Difficulties Encountered by The Third Year Students in Geometry

DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY THE THIRD YEAR
STUDENTS IN GEOMETRY: TOWARDS A GUIDE

TO IMPROVE INSTRUCTION
A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of Graduate School
Metro Manila College
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING
Major in Mathematics
BY
MARIA NERISSA C. GOMOPAS
October, 2013
ii
APPROVAL SHEET
This thesis entitled, “DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY

THE THIRD YEAR STUDENTS IN GEOMETRY: TOWARDS A
GUIDE TO IMPROVE INSTRUCTION”, prepared and submitted
by MARIA NERISSA C. GOMOPAS has been approved and
accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree,
MASTER OF ARTS IN TEACHING major in MATHEMATICS.
DANA B. TEBIA Ed. D.

Adviser
_______________________________________________
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
Approved and accepted by the committee on Oral Examination

with a grade of ____ on October 13, 2013.
FRANCISCA R. REYES, Ed. D.

Chairman
JAN GARRY D. LUNAS, Ph. D.

Member
RAMON M. GARCIA, Ph.D.

Member
Passed the Comprehensive Examination on March 16 -17 2013.
RAMON M. GARCIA, Ph.D.

Dean, Graduate Studies
iii
DEDICATION
With love the researcher
dedicate this
piece of work
to her parents,
Evaristo and Cerelina Curay,
her brothers,
Joselito and Allessandro,
her sister,
Sheilla
and
to Almighty Creator,
who has given her the

iv
needed wisdom.
MARIA NERISSA C. GOMOPAS
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
Title Page……………………………………………………….. i
Approval Sheet……………………………………………….. ii
Acknowledgement…………………………………………… iii
Dedication………………………………………………………. v
Table of Contents……………………………………………. vi
List of Tables………………………………………………….. x
List of Figure …………………………………………………. xi
Abstract…………………………………………………………. xii
CHAPTER
I THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction……………………………………………………. 1
v
Statement of the Problem…………………………………. 4
Assumptions……………………………………………………… 5
Scope and Delimitation…………………………………….. 6
Significance of the Study………………………………….. 6
Definition of Terms………………………………………..... 8
II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
Local Literature……………………………………………….. 11
Foreign Literature……………………………………………. 16
Local Studies………………………………………………….. 29
Foreign Studies……………………………………………….. 34
Conceptual Framework…………………………………….. 42
Paradigm of the Study…………………………………….. 46
Relevance of the Reviewed Literature and Studies

To the Present Study……………………………………….. 48
III METHODS OF RESEARCH
Research Design……………………………………………… 50
Sampling Technique………………………………………… 51
Respondents and Subjects of the Study……………. 51

vi
Instruments Used…………………………………………… 52
Construction of the Instrument ……………………….. 53
Validation of the Instrument……………………………… 55
Administration and Retrieval of the Instrument.…. 56
Statistical Treatment of Data…………………………….. 57
IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION

OF DATA
Profile of Student Subjects……………………………… 62
Profile of Teacher Respondents…………………..….. 67
Learning Difficulties Encountered by the Third

Year Students in Geometry as Assessed from
The Teacher Made Test …………………………………. 72
The Probable Causes and Possible Solutions to

Overcome the Difficulties of Third Year
Students in Geometry………………………………………. 76
Guide to Improve Geometry Instruction…………… 79
V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND

RECOMMENDATION
Summary of Findings………………………………………. 84
Conclusion …………………………………………………….. 89
Recommendation …………………………………………… 93
vii
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................ 95
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
Table 1: Student Subjects as to Gender…………… 62
Table 2: Student Subjects as to Family

Monthly Income..…………………………….. 63
Table 3: Student Subjects as to Highest

Educational Attainment of Parents……… 65
viii
Table 4: Student Subjects as to 2nd year

Mathematics Grade…………………………… 66
Table 5: Teacher Respondents as to Mastery of the

Subject Matter…………………………………. 67
Table 6: Teacher Respondents as to Strategies in
Teaching…………………………………………. 68
Table 7: Teacher Respondents as to Instructional

Materials Used…………………………………. 70
Table 8: Teacher Respondents as to Evaluation

Utilized………....................................... 71
Table 9: Difficulties of Third Year Students in

Geometry……………………………………… 73
Table 10: The Probable Causes and Possible

Solutions to Overcome the Difficulties of
Third Year Students in Geometry………. 76
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure Page
Figure 1: Paradigm of the Study……………………… 46

ix
ABSTRACT
DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY THE THIRD YEAR
STUDENTS IN GEOMETRY: TOWARDS A GUIDE
TO IMPROVE INSTRUCTION
x
By MARIA NERISSA C. GOMOPAS

Master of Arts in Teaching
Major in Mathematics
Mathematics plays a vital role in the life of mankind. According
to Rao (2009),
“Mathematics equips pupils with a

uniquely powerful set of tools to
understand and change the world.
These tools include logical reasoning,
problem-solving skills, and the ability
to think in abstract ways….”
Geometry is Mathematics for third year. "It is a science of
correct reasoning…." according to George Polya. It forces a person
to think very logically and to solve problems using that skill. Practice
doing that is obviously very useful in many different areas of life.
Despite the importance of Mathematics, it is very
disappointing to note that the student’s performance in the subject
is consistently unsatisfactory.
Philippines rank in Trend in International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS) in 2003 is consistent with its performance in
TIMSS 1996, in which it ranked near the bottom 39th in
Mathematics.
xi
During the National Achievement Test (NAT) in school year
2011-2012 administered to Tala High, the student’s performance is
low. Considering the low thinking ability performance of the students
observed on the said test, much effort is needed to improve their
performance in Mathematics.
Evidence of the outcome of NAT administered to 2nd year
students shows that 56% of students in secondary level lack
mastery in Mathematics. The result showed that from 2007- 2008,
there was a decrease of 0.85 percentage point in Math- from 42.85
Mean Percentage Score (MPS) in 2008, it further turn down to 42.00
MPS in 2011. This further reflect the deficiency that must be
resolved, hence this would bring about increased awareness of the
students learning difficulties in Geometry, which makes this study
relevant.
This is the rationale of the exigency of conducting this study.
It hopes to identify and remediate the difficulties of students in
learning especially in Geometry.
RESEARCH DESIGN
xii
The study adopted the Descriptive Method of research in
determining the difficulties of third year students in Geometry.
According to Trocim (2006), it is used to describe the basic features
of the data in a study. They provide simple summaries about the
sample and the measures. This design goes beyond data gathering,
it tries to relate findings in prevailing facts.
SAMPLING TECHNIQUES
The researcher employed the Stratified Random sampling. In
this sampling technique each member in the population is given an
equal chance of being included in the sample. This type of sampling,
divides first the population into two or more strata. The researcher
used the different sections of the present study as strata.
According to Calmorin (2010), the larger the population the
lesser the percentage of sample size, since this study has large
population (1,500), the researcher got 3.3% per section making a
total of 10% of the entire population. Hence the sample size is 150
from 26 sections which are 5 to 6 students in each section, both
male and female.

xiii
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This study aimed to analyze the difficulties encountered by
the students in Geometry at Tala High School, Division of Caloocan
City, District II during the Academic Year 2013 – 2014, towards a
guide to improve instruction.
Specifically, it sought answers to the following questions:
1. How may the subject and respondent be described in terms of
the following:
1.1 Student Subjects
1.1.1 gender,
1.1.2 family monthly income,
1.1.3 highest educational attainment of parents and
1.1.4 2nd year Mathematics grade
1.2 Teacher Respondents
1.2.1 mastery of the subject,

1.2.2 strategies in teaching use,
1.2.3 instructional materials use and
1.2.4 evaluation utilized?
xiv
2. What are the difficulties encountered by the third year
students in Geometry as assessed from the teacher made
test?
3. What are the probable causes of these difficulties?
4. What are the possible solutions on these difficulties?
5. How may the findings be utilized in crafting a guide to
improve Geometry instruction?
SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS
The researcher arrived at the following summary of findings
based on the data gathered.
1. Profile of the subjects/respondents
1.1 Student subjects

xv
1.1.1 seventy two or 48 percent were males and
seventy eight or 52 percent are female.
1.1.2 seventy two or 48 percent received a total
monthly income of Php 5,000 below.
1.1.3 forty seven or 31.33 percent fathers and fifty or
33.33 percent mothers are high school graduate.
1.1.4 seventy five or 50 percent have grades from
75 -79.
1.2 Teacher respondents
1.2.1 100 percent have mastery of the subject matter.
1.2.2 On the strategies used by the teachers in
teaching Geometry; the first three in rank are:
a. inductive method with weighted mean of
3.80;
b. cooperative learning with weighted mean
of 3.60 and;
c. learning by doing with weighted mean of
3.20.
xvi
1.2.3 On the instructional materials used; the first three
in rank are:
a. workbooks/worksheets/LAS with weighted
mean of 4.40;
b. textbook with weighted mean of 4.00 and;
c. used of manipulative with weighted mean
of 3.60.
1.2.4 On Evaluation utilized:
a. oral or written test after each lesson rank 1
with weighted mean of 4.6;
b. oral measures and board work rank 2.5
with weighted mean of 3.8.
2. On the difficulties encountered by the third year
students in Geometry, the first three in rank were:
a. Analysis problems with percentage of incorrect response
of 68.33;
b. Application problems with percentage of incorrect
response of 67.57 and;

xvii
c. Comprehension problems with percentage of incorrect
response of 65.25.
3. On the probable causes of difficulties, the first three in
rank were:
a. Difficulty in analyzing verbal problems with 84 percent:
b. Incomplete understanding of the Mathematics language
with 76 percent and
c. Weak foundation in four fundamental operations with
68 percent.
4. On the solutions offered by the teacher respondents to
overcome the aforementioned difficulties, the first in
three rank were:
a. The learning environment should be made conducive
for effective teaching/ learning to take place with 75
percent:
xviii
b. The teacher should use varied teaching strategies and
techniques that will arouse interest of students with 73
percent, and
c. The teacher should use instructional materials to make
the teaching real with 68 percent.
5. The researcher designed a guide to improve Geometry
instruction for third year students.
CONCLUSION
Based on the summary of findings, the following conclusions
were formulated:
1. The student respondents vary in their personal description.

xix
2. The Mathematics teachers have mastery of the subject
matter, use varied strategies or techniques in teaching and
assess the learning outcomes of students.
3. The least mastered skill or most difficult Mathematical skills
encountered by the students are on the analysis of the
problem. Students are poor in analyzing word problems and
breaking materials down into parts. These students
experience difficulty with reading. They may be able to read
but unable to comprehend.
4. The most difficult topics in Geometry are in measurement
such as perimeter and area of polygons, circumference and
area of circle and problems involving plane figures.
5. There are causes and solutions of the difficulties encountered
by the third year students in Geometry:
Causes Solutions
1. Difficulties in A. The students to develop the habit

analyzing verbal of reading or saying problems
problems. before and/or after computing
them.
xx
B. Provide the students with

answered problems on individual
cards and ask them to prove
each example using concrete
materials.
C. Allow the students to work in pairs

or in group as they share their
ideas and process their answer.
D. Provide a picture representation

/interpretation, diagram and graph
reading to analyze problems.
2. Incomplete A. Encourage the students to

understanding memorize and explain the terms in
of Mathematics Mathematics.
language.
B. Always make use of concrete
teaching materials (cube, can and
other real objects) and verbalize
each relationship (is less than or
greater than).
C. Slow down the pace of instruction.
D. A handout that contains the terms

needed be provided.
3. Weak A. Regular and short practice/drill of

foundation in four fundamental operations, 5-
the four 10-minute per day before the
fundamental formal lesson.
operations
B. Incorporate the four fundamental
operations into games.
xxi

