This study dealt with the teaching of Science and the problems encountered by the grade four pupils of Mexico Elementary School as a basis for science remediation program. It described the teaching of Science along the areas of curriculum, support to learning and the problems encountered by the teachers and pupils in teaching and learning the core area. Moreover, it also presented the assessment of the teachers and pupils in the different dimensions of the curriculum in terms of learning objectives, learning content, teaching strategies and methodologies, medium of instruction, and evaluation/assessment tools. Likewise, it presented the assessment of teachers and pupils in the different dimensions of support to learning in terms of facilities, laboratories, instructional materials, and capability of the teacher. The data gathered were treated with the use of frequency distribution, weighted mean, and Pears on r coefficient of correlation. Based from the results, the present curriculum in Science is effective. Support to learning the subject is likewise effective. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the assessment of the respondents on the curriculum and support to learning. In addition to the findings, there were problems and challenges encountered by the respondents which were given recommendations. Finally, a Proposed Science Remediation Program was suggested.
Teaching, Science Problems, Science Remediation Program
Science holds one of the dominating places in the elementary curriculum. This is so because every sector recognizes an increasing contribution of it to the progress of the modern world as well as its traditional standing as an element of humanistic and scientific education. Its importance, as one of the core learning areas is common a knowledge. Science, likewise, has been recognized as a patent means of sharpening our competitive edge.
As mandated in the Philippine Constitution, it is the duty of the schools to develop scientific and technological efficiency among pupils and students. Thus, it becomes necessary to evolve a strong science program in all levels, beginning from the grade school which is the foundation towards higher learning. It is tested that the effective teaching of Science should start at the elementary level, so that by the time that students step up towards the next level, they are already fully equipped with scientific knowledge and hands-on experiences. Concepts must be taught to them in the easiest possible way so that they could easily remember and apply them in life situations.
Science content and science processes are intertwined in the K to 12 Curriculum. Without the content, learners will have difficulty utilizing science process skills since these processes are best learned in context. Organizing the curriculum around situations and problems that challenge and arouse learners’ curiosity motivates them to learn and appreciate science as relevant and useful. Rather than relying solely on textbooks, varied hands-on, minds-on, and hearts-on activities will be used to develop learners’ interest and let them become active learners.
Varied instructional materials and manipulative activities must be used by the science teacher. According to Albarico, et. al. (2014), instructional materials are the tools teachers use to teach their pupils. Excellent instructional materials have a big impact on the pupils learning since students learn most by doing. Engaging in hands-on activities gives the pupils idea on how this experience can be applied in a real life situation. These instructional materials serve as aid for instruction. Through this, the teacher will be able to make his strategies in teaching more effective and meaningful. It is much easier also for pupils to learn and understand their lesson as well as acquire the skills necessary in the field. Further, the adequacies of instructional materials that will support the pupils’ effective learning also have its own demand in the educational system.
On the other hand, there had been existing problems that caused the low achievement of pupils. Problems of learners can be attributed to the learning environment (Baines, et. al., 2008). This may include the teacher’s competencies, curriculum, availability of instructional materials, facilities and other contributing factors in the school. Learning materials such as books and Science equipment are either unavailable or inadequate in many schools. Also, very few schools have Science laboratories. Concern also has been expressed that teachers’ manuals and guides, intended to help teachers teach more effectively, are inadequate.It is in this light that the proponent of this study intended to explore the existing conditions in the teaching of Science and the contributing factors that instigate the problems in the pedagogy and learning of the subject. This is to create an effective support plan, which she thought could be a remedial program. The Proposed Science Remediation Program (PSRP) of the researcher would be beneficial to the grade four pupils and teachers of Mexico Elementary School who seemed to have problems in learning and teaching the subject. Contents of this program would be based on the findings of the study.
