AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

A Peer Reviewed International Journal of Asian

Academic Research Associates

AARJMD
ASIAN ACADEMIC RESEARCH
JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY

EFFECTS OF MATHEMATICS COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES ON ATTITUDE

AND PERFORMANCE OF GRADE 8 STUDENTS

NOEMIE ROXAN CIUBAL-FULGENCIO1; DENIS ABAO TAN2

1
Faculty, Banisilan National High School, Philippines
2
Faculty, Central Mindanao University, Philippines

Abstract
This quasi-experimental study was conducted to determine the effects of Mathematics
Communication Strategies (MCS) on the attitude and performance of the Grade 8 students of
Banisilan National High School, Banisilan, Cotabato, Philippines. Specifically, it aimed to
ascertain if there is a significant difference in the Mathematics performance of the students
when exposed to MCS and non-MCS in terms of post-test and retention test , assess if there is a
significant difference in students’ attitude when exposed MCS and to non-MCS. This study
revealed that students’ performance in the MCS group was significantly higher than that in the
Non-MCS group in terms of posttest and retention test. Both groups showed a moderately
positive attitude towards the subject before the intervention. After the intervention, the MCS
group showed a positive attitude towards the subject but the Non-MCS group showed a
moderately positive attitude. A significant difference in their attitudes towards Mathematics was
found in favor of the MCS group.
Key Words : communication, attitude, performance, strategies

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
44
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

1.1 INTRODUCTION
The deteriorating performance of Filipino students in the national and international
Mathematics tests for the last decade has become a major challenge to Philippine education. The
National Educational Testing and Research Center (NETRC) reported that NAT result showed
national MPS of 46.37% in Mathematics for school year 2011-2012. In school year 2013-2014
Central Mindanao Region have a Mean Percentage Score of 55.57% in Mathematics. North
Cotabato Division got a Mean percentage score of 55.88% which is below average. For the last 2
years, Banisilan National high School got a mean percentage score of 57.62% which is below
average. This showed that the school failed to reach the average 75% MPS. It is expected that the
result of the test shall be utilize in strategizing intervention to address specific needs of students
to improve performance in Mathematic.
High expectations for students are necessary to achieve excellence in Mathematics. Math
is best learned through new knowledge from previous knowledge and Mathematics is learned
when previous knowledge is utilized to develop new ones. Teaching the content that student’s
need is not a problem with teachers but the problem is on how to be able to reach the desired
standards of the subject. The collection of teaching strategies with integration of reading and
writing can help teachers and students in attaining goals of mathematics learning (Haidema &
Mitchell, 2005).
Ontario Ministry of Education (2005) stressed that students are able to reflect, clarify and
expand their ideas and understanding of Mathematics ideas through communication and this
becomes an essential process of mathematics learning. Students’ mathematical communication
progress shifts in accuracy and complexity throughout the primary, junior and intermediate
grades. use These characteristics can be used by teacher during whole class discussion as a guide
both for interpreting and assessing students’ mathematical thinking for giving points (Ontario
Ministry of Education, 2010).
1.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

1.2.1 Research design

Quasi-experimental design was used in this study with intact group of two sections. The
dependent variables were students’ attitude and Mathematics performance in terms of pre-test,
post-test and retention test. Two groups of students were taught of the same lesson. Mathematics
communication strategies like journal, write and toss, think-speak-write, and IRF worksheet was
Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary
www.asianacademicresearch.org
45
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