C. Use collaborative learning and
peer teaching. It promotes
discussion between peers as they
share strategies, justify processes
and answers.
D. Have the students self-monitor

their own progress such as how
many and which facts are
mastered to be represented on a
chart.
6. There are other solutions to resolve the student’s difficulties
these are:
6.1 Learning environment should be made conducive for
effective teaching/learning to take place such as:
a. class size should be lessen, 45-50 students in
each classroom so that the teachers’ can manage,
b. prepare visual aids that are readable even to
students at last row,
c. teacher may prepare a small reading corner so
that students may benefits from reading or
relevant material during their leisure time

xxii
6.2 Teachers facilitate the use varied teaching strategies
such as: Cooperative Learning, Learning by Doing,
Mnemonic Approach, Peer Tutoring, Manipulative
Approach and Computed Assisted Instruction (CAI).
6.3 Facilitate opportunities for teachers to attend seminars
and trainings in Geometry instruction.
RECOMMENDATION
In the light of the findings and conclusions, the researcher
offers the following recommendations:
School Administrators
xxiii
1. School Administrators facilitate the attendance of their
teachers to attend seminars in Mathematics Teaching to be
abreast with the changes and new developments in their field.
2. Mathematics Department Head must have the concern of
mentoring their teachers in guiding their students to develop
their potentials through observation of classes and
demonstration teaching.
3. Mathematics Department Head collaborate to English
Department Head to facilitate remedial reading lesson to
students with Mathematics difficulty.
Teachers
1. Conduct a diagnostic test and use the result to improve
strategies in teaching.
2. A remedial teaching must be given to students with difficulty
in Mathematics. Instructions should emphasize on direct
instruction of Mathematics concepts.
3. Teachers may utilized the proposed “Guide to Improve
Geometry Instruction”, to facilitate learning.

xxiv
Students
1. They must learn to manage their time. Devote more time to
difficult subject.
2. They may opt for online assistance in solving Mathematics
problems. This innovative learning process also enhances
students' confidence.
3. Those without internet and computer at home may:
a. Use the computer of school at library to enhance their
mathematical skills.
b. Borrow books with answer key and practice solving
different mathematical questions.

Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Mathematics plays a vital role in the life of mankind. The
importance of Mathematics is two-fold. It is important in the
advancement of Science and our understanding of the workings of
the universe, and it is important to individuals for personal
advancement, both mentally and in the workplace.
According to Baired (2011), Mathematics is important in our
daily lives. People used a lot of what they were taught in school
without even thinking much about it. Rao (2009), introduced the
importance of Mathematics,
“Mathematics equips pupils with a uniquely

powerful set of tools to understand and
change the world. These tools include logical
reasoning, problem-solving skills, and the
ability to think in abstract ways. Mathematics
is important in everyday life, many forms of
employment, science and technology,
medicine, the economy, the environment and
development, and in public decision-making.”
Geometry is Mathematics for third year high school students.
Webster dictionary defines Geometry, the branch of Mathematics
concerned with the measurement and relationship between points,

2
lines, curves and surfaces. Such relationship is frequently used to
model that we called “real world” and has many applications in
solving practical problems. Chapman (2012), the practical
application of Geometry is abundant. Whenever you build something
you will encounter Geometry. Professions such as carpentry and
engineering make regular use of Geometry problem. The study of
Geometry sharpens thinking skills by teaching the process of
deductive reasoning.
"Geometry is the science of correct reasoning…." by George
Polya, a Hungarian Jewish Mathematician, from the quotations
compiled by Connor and Robertson (2006). Learning Mathematics
forces a person to think very logically and to solve problems using
that skill. It also teaches to be precise in taught and words. Practice
doing that is obviously very useful in many different areas of life.
Despite the importance of Mathematics, it is very
disappointing note that the student’s performance in the subject is
consistently poor.
Perlas (2008), cited the in his study that Philippines rank in
Trend in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in
2003 is consistent with its performance in TIMSS 1996, in which it

3
ranked near the bottom 39th in Mathematics and 40th in Science
among the 43 participating countries. According to Lumpas (2008),
the difficulty of the Filipino respondents with TIMSS (1996) was that
the students had weak and insufficient foundation on the basic
concepts in Mathematics and did not understand the problems.
During the National Achievement Test (NAT) in school year
2011-2012 administered to Tala High, the student’s performance is
low. Considering the low thinking ability of the students observed on
the said test, much effort is needed to improve their performance in
Mathematics.
Evidence of the outcome of NAT administered to 2nd year
students shows that 56% of students in secondary level lack
mastery in Mathematics. The NAT was administered in SY 2007-
2008 to SY 2010-2011. The result showed that from 2007- 2008,
there was a decrease of 0.85 percentage point in Math- from 42.85
Mean Percentage Score (MPS) in 2008, it further turn down to 42.00
MPS in 2011. This further reflect the deficiency that must be
resolved, hence this would bring about increased awareness of the
students learning difficulties in Geometry, which makes this study
relevant.
4
This is the rationale of the exigency of conducting this study.
It hopes to identify and remediate the difficulties of students in
learning Mathematics especially in Geometry.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
the following:
1.1.1 gender,

5
test?
ASSUMPTIONS
The study is guided by the following assumptions:
1. That the information obtained is reliable and valid.
2. That the student subjects maybe describe in terms of gender,
family monthly income, highest educational attainment of
parents and 2nd year Mathematics grade.
3. That the teacher respondents maybe describe in terms of their
mastery of the subject, strategies in teaching, instructional
material and evaluation utilized.
4. That there are the difficulties encountered by the third year
test.
6
5. That there are probable causes and solutions of these
difficulties.
6. That the findings be utilized in crafting a guide to improve
Geometry instruction.
SCOPE AND DELIMINATION
This study is delimited on the difficulties encountered by 3rd
year students in Geometry at Tala High School, Division of Caloocan
City, District II during the Academic Year 2013 – 2014.
The study is limited to the following topics in Geometry
namely undefined terms, angles, polygons, circles and
measurements. These content areas are stipulated in the
Department of Education (DepEd) Desire Learning Competencies in
Mathematics.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
It has been observe that students fall back from the study of
Mathematics. The teachers need to be innovative to keep them
posted on educational trends.

7
Findings in this study may be deemed significant to the
following:
Students for them to understand, apply Geometry in their
daily life.
Mathematics teachers for them to further upgrade their
mastery in teaching Geometry for the benefits of the 3rd year
students.
Parents for them to guide the learner have to overcome their
difficulties in Geometry.
Mathematics Department Head for them to facilitate
needed supervision in furtherance of appropriate instruction of
Geometry.
Curriculum Designers for them to find more needed
innovation to improve teaching of Geometry.
Future researchers for them to continue other study’s
parallel to this area.

8
DEFINITION OF TERMS
To understand better the study, the following terms are
operationally and conceptually defined.
Angle is a figure formed by two non-collinear rays with
common endpoint.
Cooperative Learning refers to strategies of teaching in
which student’s team together to explore and gain meaningful
knowledge.
Difficulties are the inability of the students to show
correctly the skill in Mathematics.
Direct Instruction is an approach in teaching where the
particular skills or content to be learned is presented explicitly or in
simple manner.
Deductive Method A traditional form of teaching in which
teacher provide information from general to particular. The concepts
are being taught first then allow students to practice the concepts.
Geometry It refers to the branch of Mathematics concerned
with the measurement and relationship between points, lines, curves
and surfaces.
9
Inductive Method It refers to strategies in teaching from
particular to general. Teachers first provide examples, then have
students practice and figure out the rule themselves.
Item Analysis is an enumeration of student performance for
each item on test. These consist of the difficulty and discrimination
index.
Learning by Doing is the strategies of teaching used in
Dynamic Learning Program (DLP). It focuses on student activities.
The student will try to understand the lesson on their own by
reading the concept notes and by doing the exercises before the
lesson is discussed and explained.
Least Mastered Skills is the lowest ranking obtains by the
students in the following skills: knowledge, comprehension, analysis
and application.
Manipulative Approach refers to teaching method using
visual representations that explain abstract concepts.
Mnemonics is a tool in aiding students in remembering
mathematical procedures and definitions. For instance, elementary
and high school students may be heard repeating "please excuse my
dear Aunt Sally" to help recall the order of operations --

10
parentheses, exponents, multiplication, division, addition and
subtraction.
Performance refers to the accomplishment or achievements
of the pupils in Mathematics.
Polygon is a plane figure formed by coplanar line
segments such that each line segment intersects exactly one at each
endpoint and no two points with common endpoint are collinear.
Result refers to the actual number of correct responses
based on the teachers made test.
Strategies in Teaching are techniques or methods used by
the teacher to impart her knowledge to the students.
Teacher made test refers to the instrument used by the
researcher which she herself constructed to measure the ability of
the 3rd yr students and to determine their difficulties in Geometry.

Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This chapter presents the related literature and studies which
were taken from local and foreign reference materials useful in the
development of this research.
Literature
These are taken from books, journals and articles from
different libraries. The pieces of information obtained help the
researcher in conceptualizing her study and preparing her
conceptual framework.
Local. The first task facing educators who deal with students with
Mathematics difficulties is to determine the causes of the problem.
Dyscalculia is a learning disability with Mathematics. Students with
dyscalculia have difficulty understanding Mathematics concepts and
solving even simple Mathematics problems despite adequate
education. According to Marshals (2011), about 60 percent of
children with dyslexia have difficulty with numbers or number

12
relationships. Some students may be able to understand
Mathematics concepts when working with Mathematics
manipulative, but may struggle working with numerals,
mathematical symbols/ formulas, and also have difficulty
understanding written procedures for solving problems, such as
“borrowing” or “carrying” in addition or subtraction. Students may
be able to understand Mathematics that is represented symbolically,
but struggle with word problems; they know that 3 + 2 = 5, but be
unable to work out a problem like “If Ana has 3 bananas and Mario
has 2, how many bananas in all?”. A parallel idea from Marshal
(2011) is presented by Dimalanta (2009), he enumerated the sign
of Mathematics difficulties posted at Manila bulletin.
“The common sign of Mathematics

difficulties are inconsistent results in
addition, subtraction, multiplication
and division. Other signs are inability
to grasp and remember Math
concepts, rules, formulas, sequence
(order of operations), and basic
addition, subtraction, multiplication
and division facts. Lastly retention &
retrieval of concept mastery may be
able to perform Math operations one
day, but draw a blank the next.”
13
These difficulties show in poor mental Mathematical ability of
an individual. Many students, despite a good understanding of
Mathematical concepts, are inconsistent at computing. They make
errors simply because they misread signs. For some students they
carry numbers incorrectly. These students often struggle, especially
in primary or elementary school, where basic computations are
stressed.
According to Ambrocio (2009), Mathematics is a language,
but it cannot be learned the same way most languages are learned.
Mathematical concepts must be learned in a specific order. Algebra
requires proficiency in Elementary Mathematics; Calculus requires
proficiency in both Elementary Mathematics and Algebra.
Remember, one missed concept and you won't be prepared for
the next level.
Since Mathematics is a language, some students have
difficulty with the vocabulary of Math. They find word problems
difficult to translate. Students should immerse themselves in solving
Mathematical problems to become proficient. Doing this everyday
will develop and reinforce the skills needed to become proficient in
Mathematics. Ambrocio also added that learning Math is difficult for

14
many people but knowing why can make Mathematics easy and a lot
of fun.
To prevent the difficulties of children, teachers should not
“scare students” Cuala (2008), appeal to educators. Never show to
the students that Mathematics is a hard subject although it seems to
be. If a child is in the primary school, saw difficult Mathematical
equations in Algebra, he will be scared. Take one step at a time. Do
not pressure him like an engineering student. Instead, find ways
how he can learn it the easy way. In addition, Cuala share useful
techniques to help children enjoy Mathematics. To be able for child
to be attracted with Mathematics, here are some of his simple tips:
Let the child play with numbers just like their favorite toy.
Posters and building blocks with numbers can easily make child
familiar with basic numbers. Use Mathematics in every possible way
you can. Any countable thing can be use as a daily practice such as
his teeth, toys, and members of the family. As they go along, it will
be notice that they will be eager to learn more.
Use friendly codes. My Dear Aunt Sally means Multiplication,
Division, Addition and Subtraction. This is being used to remember
which operation to be made first when dealing with a Mathematical

15
equation with parenthesis and bracket. Invent other friendly codes
to make formula easier to remember.
Explain the good effect. Money is the best example to use in
motivating the child. When the child starts to understand the use of
money, explain to them what can happen if they do not learn
Mathematics. No matter what their other interests are, convince
them that they will need it someday. Allow them to realize that even
beggars need to know the basic of counting.
“Mathematics is a part of our daily life and you cannot avoid
it.” Cuala concluded, hence, find ways to enjoy it so that the child
will do the same.
Mathematics plays a vital role in many facets of our life. It
also influences our participation in leisure activities such as cooking,
playing card games and sports of any kind – from childhood to
adulthood. Mathematical enriches our everyday lives. Thus
preventing poor achievement in Mathematics has wide-ranging
lifelong implications. Early prediction of students Mathematics
difficulties will be diminished or avoided through the early
interventions or remedial according to Dagasuhan (2004).

