1. 1
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction
We live in a mathematical world. Whenever we decide on a purchase, choose an
insurance or health plan, or use a spreadsheet, we rely on mathematical understanding. The
World Wide Web, CD-ROMs, and other media disseminate vast quantities of quantitative
information. The level of mathematical thinking and problem solving needed in the workplace
has increased dramatically. In such a world, those who understand and can do mathematics will
have opportunities that others do not. Mathematical competence opens doors to productive
futures. A lack of mathematical competence closes those doors. Students have different abilities,
needs, and interests. Yet everyone needs to be able to use mathematics in his or her personal life,
in the workplace, and in further study. All students deserve an opportunity to understand the
power and beauty of mathematics. Students need to learn a new set of mathematics basics that
enable them to compute accurately and to solve problems creatively and resourcefully.
It has taken such a long time to discover the importance of Mathematics in our world the
discoveries lead us to more technological or what was called Industrial Era, wherein the different
usage of technological devices occurred. In this era, application of Mathematics helps to develop
and invent such technological devices. Through these applications our life became easier.
Nowadays, Mathematics is the key to all Sciences.
Despite explaining more about mathematics and the proof that it is really important, the
students today do not like this subject. They think that the Mathematics is a boring subject, and
it’s hard to understand formulas, they always say “Why should we study Mathematics, only four
major operations are enough and the rest no longer needed. We do use graphs and formulas in
our daily living.” Only if they understand the logic behind this subject and the principles applied
in different problems, if they get what Mathematics really meant to be, they will find that it is not
a boring subject, but rather an interesting one. Mathematics becomes part of our life, not only in
our academic subjects, but in all parts of our integral life. We don’t see that even in simple

2. 2
conversation mathematics takes place. In our transportation it also occurs, and in our daily living
it is definitely applied.
Background of the Study
According to Schereiber (2000) those who have positive attitudes toward mathematics
have a better performance in this subject.
Mathematics achievement has shown that the students from each major level of
Education in Asia seemed to outperform their counterparts. Many studies have examined
students’ thinking about school and their attitude toward Mathematics. Mathematics performance
involves a complex interaction of factors on school outcome. Although the relationship between
mathematics performance and students factor has been studied widely, it is important to explore
the factors that contribute to students’ mathematics performance.
Wendy Hansen (2008) stated that boys are more likely than girls to be math geniuses.
The researcher found that neither gender consistently outpaced the other in any state or at any
grade level. Even on test questions from the National Assessment of Education Progress that
were designed to measure complex reasoning skills, the gender differences were minuscule,
according to the study.
Student engagement in mathematics refers to students’ motivation to learn mathematics,
their confidence in their ability to succeed in mathematics and their emotional feelings about
mathematics. Student engagement in mathematics plays a key role in the acquisition of math
skills and knowledge – students who are engaged in the learning process will tend to learn more
and be more receptive to further learning. Student engagement also has an impact upon course
selection, educational pathways and later career choices.
Mathematics performance has improved, again, through expecting students to achieve,
providing instruction based on individual student needs and using a variety of methods to reach

3. 3
all learners. One factor has been aligning the math curriculum to ensure that the delivery of
instruction is consistent with the assessment frequency.
This particular study attempts to determine the factors affecting mathematics
performance of Laboratory High School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University
Academic Year 2009-2010
Theoretical Framework
Inzlicht (2003) stated that entity and incremental theories of ability were assessed
separately so that their separate influences could be examined; mathematics performance was
examined by controlling for prior math performance. Entity theory was expected to be a negative
predictor of performance, whereas incremental theory was expected to be a positive predictor.
Guohua Peng (2002) stated that simple traditional methods gradually make the students
feel that mathematics is pointless and has little value to them in real life. It becomes a subject
they are forced to study, but one that is useless to them in real life.
Dweck, C. S. (1999) stated that students believe that their ability is fixed, probably at
birth, and there is very little if anything they can do to improve it is called fixed IQ theorists.
They believe ability comes from talent rather than from the slow development of skills through
learning. “It's all in the genes”. Either you can do it with little effort, or you will never be able to
do it, so you might as well give up in the face of difficulty. E.g. “ I can't do math”. And
Untapped Potential theorists, students believe that ability and success are due to learning, and
learning requires time and effort. In the case of difficulty one must try harder, try another
approach, or seek help etc.
Dan Hull (1999) stated that growing numbers of teachers today—especially those
frustrated by repeated lack of student success in demonstrating basic proficiency on standard
tests are discovering that most students’ interest and achievement in math, science, and language
improve dramatically when they are helped to make connections between new information
(knowledge) and experiences they have had, or with other knowledge they have already

