1

CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM

Introduction

Teachers’ classroom practices are important for understanding and improving educational

processes. They are closely linked to teachers’ strategies for coping with challenges in their daily

professional life and to their general well-being, and they shape students’ learning environment

and influence student motivation and achievement.

A majority of studies considering teaching practices do not look at a certain teaching

practice but rather analyze the relationship between a teacher’s evaluation score on a standard-

based teacher evaluation system and student achievement. Most of these studies find that

evaluation scores are correlated with student achievement. A similar result is found by Jacob and

Lefgren (2008). The authors analyze the relationship between the school principal’s evaluation

of a teacher and the part of actual achievement gain students have because they are taught by this

teacher. The different evaluation schemes measure a part of teacher quality.

There are three additional classroom practices: individualization, collaboration and

authentic assessment. Individualization means that teachers instruct each student by drawing

upon the knowledge and experience that that particular student already possesses. Collaborative

learning means that teachers allow students to work together in groups. Finally, authentic

assessment means that assessment occurs as an artifact of learning activities. This can be

accomplished, for instance, through individual and group projects that occur on an on-going

basis rather than at a single point in time (McLaughlin & Talbert, 1993; Graves & Sunstein,

1992; Golub, 1988).

 2

With these preceding ideas, and statements the researchers significantly would like to

determine the level of teachers’ classroom practices of Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges-

Marbel Inc., and its influence to the level of students’ class participation.

Statement of the Problem

This study sought to find out the level of teachers’ classroom practices and its

relationship to the level of students’ class participation of the Grade 11 students of Ramon

Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Inc.

Specifically, this study aimed to:

1. Determine the extent of teachers’ classroom practices.

2. Determine the level of students’ class participation.

3. Identify the significant relationship between the level of teachers’ classroom practices

and level of students’ class participation.

Significance of Study or Importance of the Study

The Administrator: the result of this study served as a basis for them on how they should

cope with the fast-growing change when it comes to education. Hence, they can improve their

facilities and faculty personnel to satisfy the needs of today’s learners.

The Researchers: this study sought answer for their study titled the level of teachers’

classroom practices and its relationship to the level of students’ class participation of the

Grade 11 students of Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Inc.

The Teachers: the result of this study wasbeneficial for the teacher to evaluate the strategies

they have used and to know the level of effectiveness of the strategy, considering the factors

that affect students’ class participation.

 3

The Parents:the findings of this study served as a reference for them on how they should

guide their children. It helped them to further understand the situation of today’s generation.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study was delimited to the level of teachers’ classroom practices and its relationship

to the level of students’ class participation of the Grade 11 students of Ramon Magsaysay

Memorial Colleges-Marbel Incorporated, who were enrolled for the Academic Year, 2017-2018.

The researchers thought that the institution and respondents fitted the need of this research. This

study was conducted on July 2017 to August 2017.

 4

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presented the related literature and studies, conceptual framework a

hypothesis of studies and definition of terms.

Related Literature

A majority of studies considering teaching practices do not look at a certain teaching

practice but rather analyze the relationship between a teacher’s evaluation score on a standard-

based teacher evaluation system and student achievement. Most of these studies find that

evaluation scores are correlated with student achievement. A similar result is found by Jacob and

Lefgren (2008). The authors analyze the relationship between the school principal’s evaluation

of a teacher and the part of actual achievement gain students have because they are taught by this

teacher. The different evaluation schemes measure a part of teacher quality. Nevertheless, when

analyzing the relationship between an evaluation score and student achievement it is unclear,

which part of the evaluated practices is (most) important for the student outcome.

This problem also arises in some other studies that look at the impact of different

categories of practices on student achievement. Smith et al. (2001) analyze if didactic or

interactive teaching methods are more effective in teaching elementary school children. They find

that interactive teaching is associated with higher gains in test scores. McGaffrey et al. (2001) and

Cohen and Hill (2000) analyze if students have higher test scores in math if their teacher uses

methods in accordance with a teaching reform promoted by the National Science Foundation.

Again, didactic and interactive methods or reform-based and traditional practices are measured at
 5

an aggregated level encompassing different teaching practices. The authors estimate an effect of a

teaching style but not of a single teaching practice.

Only a few studies have analyzed the impact of single teaching practices. Matsumura et al.

(2002) look at the effect the quality of assignments has on student achievement. Using

hierarchical linear modeling they find that a small part of student test score variance can be

predicted by assignment quality. The relationship between assignments and student achievement

is also analyzed by Newmann et al. (2001). The authors find that more intellectually challenging

assignments are related to higher gains in test scores.