16
Foreign. In 2005, Gallup conducted a poll that asked students to
name the school subject that they considered to be the most
difficult. Not surprisingly, Mathematics came out on top of the
difficult chart. According to Axe (2012), for some students, they
considered Math to be the hardest subject in school. The Center of
Excellence for Early Childhood development (CEECD) and the
Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development (SKC-ECD)
(2011), these organizations identify that about 3 out of school-aged
children have fear in Mathematics. So what is it about Mathematics
that makes it difficult?
Collins English Dictionary (2009), defines the world difficult as
“not easily or readily done: requiring much labor skill.” This
definition gets to the core of the problem when it comes to
Mathematics specially the statement that a difficult task is not
“readily” done. For many students, Mathematics is not something
that comes intuitively or automatically, with little effort. It is a
subject that sometimes requires student to devote lots and lots of
time and energy. Hence, for many, the problem has little to do with
brain power: it is mostly a matter of staying power.

17
What are the sources of difficulties in learning
Mathematics? Many students at all levels of education in
developing countries have difficulties or problems in learning
Mathematics. The causes of these difficulties are many and wide
ranging. Some of which are: some students seem to be negatively
influenced by the stereotype beliefs held by many people that
Mathematics is a difficult subject according to Heward (1996) also
affirmed by Thomas (2008), for a number of learners their
problems appear to stem from unsatisfactory teaching and the
resultant lack of experience of success as written in International
Electronic Journal of Elementary Education (2012), still for
other students their difficulties seem to be linked to the procedures
used in evaluating Mathematics learner’s state by Somerset (1987)
and Murray (1996), there are also students who unfortunately may
have a genuine specific learning disability in Mathematics according
to Bos & Vaughn (2002) and lastly poor performance in
Mathematics might also be attributed to inadequate funding of
education which results in fewer teaching/learning resources and
low quality of education by Kelly (1991).

18
According to Fuchs (2002), students who do not perform well
in Mathematics often develop Math anxiety and phobia. Math anxiety
and phobia refers to the unreasonable worries about and fear of
Mathematics. This condition can be severe and persistent if not
treated effectively through either educational intervention such as
provision of remedial instruction, learning support from parents, and
individualized educational counseling.
The book entitle ‘‘Numeracy and Learning Difficulties,
Approaches to teaching and assessment’’ by Westwood (2000),
enumerated the difficulties in learning Mathematics.
Difficulties in learning Mathematics
Difficulty with Number Facts Students with learning
difficulties may have trouble memorizing basic number facts in all
four operations, despite adequate understanding and practice.
Number facts are the basic computations (9 + 3 = 12, 2 x 4 = 8),
students are required to memorize in the earliest grades of
elementary school. Recalling these facts efficiently is critical because
it allows students to approach more advance mathematical thinking
without being bogged down by simple calculation. For some this
represents their main area on Mathematics learning difficulty.

19
Educators should encourage interactive and intensive practice with
motivational materials such as games and use direct instruction in
teaching.
Difficulty with Computation and Minor Errors Some
students with learning difficulties have a good grasp of Mathematical
concepts, but are inconsistent in calculating. They may not pay
attention to the operational sign, borrowing or carrying
appropriately, and sequencing the steps in operations. These
students also may experience difficulty mastering basic number
facts. Teachers should encourage the students to develop self-
monitoring systems to check for errors.
Difficulty with the Problem Solving Some students have
difficulty connecting the Mathematics they learn in school to real life
situations. Lasfar (2010), said that Mathematics is the mother of
science of the abstract world. Most of the topics in Mathematics are
abstract. One fairly common difficulty experience by students with
Mathematics problem is the inability to easily connect the abstract or
conceptual aspect of Math with reality. For some students, making a
link to a real life topic is difficult; math can put what they are
learning in the classroom into context. If they are able to see a

20
tangible link to a practical situation, the skills and concepts will
become easier to learn and retain, as stated by Vize (2012).
Making link to real life helps keep students motivated to learn.
Hence Westwood (2000), requested teachers at this point should
use varied concrete materials rather in problems solving tasks and
allow students to work in pair to learned more with their classmate.
Difficulty with the Language of Math For some students,
Math disability is driven by problems with language. These students
may also experience difficulty with reading, writing and speaking. In
Mathematics, however, their language problem is compounded by
inherit difficult terminology. Other problems related to difficulty with
the language in Mathematics are difficulty following verbal
explanations, and/or weak verbal skills for monitoring the steps of
complex calculations. Teaching approach includes: for teachers -
“slow down the pace of instruction and questioning, maintain normal
timing of phrases, and give information in discrete segments”, and
for students – “develop the habit of reading or saying problems
before and/or after computing them”.
Visual-Spatial Math Difficulties A small number of
students with learning difficulties have problems with visual-spatial-

21
motor organization. These difficulties may result in “weak or lack
understanding of concepts, very poor number sense, specific
difficulty with pictorial representations and/or poorly controlled
handwriting and confused arrangements of numerals.” To lessen the
difficulties in this aspect provide remediation in the area of picture
interpretation, diagram and graph reading.
Although student experience difficulty in Mathematics
“Rigorous practice is the main key to achieve success in Math.”,
expressed by Souza (2013). To become an ace in Mathematics,
students need to practice Math regularly. Most students do not
spend enough time to practice Mathematics on a regular basis. The
reasons can be varied, from disinterest to inefficiency. The fact is
that when students do not understand the topic properly, they lose
their interest and end up disappointed due to poor grades in exams.
To solve a Mathematical problem accurately, students need to be
completely involved. The process of solving a Mathematical problem
demands several sequential steps. First, students need to find the
method involved in the problem. Second, they need to apply the
right formula to get the correct solution. Third, they can find the
alternate method to solve the same problem.

22
To make each learning session more effective, Souza added
students should practice various problems on the same topic. This
gives students more clarity on each topic. Hence, they can easily
find out their learning problems and take required steps to
overcome these. However, students have a tendency to stick to a
topic which is easy to solve. Experts suggest that they should
change this habit and try to solve all kinds of problems to get
familiar with the entire curriculum. To become number one in
Mathematics, students need regularly practice. Several websites
offer Math help. When a student feels that he/she does not
understand the Mathematical concepts thoroughly in a classroom
environment, they can opt for online Math assistance. This learning
process gives them better understanding of each topic. Most
importantly, with this service, students can choose topics and level
of difficulties accordance to their preference. They can choose the
worksheet which they want to work on. Online Math help is fast and
easy to use for students. They can find instant solutions related to
any topic including Algebra, Calculus, etc. To improve student’s
mathematical skills, take extra care in some parts like more practice
and they can also take help of Math tutors or with online Math help
23
and also the most important thing is working on the assignments
given in regular class sessions. This makes the students good grades
and enhances their skills.
Geometry is Mathematics for third year high school students.
Students encounter formal (two-column) proofs in Geometry. Since
it’s the first time that a student comes across with formal proofs,
this can obviously difficult for them. According to Miller (2012), it
would be easier for students if they had encountered informal proofs
and were required to justify their statements and reasoning in
earlier school years.
Koolbreeze (2010), stated that Geometry is a difficult branch
of Mathematics since it consists of many postulates, theorems and
formulas to learned and memorized. Students must acquired this
knowledge quickly to succeed, because in this type of Math the
concept is build in one another, therefore failure to master them will
impede success.
Furthermore, Lebedev (2010), discussed the reasons why
students struggle more in Geometry than other Mathematics
courses. The reason is because; Geometry is fundamentally different
from most other Mathematics courses. Geometry is very different

24
from Algebra I and Algebra II. For example, Geometry often
requires students to visualize abstract objects. Some students are
not visual learners therefore have difficulties mastering some
Geometry concepts. It is much easier for most students to visualize
a line than to visualize a polyhedron. Another reason why students
often struggle in Geometry is because Algebra courses often do not
focus as much on proofs and reasoning as much as Geometry
courses do. In many schools, students are first introduced to the
ideas of axioms and postulates in Geometry courses. Algebra
courses are often primarily based on memorization and basic
equation solving strategies rather than proof formulations. One
solution to helping students better understand Geometry is to mix
Geometry and Algebra courses. This would allow students to be able
to both have more time to think about Geometric concepts as well
as to learn some helpful Algebraic Geometry techniques.
A pertinent problem with many Geometry students is their
weakness in the language in Geometry according to Bishop (1986).
The vocabulary in Geometry is specific and carries meaning,
descriptions and even properties. Knowing a geometric terms like
"triangles" and "squares" may not imply that the student

25
understands their exact meanings or their properties involving their
angle sums, perimeter or area. Students were unable to explain
simple terms like perimeter, area, triangle, isosceles, scalene, and
equilateral. Comprehension of Geometry language or terms
according Khoo & Clements (2001), plays a very important role in
learning and understanding of geometric concepts.
Lappan, Phillips, & Winter (1984), another problem of
Geometry involves the ability to visualize. Many concepts in
geometry require students to visually perceive the objects and
identify their properties by comparing them with their previous
experiences involving similar objects. These geometrical concepts
also require visual interpretations. Many problems in Geometry are
presented in a two-dimensional format. Thus students who are
unable to dig out geometric information about three dimensional
solid objects drawn on paper will face difficulty in interpreting
questions involving solid Geometry. Chong (2001), a Mathematics
educator recommend more visual activities in the classroom to help
students understand geometric concepts. It would therefore seem
helpful for students if Geometry lessons could be carried out with
hands-on activities. By being able to "touch-see-and-do" and

26
interacting with the objects of their learning, students can learn
Geometry in a more imaginative and successful way.
Many Geometry lessons were pictured as students copying
diagrams and properties of figures and shapes from blackboards and
doing repetitive exercises to calculate angles, lengths, and areas of
Geometric figures. This approach posed problems to students and
began to fear geometry. Other Geometry classrooms, teachers
introduce students the concept about Geometry and then drill them
with concepts using deductive approach in teaching. Students are
seldom given opportunity to discover and conceptualize geometry on
their own. However this teaching approach does not seem to help
many students as evidenced by poor geometry performance. Hence
Geometry instruction should emphasize hands-on explorations,
developing geometric thinking and reasoning, making conjectures
and even carrying out Geometry projects according to Strutchens
et al (2001).
According to Schwartz (2010), in his article, he cited that
Pierre and Dina van Hiele, Dutch researchers who examined the
question “Why so many people have difficulty learning geometry?”.
What they found was that people develop their knowledge and
27
understanding of geometric concepts in a predictable sequence of
levels of development known as The Van Hiele level of Geometric
Thought.
“Level 0: Pre-Recognition Children

perceive geometric shapes, but are unable to
identify many of them.
Level 1: Visual Children recognize basic
and mental representations of shapes. These
mental representations are visual prototypes.
Level 2: Descriptive/Analytic Children
use specific properties of shapes, rather than
visual wholes, to distinguish between them.
Reasoning is in terms of combinations of
properties.
Level 3: Abstract/Relational Students
can begin to follow informal logical reasoning
about properties of shapes.
Level 4: Formal Deduction Students
become capable of constructing original
meaningful proofs. They can produce a
logical argument on the basis of "givens."
Level 5: Rigor/Metamathematical
Students extend their reasoning power to the
elaboration and comparison of alternate
axiomatic systems of Geometry. ”
These levels are necessary to enable students to develop an
appropriate understanding of Mathematical concepts which lead to
higher level of Geometric thinking.
In addition, Miller (2012), pointed out that students are not
prepare to higher level of Geometric thinking skill. Textbook