4. 4
mastered. Students’ involvement in their schoolwork increases significantly when they are taught
why they are learning the concepts and how those concepts can be used outside the classroom.
And most students learn much more efficiently when they are allowed to work cooperatively
with other students in groups or teams.
Conceptual Framework
The major concept of this study is focused on factors affecting Mathematics Performance
of Laboratory High School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University Academic Year
2009-2010.
Figure 1; shows the relationship of input variables which contain the extent of the
student-related factors and the extent of the teacher-related factors. The process contains the
survey, data gathering, data analysis, and data interpretation while output variables contain the
analysis of student-related factors and teacher-related factors.
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
STUDENT-RELATED
FACTORS
Interest
Study Habits An Analysis of student-
Survey related factors
TEACHER-RELATED
FACTORS Data Gathering
Personality Traits Data Analysis An analysis of teacher-related
factors
Teaching Skills Data Interpretation
Instructional Materials
FIGURE 1. A conceptual paradigm showing the relationship of students’ mathematics
performance in student-related factors and in teacher-related factors.
Statement of the Problem

5. 5
The study attempted to determine the factors affecting mathematics performance of
Laboratory High School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University Academic Year
2009-2010.
Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the extent of the student-related factors in terms of:
1.1 Interest
1.2 Study Habits
2. What is the extent of teacher-related factors as evaluated by the students in terms of:
2.1 Personality Traits
2.2 Teaching Skills
2.3 Instructional Materials
3. What is the level of students’ mathematics performance?
4. Is there significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and
students-related factors?
5. Is there significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and teacher-
related factors?
Hypothesis
The following are the null hypotheses of this research:
There is no significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and
student-related factors.
There is no significant relationship between students’ mathematics performance and
teacher-related factors.
Significance of the Study

6. 6
The result of the study will merit the following:
School Administrator. The result of this study could serve as a baseline data to improve
programs for school advancement.
Curriculum Planner. The result of this study will help them appraise the existing
programs in terms of the student’s needs and abilities and make changes as required.
Guidance Councilor. This study will help develop the guidance program in line with
individual needs and abilities of the students.
Facilitators/Teachers. The results of this study may serve as an eye opener to create and
innovate instructional materials, and to use varied and appropriate teaching strategies.
Students. This study will help the students to develop their interest toward Mathematics
and appreciate the importance of Mathematics in their daily lives.
Parents. Who are directly concerned with the education of their children considering
school performance in different discipline.
Future Researcher. The result of this study can serve as basis for further study on
teaching learning activities and student mathematical performance.
Scope and Limitation
This study was limited only to Laboratory High School Students of Laguna State Polytechnic
University during the Academic Year 2009-2010.
Determining the factors affecting Mathematics Performance of Laboratory High School
Students was the focus of this research. The information needed was gathered using the checklist
style research-made questionnaire. All information and conclusions drawn from this study were
obtained only to this particular group of students.

7. 7
Definition of Terms
For better clarification and understanding of the terms related to this study, the following
terms are defined conceptually and operationally.
Instructional Materials refers to motivating techniques that teaching materials or equipment
used. It can be high technology or simple materials that can be used in learning preference.
Interest refers to the amount of the students’ dislike or like of particular things.
Mathematics Performance refers to the degree or capacity of students’ knowledge in
Mathematics.
Personality Traits refers to the good relationship of the mathematics teachers with the
students.
Study Habits refers to usual form or action of a person in studying.
Teaching Skills refers to the skills of teachers in mathematics in terms of teaching her/his
lesson.