Wenglinsky (2000, 2002) uses multilevel structural equation modeling to analyze the

impact of different teaching practices on student test scores in math and science. He finds that the

use of hands-on learning activities like solving real world problems and working with objects, an

emphasis on thinking skills and frequent traditional testing of students, but also more

individualized assessment through projects and portfolios are positively related to students’ test

scores taking into account student background and prior performance. Some evidence for the

effectiveness of frequent student assessment is also found by Kannapel et al. (2005): High-

performing high-poverty schools in Kentucky payed more attention to student assessment than

other high-poverty schools. Bonesrønning (2004) looks at a different aspect of student

assessment. He analyzes if grading practices affect student achievement in Norway and finds

evidence that easy grading deteriorates student achievement.

Brewer and Goldhaber (1997) estimate different specifications of education production

functions for tenth grade students in math with data from the National Educational Longitudinal

Study of 1988. They conclude that teacher behavior is important in explaining student test scores.

Especially, 3 they find that controlling for student background, prior performance and school and
 6

teacher characteristics, instruction in small groups and emphasis on problem solving lead to lower

student test scores.

Similarly to Brewer and Goldhaber (1997), this paper analyzes the effect of single

teaching practices on student achievement. But the analyzed practice is different from those of

Brewer and Goldhaber (1997). As in Brewer and Goldhaber (1997) problem solving is included in

the analysis. But it is not taken as the mainly analyzed teaching practice. Instead we look at the

effect of spending time on lecture style presentation compared to time spend on problem solving.

Since lecture style presentation and problem solving could be classified as belonging to different

teaching styles this study also relates to other literature that compares the effects of different

teaching styles like Smith et al. (2001).

The qualitative literature on effective teaching emphasizes the importance of high order

thinking skills (McLaughlin & Talbert, 1993). Teaching higher-order thinking skills involves not

so much conveying information as conveying understanding. Students learn concepts and then

attempt to apply them to various problems, or they solve problems and then learn the concepts

that underlie the solutions. These skills tend to be conveyed in one of two ways: through applying

concepts to problems (applications) or by providing examples or concrete versions of the concept

(simulations).

In either case, students learn to understand the concept by putting it in another context. In

the case of an application, this might mean solving a unique problem with which the student is

unfamiliar. In the case of a simulation this might mean examining a physical representation of a

theorem from geometry or engaging in a laboratory exercise that exemplifies a law from

chemistry. While both lower-order and higher-order thinking skills undoubtedly have a role to

play in any classroom, much of the qualitative research asserts that the students of teachers who
 7

can convey higher-order thinking skills as well as lower-order thinking skills outperform students

whose teachers are only capable of conveying lower-order thinking skills (see also Phelan 1989;

Langer & Applebee, 1987).

There are three additional classroom practices: individualization, collaboration and

authentic assessment. Individualization means that teachers instruct each student by drawing

upon the knowledge and experience that that particular student already possesses. Collaborative

learning means that teachers allow students to work together in groups. Finally, authentic

assessment means that assessment occurs as an artifact of learning activities. This can be

accomplished, for instance, through individual and group projects that occur on an on-going

basis rather than at a single point in time (McLaughlin & Talbert, 1993; Graves & Sunstein,

1992; Golub, 1988).

According to Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, Classroom

Practice Level One: teacher outlines the purpose of learning the content, based on the relevant

curriculum standards. They organize the learning space and resources, including ICT, to engage

students in the learning activities. The teacher assesses students’ prior knowledge by asking

them to recall what they know about the content. They endeavor to connect learning to students’

personal contexts by identifying links to their interests, experiences and background. The teacher

makes links between the content of the learning activities and the content of previous and future

learning experiences. They present content in the same way to all students, selecting general

activities that engage the class as a whole.

Moreover, the teacher presents an outline of the lesson and the work to be done in the

allocated time. They give students procedural directions needed to complete the tasks. The

teacher creates opportunities for students to practice skills and processes. They use a variety of
 8

questions to encourage students to discuss content, posing questions to the whole class and

responding to individual students’ answers. The teacher introduces the literacy and numeracy

skills of the content area, together with relevant academic vocabulary. The teacher explains the

criteria that will be used to assess student work. They prompt students’ responses in order to

assess their progress throughout the lesson, and they provide opportunities for students to

comment on their own work.

Classroom Practice Level Two: The teacher explains the lesson structure, including

timeframes for learning activities. They have all tasks, materials and resources ready and

accessible for students. The teacher uses stimuli to elicit prior knowledge and to clarify

students’ current understanding. Throughout the lesson, they monitor students’ understanding

and skill development against established learning goals and assessment criteria, adapting

strategies when necessary for individual students or the whole class.

Hence, the teacher supports students to develop their literacy and numeracy skills. They

model the use of English language conventions and the language of the discipline. The teacher

uses a variety of questioning strategies, which are designed to elicit factual knowledge and

comprehension and are inclusive of all students. The teacher develops students’ metacognitive

skills by modelling the language of thinking, and providing tools and strategies to assist them to

be aware of, and monitor, their own learning. They facilitate students’ self-assessment by

giving them tools to assess, and reflect on, their own work.