28
problems concentrate too much on calculation and using formulas,
and not enough on analyzing concepts, making conjunctures about
the properties. Mathematics teachers should not focus more on
calculation but instead they should utilize questions to develop
higher Mathematical thinking of students. Stems Questions to
Develop Mathematical Thinking as stated in SAGE (2011), are the
following:
What do the numbers used in the problem

represent?
What is the relationship of the quantities?
How is _______ related to ________?
What is the relationship between
______and ______?
What does_______mean to you?
(e.g. symbol, quantity, diagram)
What properties might we use to find a
solution?
How did you decide in this task that you
needed to use...?
Could we have used another operation or
property to
solve this task? Why or why not?
What mathematical evidence would
support your solution?
How can we be sure that...? / How could
you prove that...?
Will it still work if...?
What were you considering when...?
29
Studies
This part contains findings of researchers from both local and
foreign which revealed the difficulties in learning Mathematics.
Local. Difficulties in Mathematics are no just common but
significant, and worthy of serious instructional attention in both
regular and special education classes. Students may respond to
repeated failure with withdrawal of effort, lowered self esteem, and
avoidance behavior.
Gresola (2001), she enumerated the learning difficulties and
the causes of the difficulties of students. A test was given to the
freshmen students; an item analysis is used to determine their
learning difficulties in different topics for 1st year. The application of
knowledge and skills with equations in solving non-routine problems
was revealed to be the most difficult skill for the freshmen. The
second most difficult skill was fall under analysis questions. These
questions involve evaluation of algebraic equations, identifying
properties of plane figures and translate verbal statements into
mathematical sentences. A questionnaire was given to teacher
respondent to determine the cause of student’s learning difficulties.

30
Among the suggested causes of learning difficulties, difficulties in
analyzing verbal problems rank no. 1. It is the inability to visualize
Mathematics concepts. Students have trouble ordering the steps
used to solve a problem and have difficulty to translate word
problem into mathematical equation. Poor in logical thinking rank
no. 2. One fairly common difficulty experienced by freshmen
students is the inability to connect the abstract or conceptual aspect
of Math with reality. The other causes of difficulties are lack of
mastery, inaccuracy in computation, poor retention and
comprehension. Findings in her study revealed that there exists a
relationship between the identified learning difficulties and their
causes. She recommended an appropriate strategies and techniques
be used to enhance learning in Mathematics and overcome the
difficulties on skills identified by the first year students.
Result of the study of Perlas (2008), on analysis of the
difficulties encountered by the third year in Geometry, revealed that
the students: encountered difficulties in four skills namely basic
visual recognition, drawing, logical proving and problem solving.
Among the four skills, the logical proving skills and the drawing skills
are the most difficult.

31
Lumpas (2008), conducted a descriptive study on the
common difficulties of students in understanding the concepts were
the following:
1. Understanding the concepts of

geometric figures; their
dimensions, areas and perimeters.
2. In evaluating algebraic expression:
difficulty is in the basic concept of
the variable x and in formulating
and interpreting equation.
3. Inadequate knowledge on
fractions: getting the fractional
parts of the whole, representing
fraction in a grid, comparing
fractions, reducing fraction to
lowest terms, converting decimals
to fractions and operation of
fraction.
4. Insufficient in spatial information
and processing which hindered
from recognizing patterns of
figures and number sequence.
Valdez (2008), in her study observed that the students had
difficulties in learning the concept and processes in Geometry. She
stated “more often the students lack the necessary mathematical
concepts and principles as well as the ability to solve math problems
necessary to take higher math skills.”
According to Dela Cruz (2006), many students find
Mathematics difficult because they cannot grasp the concept and the
32
process being taught in the classroom. There are several factors that
are related to poor performance in Mathematics. Foremost of these
factors are students related. Learners do not exceed efforts to
understand the lessons being taught; hence their foundation in basic
Mathematics concepts is incomplete. Some students are afraid to
know their difficulties because they might incur the anger of their
parents. These problems can be resolve by conducting an adaptive
teaching wherein the teacher plans a learning activity designed to
help pupils master the required skills and information before moving
on the new content to be learned.
Caluya (2000), investigated students’ performance in writing
proofs. Learners experience difficulties in proving. They find it
difficult to begin with proof. They often used the theorem to be
proven as a reason in its proof and use invalid inferences forms in
writing proofs. Proofs with diagrams that contained several sets of
embedded triangles or required auxiliary lines were among the most
difficult. Similarity proofs were more difficult than congruence proofs
requiring the same of number of deductions. Students have difficulty
with complexity of the mathematical inductive principles.
Furthermore he reported that at the end of a full year course in

33
Geometry in which proof writing is studied, about 25% of the
students have no competence in writing proof, another 25% can
only do trivial proof, about 20% can do some proof with greater
complexity and only 30% master proofs similar to the theorems and
exercises in standard textbook.
In the study of Dollente (2009), on Mathematics
achievement of grade V pupils, it was found that the adequacy of
textbooks and instructional materials has a bearing on the difficulties
and achievements of pupils in Mathematics. With those findings, it
was recommended that a remedial teaching be given especially to
slow learners.
Moreover, Celestial (2010), cited the work of Labine (2008),
suggest that several approaches which may be used to help children
who are experiencing problems in Mathematics. One of the best
approaches is teaching the basic concepts using concrete objects.
Teachers should also incorporate cooperative learning in problem-
solving activities. Use technology as tool in problem solving and
teaching basic mathematics facts. Lastly let the children experience
enjoyment in learning Mathematics by using games in reviewing and
teaching Mathematics vocabulary.

34
Foreign. Learning Geometry is not easy and many students fail
to develop an understanding of Geometry concepts.
Lian (2007) cited the works of Strutchens, Harris and Martin
(2001), students learn Geometry by memorizing Geometric
properties rather than by exploring and discovering the underlying
properties. Geometry knowledge learned in this way is limited and
superficial. For example, if students memorize that a square has four
equal sides, they will be unable to distinguish between a square and
a rhombus. Eventually these students find difficulty in applying that
limited geometry knowledge in problem solving. Hence a number of
factors have been proposed to explain what makes Geometry
learning difficult. First, the Geometry language, which involves
specific terminology, is unique and needs particular attention and
understanding before it can be used meaningfully. Misuse of
Geometry terminology can lead to misconceptions of geometric
knowledge. Next, Geometry requires visualizing abilities but many
students cannot visualize three dimensional objects. Visualizing cross
sections of solids is very difficult for students lacking ample prior
concrete experiences with solid objects. Due to their limited
geometric experiences, students may not have enough opportunities

35
to develop and exercise their spatial thinking skills for effective
geometry learning. The lack of understanding often discourages the
students, and lead to poor performance in Geometry tests.
What factors are responsible for the difficulty in the teaching
and learning of Geometry in secondary schools? What strategies
could be adapted to enhance better teaching and learning of
Geometry in secondary schools? These are the major the questions
that Adolphus (2011), answer in his study. There are 300 students
and thirty (30) teachers from ten secondary schools scattered all
over Port Harcourt, the capital city of Rivers State were randomly
selected for the study. The researcher adopted the descriptive
survey method. Simple means and percentages he used to analyze
the data. Among the 10 factors, the teachers and students
respondent strongly agree that the poor foundation and lack of hard
work on the part of the students and lack of instructional materials
are the major difficulty encountered in teaching and learning of
Geometry. In her study the both respondents agree to the fact that
the learning environment should be made conducive for effective
teaching and learning to take place. Adolphus, wrap up in her study,

36
the factors responsible for the difficulties in teaching and learning of
Geometry in secondary schools. The subsequent are her conclusion:
“The foundation of most Mathematics

teachers in Geometry is poor. The students
have poor foundation in Mathematics, as
such cannot solve problem even when similar
examples are given, the teaching and
learning environment are not conducive. This
is in line with lack of infrastructures and
basic facilities for teaching and learning.
Altitude of students towards learning is very
poor. They lack the willingness and readiness
to learn. The teachers lack commitment due
to lack of motivation. It was also found that
if the necessary provisions are made and
proper monitoring is made on the students
and teachers, these problems will be a thing
of the past.”
The researcher also recommended that, “Teachers should try
as much as possible to relate their lesson to real life situation in
order to reduce abstract nature of the subject.”
Josh Wheatley (2011), in his study investigates the
difficulties of students in Geometry in solving three-dimensional
figures. The researcher gave an assessment test that he named as
Surface Area and Volume Assessment (SAAVA). Results from the
SAAVA shows that students are capable of reaching the correct
answer without sufficient explanation or justification. Wheatley

37
encourage the educators to deliver instruction in a sequential way
that begins at lower level thinking skills and progresses to higher
levels.
Masters (2010), identified three common misconceptions the
students experience in Geometry that lead to difficulties. The three
misconceptions are Shape Properties, Transformations, and
Geometric Measurement. The Shape Properties misconception
focuses on difficulties related to reasoning with a concept image and
not a concept image. The basic difficulties that students experience
related to shape properties in Geometry often stem from students
having developed a concept image without a concept definition.
Students who have this insufficiency of understanding can often
identify examples of shapes, but will also fail to identify examples of
shapes that are not identical to their own mental image of the
shape. The Transformation misconception focuses on difficulties
related to transforming shapes around distant points or reflection
and rotation. Transformations refer to the mapping of every point in
a plane, or, in other words, transforming the entire plane. Students
often think of "the plane" as the empty space behind the figure,
rather than thinking of the figure as a subset of points within the

38
plane. This belief leads them to make transformations on the set of
points that make up the figure, rather than the entire plane. The
Geometric Measurement misconception focuses on difficulties
related to spatial structuring and connecting spatial structuring to
area formulas. The researcher conclude that two common sources of
misconceptions in Geometric Measurement lies in students' ability to
mentally structure space and their ability to connect structured
space to mathematical formulas. Students frequently do not
intuitively understand the concept of area as covering space. When
mathematical formulas are introduced, students who cannot
mentally structure space will memorize the formulas and apply them
blindly, without understanding what the formulas mean or what the
calculations represent.
Mundia (2011), assess the Math learning difficulties of grade
4 pupils. The major difficulties in Math is inability to use the four
arithmetic or fundamental operations namely addition, subtraction,
multiplication, and division efficiently. Teaching intervention is
necessary to address Math difficulty. Instructions should emphasize
direct teaching (expository rather than discovery learning) of
Mathematics concept and skills. Use simple example and

39
demonstrate it highly recommended. To facilitate explanation,
demonstration and application of Mathematical concepts, the use of
concrete material such as visual aids is also recommended. This is
important because more students are functioning at the concrete
level. Lastly positive reinforcements are advice to encourage
students to maintain interest and motivation in Mathematics.
Bayetto (2007), elaborate the different teaching
techniques especially to students with learning difficulties
in Mathematics.
Provide opportunities to work alone and together
Learning Mathematical concepts and skills is more than receiving it
like a gift from an educator. Problem solving can promote discussion
between peers as they share their ideas and process their answers.
Use problem solving with divergent questions State
that problem solving is a task or situation for which there is no
immediate or obvious solution. An authentic problem must pose a
challenge question that encourages the learner to think and
development of concepts and skills. The educators should warmly
acknowledge the students for trying to solve problems rather than
discounted as not being “the preferred way”.