8. 8
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies of the sub-topics of this
research; interest, study habits, personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials.
Afolabi S. Sunday and Joshua O. Adeleke (2010), find out that instructional resources
and materials are the crucial determinants of methods used in mathematics teaching. Therefore,
should be provided through the following ways: (i) the government, (ii) improvisation by school
teachers and students, (iii) request from lovers of mathematics and (iv) philanthropists, (v)
school P.T.A (vi) setting up a department in NMC to take up the commitment of providing
standard instructional materials for the whole nation. Training and retaining of mathematics
teachers on the use of instructional materials (vii) teacher education programmers should have at
least a course whereby students are taught the construction and improvisation of instructional
materials for all courses and their uses. Teachers should be made to be aware of the importance
instructional materials. (http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr_43_3_12.pdf)
Dr. Bob Kizlik (2010) stated that effective study skills must be practiced in order for you
to improve. It is not enough to simplify “think about” studying; you have to actually do it, and in
the process use information from what you do to get better. All that follows depends on this
single concept. There is a saying that goes like this “Practice doesn’t make perfect; perfect
practice makes perfect.” If you want to be an achiever, take this saying to heart.
(http://www.cccsmurrieta.com/elementary/classfiles/pdfs/5effstudyskills.pdf)
Mark Crilly (2000) as cited by Bagongon and Edpalina (2009) stated that successful
students are able to balance social activities with good study habits. A diversion from studies will
alleviate stress and help prevent from becoming fatigued. He said that a student should make
sure that he must take a break for an hour after studies to meet with friends, to play some cards,
work out at the gym, or to gab with a new acquaintance. For this way, that student will find
concentration when he does study, if he plans a social activity afterwards. He said, “To develop a
healthy social life, develop routine study habits. After supper, lug your books and homework to

9. 9
the library, find a comfortable and quite niche, and study for two or three hours, taking
intermittent 10 minutes breaks every 45 minutes or so.” http://www.scribd.com/The-Effect-Of-
Study-Habits-On-The-Academic-Performance-Of-Freshmen-Education-Students-In-Xavier-
University-Cagayan-De-Oro-City-School-Year-2008-2009
The study of Curioso as cited by Villamor (2008), investigated the correlation of
academic performance of Freshmen College Students of University of Baguio. The study found
out that the students’ factors, teachers’ factors and environment factors were highly associated
with the academic performance of the students.
The study of Villamor (2008), found out that there is a significant functional relationship
between gender, interest toward mathematics, teaching competencies, teaching strategies and
techniques and library setting that there is no significant functional relationship between
classroom setting and the students’ performance in mathematics.
Bustos and Espiritu, as cited by Calderon and Checa (2007), explained that a teacher is
charged with the way he manage learning inside the classroom. The basis of his classroom
management is the theory of the knowledge about the learner and their involvement in the
learning process. This theory should be his basis in the decision making like analyzing and
understanding the important roles of teachers in the classroom, and these are: teachers serve as
the classroom manage, facilitator of the students’ achievement and evaluation of students
learning. This role of the teacher must be observed in every corner of the classroom. There are
times that teacher also serve as the second parents of their students because the behavior and
attitude that they display in and out the room are seen by the students.
MacAfee and Leong, as cited by Checa (2007), wrote that there are many factors that are
responsible for the achievement of the students. These are include the public, parent, funding
groups, governing boards, hole schools, and most of all the teachers. Teachers are expected to
explain what they are doing and the results. If the school environment is conducive for students
learning, then the maximum learning can be achieved.

