style.

CONCLUSION
In this study, according to the results gathered, the dominant cognitive style among the
bilinguals is the divergent cognitive style—this cognitive style is used to generate creative ideas by
exploring as many solutions as possible; in contrast, there is a weak or no correlation at all between
the convergent cognitive style and bilingualism—this cognitive style is more inclined to finding one
possible outcome through a constrained process. Although, the differences between the groups’
means are likely due to chance or sampling and not likely due to the manipulation of the Independent
Variable, it can still be concluded that the bilingual students with either one or two language mastery
have the divergent cognitive style as the more dominant thinking style.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results and conclusions, the following actions are recommended:
1. For the future researchers that will be looking into or related to this topic, it is
recommended to use another method of gathering data other than from assessment tests
in order to find out more about this topic and to dig deeper in learning. Moreover, it is also
advisable that the test population and/or scope be broadened.
2. Right-brain dominant thinkers, or divergent thinkers, are encouraged to practice and
enhance the opposite: convergent thinking. In contrast, left-brain dominant thinks, or
convergent thinkers, are encouraged to practice and enhance the opposite: divergent
thinking.
3. For current and future educators, it is recommended to consider both cognitive styles—
divergent and convergent—when it comes to teaching, as these two styles have different
effects on one’s brain.
4. This research study may be used for further reference for other future studies regarding
bilingualism and the cognitive style of the students.
REFERENCES

Books
Aitchison, J. (2003). Teach Yourself, 6th ed. United Kingdom, UK: Hodder Education.
Baker, Colin (2011). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 5th ed. Bristol: Multilingual
Matters.
Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological monographs 58.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kim K.H., Pierce R.A. (2013) Convergent Versus Divergent Thinking. In: Carayannis E.G. (eds)
Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Springer, New York, NY.
Seth, A. (Ed.). (2014). 30-Second Brain. United Kingdom, UK: Icon Books Ltd.

Articles
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G. (2012). Bilingualism: Consequences for Mind and Brain. Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 16(4), 240–250. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.03.001
Education World. (2000). Left Brain vs. Right Brain -- Which Side Are You On?.
Guilford, J.P. (1980). Cognitive Styles: What Are They? Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 40(3), 715-735. doi:10.1177/001316448004000315
Hommel, B., Colzato, L. S., Fischer, R., & Christoffels, I. K. (2011). Bilingualism and Creativity: Benefits in
Convergent Thinking Come with Losses in Divergent Thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 273.
http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00273
Kendra, C. (2017, December 6). Left Brain vs. Right Brain: The Surprising Truth. Verywell. Retrieved
January 17, 2018, from https://www.verywell.com/left-brain-vs-right-brain-2795005
Mangahas, M. (2016, September 10). Numbers on Filipino, Cebuano, and English. Philippine Daily
Inquirer. Retrieved from http://opinion.inquirer.net/97210/numbers-on-filipino-cebuano-and-
english
Marian, V., & Shook, A. (2012). The Cognitive Benefits of Being Bilingual. Cerebrum: The Dana Forum
on Brain Science, 2012, 13.
Morris, R. (2005). Left Brain, Right Brain Whole Brain?. An examination in the theory of brain
lateralization, learning styles and the implications for education Geometry and Imagination.
(2005), pp. 17-30
Oflaz, M. (2011). The effect of right and left brain dominance in language learning. Science Direct.
15, 1507-1513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.320
Sperry, R. W. (1975, August 9) “Left-Brain, Right-Brain.” Saturday Review, pp. 1–4.
Storme, M., Celik, P., Camargo, A., Formthmann, B., Holling, H., & Lubart, T. (2017). The Effect of
Forced Language Switching during Divergent Thinking: A Study on Bilinguals’ Originality of Ideas.
Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2086. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02086