utilized in teaching during the 3rd grading period to the experimental group. Traditional method
of teaching was utilized in the control group.
1.2.2 Respondents of the study
The respondents of the study were the Grade 8 students of Banisilan National High
School. There were a total of 42 males and 39 females. The control group was composed of 21
males and 18 females and the experimental group was composed of 21 males and 21 females.
1.2.3. Instrumentation
The researcher adopted the attitude questionnaire developed by Fennema and Sherman
(1976). Teacher made achievement test was used to determine the performance of the students.
1.2.4 Statistical analysis
Descriptive Statistics such as mean, standard deviation and percentage evaluation were
used in the analysis of data. The Likert scale was used for the respondents’ responses to the
indicators given in questionnaires. Attitudes and post-test scores were described in terms of
means and standard deviation.
ANCOVA was employed to determine significant difference in the academic
performance of the two groups of students in terms of post-test and retention test. Mean pre-test
score was used as covariate to eliminate possible effects of performance between groups.
ANCOVA was utilized to determine the significant difference in the attitudes of students
towards mathematics
1.2.5 Data Gathering procedure
The study was carried out in ten (10) months. Attitude questionnaires and pre-test were
administered by the researcher prior to the intervention on its first month. At the end of the third
grading period, the researcher administered post-test twice with one week interval. The attitude
questionnaire was administered again at the end of the third grading period to both groups.
1.3 RESULTS

1.3.1 Students Attitude towards Schooling

The overall mean score of students’ attitude before intervention is 3.24 and 3.39 in the
MCS and NMCs group respectively, this shows that students have moderately positive attitude
towards mathematics as a subject. Among the 47 items, students in the MCS group rated “agree”
on the 14 items, “disagree” on the 3 items and “undecided” on the 30 items. However, students
in the NMCS group rated “agree” on 22 items and undecided on 25 items.

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
46
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

The overall mean score of students’ attitude after intervention is 3.58 and 3.41 in the
MCS and NMCs group respectively, this shows that students in the MCS group have positive
attitude while students in the NMCS moderately positive attitude towards mathematics as a
subject. Among the 47 items, students in the MCS group rated agree on the 30 items, disagree on
the 5 items and undecided on the 12 items. However, students in the NMCS group rated agree on
20 items, disagree on one item and undecided on 26 items.

1.3.2 Mathematics performance of Grade 8 students

Pre-test, posttest and retention test mean scores of students exposed to MCS and NMCS
Variables MCS Group NMCS Group
x SD MPS QD x SD MPS QD
Pre-test 15.10 4.75 25.16% below 14.41 5.45 24.01% below
average average
Posttest 38.10 8.08 63.50% above 33.41 7.31 55.68% average
average
Retention test 35.86 7.63 57.76% average 29.26 8.14 48.77% average

1.3.3 Performance of Grade 8 students in different MCS

Level of performance of students in MCS group in the different MCS.

==============================================================
MCS STRATEGY MEAN SD MPS Qualitative Interpretation
description
==============================================================
Journal 9.66 3.03 60.35% Average Moderate
Write and Toss 4.48 2.12 37.36% Below average Low
Think-Speak-Write 10.39 3.97 51.93% Average Moderate
IRF Worksheet 9.44 3.66 59.03% Average High

1.3.4 Comparison of students’ attitudes between groups

GROUP MEAN SD F-value p-value

MCS 3.58 .324 5.983 .031*

NMCS 3.41 .369
*Significance at ᾳ = 0.05 level

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
47
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

1.3.5 ANCOVA test for Difference in the Performance of Students Between Groups

Comparison of post test results

GROUP N MEAN SD
MCS 42 38.10 8.084
NMCS 39 33.41 7.312
TOTAL 81 35.05 9.580
Source SS df MS F-value Sig.
Group 968.204 2 484.102 9.019 .000*
Pre-test (Covariate) 524.345 1 524.345 9.769 .002*
Error 4186.710 78 53.676
Total 109197.000 81
*Significant at 0.05 level
**Not significant at 0.01 level

1.4 DISCUSSION

The overall mean score of students’ attitude before intervention is 3.24 and 3.39 in the
MCS and NMCs group respectively, this shows that students have moderately positive attitude
towards mathematics as a subject. After intervention the overall mean score of students’ is 3.58
and 3.41 in the MCS and NMCs group respectively, this shows that students in the MCS group
have positive attitude while students in the NMCS moderately positive attitude towards
mathematics as a subject.
The MCS group has a mean score of 15.10 with a mean percentage score of 25.16% in
the pre-test which indicates that students score is below average indicating a very low
performance. The NMCS group has a mean score of 14.41 with a mean percentage score of
24.01% in the pre-test which indicates that students score is below average indicating a very low
performance. On the posttest, the MCS group obtained a mean score of 38.10 with a standard
deviation of 8.08 and MPS of 63.50% indicating a “high performance” result, while the NMCS
group had a mean score of 33.41 with standard deviation of 7.31 and MPS of 55.68% indicating
a “moderately” high performance result. Retention test results showed a “moderately” high
performance in the MCS group. The group obtained a mean score of 35.86 with standard
deviation of 7.63 and MPS of 57.76%. The result also showed a “moderately” high performance
in the NMCS group. The group obtained a mean score of 29.26 with standard deviation of 8.14
and MPS of 48.77%.