The AITSL also says that the teacher uses a variety of strategies to manage and respond

to student behavior. Communication is direct, repeated, specific and positive. They model

respectful interactions with students, using verbal and non-verbal behaviors, including
 9

expressing interest in students’ thoughts and opinions. The teacher implements safe practices by

modelling and maintaining safety protocols in the learning environment.

Much of the discussion in educational reform hinges on the question of whether schools

matter. Over the past two decades, policymakers have called for improvements in the academic

performance of U.S. students. Many educational reformers, particularly those associated with

the standards movement, hold that the key to improving student performance lies in improving

the schools. If academic standards are rigorous, curriculum and assessments are aligned to those

standards, and teachers possess the skills to teach at the level the standards demand, student

performance will improve.

However, this perspective is to some extent at odds with another that has emerged from

the discussion about school improvement, namely that it is students rather than schools that

make the difference. Hence, a New York Times story on how to improve the academic

performance of low-income students can include the headline: "What No School Can Do

(Traub, 2000).

The Classroom Practice Level Three: the teacher discusses connections between learning

goals, learning activities and assessment requirements. They articulate the learning expectations

for all students, drawing on their interests, experiences and backgrounds in order to make

connections with learning activities. The teacher explains what high-quality work looks like and

illustrates this by stating the success criteria, both verbal and non-verbal.

They align assessment strategies to learning goals and they adapt learning tasks to student

readiness. The teacher gives students standards-referenced rubrics to demonstrate how their

learning will be assessed.

 10

Classroom Practice Level Four: the teacher articulates learning goals that are

communicated clearly, referred to frequently and used by students to monitor and advance their

own learning. They clarify students’ misconceptions, in order to refine individual learning

goals. The teacher designs activities that incorporate cross-curricular applications and real-

world connections. They set out the expectations for learning and they model expected

behaviors. The teacher organizes the learning environment and resources to support individual

learning needs.

The teacher provides detailed instructions and examples of what students would need to

do, or include in their work, to produce a high-quality product. They present concepts of the

discipline in multiple ways to all students and identify diverse perspectives when presenting

content. Classroom Practice Level Five: the teacher uses a range of strategies to determine

students’ prior knowledge. They use this evidence to design challenging learning goals.

The teacher shares responsibility with students for reinforcing agreed learning

expectations and refers to agreed routines and protocols throughout the lesson. The teacher

supports students to use different representations to develop their understanding of particular

concepts and ideas. They help students make sense of connections within and between

curriculum areas. The teacher provides scaffolds on which students can build their own capacity

to appreciate diverse perspectives, and supports them to make personal connections with what

they have learnt. When articulating assessment requirements, the teacher uses examples of

student work to demonstrate the expected standards.

Lastly, Classroom Practice Level Six: the teacher supports students to use evidence,

including prior learning experiences, in personalizing and revising their learning goals and

aligning them with the curriculum standards. They spontaneously adjust their instructions
 11

during the lesson to increase learning opportunities and improve students’ understanding. The

teacher designs challenging tasks that require students to generate knowledge and elaborate

upon information. They explain the taxonomy used to structure the learning activity and to

inform the assessment criteria, so that students understand the intellectual demands of the task.

According to Sexena (2013), students are encouraged to use the knowledge they already

possess to learn new things, which gives them time for reflection. In this student-centric

approach for teaching, teachers become facilitators or just partners in learning of their students.

Through curriculum design and assessment, teachers shift the focus towards performance in real-

world contexts. They try to create organized and cohesive experiences to assist students to make

connections to vital concepts. Student-centered teaching is a key feature of imparting effective

instruction.

She also added that the evolution of student-centered classrooms can be traced back to

the 1900s, and facts suggest that students learn more by self-experience and active involvement

than by mere observation. Student responses are most valuable to steer lessons and create

instructional strategies. Asking questions and leading students to solutions nurtures students’

natural curiosity and is recommended over simply providing them with answers. Student-

centered classrooms are linked to student engagement and success. Here, students are part of

constructing their own learning in a comprehensive environment that focuses on student

interests. Students reflect on their own learning, share it with fellow students and teachers and

apply the learning to real-life. So, when students are the focus of the learning in a classroom,

they become fully engaged in the process.