40
Use concrete materials It is materials that provide tangible
ways to explore mathematical ideas and, for educators, they are a
window into student thinking. Real money and interlocking blocks
are examples of concrete materials.
Confirm student understanding of Mathematical
language Some students become confused about the meaning of
words in Mathematics lessons. The main problem of the students in
this aspect…
“is translating between their own intuitive

and concrete understanding of the real world
and the language used to describe and
quantify for Mathematical terms.”
Educators must build upon a student’s level of language,
check for understanding and not assume that nods and smiles are
indicating comprehension.
The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(NCTM) (2006), states that the use of technology is essential in
teaching and learning Mathematics; it enhances students' learning.
The internet offers educators a huge range of research-based
practices, interactive websites, and resources. A computer is a
patient teacher and it is interesting to observe some students who

41
will stay with a game well beyond the time they might usually stay
with a pen and paper exercise.
Computer software can often do what a textbook or
worksheet will never be able to do, and that is to engage. While an
educator will need to introduce a concept and ensure understanding,
a software program can often provide varied practice to develop
automaticity and fluency.

42
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Students have generally experienced difficulties in learning
Mathematics. Geometry is Mathematics for third year high school
students. Such difficulties of students in learning Geometry should
identify and remediate. The researchers study is based on the
following:
Miller (2012), pointed out that students are not prepare to
higher level of Geometric thinking skill. A lot of Geometry problems
in textbooks are just calculations “calculate the area/circumference/
perimeter etc…” Textbook problems concentrate too much on
calculation and using formulas, and not enough on analyzing
concepts, making conjunctures about the properties.
Fuys et al. (1988) found that the inability to advance in level
of thinking may be related to students' deficiencies in language,
both in knowledge of Geometry vocabulary and ability to use it
precisely and consistently.
Poverty according to Mazzocco (2007), a well established
factor for poor Mathematics achievement. Students with low
socioeconomic status has inadequate nutrition are low performing
individuals. However some hard working students with low

43
socioeconomic status overcome these obstacles. An ability of these
resilient students has close relationship with an adult other than a
parent – such as a TEACHER according to Masten and Coatsworth
(1998).
Lachance and Mozzocco (2006), carried out an extensive
analysis of potential sex differences in the primary school-age years,
there was no evidence of a male and female advantage. These
findings reflect why it is inappropriate for teachers to base their
expectation for an individual student’s Mathematical thinking on
gender or to attributes the student’s difficulty or success solely to
gender.
Gulatera (2010), cited the work of Hilton and Berglund,
conducted a study on the relationship of sex and grade point
average with the relationship of Mathematics achievement and they
found that the performance of male and female students do not
differ significantly; that grade point average of students are good
predictors of High performance in Mathematics
Sherman, Richardson and Yard (2005) believe that students
with learning difficulties are given tedious and boring activities to
develop the basics. Students who did not “get it” the first time are
44
not likely to “get it” the next several times it is taught in the usual
manner. This may be where technology can provide a different way
to develop conceptual understanding.
Westwood (2000), believes that one of the main problems
encountered by students…is translating between their own intuitive
and concrete understanding of the real world and the language used
to describe and quantify for mathematical purposes for
school. Educators must build upon a student’s level of language,
check for understanding and not assume that nods and smiles are
indicating comprehension.
The sign of Mathematics difficulties according to Dimalanta
(2009), are inability to grasp and remember Mathematics concepts,
rules and formulas. Geometry is a branch of Mathematics that
consists of many postulates, theorems and formulas to learned and
memorized.
Sherman, Richardson and Yard (2005), remind us
that Mathematics instruction must provide many opportunities for
concept building, relevant challenging questions, problem solving
reasoning, and connections within the curriculum and real-world
situations
45
Lebedev (2010), in his article “Why Do Students Struggle in
Geometry?”, pointed out that Geometry is difficult because it
requires to visualized abstract object. Students with visual problem
have difficulties in mastering some Geometry concept.
Students with learning difficulties are like all other students:
they must be taught Mathematics in a way that engages and
dignifies them as learners. Westwood (2000) also reminds us that
the educator is the pivotal person in ensuring successful learning.
Consequently, the researcher is motivated to craft a Guide to
Improve Geometry Instruction.

46
RESEARCH PARADIGM
The figure below illustrates the flow of the study.
INPUT
 Profile of the student subjects as to gender, family monthly
income, educational attainment of parents and 2nd year
Mathematics grade.
 Profile of the Geometry teacher respondents as to mastery of
the subject, strategies in teaching, instructional material and
evaluation utilized.
 The difficulties encountered by the third year as assessed from
the teacher made test.
 The causes and solutions of these difficulties.
PROCESS
Utilization of the following:

 Questionnaire
 Teacher made test
 Analysis of documents
OUTPUT
 A Guide to Improve Geometry Instruction
PARADIGM OF THE STUDY

Figure 1
47
The focus of this study is presented in the paradigm using the
INPUT – PROCESS – OUTPUT scheme.
Block 1 is the INPUT, which contained the following: (1) The
profile of the student subjects maybe describe as to: gender, family
monthly income, highest educational attainment of parents and 2nd
year Mathematics grade (2) The profile of the teacher respondents
maybe describe as to: mastery of the subject, strategies in teaching,
instructional materials and evaluation utilized. (3) Difficulties
encountered by the student’s third year students in Geometry as
assessed from the teacher made test. (4) The causes and possible
solutions to overcome these difficulties of 3rd year students.
Block 2 is the PROCESS, is the use of the questionnaire, to
gather the needed data, teacher made test and analysis of findings.
Block 3 is the OUTPUT, is the utilization of findings to craft a
guide to improve Geometry instruction.

48
RELEVANCE OF THE REVIEWED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

TO THE PRESENT STUDY
The previous literatures and studies both local and foreign
assisted the researcher to acquired perspective in line with the
study. All the preceding literatures point to difficulties, causes, and
solutions of these difficulties encountered by students in
Mathematics.
The study of Mundia (2011), is similar to the present study.
The research assesses the Mathematics learning difficulties of grade
4 pupils and the researcher offered some solutions to overcome
these difficulties. He applied the item analysis to determine their
difficulties. His study reveals that pupil’s difficulty in Mathematics is
in the basic four fundamental operations. Mundia and the present
study offered the same possible solution which is the use concrete
materials to explain the concepts in Mathematics.
The study of Lian (2007), is also similar to the present study
because the research identifies the causes of students difficulties in
Geometry. Among the difficulty of students are poor understandings
of Geometry language, weak in analyzing word or verbal problems
and poor visualizing solid figures.

49
However, of all the aforementioned studies Gresola (2001), is
parallel to the present study. Both studies apply the item analysis to
determine the student’s difficulties. The student difficulties focus
among the Mathematical skills such as: application of knowledge,
comprehension, analysis and problem solving.
Summing up, the cited study influences the present attempts
of the researcher to assess the “Difficulties of 3rd year Students in
Geometry”. This will be done to craft a guide to improve Geometry
instruction.
Chapter 3
METHODS OF RESEARCH
This chapter describe the methods and procedures of research
utilized to gather the needed data. It includes the research design,
sampling techniques, respondents and subjects of the study,
instruments used in the study, construction of the instrument,
validation, administration and retrieval and the statistical treatment
of data.
RESEARCH DESIGN
The study adopted the Descriptive Method of research in
determining the difficulties of third year students in Geometry.
According to Trocim (2006), it is used to describe the basic features
of the data in a study. They provide simple summaries about the
sample and the measures. This design goes beyond data gathering,
it tries to relate findings in prevailing facts.

51
SAMPLING TECHNIQUE
The researcher employed the Stratified Random sampling. In
this sampling technique each member in the population is given an
equal chance of being included in the sample. This type of sampling
divides first the population into two or more strata. The researcher
used the different sections of the present study as strata.
According to Calmorin (2010), the larger the population the
lesser the percentage of sample size, since this study has large
population (1,500), the researcher got 3.3% per section making a
total of 10% of the entire population. Hence the sample size is 150
from 26 sections which are 5 to 6 students in each section, both
male and female students.
RESPONDENTS AND SUBJECTS OF THE STUDY
The respondents and subjects of the study were all (5) five
Geometry teachers and the 150 3rd year students respectively. The
students were presently enrolled at Tala High School, Division of
Caloocan City, District II for the Academic Year 2013-2014.

52
INSTRUMENTS USED
In gathering data, the researcher made use of the following
instruments:
Questionnaire
It was the most important source of data, which was designed
to elicit answer to the questions posted on the statement of the
problems. The teacher’s questionnaire was consists of part 1 and 2.
It comprises questions which could be used to gather source data
for statement of problem no. 1.2, 3 and 4.
Part I: Questionnaires consists the following information about
the profile of the respondents as to: mastery of the subject matter,
strategies in teaching, instructional materials and evaluation utilized.
Part II: Questionnaires consists of the following: causes of
difficulties and the possible solutions to overcome the difficulties of
third year students in Geometry.

53
Teacher made Test
For the students difficulties, the researcher used the teacher
made test. These are 50 questions constructed by the researcher
from topics in Geometry namely undefined terms, angles, polygons,
circles and measurements.
Documentary Analysis
The researcher asked permission from the registrar to look at
the permanent record or form 137 of the student subjects for the
2nd year grade in Mathematics. The mastery of subject of the
teacher respondents was obtained through Performance Appraisal
System for Teachers (PAST) with the permission from the
department head.
CONSTRUCTION OF THE INSTRUMENT
The researcher prepared the initial draft of the questionnaire
and showed this to her adviser who in turn, suggested some
changes, additions and rejections which were all considered when
the draft was revised. This tool is anchored on the statement of the
problem.
54
Table of Specification
Table of specification is a chart that gives a summary of topics
to be tested. The researcher prepares this as a basis for teacher
made test. A table of specification as shown in Appendix D was
made first to assure equal distribution of test items. The number of
item is directly proportional to the number of days the topic was
taught. The test consists of fifty (50) multiple choice, from the
following topics in Geometry namely: undefined terms, angles,
polygons, circles and measurements.
Item Analysis
An item analysis preferred by the researcher to determine the
difficulties of third year students in Geometry.
The following are the steps in item analysis:
1. Score each answer sheet, write score total on the corner.
2. Sort the pile into rank order from top to bottom score.
3. If normal class of 30 students divides class in half, same
number in top and bottom group. For large sample of around
100 or more, cut down the sample with approximately 27%

55
(upper group) and 27% (lower group) from the total sample
size.
4. Count number of students who responded to each alternative
from upper group (U) and the lower group (L) separately.
5. Record the responses.
6. Compute the Difficulty Index (DI). Divide the sum of the
correct responses from upper group and lower group by total
number of students.
𝑼+𝑳
𝑫𝑰 =
𝑵
7. Divide the difference of the correct responses from upper
group and lower group by number of students in upper or
lower group. The result is the Discrimination Index (DP).
𝑼−𝑳
𝑫𝑷 =
𝑵
VALIDATION OF THE INSTRUMENT
The final draft of the questionnaires were tried-out or pre-
tested to three (3) Mathematics teachers who are not among the
sample respondents. These teachers have expertise in this field. The

56
results were analyzed to find out if there were still vague or
confusing items in the questionnaire.
To validate the teacher made test, a dry-run was done to 50
third year students who are not part of the sample. The results of
the dry-run were scored, tallied and the discrimination and difficulty
index were determined. According to Perlas (2008), high reliability
and validity can built into a test in advance through item analysis.
Test according to Anastasi (1986) can be improved through the
selection, substitution or revision of items.
Further revisions were made until such time that the
questionnaire and the teacher made test is ready for floating.
ADMINISTRATION AND RETRIEVAL OF THE INSTRUMENT
The researcher asked an authorization and approval through
School Principal, to the Division Superintendent of the City to
disseminate the questionnaire and the teacher made test. After the
letter was approved, the researcher proceeds to the distribution and
administered the questionnaire and the teacher made test to the
target sample. Through the help of her colleagues, she was able to
collect one hundred percent (100%) retrieval after few days.

