Mathematical Foundations

MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS AS PREDICTORS TO THE BOARD EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE AMONG SELECTED PROGRAMS IN CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY
An Undergraduate Thesis presented to the Faculty of the College of Science Education Caraga State University Ampayon, Butuan City
In Partial Fulfillment for the Requirements of the Degree Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics
Abear, Marjun C. Siega, Marvin H.
March 2014
Republic of the Philippines Caraga State University College of Science Education Ampayon, Butuan City
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The researchers would like to express their heartfelt gratitude to the Almighty Father for the guidance, wisdom and blessings he has given to them and for the success of this study. Also, the researchers acknowledge the help and encouragement of the following persons: Ms. Rosie C. Lopez-Conde , their adviser whose constructive criticisms, shared expertise and vigorous advices motivated and helped for the success of this study. Dr. Natividad R. Mamaoag, Dean of College of Science Education, whose motherly approach, shared knowledge and inspirational words encouraged the researchers to bring this endeavor into a victorious one. Dr. Carmelita C. Lipio, one of the panel evaluators and for the advices and recommendations which greatly helped the researchers in this undertaking. To their parents and peers whose full support was much appreciated and helped the researchers in the completion of this study.
The Authors
iv
DEDICATION
For the immeasurable love and inspiration, this study is profoundly dedicated to the parents of the researchers:
Macario A. Abear and Norma C. Abear; and Marcial L. Siega and Elvira H. Siega
To their brothers and sisters and, also to their friends and loved ones.
Above all, To the almighty Father in heaven.
Jun & Vin
v
ABSTRACT
Title
MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS AS PREDICTORS TO THE BOARD EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE AMONG SELECTED PROGRAMS IN CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY
Authors
Marjun C. Abear Marvin H. Siega
Degree
Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics
Adviser Host Institution
: :
Rosie C. Lopez-Conde Caraga State University Ampayon, Butuan City
The main purpose of this study was to analyzed the association of mathematical foundations on the board examination performance of the graduates from the selected programs in Caraga State University-Main Campus from 2005-2012. The following were the selected programs; Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Geodetic Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Electronics and Communication Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Forestry, and Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics. It analyzed the mathematical foundations towards board examination performance according on the respondents data; the level of mathematics taken, general point average (GPA) of mathematics, total number of units in mathematics earned, college/advance algebra taken and its corresponding total units obtained. The study was a cross-sectional type of research which analyzed the association of mathematical foundations and the board examination performance across the years.
vi
Logistic regression analysis was used to analyzed the relationship between independent (Mathematical Foundations) and dependent (Board Examination Performance) variables. The findings of the study revealed the following: majority of the respondents were female. Majority of the respondent had taken the school level mathematics and there were few who studied university level mathematics. In terms of the GPA in mathematics 21% or majority of them got a GPA of 2.262.50. In terms of total units in mathematics taken, majority or 32% of the respondents got a total of 31-40 units in mathematics. In terms of the college/advanced algebra, all of the respondents have taken this course as a prerequisite course of the respective programs. However, the data shows that the respondents only differ from the total units in college/advanced algebra where most of them took 5. It is concluded based on the findings of the study that the University Level Mathematics has a significant relationship towards the board examination performance having a significance value of 0.024. The Grade Point Average (GPA) in mathematics gained by the respondents has significant relationship towards the board examination performance with a significance value of 0.007. Thus, GPA in mathematics and the Level of Mathematics taken indicate a great effect on the performance of the respondents on the board examination.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE...i APPROVAL SHEET..ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..iii DEDICATIONiv ABSTRACTv TABLE OF CONTENTSvii LIST OF TABLES..x LIST OF FIGURESxi CHAPTER 1 THE PROBLEM Introduction Conceptual Framework Statement of the Problem Significance of the Study Scope and Delimitation of the Study Definition of Terms 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Related literature Related studies 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research Design Research Locale 27 27 14 23 1 4 9 10 11 12
viii
Population and Respondents of the Study Sampling Design Sampling Procedure Research Instrument Data Gathering Procedure Scoring and Quantification of Data Statistical Treatment 4 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA Respondents Profile Mathematical Foundations Significance Test of the Data 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary Conclusions Recommendations REFERENCES CITED APPENDICES Content Page Request letter Survey instrument Computation of the Sample size of the study
29 30 30 30 31 31 33
34 38 48
50 54 56
63 64 69 72
ix
Results and Interpretation of the data Curriculum vitae Certificate of Compliance
76 80 82
x
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 2 3 4 Distribution of the respondents Respondents profile in terms of gender Respondents profile in terms of degree program Respondents profile in terms of year graduated And year taken the board examination 5 Respondents mathematical foundation in terms of school level Mathematics 6 Respondents mathematical foundation in terms of University level Mathematics 7 Respondents mathematical foundation in terms the GPA in Mathematics 8 Respondents mathematical foundation in terms of the total number of units in mathematics 9 Respondents mathematical foundation in terms of the total number of units in college/advanced algebra 10 11 12 Respondents Board Examination Performance in terms of program Respondents Board Examination Performance in general Significance Test on the Relationship between the Mathematical Foundations and Board Examination Performance 45 46 47 43 42 40 38 36 Page 29 34 35
48
xi
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 2 3 4 5 Research paradigm The map of the research locale Graphical presentation of the Respondents Gender Graphical presentation of the degree program Graphical presentation of the respondents profile in terms of the year graduated ant took the board exam 6 Graphical presentation of the mathematical foundations in terms of School level Mathematics 7 Graphical presentation of the mathematical foundations in terms of University level Mathematics 8 9 10 Graphical presentation of the GPA in Mathematics Graphical presentation of the total number of units in mathematics Graphical presentation of the total number of units in college/advanced algebra 45 41 43 44 39 37 Page 8 28 34 36
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM Introduction Mathematics plays a vital role in the modernization of this civilization. It is everywhere and affects the everyday lives of people. Although it is abstract and theoretical knowledge, it emerges from the real world. Mathematics is one of the essential and basic areas of the college curriculum which has a wide field of subject matter. In education, mathematics plays an important role. It is the study of numbers, the relationship between these number and various operations performed on them. It is the science of quantity, size and shape. It is also a way to communicate and analyze ideas, a tool for organizing and interpreting data and above all, perhaps a method of logical reasoning unique to man. Mathematics is a necessary part of other sciences. In the words, according to physicist Richard Feynan Nature talks to us in the language of mathematics, that is numbers, mathematical rules and equations help us to make sense of the world around us (The Book of Popular Science, 2002). Mathematics supports decision making in all aspects of life. As Paulo has pointed out, students need the ability to deal with fundamental notions of number and chance in order to make sense of mathematical information p resented in everyday contexts. Moreover, our society places a high economic value on mathematical literacy. Mathematical literacy is increasingly an imperative for employment. According to Smith