Student ability does not seem to be the driving factor behind the relationship between

teaching method and test scores. When regressingthe difference of each student’s test scores in
 12

math and science on the difference of teacher reports between the subjects the estimate of the

coefficient for the percentage of effective teaching time spent on giving lecture style

presentations is again significantly positive. So, if one of the two teachers reports a higher share

of giving lecture style presentations in his effective teaching time the student does significantly

better in his subject than in the other teacher’s subject. The magnitude of the effect also seems to

be quite impressive: one percent more spent on lecture style presentation instead of problem

solving is related to an increase in test scores of between .09 and .16, which is equal to 9 and 16

percent respectively of a standard deviation in test scores. Interestingly, hardly any of the other

teacher variables have a significant relationship to the difference in test scores. It does not seem

to matter for the student’s achievement whether his teacher has a major in a math or science,

whether 9 his teacher is female or male, whether his teacher is old or young and whether his

teacher has participated in a lot of teacher training activities or not. Only a major in education

and teaching experience have a significant coefficient in one of the specifications. The latter

effect nicely aligns with results in other studies that find that teaching experience is one of the

few variables that have a significant impact on teacher quality (Rivkin et al 2005)

Related Studies

The data used here is the 2003 wave of the Trends in International Math and Science Study

(TIMSS). About 50 countries participated in the study. As most of the studies on the effect of

teaching practices concern US data this analysis also looks at students from the US. In TIMSS,

students in 4th grade and in 8th grade were tested in math and science. Test scores were

standardized across countries to a mean of 500 and a standard deviation of 100. For the following

analysis, we standardize the test scores for each subject to be mean 0 and standard deviation 1.3

In addition to test scores, the publicly available TIMSS data set provides background information
 13

on student home and family. For the purpose of estimating teacher effects on student outcomes it

is very important that TIMSS is a matched student-teacher data set. Each student’s teachers in

math and science were surveyed on their characteristics, qualifications and teaching practices.

Questions concerning teaching practices were also answered by the students. Data on certain

school characteristics reported by each school’s principal is also available.

Besides the matched student-teacher design of the data it is important to have test scores

for each student in math and science. The availability of test scores in two subjects allows to

control for all observed and unobserved student traits that are constant across the two subjects

and have the same influence on both subjects’ test scores (Dee, 2005, 2007).

The teaching practice analyzed in this paper is derived from question 20 in the teacher

questionnaires. It asks teachers to report what percentage of time in a typical week of the specific

subject’s lessons students spend on reviewing homework, listening to lecture style presentation,

working on problems with the teacher’s guidance, working on problems without guidance,

listening to the teacher reteach and clarify content, taking tests or quizzes, classroom

management and other activities. Out of these 8 categories, we classify listening to lecture style

presentation and working on problems with and without guidance as effective teaching time, that

is time in which students study new material.

The percentage of time spent on effective teaching is included as a control in the

following analysis. As we are especially interested in the impact of more traditional teaching

methods like giving lecture style presentations compared to more modern and interactive

methods like having students solve problems in class we generate the share of time spent on

lecture style presentation on the overall effective teaching time. That is the analysis focuses on
 14

the relationship between the amount of time spent on lecture style presentation relative to time

spent on problem solving.

The TIMSS 2003 US data set contains student-teacher observations on 8.912 students in

232 schools. 41 of those students have more than one teacher in science. These students are

dropped from the analysis. 8.871 students in 231 schools in 455 math classes taught by 375

different math teachers and in 1.085 science classes taught by 475 different science teachers

remain in the sample. Not all of the students and teachers completed their questionnaires. In

order not to be forced to drop a large amount of observations we included dummy variables that

indicate if a certain categorial variable is missing. 2.605 students are dropped nevertheless due to

missing teaching practice variables. As the test scores of the dropped students are a little lower

on average than the average test scores in the remaining sample the results have to be interpreted

with caution. 6.305 students in 204 schools with 638 teachers (284 math teachers and 335

science teachers, and 19 teachers who teach both subjects) remain in the sample.

According to Wenglinsky (2001), teachers' classroom practices will have the greatest

impact on student academic performance, professional development the next greatest, and

teacher inputs the least. The rationale for this expectation is that the classroom is the primary

venue in which students and teachers interact; hence, decisions by teachers as to what to do in

this venue will most strongly affect student outcomes.Hands-on learning activities appear quite

infrequent. He found out that just one-quarter of students work with objects and just one-tenth

work with blocks. Problems with a concrete or practical bent address the real-world situations are

fairly usual, however, with three-quarters of students encountering such problems as least once a

week. Writing about mathematics is fairly uncommon, with just one-third of students doing so at

least once a week. Group activities vary in their frequency; most students discuss math in small
 15

groups, but only a minority of students solve problems in groups or work on a problem with a

partner. Finally, textbooks and homework are ubiquitous in eighth-grade classrooms; nearly all

students use a textbook at least once a week, and most do some homework every day.

The result of the study view of Obinaju (2006), which states that most students

misbehave and perform below expectations because the classroom teacher fail to give and

explain disciplinary rules and regulations governing the class. This result is also in line with the

views of Okon (2009) who asserted that verbal instruction on what to be done gives students an

idea of what is expected of them in the classroom and this help them to behave well. In another

perspective, this result supports the views of Ndiana (2009) which opines that if teachers give

directives on how classroom activities should be done, the classroom will be orderly enough for

lessons to be affective, this will have positive impact on students’ academic performance. Based

on the above discussion, it is deducted that senior secondary school one (SS1) students in Uyo

Local Government Area whose teachers give verbal instructions exhibits less disruptive behavior

and perform better academically.