10. 10
Pressly, as cited by Bagayana (2006), describes how students’ interests and motivation
can be fostered through the teaching strategy used. He explains that when students have a
repertoire of strategies with which to work, they are empowered with the “the will and the skill”
to successfully problem-solve.
Valenzuela, as cited by Bagayana (2006), studied the correlates of achievement in
Mathematics. One of the construct she looked at was the interest in Mathematics. She found out
that the students have high level of interest in Mathematics. The research’s results conclude that
the students like Mathematics. Majority of the students find the subject interesting and useful. No
significant relationship was found between the interest of the students in Mathematics and
achievement in the subject.
Salandanan (2005), the teacher is an integral part of an instructional activity. Her skills
employing a variety of teaching methodologies in paramount if every classroom encounter is to
result in creating beneficial interaction of positive response.
Tolentino (2002), as cited by Almario (2004), emphasized the importance and
effectiveness of instructional materials in the teaching process. In view of the findings and
conclusion drawn, she recommends the following: 1) the proposed instructional materials will
serve as an effective vehicle in the teaching and learning, 2) the researcher proposes the adoption
of the instructional materials will further enhance the learning skills in terms of concepts
application of the different concept and principles in the study of the subjects.
Fraenkel, as cited by Gordula (2004), stated that teaching strategies represent
combination of certain specific procedures or operations, grouped and order in a definite
sequences, that teachers can use in the classroom to implement both cognitive and affective
objectives. If the teacher uses the best practices in teaching mathematics, then he can create a
positive interaction between them.

11. 11
Almario (2004), teachers who understand the situation inside the classroom should be
equipped with the necessary skills, strategies and materials and should be skilled in motivation
students to exert knowledge to meet the needs of the students and ensure the academic success.
Aquino (2003) pointed out that study skills can be taught effectively only after
identifying students’ areas of weakness and levels of achievement by means of appropriate tests.
Those whose level of achievement is appropriate to their grade level can be provided with
development (or enrichment) exercises, which will enable them to become more proficient in the
skills they have already acquired or which will help them learn new skills.
The study of Digals, as cited by Sarmiento (2002), sought to assess the instructional
competencies of master teachers, associated with their performance and selected personal
variables. He found out that master teacher respondents possess very satisfactorily in knowledge
of the subject matter and lesson planning , proficiency in language, effective use of teaching
strategies, instructional aids and materials, evaluation techniques, classroom management and
discipline, and age, educational attainment, length of service and performance rating of master
teachers are determining factors of the level of their instructional competencies. Older master
teachers and those with higher educational attainment, longer years of service and higher
performance rating tend to be more instructionally competent.
Gorhan and Christophel (1990), as cited by Sarmiento (2002), stated that humor can be
an indispensable tool in promoting a positive relationship with the students.
Grows and Cebulla (2000), state that teaching mathematics with focus on number sense
encourages students to become a problem-solver in a wide variety of situation to view
mathematics as a discipline is important.
Gonzales (2000), teaching is a responsibility and every teacher has no choices but to face
them. Teachers must start working, thinking why the quality of education is declining
continuously, and do our part as a mentors.

12. 12
Bustos and Espiritu, as cited by Tulio (2000), any teacher who is charge with the
management of classroom learning hold particular things of teaching based on his knowledge
about the learners and learning process. Such theory of teaching becomes the basic of his
decision on how to go about his various significant roles in the classroom, namely as classroom
manager, as facilitator of students’ learning and as evaluator of students’ learning.
Rohwes W.Jr.et al. as cited by Sainz (2000) further discussed the teachers need to find
ways of determining whether or not her instruction have been successful. The procedure and
method of determining such success can take the form of test of various kinds to determine
whether the students have reached the objectives they have set for them.