57
STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF DATA
The data were consolidated, organized and tabulated. They
were analyzed and interpreted using suitable statistical tools.
1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution
Frequency distribution is the itemized summary of
responses for each question on the basis of categories
established in the study or based on the set of replies pre-
established in the questionnaire.
Percentage distribution summary is the itemized
summation of the percentage of the frequency of response for
each question based on the arithmetical percentage of the
frequency distribution to the total number of responses.
This was employed to describe the profile of student
subjects and teacher respondents in terms of mastery of the
subject.
Formula:
𝒇
𝑷= 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝑵
58
Where: P percentage of distribution
f frequency of responses
N total number of respondents
To interpret the 2nd grade and the family monthly
income of student subjects the researcher uses the following
scales.
2nd Grade Interpretation
90 and above - very satisfactory
85 – 89 - satisfactory
80 – 84 - good
75 – 79 - fair
74 and below - poor
Family Monthly
Income Interpretation
25,000 and above Above Middle Class
15,000 to 24,999 Middle Class
5,000 to 14,999 Below Middle Class
5,000 below Poor

59
2. Weighted mean
This was utilized by the researcher to interpret the
extent of personal feeling of the third year Mathematics
teachers towards the use of strategies in teaching,
instructional material and evaluation utilized.
Formula:
𝒇(𝒂𝒘)
𝑾𝑴 =
𝑵
Where: WM weighted mean
 Summation of
f frequency
aw assign weight
N number of respondents
The following are the scales and the corresponding
interpretations devised by the researcher.
Weighted Mean Scale Verbal Interpretation
4.50 – 5.00 5 Always
3.50 – 4.49 4 Almost Always
2.50 – 3.49 3 Sometimes
1.50 – 2.49 2 Seldom
1.00 – 1.49 1 Never

60
3. Ranking
Ranking was utilized to answer problem no 3 (causes of
learning difficulties in Geometry) and problem no 4 (possible
solutions to overcome the encountered difficulties of third
year students in Geometry) in the study.

Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the gather data from the instruments in
tabular forms. Each table is given its corresponding analysis and
interpretation which answers the questions given in the statement of
the problem.
Profile of the Subjects and Respondents
Table 1-4 presented the description of the student subjects.
Table 5-8 presented the description of the teacher
respondents.
Difficulties Encountered
Table 9-10 presented the difficulties, causes of these
difficulties and possible solutions to overcome the
encountered difficulties of third year students in
Geometry.
62
Profile of Student Subjects
Table 1
Profile of Subjects as to Gender
Gender f %
Male 72 48
Female 78 52
Total 150 100
Table 1, shows the frequency and percentage distribution of
the student subjects as to gender. As presented on the table, for
150 respondents 72 or 48 percent are male and 78 or 52 percent
are female. This means that female students dominate the third year
for this school year since there are more female than male as shown
in the NSO records.

63
Table 2
Profile of Subjects as to Family Monthly Income
Family Monthly Interpretation f % Rank

Income
25,000 and above Above Middle 2 1.33 4
Class
15,000 to 24,999 Middle Class 30 20.00 3
5,000 to 14,999 Below Middle 46 30.67 2

Class
5000 below Poor 72 48.00 1
Total 150 100
With respect to family income, almost half of the respondents
with 72 or 48 percent have income of 5,000 below which belongs to
poor. These student subjects are usually reside in squatter areas
and live on a hand-to-mouth basis, meaning they are not assured if
they will have something to eat by the next meal time.
Poverty according to Mazzocco (2007), is an established factor
to poor Mathematics achievements. Students with low
socioeconomic status have inadequate nutrition and most are low
performing individuals.
64
Foods fuel the brain and have significant effect on the
academic performance of students. Fish help to improve the ability
to focus and learn how to study more effectively, nuts and dark
chocolates- provides oxygen to the brain which helps to increase
mental alertness and the ability to retain information, whole grains
and apples- enhance memory function, vegetables for memory
retention and legumes helps to recall information. Adding these
foods to diet is a simple and effective way to improve the academic
performance of student subjects. In addition, eating a balanced diet,
staying hydrated and paying attention to overall nutrition is a great
way to complement the good performance of students.

65
Table 3
Profile of Subjects
as to Highest Educational Attainment of Parents
Highest Father Mother

Educational
Attainment of f % Rank f % Rank
Parents
Elementary 20 13.33 5 13 8.67 5
undergraduate
Elementary 5 3.34 6 9 6 6
Graduate
High School 22 14.67 3 23 15.33 3
Undergraduate
High School 47 31.33 1 50 33.33 1
Graduate
College Graduate 21 14 4 20 13.34 4
College 35 23.33 2 35 23.33 2

Undergraduate
Total 150 100 150 100
As noted on the table above the 50 or 33.33 percent is the
highest percentage, are mother that are high school graduate and
47 or 31.33 percent are father with the same level of education. The
2nd in rank are parents (father and mother) that are college
graduate.
This implies that parents of student subjects in general have
the capacity of guiding their child with respect to any mathematical

66
endeavors as they have taken their basic education. Since most of
the student subjects belong to “poor” economic status, their parents
spend more time in working to provide their basic needs such as
food and shelter. Hence guiding the subjects with respect to their
education is not their priority.
Table 4
Profile of Subjects as to 2nd year Mathematics Grade
2nd year Verbal f % Rank

Mathematics Grade Interpretation
90 and above Very Satisfactory 1 0.67 5
85 – 89 Satisfactory 10 6.67 3
80 – 84 Good 62 41.33 2
75 – 79 Fair 75 50.00 1
74 and below Poor 2 1.33 4
Total 150 100
As gleaned on the table 75 students or 50 percent belongs to
the bracket of 75-79 with fair performance, followed by 62 students
or 41.33 percent belongs to the bracket 80-84 with good

67
performance and only one students or 0.67 percent belongs to 90
and above. It indicates that half of the subjects are below average
level and few students are high and low performing students. This
implies further that students may need remedial teaching to prepare
them for the skills offered on Geometry in third year.
Profile of Teacher Respondents
Table 5
Profile of Respondents as to Mastery of the Subject Matter
Mastery of the Subject f % Descriptive Rating

Matter
8.60 to 10.00 Outstanding
6.60 to 8.59 5 100 Very Satisfactory
4.60 to 6.59 Satisfactory
2.60 to 4.59 Unsatisfactory
2.59 below Poor
As noted on the table, 5 or 100 percent are teachers who
have very satisfactory performance rating. This was obtained
through Performance Appraisal System for Teachers (PAST). It

68
means that all respondents have mastery of the subject matter and
are expected to transfer skills necessary for the learners to acquire
Geometry knowledge.
Table 6
Profile of Respondents as to Strategies in Teaching
Strategies Used by the Weighted Verbal Rank

Teacher Mean Interpretation
Deductive Method 3.00 Sometimes 5
Inductive Method 3.80 Almost Always 1
Cooperative Learning 3.60 Almost Always 2
Learning by Doing 3.20 Sometimes 3

or Discovery Approach
Peer Tutoring 3.00 Sometimes 5
Mnemonic Approach 2.80 Seldom 7
Manipulative Approach 3.00 Sometimes 5
It is eminent from the table that the strategies of teaching
that are found almost and always used by the teachers are the
inductive method and cooperative learning. The teachers sometimes
use the deductive method, learning by doing, peer tutoring and

69
manipulative approach while mnemonic approach is seldom apply. It
implies that most of the respondents used inductive method in
teaching.
Since we are now at 20th century, where computers are
rampant, teachers can facilitate the use of Computer Assisted
Instruction (CAI). CAI provides students with an alternative to
classroom settings and frees the instruction from rote processes that
are better handled by the computer. The positive outcomes of CAI
according to Albon (1997), cited in the study of Mahmood (2004),
learning is more enjoyable for graduate and undergraduate
students: students are provided with concise and consistent
information in a self paced manner. Widespread and effective use of
CAI in Mathematics is evident from the availability of various types
of CAI software for all grade levels in the market. There are games
for elementary, tutorial and drill software for high school students.
In addition, CAI can also help in teaching Geometry, since it
allows a dynamic, interactive manipulation of a figure. There are
dynamic geometry software such as Cabri, Geometer’s Sketchpad,
Cinderella and GeoGebra that can be use in Geometry.

70
Table 7
Profile of Respondents as to Instructional Materials Used
Instructional Materials Weighted Verbal Rank

Used by the teacher Mean Interpretation
Textbook 4.00 Almost Always 2
Workbook/Worksheet/ 4.40 Always 1

(LAS) Learning Activity
Sheets
Cuts out of figures 2.80 Sometimes 4.5
Flashcards 2.40 Seldom 6
LCD monitor (projector) 1.80 Never 7
bringing manipulative 3.60 Almost Always 3

such as three dimensional
object as actual object
Chart such as Venn and 2.80 Sometimes 4.5
tree diagram
The table presents the instructional materials used by the
teacher. Most of the respondents always used
workbook/worksheet/LAS with highest weighted mean of 4.40 with
rank 1. It implies that to improve the mathematical skills, the
students need more practice as Souza (2013) said “practice is the
main key to achieve success in math.” Textbook (rank 2) and used
of manipulative as visual aids (rank 3) are almost always use with

71
weighted mean of 4.00 and 3.60 respectively. The use of chart such
as tree or Venn diagram and cut out of figures rank 4.5 with
weighted mean of 2.80. It reveals that manipulative and concrete
materials provide tangible ways to explore mathematical ideas.
Table 8
Profile of Respondents as to Evaluation Utilized
Evaluation Utilized by Weighted Verbal Rank

the Teacher Mean Interpretation
Oral or written test after 4.60 Always 1
each lesson
Paper and pencil test such 3.60 Almost Always 4
as long/summary/chapter
test
Recitation 3.80 Almost Always 2.5
Board work (solving and 3.80 Almost Always 2.5

explaining math problems
on board)
Analyzing work products 3.40 Sometimes 5
(projects)
As shown on the table above, the evaluations commonly used
by the respondents are: oral or written test after each lesson rank 1
with highest weighted mean of 4.40 always used. It implies that

72
evaluation of learning after teaching each lesson is the first priority
of the teacher.
Recitation and board work with weighted mean of 3.80 rank
2.5, followed by paper and pencil test such as
long/summary/chapter test and analyzing work products (projects)
rank 4 and 5 with weighted mean of 3.60 and 3.40 respectively.
Since the weighted mean of rank 2.5, 4 and 5 are close to each
other, this reveal that teacher provides or uses of variety of
appropriate assessments strategies to monitor and evaluate the
learning among the students.
Learning Difficulties Encountered by the Third Year

Students in Geometry as Assessed from the Teacher Made
Test
The table presents the skills and competencies that were
found difficult by the third year students in Geometry based on their
actual performance in the teacher made test. There are four major
aspects of skills namely: knowledge, comprehension, analysis and
application. The table only shows the percentage of incorrect
response of more than 50 percent.