Teacher's classroom management practices have a significant, positive effect on

decreasing problem behavior in the classroom. Students in the treatment classrooms in all 12

studies located for the review showed less disruptive, inappropriate, and aggressive behavior in

the classroom compared to untreated students in the control classrooms. (Daniel, J. 2001)

The overall mean classroom effect size of either .80 or .71 indicates a positive effect that

significantly impacts the classroom environment. To put our classroom-level mean effect sizes

into a comparable format with the more typical effect sizes, we back-transformed our mean

effect sizes using the original adjustment formulas (Hedges, 2007).

 16

Thus, the classroom-level mean effect sizes of .80 and .71 are roughly comparable to

student level effect sizes of .18 and .22 for ICC=.05 and ICC=.10, respectively. Teachers who

use effective classroom management can expect to experience improvements in student behavior

and improvements that establish the context for effective instructional practices to occur.\

Positive learning outcomes occur when students are actively involved in the learning

experience (Davis, 2009; Mayer, 1998). Immediacy behaviors can be a valuable tool for

encouraging classroom participation and thusly, active involvement in the learning process

(Menzel & Carrell, 1999; Rocca, 2008). Previous research suggests these behaviors work

because they create a congenial environment where students feel comfortable contributing

(Mehrabian, 1972/2007). Additionally, our findings suggest that asking for students’ input and

showing warmth (i.e., relaxed body position, use of personal examples, humor, and eye contact)

may be particularly effective for encouraging participation in the college classroom. Because this

study investigated the relationship between teacher immediacy and student participation across

disciplines, the results are useful to teachers from a variety of academic backgrounds.

Incorporating these immediacy behaviors may be a beneficial pedagogical strategy for promoting

student success across academic disciplines (Rocca, 2010) and even across cultures (Ozmen,

2011.)

According to Susak (2016), the majority of students indicated that they are more inclined

to participate in the classroom when they know their professor is supportive, open to ideas, and

will not criticize them. Rocca (2009) indicated that when professors make negative comments

towards students this can lower participation levels and Fassinger (2000) indicated that students

were more inclined to participate if the professor was approachable. Professors should aim to

ensure that the classroom environment is on that commands respect by all participants and in
 17

their dialogue with one another. Professors need to ensure that dialogue is managed in a way that

facilitates open discussion among peers and supports the importance of differing perspectives.

According to Cabrillana and Mayan (2015) that the Estimation results from using

separately students’ and teacher’s answers show that modern practices are related to better

student achievement, while traditional teaching, if anything, is detrimental. The magnitude of the

coefficients is larger when practices are reported by students. The use of traditional and modern

materials in class is not significantly associated to test scores. By subject, we find that modern

teaching practices improve reading achievement, while they are not significant for maths. Results

are robust to considering alternative definitions of teaching practices and to controlling for class-

average socio-demographic characteristics

Conceptual Framework

A conceptual framework was an analytical tool with several variation and context. It was

used to make conceptual distinction and organize ideas. It was developed in order to explain the

relationship among the variables utilized in the study. Using this diagram below, it was now

easy to figure out the Students’ Perception on the Utilization of 21st Century Strategies as an

independent variable and its relationship to their social skills as a dependent variable.

According to Wenglinsky (2001), teachers' classroom practices will have the greatest

impact on student academic performance, professional development the next greatest, and

teacher inputs the least. The rationale for this expectation is that the classroom is the primary

venue in which students and teachers interact; hence, decisions by teachers as to what to do in

this venue will most strongly affect student outcomes.Hence, researchers came up with

conceptual framework shown below.

 18

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLES

LEVEL OF LEVEL OF
TEACHERS' STUDENTS' CLASS
CLASSROOM PARTICIPATION
PRACTICES

Figure 1: Conceptual Paradigm

Hypothesis

There was no significant relationship between the level of teachers' classroom practices

and the level of students' class participation.

Definition of Terms

To make this study specifically accurate and clear, the following terms operationally

defined.

Teachers' Classroom Management- refers toteachers’ strategies for coping with challenges in

their daily professional life and to their general well-being, and they shape students’ learning

environment and influence student motivation and achievement.

Students' Class Participation- result in insightful comments and interesting connections being

made by the students, and can foster a high level of energy and enthusiasm in

the classroom learning environment.

Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Incorporated- refers to the location where

the study was conducted.

Grade 11- refers grade level where the study was conducted
 19

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presented the methods and procedures of the studyincluding the research

design, respondent, research instrument, data gathering and procedures and statistical treatment

used in the study.

Research Design

This study utilized the descriptive correlational research design. This method described

the level of teachers’ classroom practices and its relationship to the level of students’ class

participation in Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Incorporated.

A correlational research was a quantitative method in which you have 2 or more

quantitative variables from the same group of participants, & you were trying to determine if

there was a relationship (or covariation) between the 2 variables (that was, a similarity in pattern

of scores between the two variables, not a difference between their means) (Warters, 2017).