2
and Schumacher (2005) as cited by Brian Lee and Jungsun Lee, Mathematics has always been considered as one of the essential skills that students need to successfully complete a college education. According to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) and National Association for Education of Young Children (NAEYC) high-quality,
challenging and accessible mathematics education for 3 to 6 years old children is a vital foundation for future mathematics learning. High school students need mathematical proficiency to succeed in course work that provides a gateway to technological literacy and higher education. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM 2010) affirmed also that in the changing world, those who understand and can do mathematics have significant opportunities and options for shaping their future. Thus, the statement says that in this modernized world Mathematical foundation plays an important role in the success of an individual. According to the U.S. Department of Education (2003) many adults need to improve their basic mathematics skills for success in postsecondary education and employment. The General Educational Development (GED) Testing Center (2010); Kutner, Greenberg, & Baer (2005); Tamassia et. al. (2007), found that Mathematics instruction for learners should be enhanced to enable them to assemble their mathematics skills so that they can succeed in the workforce, advance in their careers and participate fully as a citizen as cited by Berkeley (2011).
3
Smith and Schumacher (2005) examined the importance of the mathematical foundation to their success in college by focusing on actuarial science courses and noted that most important for degree completion is finishing high school mathematics. Several studies showed the importance of mathematical foundation towards the success of an individual. Thus the researchers envisioned in assessing the mathematical foundation among selected programs in selected programs at Caraga State University, Butuan City towards the performance in the licensure examination. Furthermore, this study aimed to assess the intensity of the different factors such as: level of mathematics taken, percentage level of the graduates in terms of the GPA in mathematics, units of mathematics earned and the relation to units in College Algebra also with regards to their performance that goes behind the results of the different licensure examinations of the respective programs. This data will be identified and gathered by the cross-sectional design. In the cross-sectional research design, the data are collected or gathered at one time. All participants do not provide data at one exact moment, time is assumed to have random effect that produces only variance, not bias. Nevertheless, this study was guided with the cross-sectional study framework that measure the predominance of these different factors on the process and that will satisfy the conduct of this research. understandable study. It will also enable to create a simpler but concrete and
4
Conceptual Framework There are different segments of society who possesses different views about what constitutes mathematics. Some think of mathematics as a collection of rules and procedures to be learned and applied for basic living. From this perspective, the teaching of mathematics relies on those methods best suited to promote the acquisition of skills. Others see mathematics as a basis for developing critical thinking and problem solving skills. From this second perspective which is closely aligned to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) standards, teacher education encourages reflection and promotes attention to critical thinking (NCTM, 2010). How a community defines mathematics affects what, and how mathematics gets taught in the local schools. It can also have an impact on how teachers are trained to teach in those schools according to Encyclopedia of Education (2003). It is therefore important method to promote the acquisition of mathematical skills that are simplified and dont give much doubt in t he young mind of the learners. According to the findings of Talictic et. al. (2008) being efficient cannot replace being effective. Hence, a strong foundation in basic mathematical skills should be enhanced. Since algebra is the foundation of higher mathematics, students should know how the fundamental laws and properties of integers, properties of exponents, special product of binomials and properties of radicals. Since mathematics is a commutative subject, recently learned mathematics principles and skills are used in the future. If a
5
student fails to understand the mathematical principles it will hinder their skills and understanding in higher mathematics. Based on Definition Theory by Plotnik, (2002), one can form a concept of an object, event, animal, or person by making a mental list of the actual or essential characteristics of that particular thing. Through an organized, concise and understandable presentation of the mathematics lessons, the student can make the mental list of what will be the process that he/she must undergo in applying the concepts that has been introduced. Whereas it is stated in the New Philippine Constitution, Article XIV, Section 10, that Science and Technology are essential for national development and progress. The state shall give priority to research and development, invention, innovation, and their utilization and to science and technology, education, training and services. It shall support indigenous appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities and their application to the countrys productive systems and national life. The constitution directs the state to promote scientific research and technology, it is therefore important that mathematics will be fully utilized in exact and accurate way. It is in mathematics where science and technology complete the advancement essential for national development and progress as mentioned by the New Philippine Constitution, Article XIV, Section 10 (Almonia et. al. 2006). As noted by Eric Bell, a Scottish American mathematician, Mathematics is the Queen and servant of the sciences. Thus mathematics should be utilized correctly in the
6
realization of national benefits for science and technology and the people in general as a whole (Talictic et.al, 2008). Thus, Trusty and Nile (2003) continued the work of Adelman and examined the effect of different backgrounds in mathematics on college education. Smith and Schumacher (2005) further examined the relevance of students mathematical
backgrounds to their success in the college by focusing on actuarial science courses, found out that mathematical knowledge has a significant effect in the success of an individual. Figure 1 shows the research paradigm of the study. This gives emphasis on the impact of the independent variables on the board examination performance. The independent variables will be the determinant that will show on how the dependent variable varies according to these factors. Moreover, the researchers envisioned to show the relationship between the variables. The mathematical foundations as the independent variables were considered as the factors that will determine the respondents performance in the board examination. The level of mathematics taken determined the respondents level on the mathematics courses taken in the years they have studied. This level can be classified whether school level mathematics or university level mathematics. The grade point average (GPA in mathematics) distinguished the respondents performance in their mathematics courses whethe r the respondents grades are high or low. This was computed by getting the average grade of their grades in mathematics.