73
Table 9
Difficulties of Third Year Students in Geometry
Rank
Response
Incorrect
of ITEM
% of
No.
Mathematical Skills and Competencies
Topic
Skill
Topic
A. KNOWLEDGE 63.75 4
15 Name the secondary parts of a triangle. 69 Polygons 9
16 Define the kinds of an angle. 64 Polygons 16
17 Name the part of a right triangle. 66 Polygons 13.5
24 Define the different kinds of quadrilaterals. 56 Polygons 22
B. COMPHERENSION 65.25 3
1 Describe the ideas of point, line and plane. 61 Undefined 19
Terms
3 Describe the properties of the subset of a 61 Undefined 19
Terms
line.
5 Identify and illustrate an angle. 67 Angles 11.5
6 Name and identify the parts of an angle. 72 Angles 6
C. APPLICATION 67.57 2
4 Determine the number of line segment. 61 Undefined 19
Terms
27 Determine the sum of the measure of angles 53 Polygons 24

in a triangle.
29 Determine the sum of the measure of 54 Polygons 23
exterior angles of a polygon.
31,323 Determine the sum of the measures of 77 Polygons 4
3 angles of an n-sided polygon.
40,41 Determine the perimeter of polygon. 66 Measurements 13.5
43 Determine the circumference of circle and 80 Measurements 2.5
perimeter of a polygon.
46,48, Apply knowledge on measurement in solving 82 Measurements 1
49 word problem.
C. ANALYSIS 68.33 1
18 Identify the characteristics of different kind 73 Polygons 5
of triangles.
19 Identify the different kinds of triangle. 63 Polygons 17
20 Determine the number of diagonals of a 65 Polygons 15
polygon.
23 Identify the properties of the different kinds 70 Polygons 7.5
of parallelogram.
25 Identify the properties of rectangle. 68 Polygons 10
26 Differentiate trapezoid from parallelogram. 67 Polygons 11.5
38 To identify the properties of common solids. 59 Measurements 21
42 Compare the circumference of two circles. 80 Measurements 2.5
50 Compare the area of the figures. 70 Measurements 7.5
74
It could be observed that the least mastered skill or most
difficult skill reveal by the third year students is analysis with
percentage of incorrect response of 68.33. It implies that students
had difficulty in breaking materials down into parts and explaining
the relation hence teachers should utilize questions that develop the
higher level of mathematical thinking. It is followed by application of
knowledge with percentage of incorrect response of 67.57. It implies
that students have hard time in selecting a concept or skill and use
it to solve a problem. Oandasan (2012), cited the study of Diaz
(1989), that the main difficulties of the students in solving any
practical problems includes inability to comprehend and due to poor
reading ability. The third difficulties of third year experience are in
comprehension with percentage of incorrect response of 65.25. It
reveals that most students have little understanding of the meaning
of the facts. Lastly the student also experience difficulties in
knowledge with percentage of incorrect response of 63.75. The
result shows that the student respondents have difficulty of
remembering facts, terms, definitions, concepts and principle.

75
The item that are more difficult to students are: item 46, 48
and 49, applying knowledge on measurements in solving word
problem with percentage of incorrect response of 82 rank 1,
determining and comparing the circumference of circle and
perimeter of polygons with same percentage of incorrect response
of 80 rank 2.5. It reveals that students have difficulty in word
problems. According to Duque (2003), difficulty of students in
problem solving is attributed to the inability of the learner to
comprehend what the problem is all about. Students hardly
comprehend the problem due to poor vocabulary as stated by
Oandasan (2012).
76
Table 10
The Probable Causes and Possible Solutions to

Overcome the Difficulties of Third Year Students in
Geometry
Causes % Rank Solutions % Rank
Weak Foundation in 68 3 The teacher should use 68 3

Four Fundamental instructional materials to
Operation make the teaching real.
Poor Retention 44 4 The teacher should arouse 63 4

the interest of the students
while introducing the
topics.
Incomplete 76 2 The teacher should use 73 2

Understanding of varied teaching strategies
the Mathematics and techniques that will
Language arouse interest of
students.
Difficulty in 84 1 The learning environment 75 1

Analyzing Verbal should be made conducive
Problems for effective teaching
/learning to take place.
Computational 32 5 The lesson should be 60 5

Weakness related to real life
situation.
*Multiple responses
It is eminent that difficulty in analyzing verbal or word
problems with percentage of 84 rank 1. It implies that reading with
comprehension should be develops among students. In addition, to
overcome the difficulty in analyzing word problems, encourage the

77
students to develop the habit of reading or saying problems before
and/or after computing them.
Incomplete understanding of Mathematics language with
percentage of 76 is rank 2. It reveals that students have difficulty in
remembering Math vocabulary. According to Bishop (1986), a
pertinent problem with many Geometry students is their weakness
in the language in Geometry. It is because some of the terms are
nowhere heard outside the classroom.
Weak foundation in four fundamental operations with
percentage of 68 is rank 3. It shows that these students struggle
more especially in their elementary where basic computations are
stressed. Educators should encourage interactive and intensive
practice with motivational materials such as games and use direct
instruction in teaching.
As revealed by the table, the first solution offered by the
respondents to overcome the student difficulties in learning
Geometry is the learning environment should be made conducive for
effective teaching and learning to take place which rank 1 with
percentage of 75. This result is supported by the study conducted by
Adolphus (2011), in which revealed that students and teachers

78
respondents both agree that the first solution to overcome the
difficulties of students is that “learning environment should be made
conducive for effective teaching then learning will take place.” The
teacher should use varied teaching strategies and techniques that
will arouse interest of students rank 2 with percentage of 73. It
implies that there is no a single best strategy or method in teaching
since the choice of teaching strategy depends on a number of
factors such as class size, availability of instructional materials and
others.
79
Guide
To
Improve
Geometry
Instruction
80
Guide to Improve Geometry Instruction.
The foregoing statements are formulated as a guide to
improve Geometry instruction.
1. Teachers should update their knowledge by attending
trainings and seminars.
2. Use variety of teaching strategies suited to the conditions of
the learners and the nature of the subject matter such as:
Computed Assisted Instruction (CAI), it provides
students with an alternative to classroom settings and frees
the instruction from rote processes that are better handled by
the computer.
Concept Attainment Strategy (CAS), it sharpens student
skills in defining and explaining concepts.
Manipulative Approach it provides a tangible ways for the
students to explore Mathematics ideas.
Powerful Questions Teachers may utilize questions to
develop higher-order questions as these require higher-order
thinking skills (HOTS). Examples of these questions are in
Appendix F.
81
Cooperative learning, it increases the student achievement
through group collaboration and enables them to learn from
each other.
Learning by doing, it encourages student’s independence in
learning.
Mnemonic Approach, it helps the student to remember
Mathematical procedures and definitions.
3. Use variety of evaluation to balance the assessments for
student mastery such as:
Teacher made test in a form of essay, multiple choice, true
or false, completion test, matching type and problem solving.
These evaluation measure student knowledge in particular
lesson.
Project, it could be in a form of portfolio. These measure
student progress.
Recitation The students given a change to response by
describing a pattern, interpret the graph, explain the solution
and allow them to solve in different ways. Through recitation
the students develop the ability to explain.

82
4. Use technology to enhance students learning. It offers a lot of
interactive activities, Math quizzes and games. Teacher should
use available on websites and software to make Geometry an
interesting subject.
a. Mathsnet interactive shape a free online tutorial
about basic shapes and Geometry concepts
b. Dynamic Geometry software such as Cabri,
Geometer’s Sketchpad, Cinderella and GeoGebra.

Chapter 5
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATION
This chapter presents the summary of the study from the
gathered data, the conclusions drawn from the findings, and the
recommendations offered by the researcher in the light of the
findings and conclusions.
Statement of the Problem
the following:
84
1.1.1 gender,

students in Geometry as assessed from teacher made test?
SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS
Based from the gathered data, the researcher came up with
the following findings.

85
1. Profile of the subjects/respondents
1.1 Student subjects
1.1.1 seventy two or 48 percent were male and seventy
eight or 52 percent are female.
1.1.2 seventy two or 48 percent received a total
monthly income of Php 5,000 below.
1.1.3 forty seven or 31.33 percent fathers and fifty or
33.33 percent mothers are high school graduate.
1.1.4 seventy five or 50 percent have grades from
75-79.
1.2 Teacher respondents
1.2.1 100 percent have mastery of the subject matter.
1.2.2 On the strategies used by the teachers in
teaching Geometry; the first three in rank are:
a. inductive method with weighted mean of
3.80;
b. cooperative learning with weighted mean
of 3.60 and;
86
c. learning by doing with weighted mean of
3.20.
1.2.3 On the instructional materials used; the first three
in rank are:
a. workbooks/worksheets/Learning Activity
Sheets (LAS) with weighted mean of 4.40;
b. textbook with weighted mean of 4.00 and;
c. used of manipulative with weighted mean
of 3.60.
1.2.4 On Evaluation utilized:
a. oral or written test after each lesson rank 1
with weighted mean of 4.6;
b. oral measures and board work rank 2.5
with weighted mean of 3.8.
2. On the difficulties encountered by the third year
students in Geometry, the first three in rank were:
a. Analysis of problems with percentage of incorrect
response of 68.33;
87
b. Application problems with percentage of incorrect
response of 67.57 and;
c. Comprehension problems with percentage of incorrect
response of 65.25.
3. On the probable causes of difficulties, the first three in
rank were:
a. Difficulty in analyzing verbal problems with 84 percent:
b. Incomplete understanding of the Mathematics language
with 76 percent and
c. Weak foundation in four fundamental operations with
68 percent.
4. On the solutions offered by the respondents to
overcome the aforementioned difficulties, the first in
three rank were:
a. The learning environment should be made conducive
for effective teaching/ learning to take place with 75
percent:
88
b. The teacher should use varied teaching strategies and
techniques that will arouse interest of students with 73
percent, and
c. The teacher should use instructional materials to make
the teaching real with 68 percent.
5. The researcher designed a guide to improve Geometry
instruction for third year students.

89
CONCLUSION
Based on the summary of findings, the following conclusions
were formulated:
1. The student respondents vary in their personal description.
2. The Mathematics teachers have mastery of the subject
matter, use varied strategies or techniques in teaching and
assess the learning outcomes of students.
3. The least mastered skill or most difficult Mathematical skills
encountered by the students are on the analysis of the
problem. Students are poor in analyzing word problems and
breaking materials down into parts. These students
experience difficulty with reading. They may be able to read
but unable to comprehend.
4. The most difficult topics in Geometry are in measurement
such as perimeter and area of polygons, circumference, and
area of circle and problems involving plane figures.
5. There are causes and solutions of the difficulties encountered
by the third year students in Geometry:

90
Causes Solutions
1. Difficulties in A. The students to develop the habit

analyzing of reading or saying problems
verbal before and/or after computing
problems. them.
B. Provide the students with answered

problems on individual cards and
ask them to prove each example
using concrete materials.
C. Allow the students to work in pairs

or in group as they share their ideas
and process their answer.
D. Provide a picture representation

/interpretation, diagram and graph
reading to analyze problems.
2. Incomplete A. Encourage the students to memorize

understandin and explain the terms in
g of Mathematics.
Mathematics
language. B. Always make use of concrete
teaching materials (cube, can and
other real objects) and verbalize
each relationship (is less than or
greater than).
C. Slow down the pace of instruction.
D. A handout that contains the terms

needed be provided.
91
3. Weak A. Regular and short practice/drill of

foundation in four fundamental operations, 5-10-
the four minute per day before the formal
fundamental lesson.
operations
B. Incorporate the four fundamental
operations into games.

C. Use collaborative learning and peer
teaching. It promotes discussion
between peers as they share
strategies, justify processes and
answers.
D. Have the students self-monitor their

own progress such as how many
and which facts are mastered to be
represented on a chart
6. There are other solutions to resolve the student’s difficulties
these are:
6.1 Learning environment should be made conducive for
effective teaching/learning to take place such as:
a. class size should be lessen, 45-50 students in
each classroom so that the teachers’ can manage,
b. prepare visual aids that are readable even to
students at last row,

92
c. teacher may prepare a small reading corner so
that students may benefits from reading or
relevant material during their leisure time.
6.2 Teachers facilitate the use varied teaching strategies
such as: Cooperative Learning, Learning by Doing,
Mnemonic Approach, Peer Tutoring, Manipulative
Approach and Computed Assisted Instruction (CAI).
6.3 Facilitate opportunities for teachers to attend seminars
and trainings in Geometry instruction.