13. 13
Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design, research procedure, the subject of the study,
determination of sample, research instrument and statistical treatment of data.
Research Design
This study determined the factors affecting mathematics performance of Laboratory High
School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University. The descriptive – correlation method
was used in this study.
In descriptive method, Calmorin (1994) as cited by Bagayana (2006), wrote the study
focuses on the present condition. The purpose is to find new truth, which may come in different
forms such as increased quantity of knowledge, a new generalization, or increased insights into
factors, which are operating, the discovery of a new causal relationship, a more accurate
formulation of the problem to be solved and many others.
Since this study measured data that already exist and the number of respondents is not
large, the descriptive – correlation method of studies is best suited. As mentioned, the student-
related factors in terms of interest and study habits, and the teacher-related factors in terms of
personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials were generated using researcher –
made questionnaire.
Subject of the Study
The respondents in this study were the one hundred twenty six (126) Laboratory High
School Students at Laguna State Polytechnic University Academic Year 2009-2010.
Research Instrument
The main tool used in this study was a researcher – made questionnaire – checklist. A set
of questionnaire-checklist was constructed for the student respondents. The questionnaire –
checklist consisted of the students’ level of interest in Mathematics, their study habits and their

14. 14
teachers’ personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials used in teaching as
perceived by the students.
Part 1 on the questionnaire – checklist obtained the students’ level of interest in
Mathematics presented five(5) statements and the students’ study habits presented ten(10)
situations. These were given one set of five checkboxes each. The five checkboxes were ranked
as:
5 – Always
4 – Often
3 – Sometimes
2 – Rarely
1 – Never
Part 2 obtained teacher’s personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials
used in teaching as rated by the students. Each statement was given one set of five checkboxes.
Again, the five checkboxes were ranked as:
5 – Always
4 – Often
3 – Sometimes
2 – Rarely
1 – Never
The questionnaire – checklist was presented to the adviser and expert on Mathematics for
comments, corrections, and suggestions on the content.
Research Procedure
The original title proposed by the researcher was checked, revised and rechecked by the
researcher’s adviser to maintain conformity to the subject of research. The questionnaire-
checklist that aims to draw out proper responses on the objectives of this study was constructed.
This questionnaire – checklist made by the researcher was presented, analyzed and checked by
the research adviser, Mrs. Delia F. Mercado, to ensure the validity of responses it would elicit.

15. 15
The permit to conduct research and study was secured through a letter request for
permission from the principal of Laboratory High School at Laguna State Polytechnic
University.
Data gathered from answered questionnaires were checked, classified, tabulated and
analyzed according to the research design described in this chapter using Microsoft Excel and
prepared for final presentation to the experts of different fields of specialization.
Statistical Treatment of Data
Analysis Statistical Tools
1. The extent of student-related factors Weighted Mean
in terms of:
1.1 Interest
1.2 Study habits
2. The extent of teacher-related factors Weighted Mean
in terms of:
2.1 Personality Traits
2.2 Teaching Skills
2.3 Instructional Materials
3. The level of students’ mathematics Mean, median, mode, skewness and
performance. kurtosis.
4. Significant relationship between Pearson R, Spearman Rho, Regression
students’ mathematics performance
and student-related factors.
5. Significant relationship between Pearson R, Spearman Rho, Regression
students’ mathematics performance
and teacher-related factors.
Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

16. 16
This chapter presents, analyzes and interprets the data gathered from the students of
Laboratory High School at Laguna State Polytechnic University in determining factors affecting
Performance in Mathematics.
Extent of Interest of the students in Mathematics
Table 1 shows the weighted mean of students’ interest in Mathematics. Students’ level of
interest in Mathematics was rated based on the students’ self-perceived level of preparation for
the Mathematics subject, attention given to teacher’s lectures, active participation in class, their
desire to get good grades and their desire to listen to discussions or attention class.
The students gave a unifying perception on their level of interest in Mathematics. The
item “I want to get good grades on tests, quizzes, assignments and projects.” ranked first with an
average weighted mean of 4.77. The item “I get frustrated when the discussion is interrupted or
the teacher is absent.” got the lowest rating with an average weighted mean of 2.88.
Table 1. Extent of Interest in Mathematics as Perceived by the Students
Weighted Verbal
Interest Rank
Mean Interpretation
1. I make myself prepared for the math subject 3.79 4 Often
4.10 2 Often
2. I listen attentively to the lecture of my math teacher.
3. I actively participate in the discussion, answering exercises
3.93 3 Often
and/or clarifying things I did not understand.
4. I want to get good grades on tests, quizzes, assignments and
4.77 1 Always
projects.
5. I get frustrated when the discussion is interrupted or the
2.88 5 Sometimes
teacher is absent.
Average Weighted Mean 3.90 Often
The overall weighted mean of interest in Mathematics is 3.90. This means students are
“often” interested in this subject. Among questionnaire items, the desire to get good grades is the
most interesting to students but the desire to attend discussion received the lowest extent of
interest.