7
Moreover, the total number of units earned in mathematics determined the sum of the respondents units in mathematics earned. The total units in college/advanced algebra were obtain by calculating the total units of the college/advanced algebra that the respondents took up.
8
Independent Variables
Dependent Variable
Respondents Profile Gender Degree Program Year Gradated and took the board examination
Mathematical Foundations Level of Mathematics taken GPA in Mathematics Total number of Units earned in Mathematics Total number of Units in College and Advanced Algebra taken
Board Examination Performance across the years in terms of Program
Figure1. The Research Paradigm
9
Statement of the Problem The main objective of this study was to determine the relationship between the mathematical foundations and board examination performance of the graduates among selected programs in Caraga State University. Specifically, this study envisioned in answering the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of: 1.1 Gender 1.2 Degree program 1.3 Year graduated and took the board examination 2. What is the level of mathematical foundations of the respondents in terms of: 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. School level; University level; G.P.A in mathematics; Total number of units of mathematics earned; Total number of units in College/advance algebra taken.
3. What is the level of board examination performance of the graduates across the years in terms of: 3.1 Respondents performance 3.2 Overall performance 4. Is there significant relationship between mathematical foundations and board examination performance of the graduates across the years 2005-2012?
10
Hypothesis Based on the problems presented the hypothesis below was formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance. Ho : There is no significant relationship between the mathematical foundations and board examination performance.
Significance of the Study The study aimed to assess the mathematical foundations as a determinant on the board examination performance among selected programs in Caraga State University main campus. This study will be significant to the following: Administrators. This study will help them in planning the curriculum that revealed the competencies and needs to meet the higher standards, to help student perform their best and be prepare for college/tertiary education. Teacher. This study will help them choose a curriculum design and implement effective methods strategies on the mathematical foundations. It will also help them assess the students on the level of competency and mathematics proficiency to comply the requirements in preparation for the board examination. Students. The result of this study will enable the students to improve their mathematical foundation and increase their academic performance. It will also help them
11
fulfill the maximum requirements in terms of the level of mathematics and of the board examination. Researchers. The result of this study will give them a great help in their researches for promoting development of the curriculum in the tertiary level most especially on programs requiring a big percentage of mathematics courses.
Scope and Delimitation This study focused on the analysis of the mathematical foundation among selected programs in Caraga State University towards the performance in the licensure examination. This study utilized the records generated from CSU registrars office of the respondents data which includes the graduates of selected programs particularly the graduates of Bachelor of Science in Geodetic Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Electronics and Communication
Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Forestry, and Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics. This study was also limited to the graduates among selected programs who took the board examination across the years 2005-2012.
12
Definition of Terms The following terms are operationally defined for clear understanding: Analysis. It is a systematic examination and evaluation of data or information, by breaking it into its component parts to uncover their relationship. Board Examination. It is a comprehensive integrated examination designed to test competency. A set of tests taken that allow working in a particular area of specialization. GPA. This refers the general point average of the students in mathematics area. Mathematical Foundation. This is used in the study as the independent variable which includes the level of mathematics, GPA in mathematics, total number of units earned in mathematics and the Total units in College and Advanced Algebra. Mathematics. It is the study of the measurement, properties, and relationships of quantities and sets, using numbers and symbols also the science of structure, order, and relation that has evolved from counting, measuring, and describing the shapes of objects. It deals with logical reasoning and quantitative calculation. Mathematics literacy. It is a program where the students are trained for developing and enhancing the mathematical knowledge and skills for the strong mathematical foundation.
13
School Level Mathematics. A level of mathematics which is the basic foundation that which consists the concept of numbers, measurements, geometry, data presentation, calculus, functions & validations, and structuring abstracting. University Level Mathematics. A level of mathematics that is consists of higher mathematics such us; continuity & functions, discrete structures & logic, geometry, probability, and statistics application.
Chapter 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter presents the review of literature and studies reviewed by the researchers to guide them in the development and accomplishment of this study.