Respondent of the Study

The respondents of this study were thirty (30) grade 11 students of Ramon Magsaysay

Memorial Colleges- Marbel Incorporated for the school year 2017-2018. Randomization was

used in selecting the respondent.

Research Instrument

The data were gathered using two different questionnaires developed by the researchers

and were validated by the panel to ensure its correctness. The questionnaires both consisted of 10

items that were answered by the respondents using five (5) scales. The questionnaire one (1) was

about the teachers’ classroom practices with the scale of Always, Usually, Sometimes, Rarely,
 20

and Never. The questionnaire two (2) focused on students’ class participation with the scale of

Strongly Agree, Agree, Uncertain, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree.

Data Gathering Procedure

A permit to conduct a research and study was secured from the office of the administrator

of the RMMC-M.I. After the permit to conduct was secured, the researchers proceeded to their

designated school, Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Incorporated where the study

was conducted.

The researchers asked permission through letter to the principal of the school to conduct

the study among thirty (30) randomly selected grade 11 students titled the level of teachers’

classroom practices and its relationship to the level of students’ class participation. Upon the

approval, the researchers asked permission from the principal of the school to schedule when to

administer the questionnaire.

Statistical Treatment for Data Analysis

The researchers used the frequency distribution and weight mean to analyze and to

determine the level of teachers’ classroom practices and its relationship to the level of students’

class participation.

The Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to determine the

significant relationship between the level of teachers’ classroom practices and the level students’

class participation.
 21

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presented the analysis and interpreting the data obtained from the responses

of thirty (30) Grade 11 students, on the results were presented on the succeeding tables.

Table 1.1
The Teachers’ Classroom Practices in Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Inc.

Item Indicators X Description Interpretation

No.
1. Teachers begin a new unit of study and clarify the purpose and learning 4.67 Always The level describes in the statement was
observed and practiced all the times.
goals by presenting an outline of the lesson and the work to be done in the
allocated time.
2. Teachers engage learners personally, hold high expectations of learners, and 4.3 Often The level describes in the statement was

should not limit learners to grade level or perceived ability. observed and practiced majority of the time.

3. Teachers provide explicit criteria on how students can be successful. 4.3 Often The level describes in the statement was
observed and practiced major of the times
4. Teachers present learning experiences that are integrated, related to the real 4.46 Often The level describes in the statement was

world, reviewed consistently, and connected to subsequent curricula. observed and practiced major of the times

5. Teachers support students to use evidence, including prior learning 4.63 Always The level describes in the statement was

experiences, in personalizing and revising their learning goals and aligning observed and practiced all the time.

them with the curriculum standards.

6. Teachers enrich students’ vocabulary that is evident and is drawn directly 4.43 Often The level describes in the statement was

from challenging writings, informational text, and/or wisdom literature. observed and practiced majority of the time.

7. Teachers make sure that learners’ work is displayed in some form. Positive 4.26 Often The level describes in the statement was

and timely feedback is provided through oral and/or written commentary. observed and practiced majority of the time.

8. Teachers assess students’ prior knowledge by asking them to recall what 4.67 Always The level describes in the statement was

they know about the content. observed and practiced all the time.

9. Teachers share responsibility with students for reinforcing agreed learning 4.23 Often The level describes in the statement was

expectations and refers to agreed routines and protocols throughout the observed and practiced majority of the time.

lesson.
10. Teachers’model respectful interactions with students, using verbal and non- 4.43 Often The level describes in the statement was

verbal behaviours including expressing interest in students’ thoughts and observed and practiced majority of the time.

opinions.
Weighted Mean 4.43 Often The level describes in the statement
8 was observed and practiced majority
of the time.
 22

Scale Range Description

5 4.50-5.00 Always
4 3.50-4.49 Usually
3 2.50-3.49 Sometimes
2 1.50-2.49 Rarely
1 1.10-1.49 Never

Table 1 showsthe teachers’ classroom practices. It shows that the indicator with the

lowest weighted mean of 4.23 is indicator number 9, describes as Often and interprets as the

level describes in the statement was observed and practiced majority of the time. On the other

hand, the indicators with the highest weighted mean of 4.67 are number 1 and 8, described as

Always and interpreted as the level describes in the statement was observed and practiced all the

time.

The total weighted mean of ten indicators on teachers’ classroom practices is 4.438 also

described as Often and interpreted as the level describes in the statement was observed and

practiced majority of the time.

This is being supported by Wenglinsky (2011), on his research about ‘Teacher Classroom

Practices and Student Performance’ he found out that hands-on learning activities appear quite

infrequent. Just one-quarter of students work with objects and just one-tenth work with blocks.

Problems with a concrete or practical bent address the real-world situations are fairly usual,

however, with three-quarters of students encountering such problems as least once a week.