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
48
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

Students have a mean score of 9.66 with standard deviation of 3.03 and MPS of 60.35%
in journal writing. The result showed a moderately high performance in journal writing. The
group have a mean score of 4.48 with standard deviation of 2.12 and 37.36% MPS in write and
toss strategy, which showed a low performance. However, the group got a mean score of 10.39
with standard deviation 0f 3.97 and 51.93% MPS in the think-speak-write strategy and got a
mean score of 9.44 with standard deviation of 3.66 and MPS of 59.03% in the IRF worksheet
strategy which shows a moderately high performance in both IRF worksheet and think-speak-
write strategy.
Students in the MCS group perform better in journal writing strategy with a mean score
of 9.66 with standard deviation of 3.03 and 60.35% MPS. Students have moderately high
performance in the after lesson writing activity.
Students attitudes when exposed to MCS environment had a mean score of 3.58 with
standard deviation of .324 and a mean score of 3.41 with standard deviation of .369 in the NMCS
group, respectively. The scores appear to have an F-value of 5.983 and a probability of .031
indicating a significant difference in the attitudes of two groups in favor of the MCS group, thus
the null hypothesis is rejected.
The F value between groups is 9.019 with a probability value of .000 (p<0.01) indicating
a highly significant difference, thus the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference in
students mathematics performance between groups is rejected. The F value is equal to 15.062
with probability value of .000 (P<0.01) between groups which indicates a highly significant
difference, thus the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference in students
retention between groups is rejected.

1.5 CONCLUSION

MCS group display a positive attitude towards mathematics compared to NMCS group
after intervention. MCS group have higher level of attitude compared to NMCS group. MCS is
effective in producing a positive attitude towards mathematics.
Student’s performance under the MCS environment has higher MPS as compared to
NMCS environment. MCS group perform better compared to NMCS group. MCS is effective in
developing student’s performance in geometry.

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
49
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

Students in the MCS group have moderately high performance in journal writing
strategy, IRF worksheet and think-speak-write strategy. However they have low performance in
Write and toss strategy.
Students perform better in journal writing strategy. The after lesson writing activity have
higher MPS than before lesson activity. It is a valuable tool for students to clearly articulate what
they have learned. A significant difference exists in students attitude towards mathematics
between MCS and NMCS group.
There is a significant difference in the performance of the students in geometry in terms
of posttest and retention test when exposed to MCS and NMCS environment.

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
50
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

1.6. References

Alice, D. J. (2007).The use of analogy to enhance performance and retention of concepts

in evolution among NCE III biology students in Niger State.An Unpublished M.Sc
(ED) thesis, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Askey, R. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. American
Educator, 19 (1), 14-24.

Bandura, A. (1986).Social foundations of thoughts and actions: A social

Cognitive Theory.New Jersy: Englwood Cliffs prentice hall.

Barr, J. (2006). Reflective practice to improve schools. California:Corween Press, SAGE

Publications Company.

Beach & Bridwell, I. (1984). Learning through writing: A rationale for writing
across the curriculum. Northwood New Jersey: Abbey.

Beecher, M., & Sweeny, S. (2008). Closing the Achievement Gap with Curriculum ……….. .
Enrichment and Differentiation: One School's Story. Journal of Advanced
………Academics, 19(3), 502-530.
Bermejo, E. (2009). Mathematics journal writing: Its’ effects on students learning
competence and attitudes in advance algebra(Unpublished Thesis). CMU, Musuan
Bukidnon.