Related Literature According to Marilyn Gouthro et. al., Mathematical literacy involves more than executing procedures. It implies a knowledge base and the competence and confidence to apply this knowledge in the practical world. A mathematically literate person can estimate; interpret data; solve day-to-day problems; reason in numerical, graphical, and geometric situations; and communicate using mathematics (Consortium of Ontario School Boards, 2004, p.9). A further study explains that this definition revolves around the wider uses of mathematics in peoples lives rather than being limited to mechanical operations. Mathematical literacy includes the ability to put mathematical knowledge and skills to functional use rather than just mastering them within a school curriculum. To engage in mathematics covers not simply physical or social actions (such as deciding how much change to give someone in a shop) but also wider uses, including taking a point of view and appreciating things expressed mathematically (such as having an opinion about a governments spending plans). Ma thematical literacy also implies the ability to pose and solve mathematical problems in a variety of situations, as well as the
15
inclination to do so, which often relies on personal traits such as self-confidence and curiosity Students who are mathematically literate possess the mathematical knowledge and skill and the confidence to apply them necessary for work and personal success in the twenty-first century. It is clear that a substantial proportion of adolescents face the prospect of leaving secondary school without having developed mathematical literacy. This cannot be allowed to happen (Ward, 2000). The OECD Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) (1999) defines mathematical literacy as an individuals capacity to identify and understand the role that mathematics plays in the world, to make well-founded mathematical judgments and to engage in mathematics, in ways that meet the needs of that individuals current and future life as a constructive, concerned and reflective citizen. Time should be spent on developing meaningful conceptual understanding, on understanding relationships among different representations of mathematical ideas, on flexibly moving from one representation to another, on establishing computational fluency, on developing a repertoire of problem-solving strategies, and on reinforcing the expectation that mathematics can and should make sense and that every student can learn to understand and use it (NMAP, 2008). According to Jackson & Ginsburg (2008), stated that the aspects of mathematical proficiency are more likely to have a long- term impact on adults successful mastery of mathematics than lists of steps to be memorized or computational strategies. Instruction
16
that attends to learners backgrounds and learning histories as well as their goals also should incorporate strategies for formative assessment and collaborative learning.
Learning to use technological tools such as calculators and spreadsheets as they are used in everyday life, in the workplace, and on assessments such as the GED, should be an integral part of instruction. These tools do not diminish the mathematical proficiency expected, but rather enhance learners preparation for meeting their goals. According to Kutner, Greenberg, & Baer, (2005) as cited in MPR Associates Inc., (2011, p.24), computational fluency requires not only proficiency with arithmetic and algebraic procedures, but also understanding of why and how they work. Both aspects should be part of adult mathematics instruction. Adult mathematics instruction should recognize and address negative affective factors, both beliefs and emotions that can interfere with learning. According to the study of Madison, (2006) as cited in MPR Associates Inc., (2011, p. 24) adult students should be able to demonstrate all aspects of mathematical proficiency: conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic competency, and adaptive reasoning. Through their learning experiences, they should be developing a productive disposition toward learning and using mathematics. Many adults need to improve their basic mathematics skills for success in postsecondary education and employment, according to several large-scale national and international surveys U.S. Department of Education, (2003). Results from The Adult Literacy and Life- skills Survey, which examined adults literacy and numeracy skills in
17
the context of daily life and work across seven countries, including the United States, showed that those with low numeracy skill levels are more likely to be unemployed for six months longer than those at higher levels and three times more likely to receive social assistance payments (OECD 2005). Based on the study of Ellington, A. J. (2005) as cited in MPR Associates Inc., (2011, p.6) Algebraic thinking is essential for decision making in daily life and the workplace. Elements of algebra, therefore, should be introduced early to all students in adult mathematics instruction. All content strands (number, geometry and measurement, algebra, and statistics) should be included in varying degrees at all levels of adult mathematics instruction. Katz, Victor J. (2004, p.38) found that the context of College Algebra, provides students a college level academic experience that emphasizes the use of algebra and functions in problem solving. Modeling provides a foundation in quantitative literacy, supplies the algebra and other mathematics needed in partner disciplines, and helps meet quantitative needs in, and outside of, academia. Students address problems presented as real world situations by creating and interpreting mathematical models. Solutions to the problems are formulated, validated, and analyzed using mental, paper and pencil, algebraic, and technology-based techniques as appropriate. There are additional reasons beyond preparation for algebra that adult education should focus attention on the concept of rational numbers. As indicated in the previous discussion of adult goals, adults need to be proficient with fractions, decimals, and
18
percents to thrive in all aspects of adult life. As consumers, adults daily confront situations demanding a clear understanding of percents, and, as workers, they may need to use fractions to measure precisely or compare probabilities. Adults must solve problems requiring proportional reasoning, and, as college students, they need to master fractions before moving on to more advanced mathematical topics General Educational Development (GED) Testing Service (2010). Todays mathematics curriculum must prepare students for their tomorrows. It must equip them with essential mathematical knowledge and skills; with skills of reasoning, problem solving, and communication; and most importantly, with the ability and the incentive to continue learning on their own. According to General Education Development (2010), understanding rational numbers should be at the forefront of adult mathematics instruction for all adult learners. Learners need to attain a deep understanding of the rational number system and the relationships among fractions, decimals, and percents. This level of understanding can only develop with extensive use of rational numbers in class, including computation practice and opportunities to solve problems and explain solutions. This foundational knowledge is needed to support mathematics competency in all goals General Educational Development (GED) Testing Service (2010). Mathematical Association of America (MAA) (2004) stated that those having a clear structures are most likely to succeed. Mathematics instruction should include the technology used in the contexts for which students are preparing. Teacher preparation for
19
adult mathematics instruction must be sufficiently intensive and focused on providing instructors with a strong base of mathematics content and pedagogical knowledge. Based on the analysis of Manly & Ginsburg (2010), adult mathematics teachers should choose mathematical content based on the contexts for which students are preparing. Instruction should explicitly include foundational topics students need for full understanding of the mathematics they will use. Teachers should have an accurate view of the extent to which practical applications and abstract/symbolic understanding are required so that they can achieve an appropriate balance in the classroom. Gal & Schuh, (1994); Mullinix,(1994) as cited by Tamassia et al. (2007) found that Mathematics instruction for adults needs improvement to enable adults to build their mathematics skills so that they can succeed in the workforce, advance in their careers, and participate fully as citizens General Educational Development (GED) Testing Service (2010).Those who teach mathematics in adult education often lack the appropriate credentials and expertise, and many willingly admit their discomfort in offering
mathematics instruction. According to Masingila, Davidenko, & Prus-Wisniowska, Madison (2006), mathematics instruction for adults should prepare them to negotiate the types of situations successfully. Mathematics instruction for adults also should take account of how adults actually use math in daily life, as well as previous math instruction that may have incorporated alternative algorithms and strategies. Some standard computational
procedures learned in school may not be the most useful for many everyday situations.