Writing about mathematics is fairly uncommon, with just one-third of students doing so at least

once a week. Group activities vary in their frequency; most students discuss math in small

groups, but only a minority of students solve problems in groups or work on a problem with a

partner. Finally, textbooks and homework are ubiquitous in eighth-grade classrooms; nearly all

students use a textbook at least once a week, and most do some homework every day.
 23

Table 2
The Students’ Class Participation in Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Inc.

Item
No. Indicators X Description Interpretation

1. I feel comfortable answering 4.167 Often The level describes in the statement was
questions in class. observed and practiced majority of the time.
2. I always look forward to classroom 4.167 Often The level describes in the statement was
discussion. observed and practiced majority of the time.
3. The teacher makes me feel 4.467 Often The level describes in the statement was
comfortable answering questions, observed and practiced majority of the time.
even if I get wrong.
4. I like to share my opinion about 4.03 Often The level describes in the statement was
the daily topic with my classmates. observed and practiced majority of the time.
5. I feel as though the same people 4.33 Often The level describes in the statement was
answer the questions and talk observed and practiced majority of the time.
during discussion.
6. I always raise my hands when I 3.9 Often The level describes in the statement was
have ideas in mind. observed and practiced majority of the time.
7. I become interested in whatever 4.267 Often The level describes in the statement was
subject matter we had in class. observed and practiced majority of the time.
8. I would like more class sessions 3.9 Often The level describes in the statement was
than the usual. observed and practiced majority of the time.
9. I am not ashamed to stand in front 4.2 Often The level describes in the statement was
to articulate and share my thoughts observed and practiced majority of the time.
and ideas if necessary
10. I get more involved in solving 4.1 Often The level describes in the statement was
problem and activities that require observed and practiced majority of the time.
higher-order thinking skills.
Weighted Mean 4.1528 Often The level describes in the statement was
observed and practiced majority of the
time.
 24

Scale Range Description

5 4.50-5.00 Always
4 3.50-4.49 Frequently
3 2.50-3.49 Occasionally
2 1.50-2.49 Rarely
1 1.10-1.49 Never

Table 1.2 describes students’ class participation. It shows that the indicators with the

lowest mean of 3.9 are indicators 6 and 8, described as Often and interpreted as the level

describes in the statement was observed and practiced majority of the time. On the other hand,

the indicator with the highest mean of 4.467 is indicator number 3, describes as Often and

interprets as the level describes in the statement was observed and practiced majority of the time.

The composite mean of the ten indicators on students’ class participation is 4.1528, also

describes as Often and interprets as the level describes in the statement was observed and

practiced majority of the time.

This was being supported by Susak (2016), on her conducted research about ‘Factors

Affecting Classroom Participation’ she found out thatmajority of students indicated that they are

more inclined to participate in the classroom when they know their professor is supportive, open

to ideas, and will not criticize them.

Rocca (2009) indicated that when professors make negative comments towards students

this can lower participation levels and Fassinger (2000) indicated that students were more

inclined to participate if the professor was approachable. Professors should aim to ensure that the

classroom environment is on that commands respect by all participants and in their dialogue with

one another. Professors need to ensure that dialogue is managed in a way that facilitates open

discussion among peers and supports the importance of differing perspectives.

 25

Table 3

The relationship between the level of teachers’ classroom participation and the level of

students’ class participation

Correlation Level of Critical t test

Variables f value Coefficient r Significance Value value Decision Relationship

The level of 6.57421 Slight 0.05 ± 0.012 0.355 Reject Significant

teachers’ Correlation the Ho
classroom
practices
and
The level of
students’ class
participation

Table 3 discusses the relationship between the level of teachers’ classroom practices and

the level of students’ class participation. It reveals that f value is 6.57421with a p value of 0.1296

less than .05 level of significance hence the decision reject the null hypothesis that there is a

significant relationship between the level of teachers’ classroom practices and the level of

students’ class participation.

 26

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presented the summary, findings, conclusions and recommendations of the

study.

Summary

The overriding purpose of this studywas to determine the relationship between the level

of teachers’ classroom practices and the of level students’ class participation, the result was

based on a survey questionnaire conducted to the students.

This study was conducted to find out the level of teachers’ classroom practices and its

relationship to the level of students; class participation of Grade 11 Senior High School students

of RMMC- Marbel. Specifically, this study aimed to determine the extent of teachers’ classroom

practices and the level of students’ class participation and to identify the significant relationship

between the level of teachers’ classroom practices and level of students’ class participation.

The researchers used survey questionnaires consisted of twenty (20) questions to serve as

instrument of gathering data. The respondents of the study were thirty (30) Grade 11 Senior High

School students of Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Inc. The survey was

conducted during the school year 2017-2018.

 27

Findings

Based on the analysis and interpretation of the gathered data of the study, the following

findings are:

1. The extent of teachers’ classroom practices has a 4.438 which describes as Often and

with that, the level of teachers’ classroom practices is shown majority of the time.