Webpages
Candle problem. (2016, November 27). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved December 14,
2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Candle_problem&oldid=751647611
Flynn, James R. (March 1987). "Massive IQ Gains in 14 Nations: What IQ Tests Really Measure" (PDF).
Psychological Bulletin. 101 (2): 171–191. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171. Retrieved 16
January 2018, from http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/flynn1987.pdf
Pinaroc, J. & Calimag, M. (2008, June 3). Philippines' Outsourcing Ambition Spurs English Proficiency.
Retrieved from http://www.zdnet.com/article/philippines-outsourcing-ambition-spurs-english-
proficiency/
Raven's Progressive Matrices. (2017, December 4). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved
12:44, January 17, 2018, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices&oldid=81362012
1
Smith, H. (2015). Does being bilingual make you smarter? Scientific Learning. Retrieved from
http://www.scilearn.com/blog/does-being-bilingual-make-you-smarter
Some facts about the world’s 6,800 tongues. (2001). Associated Press. Retrieved January 8, 2018, from
http://articles.cnn.com/2001-06-19/us/language.glance_1_languages-origin-tongues?_s=PM:US.
Threshold Hypothesis. (2016, July 4). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved January 8, 2018,
from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Threshold_hypothesis&oldid=728298972
Others
Bialystok, E. (2011, May 30). New York Times interview with Claudia Dreifus.
APPENDIX

A. Request Letter

December 18, 2017

Mdm. Raquel Barril


High School Coordinator
Philippine Christian Gospel School

Dear Mme. Barril,


Good day! We are students in Grade 12 STEM who are assigned to do a research entitled "The
Influence of Bilingualism in the Cognitive Styles among the Grade 12 Students of PCGS". This research
is part of our compliance with the data requests.
We want to ask for your permission to allow us to conduct three tests; specifically: Language
Proficiency test, Divergent thinking test, and Convergent thinking test. Their scores on the said tests
will be the basis for our academic field research. We promise that these data will be taken care of and
will be kept with utmost confidentiality.

We are hoping for your understanding. Thank you very much!

Approved by: Sincerely,

Ms. Bea Martinez Charlotte Tan


Research Adviser Group representative
APPENDIX

B. Language Proficiency Test

Name:
Error Identification [1-10]
These sentences will test your ability to recognize grammar or usage errors. There are three underlined portions that may contain errors and a
fourth option, which indicates that there is no error.

Select the letter of the underlined portion that has an error or choice D if there is no error. There is no more than one error in every item.

1. While Anna was baking cookies, Arthur maked some refreshments. No Error
A B C D

2. The new government was drafting a constitution, electing a legislative body and established
diplomatic relations.
A B C
No Error
D

3. As passionate musicians, Joe and Ernesto plan to become a member of the Manila Philharmonic. No Error
A B C D

4. Neither Senate or Congress wants to pass the bill suggested by the President. No Error
A B C D

5. Some scientists consider Sergey Koryolev’s rockets to be more revolutionary than Von Braun of NASA. No
Error.
A B C
D

6. The students protested on the new tuition fee hike in the university quadrangle yesterday. No Error
A B C D

7. These days, kids under 12 years of age prefer cellular phones more than toys. No Error.
A B C D

8. Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev brought the world to the edge of nuclear war in the 60’s. No Error
A B C D

9. The resuscitation of multiple victims of the tsunamis have kept the death toll to a minimum. No Error.
A B C D

10. May Day, or International Workers’ Day is celebrated annually. No Error.


A B C D
Spelling [11-15]
You will be given sets of four words, of which only one is spelled correctly. Select the correct word and shade the appropriate circle.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15.


a. Tourniqutte a. Equivocall a. Herbivor a. Gnat a. Connoisseur
b. Croquete b. Arbitrary b. Eucalypteus b. Psuedonym b. Flourescent
c. Bagguette c. Croissannt c. Artichoke c. Hier c. Auxilliary
d. Parquet d. Iterinary d. Bulbouos d. Bacalaureate d. Ardvark

Vocabulary [16-25]
You will be given items where there is a sentence that uses a word in italics. Select the word/s that has/have the closest meaning to the italicized word
and shade the appropriate circle.