20
Smith et al., (2003) mentioned in the Consortium of Ontario School Boards, that mathematics supports decision making in all aspects of life. It has pointed out that students need the ability to deal with fundamental notions of number and chance in order to make sense of mathematical information presented in everyday
contexts.Moreover, our society places a high economic value on mathematical literacy, as shown by Ontario Ministry of Education, requirements for secondary school graduation and entry into postsecondary institutions and apprenticeship programs. Mathematical literacy is increasingly an imperative for employment. According to Marilyn Gouthro et. al. as cited in Consortium of Ontario School Boards, (2004, p.9) knowledge expands and the economy evolves, more people are working with technologies or working in settings where mathematics is a cornerstone. Problem solving, the processing of information, and communication are becoming routine job requirements. Outside the workplace, mathematics arises in everyday situation after situation. Mathematical literacy is necessary both at work and in daily life. It is one of the keys in coping with a changing society. Mathematical literacy is as important as proficiency in reading and writing. Mathematics is so entwined with todays way of life that we cannot fully comprehend the information that surrounds us without a basic understanding of mathematical ideas. Confidence and competence in mathematics lead to productive participation in todays complex information society and open the door to opportunity.
21
Hiebert et al. (1997, pp. 89) as cited in NRCIM (2004, p. 4) says that curriculum should engage students through the use of challenging problems that are meaningful both mathematically and in context and substantial questions that motivate students to persevere in substantial mathematical investigations. Teachers must manage the
frustration that can come with genuine thinking. Marilyn Gouthro et.al. (2004, p.9) mentioned in Consortium of Ontario School Boards, that society has accepted the stereotype that mathematics is for the few, not the many. The reality is that mathematics is deeply embedded in the modern workplace and in everyday life. It is time to dispel the myth that mathematics is for some and to demand mathematics success for all. We must truly embrace the fact that every adult and therefore every child can do mathematics. If we convey the conviction that mathematical literacy is for everyone, our confidence in students will build their self-confidence. Selfconfidence is a key ingredient in learning and success in mathematics. Tamassia et al. (2007) as cited in MPR Associates Inc. (2011, p.24) states that those adults goals and experiences offer opportunities to embed instruction in meaningful contexts. Instruction should include connections to student interests, work situations, and everyday life (e.g., following recipes, basic accounting required on the job or at home) to stimulate engagement and promote applicability. Formative assessment reveals student thinking and monitors progress and should be common practice in adult education. A variety of student grouping strategies should be implemented to enhance learning through communication and collaboration.
22
According to French, Immekus, Oakes (2005) student success and persistence within the major and university were examined through hierarchical linear and logistic regression analyses for two cohorts of engineering students. Indicators of success and persistence were based on theoretical and empirical evidence and included both cognitive and non cognitive variables. Cognitive variables included high school rank, SAT scores, and university cumulative grade point average. Non cognitive factors included academic motivation and institutional integration. Outcome variables included grade point average, enrollment at the university, and status as engineering major. In general, the findings were in order for the students to persist particularly as an engineering major, a strong academic background, achievement of good grades, and academic motivation are highly needed. NCTM (2006) affirm that success in early semesters at college also ultimately impacts students post-college experiences, such as career choice, personal income and level of success, and degree and nature of participation in community life. Thus, the experience a student has in the introductory college classes she or he attends can have a significant influence on the course of that students adult life . Gainen (1995) as mentioned by Horn et al. (2002) says that it is therefore alarming that introductory college classes are among the least enjoyed and least understood classes in a students postsecondary academic career. Disaffection with and low performance in introductory college classes is a serious problem at colleges and universities nationwide. The problem is especially evident in introductory business,
23
mathematics, and science courses. Such courses are often required and integral components of an undergraduate education, yet many students who enroll in these courses achieve moderate or low levels of success in them.