2. The level of students’ class participation has weighted mean is 4.1528 which describes

as Often and the data supports that students participate in class discussion majority of the time.

3. There is a significant relationship between the level of teachers’ classroom practices

and the level of students’ class participation.

 28

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. The level of teachers’ classroom practices are practiced often thus create a healthy

classroom for learning.

2. The level of students’ class are shown often thus learners participate actively when

teachers engaged them in more joyful and child-friendly classroom.

3. The findings reveal that there is a significant relationship between the level of

teachers’ classroom practices and the level of students’ class participation.

 29

Recommendations

Based on the following conclusions, the researchers suggest the following

recommendations:

1. The School Administrator should conduct a classroom monitoring to determine the

teachers’ performance and the development of the students.

2. The teacher should create a 21st century classroom by crafting a program in classroom

setting.

3. The parents should make it a habit to visit the school by attending PTA meetings,

commencement exercises

4. Future researchers should conduct a study on the level of teachers’ classroom

practices: basis for proposed professional learning program.

 30

REFERENCES

Brenneman, R. (2016). Why Is Classroom Management Such a Problem for New Teachers.
Retrieved from http:// edweek.org/teachers/teaching_now/2016/01/new-teachers
Cabrillana, A & Mayan, C. (2015).Teaching Practices and Student Achievement. Retrieved
from https://afse2015.sciencesconf.org/58706/document
Goldhaber, D. & Brewer, D. (1997).Evaluating the Effect of Teacher Degree Level on
Educational Performance. Retrieved fromhttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R. (2005).Teaching Students To Be Peacemakers (4th Edition).
Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Retrieved from https://www.waldenu.edu.com
Kubacka, K. (2015), Classroom Practices and Teachers’ Belief about Teaching.
Retrieved from http://oecdeducationtoday.blogspot.com/2015/09/classroom
Lucas, G. (2015).Five Highly Effective Teaching Practices. Retrieved from
https://www.oecd.org/berlin/43541655.pdf
Mussawy, S. (2009).Assessment Practices: Students’ and Teachers’ Perception of
Classroom Practices. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.umass. edu/cgi
Mustaphaa, S., Rahmanb N., &Yunusc, M.(2010). Factors influencing classroom
participation: a case study of Malaysian undergraduate students. Retrieved from
file:///C:/Users/comp/Downloads/1-s2.0-S1877042810023943-main.pdf
Saxena, S. (2013).Best Classroom Practices for Student- Centric Teaching. Retrieved from
http://edtechreview.in/trends-insights/insights/775-best-classroom-practices-for-student-
centric-teaching
Schwerdt, G., &Wuppermann, A. (2008).Do Teaching Practices Influence Student
Achievement?. Retrieved from http://www.edgepage.net/jamb2008/Papers
Sheridan, H. (2017). Effective Classroom Practices. Retrieved from
https://www.brown.edu/about/administration/sheridan-center/teaching-learning
Shore, K. (2017) Encouraging Class Participation.. Retrieved from
http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/shore/shore056.shtml
Spencer, J. (2017). Encouraging Introvert Learners to Speak Up.. Retrieved from
https://www.quietrev.com/encouraging-introverts-to-speak-up-in-school/
Susak, M. (2016).Factors that Affect Classroom Participation.. Retrieved from
http://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10526&context=theses
Wenglinsky, H. (2001). Teacher Classroom Practices and Student Performance: How
Schools Can Make a Difference. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/Media/Research
Yusof Abdullah, M. (2012).Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences.. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281203337X
 31

Letter of Permission
Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Incorporated
Lower Arellano, City of Koronadal

October 12, 2017

Ms. JENNELYN T. SAADVEDRA, MAEd

Senior High School Principal
Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges- Marbel Inc.
Koronadal City

Madam:

Greetings of peace and joy!

We, Mary Claire O. Lagarto, Hazel S. Perez and Niña D. Carillo, are currently taking up
Bachelor of Secondary Education- Major in English at Ramon Magsaysay MemorialColleges-
Marbel Incorporated. We are presently conducting our research study entitled “THE LEVEL
OF TEACHERS’ CLASSROOM PRACTICES: ITS RELATIONSHIP TO STUDENTS’
CLASS PARTICIPATION”.

In line with this, we would like to ask your permission to allow us to conduct a research in your
institution. We know that your assistance will be of help for our study and we will be grateful if
you will permit us to do so. All information will be treated confidentially.

Your approval for this letter will be greatly appreciated. God bless!

Respectfully yours,

MARY CLAIRE O. LAGARTO HAZEL S. PEREZ NIÑA D. CARILLO

Researcher Researcher Researcher

Noted by:

ROSE E. USERO, MAEd

Thesis Adviser

Recommending Approval: Approved:

JOSE A. EVANGELISTA SR., PhD JENNELYN T. SAADVEDRA, MAEd

Program Director Prinicipal