16 Harry placed his hand gingerly on the 17 The hallowed church has seen a decrease
. fragile . in
sphere. visitors this year.
a. Carefully a. Empty
b. Firmly b. Destroyed
c. Nervously c. Damaged
d. Arduously d. Holy
18 19 Chef Ton’s new dish was palatable to the
. The new table’s surface was immaculate. . critics.
a. Intricate a. Presentable
b. Special b. Acceptable
c. Unique c. Different
d. Flawless d. Inedible
20 The book Crime and Punishment is 21 Communism is considered as the
. considered by . antithesis of
many to be Dostoevsky’s magnum opus. capitalism.
a. Greatest work a. Opponent
b. Favorite b. Opposite
c. Longest work c. Raconteur
d. Achievement d. Depredation
22 Cyrano swept into the party with such 23 Arturo began the long and arduous
. panache . journey uphill.
a. Speed a. Taxing
b. Exuberance b. Winding
c. Rudeness c. Complicated
d. Flamboyance d. Effervescent

24. No person could articulate his ideas better than 25. Paul Revere alerted the villagers to the arrival of
the the
council British
president. troops.
a. Say a. Tricked
b. Present b. Gossiped
c. Organize c. Informed
d.Translate d. Surrendered
Paragraph Arrangement [26-30]
You will be given sets of items that correspond to a particular set of sentences that are not in order. Arrange these sentences logically and answer the questions
given.

a. Nobody can doubt the advantage of a good education.


b. It is definitely something that will make a difference in your life.
c. It gives you valuable knowledge and skills that you can apply in life.
d. Education also provides a medium for you to make friends and connections.

26. Which sentence should go first?

a. (a)
b. (b)
c. (c)
d. (d)

27. Which sentence should go last?

a. (a)
b. (b)
c. (c)
d. (d)

a. For sure, a better future lies ahead.


b. The economy has been growing fast, and jobs are widely available.
c. People here and abroad are upbeat about the Philippines.
d. Additionally, the government is building a lot of new and useful infrastructure.

28. Which sentence should be first?

a. (a)
b. (b)
c. (c)
d. (d)

29. Which sentence should be last?

a. (a)
b. (b)
c. (c)
d. (d)

30. What is the correct order of the sentences?

a. (b, d, c, a)
b. (b, c, a, d)
c. (c, b, d, a)
d. (c, d, b, a)
Sentence Completion [31-40]
You will be given incomplete sentences with missing words. Select the word/s that most appropriately completes the sentence and shade the
corresponding circle.
31. There ______ no doubt in Josephine’s 32. Amazingly, the chef was chopping
mind onions,
baking bread, ___________ to his
that she will take up medicine. assistant
at the same time.
a. were
wa
b. s a. and talked
c. being b. and talking
d. is going to be c. talking
d. and were talking
33. Winston had ______ across the 34. Vincent van Gogh was known not just
English for his
Channel more than once. works of art, ________ his famous ear.
a. swum a. but
b. swam b. and also
c. swim c. also
d. swamth d. but also for
36. The Universite Paris IV Sorbonne,
35. UP Manila offers the most sought after _____
Paris, France, was once part of the
course ____ aspiring doctors: the UP second
INTARMED program. oldest university in the world.
a. to a. in
b. among b. at
c. from c. on
d. with d. under
38. Shakespeare’s work is considered by
37. The progress made with different many to
technologies _______ made the world be more influential than
a _______________.
much smaller place.
a. Mark Twain
ha
a. d b. the writer Mark Twain
ha
b. s c. Mark Twain’s work
c. have d. ones of Mark Twain’s
d. will have
39. Between you and _____, Ivan has
really 40. Despite his flu, Leo is feeling _______ today.
started to become annoying to
converse with.
a. good
a. me b. best
b. I c. ok
c. them d. arched
d. us
Pagtukoy ng Mali [41 - 50]
Piliin ang titik ng bahagi ng pangungusap na may mali sa balarila.