Related Studies These related literature and studies give insights to the researchers in using the instruments and research tools. These materials also helped the researchers in the conceptualization of the study. Accordingly, the study Mathematics and Academic Success in three Disciplines: Engineering, Business and the Humanities of Lee, Brian and Lee, Jungsun, (2009, p.1), aimed to investigate the association between grades in mathematics courses and the academic performance of students in different disciplines -engineering, business, and the humanities in which the requirement of mathematical knowledge and skills varies. Results from both engineering and business students show a significant association between grades in mathematics courses and success in the major, as well as general academic success. Accordingly, engineering and business students with advanced skills in mathematics would have a good chance at succeeding in college. Results from humanities students, on the other hand, do not show a significant association between grades in mathematics courses and general academic success. As the humanities curricula are comprised mostly of qualitative concepts, students' performance in mathematics courses does not indicate the academic success of their college program. As a result, a
24
grade in a mathematics course represents the level of students' mathematical knowledge and skills, but not the overall level of their intellectual ability or academic commitment Prior studies of Lee, Brian and Lee, Jungsun (2009, p.2) indicate that students' mathematical backgrounds positively influence their success in college. Nonetheless, these studies do not clarify whether students' mathematical backgrounds represent their proficiency in mathematics, the level of their commitment to academic performance, or the level of their intellectual capacity. Accordingly, this study seeks to extend prior studies by examining the effect of students' mathematical backgrounds on their college education in different academic disciplines: engineering, business, and the humanities. Since the need for mathematical skills varies from discipline to discipline, this study is able to provide answers regarding precisely how students' mathematical backgrounds positively influence their college education. Crow (2006) found that today's global village, merchandise and jobs flow from one country to another depending upon relative productivity. In order to compete with workers overseas, therefore, U.S. workers need to acquire higher levels of skills and technological knowledge through a college education. Lee, Brian and Lee, Jungsun (2009, p.2) states that Mathematics is considered as one of the important subjects that students need to successfully continue their education at an advanced level. Nonetheless, no previous studies had examined how students' mathematical backgrounds positively influenced their college education. In the case of Smith and Schumacher, it is intuitive that students' mathematical knowledge has a positive effect on
25
their academic success in actuarial science, in which concepts are expressed using mathematical notation (Lee, Brian and Lee, Jungsun, 2009, p.4). The empirical results indicate that a grade in mathematics courses is a relevant indicator of academic success for students in both engineering and business. The academic success of humanities students in both their major field and their overall college program is not related to their grades in mathematics courses. Thus, humanities students may not perceive a strong relevance of mathematical skills and knowledge to the successful completion of their college education (Lee, Brian and Lee, Jungsun, 2009, p.9). Based on the study of Smith and Schumacher (2005) as cited by Lee, Brian and Lee, Jungsun (2009, p.1). Mathematics has always been considered as one of the essential skills that students need to successfully complete a college education. Prior studies investigating the influence of mathematical knowledge and skills on academic
performance have therefore focused primarily on students in quantitative subjects. Such studies reveal a positive correlation between mathematical knowledge and academic success. However, high achievement in mathematics could simply represent one dimension of a student's overall intellectual capacity, as students who do well in one subject can easily excel in other fields. Thus, the relationship between achievement in mathematics and academic success may not be a causal one, but may be determined by other factors, such as the student's general academic commitment.
26
Many researchers examined the importance of mathematical foundations towards the individual performance particularly in board examination. Several studies also revealed that mathematical foundations are very significant to the academic performance of an individual.
Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design, research locale, population and respondents of the study, sampling design, sampling procedure, research instrument, validation of the instruments, data gathering procedure, and statistical treatment of data.
Research Design This study was a cross-sectional type of research. This attempted to analyze the performance of the graduates on the board examination among selected programs in Caraga State University on the basis of Mathematical Foundation as predictors. From the analyses of data, possible suggestions were given for the development and success of graduates.
Research Locale The study was conducted at Caraga State University, Ampayon, Butuan City. The following colleges; the College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, College of Engineering and Information Technology and College of Science Education,were the population of the study. The school was located in a 232 square hectares at P-6 Ampayon, Butuan City. Multicab, public utility jeepney and tricycle can be used to reach the area of study from the heart of the city.
28
TO BUTUAN CITY
AMPAYON NATIONAL HIGH WAY
TO AMPAYON
CSU MAIN GATE
CSU GUARD HOUSE
TO CASNR
TO CSE
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COLLEGE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION T O A D M I N B L D G .
Figure 2. The map of the research locale
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
29
Population and Respondents of the Study The respondents of the study were the graduates of Caraga State University on the following selected programs; the Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics, Bachelor of Science in Electronics and Communications Engineering, Bachelor of Science Agricultural Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Geodetic
Engineering and Bachelor of Science in Forestry, who at the same time took the licensure examination on the School Year 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2008-2009, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Table 1 shows the distribution of the respondents. Table1 Distribution of the Respondents
Respondents BS A. E. Freq. No. of takers No. of Passers No. of Failed Participants /Respondents of the study No. of Passers No. of Failed 15 Per 100% BS E.C.E Freq. 10 Per 100% BS G.E Freq. 54 Per 100% BS F Freq. 64 Per 100% BSEd-Math Freq. 68 Per 100% Total Freq. Per
211 100%
14
93%
30%
49
91%
36
56%
30
44%
132
63%
7%
70%
9%
28
44%
38
56%
79
37%
100%
100%
11
100%
15
100%
12
100%
47 100%
71%
50%
11
100%
60%
50%
32
68%
29%
50%
0%
40%
50%
15
32%
30
Sampling Design This study used the method of stratified random sampling which distributed the respondents population according to the selected programs in Caraga State University who took the Board Examination as the respondents of the study (refer to Appendix 3).
Sampling Procedure The researchers submitted a letter to the University registrar of Caraga State University asking permission to obtain authenticated records of the respondents. The researchers also seek the approval to the selected program coordinators to acquire files of the board takers under them.
Research Instrument A survey instrument was used as the instrument in gathering the data. The survey instrument was divided into two parts, the respondents profile such as name and degre e program. The second part includes the different areas of concerns like; a.) GPA in Mathematics, b.) University Level of Mathematics had taken, c.) Total number of Units earned in Mathematics, d.) Total numbers of units in College/Advanced Algebra, e.) Board Examination result pass or fail (refer to Appendix 2).