93
RECOMMENDATION
In the light of the findings and conclusions, the researcher
offers the following recommendations:
School Administrators
1. School Administrators facilitate the attendance of their
teachers to attend seminars in Mathematics Teaching to be
abreast with the changes and new developments in their field.
2. Mathematics Department Head must have the concern of
mentoring their teachers in guiding their students to develop
their potentials through observation of classes and
demonstration teaching.
3. Mathematics Department Head collaborate to English
Department Head to facilitate remedial reading lesson to
students with Mathematics difficulty.
Teachers
1. Conduct a diagnostic test and use the result to improve
strategies in teaching.
94
2. A remedial teaching must be given to students with difficulty
in Mathematics. Instructions should emphasize on direct
instruction of Mathematics concepts.
3. Teachers may utilized the proposed “Guide to Improve
Geometry Instruction”, to facilitate learning.
Students
1. They must learn to manage their time. Devote more time to
difficult subject.
2. They may opt for online assistance in solving Mathematics
problems. This innovative learning process also enhances
students' confidence.
3. Those without internet and computer at home may:
a. Use the computer of school at library to enhance their
mathematical skills.
b. Borrow books with answer key and practice solving
different mathematical questions.

95
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
A. BOOKS
A Project of the Teacher Education Council (TEC) Department of

Education (DepED) Commission on Higher Education (CHED),
“Experiential Learning Courses Handbook”, TEC
Copyright, 2007
Broto, Antonio S., “Parametric Statistics (with Computer Aided

Solutions)”, Published by National Book Store,2008
Calmorin, Laurentina P., “Reseach and Statistics with

Computer”, Published by National Book Store, 2010
Kehoe, Jerard, ”Practical Assessment, Research &

Evaluation”, Basic item analysis for multiple-choice tests,
Vol. 18, 4(10)
Westwood, Peter “Numeracy and Learning Difficulties,

Approaches to Teaching and Assessment”, ACER Press,
2000
B. MAGAZINES/JOURNALS
Anthony, Glenda, and Walshaw Margaret, ’’Characteristics of

Effective Teaching of Mathematics: A View from the
West’’, Journal of Mathematics Education © Education for All,
Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.147-164, December 2009
Ambrocio, Isabel, “Learning Mathematics Difficult for Many

People- Knowing Why can make Mathematics Easy
and Fun”, Ezine Articles, 2009
96
Bishop, A. J., “What are Some Obstacles to Learning

Geometry?”, Studies in Mathematics Education (UNESCO), 5,
141-159, 1986
Bos, C. S., & Vaughn, S. “Strategies for Teaching Students

with Learning and Behavioural Problems”, 2002
Buccat, Iois A., “The Effectiveness of Diagnosis in the

Teaching of Mathematics”, The Modern Teacher, 2004
Cuala, Angel “Useful Techniques To Help Your Child Enjoy

Mathematics”, 2008
Dagasuhan, Marco J., “Broken Silence: Mathematics in Our

Lives”, Manila Bulletin, 2004
Das, J.P. and Janzen, Chris, “Learning Math: Basic Concept,

Math Difficulties, and Suggestion for Intervention”,
Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 191-205,
2004
Dimalanta, Francis Xavier M., “Understanding Dyscalculia”,

Manila Bulletin, 2009.
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D., “Mathematical Problem-Solving

Profiles of Students with Mathematical Disabilities
With and Without co Morbid Reading Disabilities”,
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 563–573. 2002
Heward, E. L. “Exceptional Children: An Introduction to

Special Education”, 1996
Khoo, S. c., & Clements, M. A., “A-Level Students'

Understanding of Lower Secondary School Geometry”,
2001
97
Lanchance J. & Mazzocco Michelle M., “A Longitudinal Analysis

of Sex Differences in Math and Special Skills in Primary
School-Age Children, Learning and Individual
Differences”, 16, 195-216, 2006
Lappan, G., Phillips, E.A., & Winter, M. J. “Spatial Visualization”,

Mathematics Teacher, 618-625. 1984
Lebedev, Anton “Why Do Students Struggle in Geometry?”,

2010
Marshall, Abigail “What are the Symptoms of Dyscalculia”,

2011
Masten, M. G. and Coatsworth, J.D., “The development of

Competence in Favorable and Unfavorable
Environments: Lesson from Research on Successful
Children”, American Psychologist Bulletin, 53,205-220, 1998
Mazzocco, Michèle M., “Early Predictors of Mathematical
Learning Difficulties: Variations in Children’s
Difficulties With Math”, Exchange Magazine, 2007.
Perspect, Lang L., “Number Combination Remediation or

Students with Mathematical Difficulty”, Spring: 37(2):
11-16, 2012
Schwartz, J.E., “Why Do People Have Difficulty with

Geometry?”, 2010
Sherman, H.J., Richardson, L.I. & Yard, G.J., “Teaching Children

who Struggle in Mathematics: A Systematic Approach
to Analysis and Correction”, 2005
98
Strutchens, M. E., Harris, K. A., & Martin, W. G. “Assessing

Geometric and Measurement Understanding Using
Manipulative”, Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School,
6(7),402-405. 2001
Vize, Anne “Students Struggling With Math in High School:

How to Help”, 2012
Walshaw, Margaret and Anthony, Glenda “Characteristics of

Effective Teaching of Mathematics”, Journal of
Mathematics Education, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.147-164, December
2009
C. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS
Caluya, D. C. “Students Level of Geometric Thinking in

Relation to Teachers Transformation Practices
Geometry Classes”, Unpublished Master Thesis, PNU, 2000
Celestial, William G., “Factors Attributed to the Extent of

Difficulties Encountered in Math”, 2010
Dela Cruz, M.M, “Minimizing Common Mathematical Errors of

the Second Year Students Through Remediation
Approach”, 2006
Dollente, G. D., “Mathematics Achievement of Grade V Pupils

of Sta Maria District, Division of Ilocos Sur”, 2009
Gresola, Rowena “Analysis of Learning Difficulties of the

Freshmen Students in Math: Input to Teaching and
Learning Scheme”, 2001
Gulatera, Anadin D., “Assestment of the Pupils Performance in

Mathematics: Towards a Guide to Enhance
Mathematics Instruction”, Unpublished Master Thesis,
Metro Manila College, 2010
99
Masters, J. “Diagnostic Geometry Assessment Project: Item

Characteristics”, 2010
Mundia, L. “The Assessment of Math Learning Difficulties in a

Primary Grade-4 Child with High Support Needs: Mixed
Methods Approach”, 2011
Oandasan, Catherine M., “Difficulties of Secondary Students

in Learning Intermediate Algebra: Towards
Supplementary Instructional Materials”,
Unpublished Master Thesis, Metro Manila College, 2012
Perlas, Julieta L., “Difficulties Encountered in Geometry by

Third Year High School Students in Roosevelt College:
An Analysis”, Unpublished Master Thesis, 2008
Santiago, Mery “Remedial Class; Its Effect to the

Perpormance in Selected Topic in Geometry”, 2009
Sus, Jocelyn T., “Implementation of Basics Mathematics Skills

In Grade V: Towards a Guide to Enhance Instruction”,
Unpublished Master Thesis, Metro Manila College, 2011
D. INTERNET
Adolphus, Telima, “Problems of Teaching and Learning of

Geometry in Secondary Schools in Rivers State, Nigeria”,
2011, retrieved from http://ijes.info/1/2/4254129.pdf, 2013
Blooms Taxonomy Math Question Stems Questions to
Develop Mathematical Thinking, retrieved from
http://www.rogersherr.dpsnc.net/links/question_stems/math.shtml,
2013
Connor J. and Robertson E. “Quotations by George Pólya”,
2006, retrieved from http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk
/Quotations/Polya.html, 2013
100
Lasfar, Amine, “The Importance of Mathematics-Mathematics

Are Good After All!”, 2010, retrieved from http://voices.
yahoo.com/the-importance-mathematics-5224583.html, 2013.
Lian, Noraini B., “Teaching and Learning of Geometry:

Problems and Prospects”, 2010, retrieved from http://myais.
fsktm.um.edu.my/5101/1/14.pdf, 2013
Miller, Maria, “High school geometry: why is it so difficult?”,

2012, retrieved from http://www.homeschoolmath.net/
teaching/geometry. php, 2013
National Achievement Education Testing and Research

Center (NETRC), National Achievement Test (NAT) for
Secondary Level, retrieved from http://www.deped.gov.ph/
index.php/component/content/articl e/2-general/381-department-
of-education-facts-and-figures, 2013
“The Van Hiele level of Geometric Thought” retrieve from

www.nzmaths.co.nz/geometry-information, 2013
Wheatley, Josh, “An Investigation of Three-dimensional

Problem Solving and Levels of Thinking Among High school
geometry students”, 2011, retrieved from http://oursland.
edublogs.org/files/2011/08/JoshThesis-2bz802t.pdf, 2013
E. OTHERS
Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition,

2009
101
102
103

Difficulties Encountered by The Third Year Students in Geometry

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Difficulties Encountered by The Third Year Students in Geometry

Caricato da

Copyright:

DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY THE THIRD YEAR

STUDENTS IN GEOMETRY: TOWARDS A GUIDE

This thesis entitled, “DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY

DANA B. TEBIA Ed. D.

Approved and accepted by the committee on Oral Examination

FRANCISCA R. REYES, Ed. D.

JAN GARRY D. LUNAS, Ph. D.

RAMON M. GARCIA, Ph.D.

Passed the Comprehensive Examination on March 16 -17 2013.

RAMON M. GARCIA, Ph.D.

With love the researcher

Evaristo and Cerelina Curay,

Joselito and Allessandro,

who has given her the

MARIA NERISSA C. GOMOPAS

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

List of Figure …………………………………………………. xi

I THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Statement of the Problem…………………………………. 4

Scope and Delimitation…………………………………….. 6

Significance of the Study………………………………….. 6

II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Paradigm of the Study…………………………………….. 46

Relevance of the Reviewed Literature and Studies

III METHODS OF RESEARCH

Respondents and Subjects of the Study……………. 51

Construction of the Instrument ……………………….. 53

Validation of the Instrument……………………………… 55

Administration and Retrieval of the Instrument.…. 56

Statistical Treatment of Data…………………………….. 57

IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION

Profile of Student Subjects……………………………… 62

Profile of Teacher Respondents…………………..….. 67

Learning Difficulties Encountered by the Third

The Probable Causes and Possible Solutions to

Guide to Improve Geometry Instruction…………… 79

V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND

Table 1: Student Subjects as to Gender…………… 62

Table 2: Student Subjects as to Family

Table 3: Student Subjects as to Highest

Table 4: Student Subjects as to 2nd year

Table 5: Teacher Respondents as to Mastery of the

Table 7: Teacher Respondents as to Instructional

Table 8: Teacher Respondents as to Evaluation

Table 9: Difficulties of Third Year Students in

Table 10: The Probable Causes and Possible

Figure 1: Paradigm of the Study……………………… 46

DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY THE THIRD YEAR

STUDENTS IN GEOMETRY: TOWARDS A GUIDE

By MARIA NERISSA C. GOMOPAS

Mathematics plays a vital role in the life of mankind. According

“Mathematics equips pupils with a

Geometry is Mathematics for third year. "It is a science of

correct reasoning…." according to George Polya. It forces a person

doing that is obviously very useful in many different areas of life.

Despite the importance of Mathematics, it is very

disappointing to note that the student’s performance in the subject

Philippines rank in Trend in International Mathematics and

Science Study (TIMSS) in 2003 is consistent with its performance in

TIMSS 1996, in which it ranked near the bottom 39th in

During the National Achievement Test (NAT) in school year

2011-2012 administered to Tala High, the student’s performance is

low. Considering the low thinking ability performance of the students

observed on the said test, much effort is needed to improve their

Evidence of the outcome of NAT administered to 2nd year

students shows that 56% of students in secondary level lack