41. Bihira uhawin si Ramon kapag naglalaro siya sa kalye. Walang Mali
A B C D

42. Naguunahan ang mga bata na makahuli ng tutubi sa bukid. Walang Mali.
A B C D

43. Nakakaginhawa sa kaloobang malaman na may lunas ang sakit ni lolo. Walang Mali.
A B C D

44. Sino ba naman ang mag-aakala na magiging pangulo siya nang Pilipinas? Walang Mali.
A B C D

45. Sikat si Fernando Amorsolo sa kanyang paglalarawan ng buhay sa probinsya. Walang Mali.
A B C D

46. Kundi man ngayon makaluwas si Jorge sa Maynila, ay sa Agosto pa siya luluwas. Walang Mali.
A B C D

47. Mahilig sa mga kwentong luma si Ina, kaya napakalalim ng kanyang Filipino. Walang Mali.
A B C D

48. Ang mga Dominicano ang nagtatag ng Universidad de Santo Tomas, na mas sikat sa tawag na UST.
Walang Mali.
A B C D

49. Hindi bumoboto doon si manong Jose dahil laging mahaba ang pila. Walang Mali.
A B C D

50. Mas maginhawa sana ang buhay nila ngayon kung hindi labimpito ang anak nila. Walang Mali.
A B C D
Pag - Aayos ng Talata [51 - 55]
Ayusin ang talata nang kronolohikal at naayon sa lohika at sagutin ang mga tanong na ibibigay.

a. Kada taon, maraming bagyo ang bumabayo sa mga isla ng Pilipinas.


b. Dahil alam natin na malaki ang pinsalang naidudulot nito, dapat lagi tayong handa.
c. Nagdadala ang mga ito ng malalakas na hangin at maraming ulan.
d. Ito ay nagiging sanhi ng pagbaha at pagkasira ng maraming bagay

51. Alin ang unang pangungusap?


a. ( a )
b. ( b )
c. ( c )
d. ( d )

52. Alin ang pangatlong pangungusap?


a. ( a )
b. ( b )
c. ( c )
d. ( d )

53. Alin ang panghuli na pangungusap?


a. ( a )
b. ( b )
c. ( c )
d. ( d )

a. Ang basketball ang pinakasikat na laro sa Pilipinas.


b. Sikat din ang mga paligsahan sa laro na ito, tulad ng PBA at UAAP, na pinapalabas sa telebisyon.
c. Subalit, dahil hindi gaanong matangkad ang mga Pilipino, nahihirapan ang Pilipinas sa
pandaigdigang mga kompetisyon.
d. Nilalaro ito ng halos lahat ng mga bata at matanda, mahirap man o mayaman.

54. Alin ang pangalawang pangungusap?


a. ( a )
b. ( b )
c. ( c )
d. ( d )

55. Alin ang pangatlong pangungusap?


a. ( a )
b. ( b )
c. ( c )
d. ( d )
Talasalitaan [56 - 65]
Pillin ang titik ng salita/mga salita na pinakamalapit sa kahulugan ng salitang nakasalangguhit.
56. Naniniktik ang mga Espanyol sa mga posisyon 57. Madalas kang makakakita ng sambalilo sa ulo
ng mga ng
Katipunero. kinakalbong si Padre Francisco.
a. Umaatake a. Sombrero
b. Nanghihimasok b. Kapa
c. Nag-eespiya c. Huwad na buhok
d. Sumusugod d. Takip sa ulo ng mga pari
59. Bumalik lang ang Kapisanan ni Hesus sa
58. Hindi pa rin humuhupa ang baha. Pilipinas
noong ika-19 na siglo.
a. Umuurong
b. Humihina a. Kaparian
c. Dumadami b. Samahan
d. Gumagalaw c. Eklesyastiko
d. Banal na estatwa
61. Hindi napukaw ang atensyon ng mga
60. “Bangon mga busabos!” Ito ang sigaw ng mga manonood ng
rebolusyonaryo noong panahon ng
kolonisasyon. bagong kanta.
a. Tao a. Nakuha
b. Pesante b. Naantala
c. Kulugo c. Nasik
d. Alipin d. Nagulat
62. Bumubulaslas si Maria Clara sa kanto ng 63. Masyado maselan ang mga mayayaman sa
Kalye pagkain.
Anloage
a. Mahilig
a. Tumatakbo b. Matakaw
b. Nagwawala c. Magastos
c. Umiiyak d. Mapili
d. Kumakanta nang malakas
65. Sinulot ni Angelika ang asawa ng kapibahay
64. Si Salvi ang pasimuno ng lahat ng ito. niya.
a. Tumgil a. Inagaw
b. Nagsimula b. Binastos
c. Nagpakalat c. Pinagsamantalahan
d. Naghasik d. Inakit
Pagkumpleto ng pangungusap [66 - 70]
Piliin ang titik ng pinakawastong salita/mga salita para sa pangungusap.