31
Data Gathering Procedure The researchers seek approval from the University Registrar and College deans through their Program coordinators in acquiring data. Upon approval, the survey instruments were filled in completely. After the data was gathered and collected, it was tabulated and analyzed by a statistician at Mathematical Statistical and Computing Center (MSCC).
Scoring and Quantification of the Data For the purpose of the study the data were quantified to the following:
For GPA 4.00 3.76 3.75 3.51 3.50 3.26 3.25 3.01 3.00 2.76 2.75 - 2.51 2.50 2.26 2.25 2.01 2.00 1.76 1.75 1.51 1.50 1.26
Level 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
32
1.25 1.00 For the level of Mathematics University level mathematics School level mathematics For the number of units in mathematics earned by the respondents 71 80 61 70 51 60 41 50 31 40 21 30 10 20 For taking college/advance algebra No Yes For the number of units/hour in college/advance algebra 15 units/hour 10 units/hour 6 units/hour 5 units/hour 3 units/hour
1 0
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
1 0
5 4 3 2 1
33
For the result of board examination Failed Passed 1 0
Statistical Treatment of Data The following statistical tools were used in this study: Frequency and percentage was used to describe the profile on the gender, degree program of the graduates as well as the year they graduated. It was also used to describe the independent variables of the study GPA in Mathematics, University level of Mathematics taken, total number of units earned in Mathematics and total number of units in College/Advanced Algebra. Logistic Regression Analysis was used to analyze the board examination result (pass or fail) of the graduates on the basis of their GPA in Mathematics, University level of Mathematics taken, total number of units earned in Mathematics and total number of units in College/Advanced Algebra subject.
Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data gathered from the research instruments administered to the respondents. Thus, the findings discussed follow the sequence of the specific problems. 1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of: 1.1 Gender Table 2 Respondents Profile in terms of Gender Figure 3: Graphical Presentation of Respondents Gender
Gender
Frequency
Percentage
Female Male Total
25 22 47
53% 47% 100%
35
Table 2 showed the distribution of the respondents according to gender. Twentyfive (25) or 53% of the respondents are females and twenty-two (22) or 47% are males as indicated also in the graphical presentation of the respondents gender shown in figure 3. 1.2 Degree Program Table 3 Respondents Profile in terms of Degree Program Degree Program BS Ag. Eng. BS ECE BS GE BS F BSEd-Math Total Frequency 7 2 11 15 12 47 Percentage 15% 4% 23% 32% 26% 100%
The graphical presentation of respondents degree program is shown in the Figure 4 with the respondents profile in Table 3. It has been observed that fifteen (15) or 32% of the respondents are from Bachelor of Science in Forestry, twelve (12) or 26% are from Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics, eleven (11) or 26% are from Bachelor of Science in Geodetic Engineering, seven (7) or 15% are from Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Engineering, and two (2) or 4% are from Bachelor of Electronics and Communications Engineering. Table 4 shows the respondents profile in terms of year graduated and year taken the board examination.
36
Figure 4: Graphical Presentation of the degree program
1.3 Year graduated and took the board examination Table 4 Respondents Profile in terms of Year Graduated and Year taken the Board Examination Year Graduated and taken the Board Examination 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Frequency 5 2 4 4 7 6 10 9 47 Percentage 11% 4% 8% 8% 15% 13% 21% 19% 100%
37
The table 4 showed the distribution of the respondents profile according to the year graduated and the year taken the board exam. There are ten (10) or 21% graduated and taken the exam in the year 2011, nine (9) or 19% in the year 2012, seven (7) or 15% in the year 2009, six (6) or 13% in the year 2010, five (5) or 11% in the year 2005, four (4) or 9% in the years 2007 and 2008, and two (2) or 4% are in the year 2006. The graphical presentation is shown in Figure 5. Figure 5: Graphical presentation of the respondents profile in terms of year graduated and took the board examination
38
Problem 2. What are the mathematical foundations taken in general across the years in terms of: 2.1 School level Table 5 Respondents Mathematical Foundations in terms of School Level Mathematics School Level Mathematics Level of Mathematics Numbers Measurement Geometry Function Data representation Calculus Validation 47 47 47 47 46 47 12 Studied Frequency Percentage 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% 26% 0 0 0 0 1 0 35 Not Studied Frequency Percentage 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 74% 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 Total Frequency Percentage 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Table 5 showed the distribution of the respondents data of the mathematical foundations in terms of the school level mathematics. Figure 6 indicates that a total of forty-seven (47) or 100% has studied the numbers, measurement, geometry, function, and calculus. There are forty-six (46) or 98% who had studied the data representation, and twelve (12) or 26% who had studied validation, which acquires a low percentage in the school level mathematics. This implies that only few of the graduates took it. The graphical presentation in Figure 6 shows that almost all the subjects in school level mathematics have been studied with validation being the only subject almost not studied by the students.
39
Figure 6: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundations in terms of School level Mathematics
40
2.2 University level Table 6 Respondents Mathematical Foundations in terms of University Level Mathematics
Level of Mathematics Linear Algebra Number theory Analytic coordinate Geometry Beginning calculus Probability Theoretical or Applied statistics Discrete Mathematics
University Level
Studied Not Studied Total Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage 12 12 47 47 15 0 0 26% 26% 100% 100% 32% 0% 0% 35 35 0 0 32 47 47 74% 74% 0% 0% 68% 100% 100% 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Table 6 presented the distribution of the respondents mathematical foundation in terms of the university level. It has been observed that there are forty-seven (47) or 100% of the respondents who had studied the analytic coordinate geometry, and beginning calculus. There are fifteen (15) or 32% who had studied the probability, twelve (12) or 26% of the respondents who had studied the linear algebra, and number theory. On the theoretical or applied statistics, and discrete mathematics 100% of the respondents who did not study it.