17. 17
Extent of Study Habits
Table 2 shows the lists of ten (10) items about situational/action statements used in the
data gathering and the corresponding weighted means of the students’ responses ranked from the
highest to lowest weighted mean together with the verbal interpretation. The criteria in obtaining
students’ level of study habits were based on their personal tendency or pattern of action in
studying when they are in school days.
Table 2. Extent of Study Habits as Perceived by the Students
Overall, the extent of study habits as perceived by the students themselves gained an
“often” result with an overall weighted mean of 3.60. Among each situational/action statements or
items given, the item “I study harder to improve my performance when I get low grades.” ranked
first with an average weighted mean of 4.34 but the item “I spend less time with my friends
during school days to concentrate more on my studies.” got the lowest extent of study habits in
Weighted Verbal
Study Habits Rank
Mean Interpretation
1. I do my assignments regularly. 4.09 2 Often
2. I exert more effort when I do difficult assignments. 3.88 4 Often
3. I spend my vacant time in doing assignments or studying my
3.08 9 Sometimes
lessons.
4. I study the lessons I missed if I was absent from the class 3.65 5 Often
5. I study and prepared for quizzes and tests. 4.07 3 Often
6. I study harder to improve my performance when I get low
4.34 1 Often
grades.
7. I spend less time with my friends during school days to
2.97 10 Sometimes
concentrate more on my studies.
8. I prefer finishing my studying and my assignments first before
3.10 8 Sometimes
watching any television program.
9. I see to it that extracurricular activities do not hamper my
3.37 7 Sometimes
studies.
10. I have a specific place of study at home which I keep clean and
3.45 6 Often
orderly.
Average Weighted Mean 3.60 Often
Mathematics.
Extent of Teachers’ Personality Traits

18. 18
. Table 3 shows the data on the extent of personality traits of the teachers with the
computed weighted mean, rank and interpretation. Extent of teachers’ personality traits were
ranked based on their relationship with the students, their smartness, confidence and firmness in
making decisions, their imposing proper discipline and not lenient in following the prescribed
rules, their personality with good sense of humor and their appreciation to suggestions and
opinions and their worthy of praise
Table 3. Extent of Teachers’ Personality Traits as Perceived by the Students
The table reveals that item number 1 ranked first with an average weighted mean of 4.60
and interpreted as “always” which means that the teacher always has a good relationship with the
students. The item number 2 ranked second with an average weighted mean of 4.58 also
interpreted as “always” which means that the teacher always shows their smartness, confidence
and firmness in making decisions. Items 3, 4, and 5 interpreted as “often” with the weighted
means of 4.48, 4.43, and 4.41 for ranks 3, 4, and 5, respectively.
Extent of Teaching Skills
Weighted Verbal
Personality Traits
Mean Rank Interpretation
4.60 1 always
1. Has a good relationship with the students and teachers.
2. Shows smartness, confidence and firmness in making
4.58 2 always
decisions.
3. Imposes proper discipline and is not lenient in following the
4.43 4 often
prescribed rules.
4.41 5 often
4. Has an appealing personality with good sense of humor.
4.48 3 often
5. Is open to suggestions and opinions and is worthy of praise.
Average Weighted Mean 4.50 always
Table 4 presents the extent of teaching skills acquired by the teachers in Mathematics as
perceived by the students. The overall weighted mean of the teachers in terms of teaching skills
is 4.41 which is interpreted as “often”.
Table 4. Extent of Teaching Skills as Perceived by the Students