66. __________ siya sa kanto gabi-gabi. 67. Madaling makakita ng ________ sa bahay niya.
a. Sumisigarilyo a. Paru-paro
b. Nagsigarilyo b. Paruparo
c. Naninigarilyo c. Paro-paro
d. Nagnigarliyo d. Paro paro
68. Sa Laguna ______ naman pala siya pupunta 69. ________ si Padre Damaso, kaya mahusay siya
bukas. magsalita
ng wikang Espanyol.
a. rin
b. din a. Taga Espanya
c. pala b. Taga-Espanya
d. talaga c. TagaEspanya
d. Taga-Espanyol

70. ____________ siya sa kalagayan ng kanyang ospital


tatay na nasa .
a. Nag-aalala
b. Nagaalala
c. Nag aalala
d. Nagalala

STOP!
-END OF SECTION-
Do not move on to other sections or return to any previous sections.
APPENDIX

C. Divergent Test

Name:
Divergent Test
I. Brainstorming
Instructions: Answer the following questions.
1. What can you do with a paper clip?

2. What can you do with a knife?

II. The Candle Problem

Instructions: Based on the scene above, find a way to affix the candle to the wall without dripping
wax on the table when lit.
APPENDIX

D. Convergent Test

Name:
Procedure
This test has 25 questions which start on the next page. The last page has scoring instructions.

The questions take the form of a 3x3 matrix from which one tile is missing. For each question, there
are eight possible answers (A-H). You must choose the tile that completes that matrix best.

1.

2.
3.

4.
5.

6.
7.

8.
9.

10.
11.

12.
13.

14.
15.

16.
17.

18.
19.

20.
21.

22.
23.

24.
25.

STOP!
-END OF SECTION-
Do not move on to other sections or return to any previous sections.
E. Infographic Poster
CURRICULUM VITAE

ELIJAH PSALM CAÑETE


Lot 6391 – D – 1 Quijada St. Dream Homes, Guadalupe, Cebu City
Contact Number: 0949 782 7698
Email: elijahpsalm69@gmail.com

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Age : 17
Height : 5’8”
Weight : 121 lbs.
Birth date : September 20, 1999
Father’s Name : Landrino Palermo Cañete
Mother’s Name : Anaisa Eslawan Cañete
City Address : Lot 6391 –D – 1 Quijada Street, Dream Homes, Guadalupe, Cebu City

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Pre-Elementary : Harvest Christian School Int. Year Graduated: 2006


Elementary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: 2012
Secondary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: On Going

RECOGNITION/AWARDS

3rd Runner up- Asia Pacific Youth Tchoukball Championships Singapore


August 2014
TRAININGS / WORKSHOPS / SEMINARS ATTENDED

Translation: Beyond Basics


The University of San Carlos (USC) Cebuano Studies Center
October 14-15, 2016

Fire Fighting, First Aid, Basic Life Support, and Disaster Risk Reduction Modules
Emergency Rescue Unit Foundation Phil Inc.
July 24-28, 2017
KENNY EDWINSON KAW
Cebu Universal Lumber Co., Inc., Jaena Lopez St., Mandaue City
Contact Number: 0943 726 1648
E-mail: kawkenny2000@gmail.com