Bizar, M. & Daniels, H.( 2005). Teaching the best practice way.Portland:Stenhouse publisher.

Boscolo, P. & Mason, L. (2001). Writing to learn, writing to transfer. In P. Tynjala, L. Mason,
& K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer .
Academic Publishers.

Carrington, B. (2008). Boy´s underachievement and the feminization of teaching. Journal of

education for teaching international research and pedagogy, Volume 34, Issue 2, 109-
120.

Choppin, J. M. (2007). Teacher-orchestrated classroom arguments. Mathematics Teacher,

………10(4), 306-310.

Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., & McNeal, B. (1992). Characteristics of classroom mathematics
tradition: An interactional analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 573-.
604

Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1994). Discourse, mathematical thinking, and
……..classroom practice. In contextsfor learning: Sociocultural dynamics in ……..children’s
development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Collins, D. W., & Kimura, D. (1997). A large sex difference on a two-dimensional mental
rotation task. Behavioral Neuroscience, 111(4), 845-849.
Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary
www.asianacademicresearch.org
51
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

Cordova, C.C., & Tan, D. A. (2018). Mathematics Proficiency, Attitude and Performance of
Grade 9 Students in Private High Schools in Bukidnon, Philippines. Asian Academic
Research Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(2), 103-116.

Depka, E. (2007). Designing assesment for math: Using rubrics in math.CA:

Corween Press. A Sage Publishing Company.

Emig, J.(1997). Writing as a mode of learning. College composition and communication 28:122-.
128

Ferrara, P.J., & FERRARA, M. M. (2004). Single-gender classrooms: lessons from a

New York middle school. Spectrum.Journal of school research and information,
22(3), 26-32.

Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. (1978). Sex related differences in mathematics

achievement and related factors: A further study. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 9, 189-203

Haidema, C. & Mitchell, A. (2005). Reading and writing to learn mathematics: Ten strategies to
improve problem solving. Denver:RMC. Research Company.

Harrison, C. & Black J. (2012). Writing across the curriculum: R.A.F.T. prompts
for math class. The North Nevada Writing project. Retrieved on April 16, 2014
from www.writingfix.co./WAC/writing-across-curriculum-RAFTS-Math.

Kotsopoulos, D. (2007). Mathematics discourse: It’s like hearing a foreign language.

………..Mathematics Teacher, 101 (4), p. 301-305.

Manouchehri, A. & St. John, D. (2006). From classroom discussions to group discourse.
………..Mathematics Teacher, 99, 544-551.

Nass, R. D. (1993). Sex differences in learning abilities and disabilities. Annals of

dyslexia, 43, 61-78..

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school .
mathematics Reston, VA: Author. Available: http://standards.nctm.org

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2005). The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1 to 8:

………..Mathematics. Toronto, ON: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2006). A guide to effective instruction in mathematics,

………Kindergarten to grade 6: Volume 2 – Problem solving and communication. Toronto,
ON: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Pajares, F. & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of Self-efficay And Self-concept beliefs

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
52
AARJMD VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 (FEBRUARY 2018) ISSN : 2319 - 2801

in mathematics problem solving: a path analysis. Journal of educational

psychology 86(2):193-203.

Porter, M., & Masingla, J.O.(2000). examining the effect of writing on conceptual and
procedural knowledge in calculus. Educational Studies in mathematics, 42, 165-177

Prado, N. I., Tan, D.A., & Pabualan, M.S. (2016). Mathematics Teachers’ Self-efficacy Beliefs
Survey in all Levels of Education. Central Mindanao University Journal of Science, 20
(02), 44-58.

Tran, Vui (2006). Helping students develop and extend their capacity to do purposeful
………mathematical works. Tsukuba Journal of Educational Study in Mathematics Vol. 25.
……..pp. 279 - 287.

Walz, C. (2008). Journal Writing in Mathematics. Exploring connections between math

journals and the completion of homework assignments(Masters thesis). University
of Nebraska, Lincoln.

Woulds, R., Kilpatrick, S. & Hutton, B.. (2006). Single-sex classes in co-educational
schools. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(3), 277-291.

Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary

www.asianacademicresearch.org
53