19. 19
Weighted Verbal
Teaching Skills
Mean Rank Interpretation
1. Explains the objectives of the lesson clearly at the start
4.51 2 always
of each period.
2. Has mastery of the subject matter. 4.70 1 always
3. Is organized in presenting subject matters by
4.40 4 often
systematically following course outline.
4. Is updated with present trends, relevant to the subject
4.46 3 often
matter.
5. Uses various strategies, teaching aids/devices and
3.96 5 often
techniques in presenting the lessons.
Average Weighted Mean 4.41 often
Looking closely at the table item per item, it was observed that the “The teacher has
mastery of the subject matter” has the highest average weighted mean among the five items and
interpreted as “always” followed by the item “The teacher explains the objectives of the lesson
clearly at the start of each period” also interpreted as “always”. Items “The teacher is updated
with present trends, relevant to the subject matter” , “The teacher is organized in presenting
subject matter by systematically following course outline”, and “The teacher uses various
strategies, teaching aids/devices and techniques in presenting the lessons” interpreted as “often”
with the average weighted means of 4.46, 4.40 and 3.96 for ranks 3, 4 and 5, respectively.
Extent of Instructional Materials used by the Mathematics Teachers
Table 5 presents the extent of instructional materials used by the teachers in Mathematics.
It shows that the teachers “always” used chalk and blackboard in explaining the lessons with an
average weighted mean of 4.93. The teachers used workbooks/textbooks and materials for
project development interpreted as “sometimes” with the average weighted means of 3.45 and
2.55 for ranks 2 and 3. The teachers used articles interpreted as “rarely” with an average
weighted mean of 2.48. Lastly, used of power point presentation got the lowest extent of
instructional materials with an average weighted mean of 1.49 interpreted as “sometimes”.
Table 5. Extent of Instructional Materials used by the Mathematics Teachers
Instructional Materials Weighted Mean Rank Verbal Interpretation

20. 20
1. Chalk and blackboard in explaining the
4.93 1 always
lessons.
2. workbooks/textbooks 3.45 2 sometimes
3. PowerPoint presentations (visual aids) 1.49 5 never
4. articles 2.48 4 rarely
5. materials for project development 2.55 3 sometimes
Average Weighted Mean 2.98 sometimes
The overall extent of instructional materials used by the Math teachers as perceived by
the students gained “sometimes” result with an overall average weighted mean of 2.98. This
means that the teacher in Mathematics sometimes uses instructional materials.
Level of Performance of Students in Mathematics
Table 6 presents the level of performance of Laboratory high school students in
Mathematics in terms of some measure as mean, median, mode, standard deviation, skewness
and kurtosis. The grades presented are the means of the grades of students-respondents in third
grading period obtained through documentary analysis of Form 138 provided by the adviser.
Table 6. Level of Performance of Students in Mathematics
Statistics Value Verbal Interpretation
Mean 88.23 Satisfactory
Median 89.00 Satisfactory
Mode 91.00 Very Satisfactory
Standard Deviation 4.84
Kurtosis 2.10 Relatively Steep/leptokurtic
Skewness -1.13 Skewed to the left/negatively skewed
Table reveals that the mean performance of students in Mathematics was “satisfactory”
with an average of 88.23 median of 89 mode of 91 and standard deviation of 4.84. The skewness
of the level of students is -1.13 which, which skewed to the left/negatively skewed while kurtosis
is 2.10, which is leptokurtic or has a relatively peaked distribution.
It reveals that several of the students really wanted the subject of Mathematics. Only few
of the students got low and the rest got the high grades.

21. 21
Significant Relationship of the Mathematics Performance of the Students in Student-
related factors and Teacher-related factors
Table 7 presents the significant relationship of the factors affecting Mathematics
Performance of Laboratory High School. As seen on the table, the Pearson r of the five (5)
factors such as Interest, Study Habits, Personality Traits, Teaching Skills and Instructional
Materials have high degree of correlation but the t revealed the lesser value of 2.01. It means that
there is no significant relationship to Mathematics performance of the students.