The study was focused on the teaching of Science and the problems encountered by the Grade 4 pupils of Mexico Elementary School as a basis for a Proposed Science Remediation Program (PSRP).The schematic diagram in Figure 1 shows the hypothesized relationships among key variables: independent variables (presumed cause), intervening variables (other variables that influence the effect of the independent variable), and dependent variables (presumed effect).INPUT (presumed cause) comprised the assessment of the respondents on the teaching of Science along the areas of curriculum which include learning objectives, learning content, teaching strategies and methodologies, medium of instruction, and evaluation tools. Added to these are the support to learning which are facilities, laboratories, instructional materials, and capability of the teacher/facilitator. Problems and challenges encountered by the respondents completed the input. PROCESS (intervening variables) included the intervening key which is the development of a proposed remediation program, which will be achieved through data gathering in the form of survey questionnaire, unstructured interview, observation and documentary materials. OUTPUT (presumed effect) referred to the Proposed Science Remediation Program (PSRP).
Statement of the problem
This study aimed to describe on the teaching of Science and the problems encountered by the Grade 4 pupils of Mexico Elementary School as a basis for the conceptualization of a Science Remediation Program. Specifically, the study sought to answer the following questions:
1. How may the respondents assess the teaching of Science along the following areas:
II.Support to Learning
2.Is there a significant difference between the assessment of teachers and pupils on the teaching of Science along the above mentioned areas?
3.How may the respondents assess the problems and challenges they encounter relative to the pedagogy and learning of Science? Based from the findings, what suggestions may be drawn?
Materials and methods
This study utilized the descriptive survey type of research. Ariola (2006) pointed out that descriptive survey of research is usually used by graduate and undergraduate students when they attempt to analyze, interpret, and report the present state of their subject matter or problem. It deals with the cross-section of the present time and uses the questionnaire or other instruments to gather data. This method also relies on observation for the acquisition of data, which must be organized and presented systematically so that valid and accurate solutions may be drawn from them.Garcia and Reganit (2010) confirmed that descriptive research seeks to describe systematically, factually, accurately, and objectively a situation, problem, or phenomenon. It seeks to describe “what is.” Calmorin (2010) pointed out that descriptive method of study focuses at the present situation (what is) the purpose to find new truth. Descriptive research is valuable in: (1) providing facts in which scientific judgment may be based; (2) provide essential knowledge about the nature of objects and persons; and (3) for closer observation into three practices, behaviour, methods, and procedures. The study aimed to identify the teaching of Science and the problems encountered by the Grade 4 pupils of Mexico Elementary School as a basis for the conceptualization of a Science Remediation Program of the institution. The assessment of the respondents on the areas on curriculum and support to learning were the focal points of exploration; furthermore, the problems and challenges encountered by the respondents with the corresponding solutions were given due account.
Locale of the study
Population is a group of experimental data, persons, etc. A population may be studied using one of two approaches: taking a census or selecting a sample. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2013), a census is a study of every unit, everyone or everything, in a population. It is known as a complete enumeration, which means a complete count. When the universe is under 300, consider census in selecting the respondents. Since the universal count of Grade 4 pupils in Mexico Elementary School is below 300, and the teachers were only five (5) then census was utilized in the selection of the respondents of this study. The respondents of the study were the 289 Grade 4 pupils and five (5) Grade Four Science teachers of Mexico Elementary School during the School Year 2014-2015. Table 1, as reflected below contains the distribution of the respondents according to class sections with the assigned teachers.
In order to yield pertinent accurate data and information needed to answer the specific problems presented in Chapter 1, the researcher utilized the following data gathering instruments: (1) questionnaire (2) unstructured interview; (3) observation; and (4) documentary materials.
Likert-type questionnaire was utilized in the study. It was constructed following these parts: Part I showed the assessment of the respondents to the teaching of Science along these areas: (1) learning objectives, (2) learning content (3) teaching strategies and methodologies, (4) medium of instruction, and (5) evaluation/assessment tools. Part II included the support to learning: (1) facilities, (2) laboratories, (3) instructional materials, and (4) capability of the teacher/facilitator. Part III comprised the problems and challenges encountered by the respondents relative to the pedagogy and learning of Science.
It was conducted in the form of casual conversation with the respondents. No fixed questions were asked. Questions relevant to the suggestion of a remediation program that will enhance the teaching of Science among the pupils were asked. Moreover, the questions asked depended on the actual observation of the researcher and answers of the respondents.
The researcher observed classes during Science period. She recorded the actual class scenario to get the salient points needed to supplement her study.
The researcher availed some of the school records such as: (1) results of the 1st and 2nd Periodic Test Results, (2) Form 138 (Report Card), and (3) the Curriculum Guide in Science Grade 4 to authenticate and substantiate the findings of the study.