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Age : 18
Height : 5’7”
Weight : 164 lbs.
Birth date : February 29, 2000
Father’s Name : Edwin Kaw
Mother’s Name : Chun Nei Kaw
City Address : Cebu Universal Lumber Co., Inc., Jaena Lopez St., Mandaue City

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Pre-Elementary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: 2006


Elementary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: 2012
Junior High School : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: 2016
Senior High School : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: On Going

RECOGNITION/AWARDS

Super Reader Award, Philippine Christian Gospel School


SY 2005-2006
Chinese Recitation Competition, Philippine Christian Gospel School
1st Place
SY 2008-2009
Excellence in English Award, Philippine Christian Gospel School
SY 2014-2015
MEMBERSHIPS / POSITIONS AND EVENTS
Class President, Philippine Christian Gospel School
SY 2011-2012

TRAININGS / WORKSHOPS / SEMINARS ATTENDED

Industrial and Construction Expo


CEBUCON, Waterfront Cebu
April 2016

Graphic Design Seminar


GraphicStar
2015
AMANDA LEE SHARPE
540 3rd st. Carmen Village, Talisay City, Cebu
Contact Number: 0906 397 3150
Email: mandeesharpe@gmail.com

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Age : 18
Height : 5’3”
Weight : 107 lbs.
Birth date : April 17, 1999
Father’s Name : Douglas Graham Sharpe
Mother’s Name : Marla Sagun Sharpe
City Address : 540 3rd st. Carmen Village, Talisay City, Cebu

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Pre-Elementary : Seeds of Promise Year Graduated: 2006


Elementary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: 2012
Secondary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: On Going

RECOGNITION/AWARDS

3rd Honor in the first semester of Grade eleven


SY 2016- 2017
59

MEMBERSHIPS / POSITIONS AND EVENTS

Member- Choir
SY 2010-2011

Member- Homemakers
SY 2013-2014

Marshall- Science Club


SY 2014-2015

Member- Chinese Club


SY 2016-2017

Member- Music Club


SY 2016-2017

Member- Bible Club


SY 2016-2017

Member- Robotics Club


SY 2017-2018

TRAININGS / WORKSHOPS / SEMINARS ATTENDED

ERUF Disaster and Risk Reduction Conference


ERUF center, Mandaue City, Cebu
July 10-11, 14-15, 2017
60

CHARLOTTE BEATRIZ TAN


#60 F. Go Chan St., Mabolo, Cebu City
Contact Number: 0920 957 3968
Email: c.tan94@yahoo.com

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Age : 18
Height : 5’3”
Weight : 45 kg.
Birth date : August 14, 1999
Father’s Name : Charlie Tan Tan
Mother’s Name : Shirly Lacson Tan
City Address : #60 F. Go Chan St., Mabolo, Cebu City

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Pre-Elementary : Bataan ACES Foundation Year Graduated: 2006


Elementary : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: 2012
Junior High School : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Completed: 2016
Senior High School : Philippine Christian Gospel School Year Graduated: On Going

RECOGNITION/AWARDS

3rd Honor Awardee


SY 2012-2013
61

1st Runner-up in the Essay Writing Contest


Centennial Celebration of Cebu Gospel Church
November 15, 2015

Candidate for Honors


SY 2016-2017

Consistent Top 10 Ranking


SY 2012-2017

MEMBERSHIPS / POSITIONS AND EVENTS

House Representative – Supreme Student Government of Philippine Christian Gospel School


SY 2012-2013; 2014-2015

Managing Editor – Phos Alethia of Philippine Christian Gospel School


SY 2015-2016

Assistant Secretary – Christian Youth Fellowship of Cebu Gospel Church


2014-2017

TRAININGS / WORKSHOPS / SEMINARS ATTENDED


62

Bible Baptist Church Weekly Outreach


Philippine Christian Gospel School (PCGS)
SY 2016-2017

Fire Fighting, First Aid, Basic Life Support, and Disaster Risk Reduction Modules
Emergency Rescue Unit Foundation Phil. Inc. (ERUF)
July 24-28, 2017