22. 22
Table 7. Significant Relationship of the Mathematics Performance of the Students in Student-
related factors and Teacher-related factors
Variables df T-Computed T- value Interpretation
Interest 0.544326 2.10 not significant
Study Habits -0.465262108 -2.10 not significant
Personality Traits -0.095499 -2.10 not significant
Teaching Skills 113 0.984864987 2.10 not significant
Instructional
-2.10
Materials -1.043867038 not significant
The table reveals that the interest, study habits, personality traits, teaching skills and
instructional materials do not affect the Mathematics performance of the Students of Laguna
State Polytechnic University.

23. 23
Chapter 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter presents the summary of findings; the conclusions made and the
recommendations offered.
Summary of Findings
The summary of findings is made according to the sequence outline of the statement of
the problem presented in chapter 1.
Based on the data gathered, the overall weighted mean of interest in Mathematics is 3.90.
This means students are “often” interested in this subject. Among questionnaire items, item #4 is
the most interesting to students but item #2 received the lowest extent of interest.
Study habits had an average weighted mean of 3.60 and also interpreted as “often”.
Among each situational/action statements or items given, the item #6 ranked first with an average
weighted mean of 4.34 but the item # 7 got the lowest extent of study habits in Mathematics.
Personality traits had an average weighted mean of 4.50 and interpreted as “always”. It
reveals that item number 1 ranked first with an average weighted mean of 4.60 and interpreted as
“always” which means that the teacher always has a good relationship with the students. The
item number 2 ranked second with an average weighted mean of 4.58 also interpreted as
“always” which means that the teacher always shows their smartness, confidence and firmness in
making decisions.
Teaching skills had an average weighted mean of 4.41 and interpreted as “often”. It
reveals that item #2 got the highest average weighted mean and item #5 got the lowest average
weighted mean.
Instructional materials had an average weighted mean of 2.98 and interpreted as
“sometimes”. This means that the teacher in Mathematics sometimes uses instructional materials.

24. 24
In terms of level of performance of the students in mathematics, the students obtained the
mean grade of 88.23 with verbal interpretation of “Satisfactory” and standard deviation of 4.84.
It reveals that several of the students really wanted the subject of Mathematics. Only few of the
students got low and the rest got the high grades.
Through the test of significance, the researcher came up with the following conclusion;
there is no significant correlation between student interest in mathematics and their performance
in mathematics. Their computed z-value is 0.54 which is less than the tabular z-value of 2.10 at α
= .05. There is no significant correlation between study habits and their performance in
mathematics. The computed z-value is -0.47 which is less than the tabular z-value of -2.10 at α
=0.05. This means that the performance of the students in mathematics was not affected by the
student-related factors in terms of interest and study habits.
There is no significant relationship between teacher-related factors such as personality
traits, teaching skills and instructional materials and the performance of the students in
mathematics. Their computed z-values are -0.10, 0.98 and -1.04 which are less than the tabular z-
value of -2.10, 2.10 and -2.10 respectively. Thus, teacher-related factors do not affect the
performance of the students in mathematics.
Conclusions
The results of this study showed that in terms of students’ interest and study habits,
teachers’ personality traits, teaching skills and instructional materials had no significant bearing
on students’ mathematics performance.
Therefore, it is concluded that student-related factors and teacher-related factors do not
affect the students’ mathematics performance of laboratory high school students at Laguna State
Polytechnic University Academic Year 2009-2010.

25. 25
Recommendations
Based on the conclusions made, the following recommendations are given: that a more
comprehensive research on relationship to Mathematics be made by the future researchers to
determine a more focused result on the relationship; that teachers shall use more interactive
teaching techniques that would boost interest in mathematics; that a more thorough research on
study habits be made by future researchers to determine its effect on student performance; and it
is further recommended that the same study be conducted in a National High School wherein the
respondents will be composed of heterogeneous learners.