The data gathered through the questionnaire were organized, classified, tallied, and tabulated. These were treated with the use of frequency distribution, weighted mean, and Pearson r coefficient of correlation. Data to answer specific problems were treated as follows: The assessment of the respondents on the teaching of Science along the areas in Curriculum and Support to Learning, was treated with the use of the following rating scale with the corresponding point values:
Very Much Effective
Very Much Ineffective
The assessment of the respondents on problems and challenges they encounter relative to the pedagogy and learning of Science was treated with the use of the following rating scale with the corresponding point valu es:
To get the overall rating, the weighted mean was computed with the use of the following formula
Xw = weighted arithmetic mean
x = values of the items
w = weight of the item
Ʃ = summation of
Ʃwx = sum of the product of values and weight of items
Ʃw = sum of the weight of the item
To convert the quantified weighted mean of the areas in the curriculum and support to learning into a descriptive rating, the following conversion table was used:
4.21 – 5.00
Very Much Effective
3.41 – 4.20
2.61 – 3.40
1.81 – 2.60
1.00 – 1.80
Very Much Ineffective
To test significant relationship between the assessment of respondents on the curriculum and support to learning, the Pearson r coefficient of correlation (Siegle, 2009) was used. The formula is as follows:
r = symbol for Pearson r coefficient of correlation
X = first set of scores
Y = second set of scores
X 2 = square of each X scores
Y 2 = square of each Y scores
(ƩX)2 = square of the sums of X scores
(ƩY)2 = square of the sums of Y scores
XY = X multiplied by Y
N = number of cases
Ʃ = summation of
The level of significance was tested at 0.05.
To convert the quantified weighted mean on the problems and challenges encountered by the respondents into a descriptive rating, the following conversion table was used:
4.21 – 5.00
3.41 – 4.20
2.61 – 3.40
1.81 – 2.60
1.00 – 1.80
Results and discussion
Based on the assessment of the respondents, the curriculum was “Much Effective” with 3.65 grand weighted mean. The area in the curriculum that got the highest rating was learning objectives, having a weighted mean of 4.09 and described as “Much Effective.” The least rating on their assessment was learning content with 3.30 receiving a descriptive rating of “Effective.” The respondents’ assessment on support to learning was “Effective” with 2.71 grand weighed mean. Capability of the teacher obtained the highest weighted mean of 4.42 described as “Very Much Effective.” The least weighted mean of 1.51 described as “Ineffective” was gained by instructional materials.
There is no significant difference in the assessment of the respondents on the curriculum and support to learning as far as teaching of Science is concerned.
In the assessment of the respondents on the problems and challenges they encounter relative to the pedagogy and learning of Science, availability of materials was found to be “Somewhat Serious.” It acquired the highest weighted mean of 2.33. On the other hand, the least problem assessed by the respondents was writing lecture notes which received a weighted mean of 1.00 and a descriptive rating of “Not Serious.”
The researcher was able to arrive at these conclusions based on the findings of the study:
Based on the foregoing conclusions of the study, the following are hereby recommended:
- Albarico, Shela, et. al.2014 Adequacy of Instructional Materials Used by Teachers in Teaching Technology and Livelihood Education. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Pattlaya, Thailand, 2014).
- Amamio L.2000 “Attitudes of Students, Teachers, and Parents of RVM Schools in Metro Manila Toward English and Filipino as Media of Instruction.” (Unpublished Thesis, UST Graduate School. Manila, Philippines).
- Angelo, T. A., and K. P. Cross.1993 Classroom Assessment Techniques: a Handbook for College Teachers, 2 nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Angrist, Joshua. D. and Victor Lavy.,2001 Using Maimonides Rule to Estimate the Effect of Class Size on Scholastic Achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, p. 535-75.
- Ariola, Mariano M.2006 Principles and Methods of Research. Manila: Rex Bookstore, Inc.
- Asirit, Lynard Bobby L., (2013). Science CompetencyBased NAT Intervention Program of Grade Six Union Elementary School Pupils. (Unpublished Action Research, Department of Education, Division of Tagum City, 2013).
- Baines, et. al.,2008Current Challenges in Basic Science Education. UNESCO Education Sector, Paris, France.
- Barberos, Maria Theresa, at.al.2015 “The Effect of the Teacher's Teaching Style on Students' Motivation: An Action Research.” (New York University, New York, 2015.)
- Bello, Ruel C.2014 Instruction Preparedness and Teaching Performance of Secondary Teachers of the Archdiocesan Schools in Pampanga. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Don Honorio Vetura Technological State University, Bacolor, Pampanga, 2014).
- Bennett, J.2003 Teaching and Learning Science. A Guide to Recent Research and its Applications Continuum. London.
- ] Cadieux, Colleen.2012 Essential Qualities of a Highly Effective Science Teacher. Mary Grove College, Detroit, USA
- Calmorin, Dr. Laurentina Paler.2010 Research and Statistics with Computer, National Bookstore. Center for Public Education Journal. (2007), p. 265.
- Crawford, B.2007 Learning to Teach Science as Inquiry in the Rough and Tumble of Practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613-642.
- Fensham, Peter J., et. al.1995 The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to Its Teaching and Learning. Monash University, Australia.
- ] Garcia, Carlito and Arnulfo Aaron Reganit.2010Developing Competencies in Research and Thesis Writing. Mandaluyong City
- Hofstein, Avi and Rachel Mamlok-Naaman.2007 The Laboratory in Science Education: The State of the Art. Rehovot, Israel
- Isip, Myla L. 2008 “Continuing Professional Education Activities of Teachers in Private and Public Secondary Schools in Porac, Pampanga.” (Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Don Honorio Vetura Technological State University, Bacolor, Pampanga, 2014.)K to 12 Science Curriculum Guide. 2013
- Kochhar, S.K.2008Methods and Techniques of Teaching. 2nd Revised Edition. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers Private, Ltd
- .Khurshid, Fauzia and Urusa Ansari2012 “Effects of Innovative Teaching Strategies on Students’ Performance.” (Global Journals Inc., USA, 2012.)
- ] Maulik, Manas Kumar and Biagioli, Nicole. 2012IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSRJHSS), p. 18.
- McKernan, J. 2008Curriculum and Imagination: Process Theory, Pedagogy and Action Research. New York, NY: Routedge.
- Meador, Derrick. 2015 Instructional Strategies. Oklahoma, USA.Nafees, Muhammad (2012). “Effects of Instructional Strategies on Academic Achievement in a High School General Science Class.” (FG Sir Syed College of Special Education, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 2012.)
- Nilson, L. B. 2010 Teaching at Its Best: A Researchbased Resource for College Instructors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
- Nnamoko, Chidiebere Raphael2013 “The Effect of Instructional Materials on the Learning and Teaching of Economics in Secondary Schools in Nigeria.”(University of Nigeria, Nigeria, 2013.)
- Nwadinigwe, A. O. And Onyekwelu, S. S. C. 2000 ”The Flora and Benefits of Obollo Afor Savanna Woodland, The Need For Conservation.” (University of Nigeria, 2000.
- Oakes, Jeannie and Marisa Saunders.2002 “Access to Textbooks, Instructional Materials, Equipment, and Technology: Inadequacy and Inequality in California’s Public Schools.” (University of California, Los Angeles, 2002.)
- Siegle, Del.2009 Principles and Methods in Educational Research. Connecticut: Prufrock Press.Statistics. (2013). Australian Bureau of Statistics.
- ] Suter, W. Newton.1998 Primer of Educational Research, Allyn and Bacon.The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. (2013). 5th edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.
- The Oxford Dictionary. 2015Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Tobin K.G., (1990). Research on Science Laboratory Activities: In Pursuit of Better Questions and Answers to Improve Learning.
- Trowbridge, L. W., Bybee, R. W., & Powell, J. C. 2008Teaching Secondary School Science: Strategies for Developing Scientific Literacy (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Usman, A. 2008 General Principles and Methods in Education. Lahore, Pakistan.
- Vagias, Wade M.2006 Likert-type Scale Response Anchors. Clemson International Institute and Research Development, Clemson University.
- Wang, Tzu-Pu. 2009 The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, p. 88- 89.dictionary.reference.com. – Retrieved on January 30, 2015