41
From the discussions above, it was observed that when it comes to the level of mathematics most of the respondents had studied the school level mathematics. On the other hand, the data revealed that a lower percentage of the respondents who did not study the university level indicate that there are only few who had taken the university level mathematics. It implies that most of the respondents studied the lower level or basic foundations of mathematics. The graphical presentation is shown in Figure 7. Figure 7: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundations in terms of University level of Mathematics
42
2.3 Grade Point Average (GPA) in mathematics Table 7 Respondents Mathematical Foundations in terms of the GPA in Mathematics GPA in Mathematics Interval 1.00-1.25 1.26-1.50 1.51-1.75 1.76-2.00 2.01-2.25 2.26-2.50 2.51-2.75 2.76-3.00 3.01-3.25 3.26-3.50 3.51-3.75 3.76-4.00 4.01-4.25 Total Frequency 0 1 1 1 5 10 6 5 7 5 3 2 1 47 Percentage 0% 2% 2% 2% 11% 21% 13% 11% 15% 11% 6% 4% 2% 100%
Table 7 showed the distribution of the respondents GPA in mathematics. Based on the above figure there are ten (10) or 21% who got a GPA that ranges from 2.26-2.50, seven (7) or 15% who got a range of 3.01-3.25, six (6) or 13% who got a range of 2.512.75, three of which have a frequency of five (5) or 11% who got a range of 2.01-2.25, 2.76-3.00,and 3.26-3.50, three (3) or 6% who got a range of 3.51-3.75, two (2) or 4% who got a range of 3.76-4.00, and four of which have a frequency of one (1) or 2.10% who got a range of 1.26-1.50, 1.51-1.75, 1.76-2.00, and 4.01-4.25, and no one got a GPA that ranges from 1.00-1.25. The graphical presentation is shown in Figure 8.
43
Figure 8: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundations in terms of GPA in Mathematics
2.4 Total number of units of mathematics earned Table 8 Respondents Mathematical Foundations in terms the Total Number of Units in Mathematics Total Number of Units in Mathematics 10-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 Total
Frequency 2 13 15 10 4 0 3 47
Percentage 4% 28% 32% 21% 9% 0% 6% 100%
44
The respondents total number of units in mathematics was shown in Table 8. It has been observed that fifteen (15) or 32% got total units in mathematics that ranges from 31-40, thirteen (13) or 28% ranges from 21-30, ten (10) or 21% ranges from 41-50, four (4) or 9% ranges from 51-60, three (3) or 6% rages from 71-80, two (2) or 4% ranges from 10-20, and nothing got a total number of units in mathematics that ranges from 6170. Figure 9 shows the graphical presentation of the Mathematical Foundation in terms
of total number of units in Mathematics. Since the dependent variable is dichotomous, and independent variable is also a qualitative data, then the statistical tool that we used to analyze and determine if there is a significant relationship between board examination performance and total units in Mathematics, GPA in Mathematics, and Level of mathematics taken in university level is the logistic regression analysis. Figure 9: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundations in terms of Total Number of Units in Mathematics
45
2.5 Total Number of units of College/Advanced Algebra Table 9 Respondents Mathematical Foundations in terms the Total number of units in College/Advanced Algebra Total Number of Units in College/Advanced algebra 3 Units 5 Units 6 Units 10 Units 15 Units Total Frequency 6 27 5 7 2 47 Percentage 13% 57% 11% 15% 4% 100%
Table 9 showed the distribution of respondents mathematical foundation in terms of the total units in College/Advanced Algebra. It has been observed in the figure that twenty-seven (27) or 57% got a total of 5 units, seven (7) or 15% got a total of 10units, six (6) or 13% got a total of 3 units, five (5) or 11% got a total of 6 units, and two (2) or 4% got a total units of 15. The graphical presentation is shown in Figure 10. Figure 10: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundation in terms of the Total units in College/Advanced Algebra
46
Problem 3. What is the level of board examination performance of the graduates: 3.1 Respondents performance Table 10 Respondents Board Examination Performance in terms of the Program Board Examination Performance Year Frequency Percentage Passed Percentage 2010 2 29% 2011 2 29% 5 71% 2012 3 43% 2007 1 50% 1 50% 2008 1 50% 2005 2 18% 2006 1 9% 2007 1 9% 2008 2 18% 11 100% 2009 2 18% 2010 1 9% 2011 1 9% 2012 1 9% 2007 1 7% 2009 1 7% 2010 3 20% 9 60% 2011 5 33% 2012 5 33% 2005 3 25% 2006 1 8% 2007 1 8% 2008 1 8% 6 50% 2009 3 25% 2010 1 8% 2011 1 8% 2012 1 8%
Programs BS A.E BS E.C.E
Failed 2 1
Percentage 29% 50%
BS G.E
0%
BS F
40%
BSEdMath
50%
47
Table 10 showed the board examination performance (passed and failed) of the respondents in terms of the program and year of taken the board examination. It revealed that 71% of the BSAE respondents passed the board examination and 29% failed, 50% of the BSECE respondents passed and failed respectively. On the other hand, a perfect 100% of the BSGE respondents passed the board examination, 60% of the BSF respondents passed the board examination while 40% failed, and 50% of the BSEd-Math respondents passed and failed the board examination respectively. Generally, the respondents from the BSAE, BSGE, and BSF got a higher percentage of passing percentage while the respondents from BSECE and BSEd-Math got 50% of passing and failing percentages respectively.
3.2 Overall Performance Table 11 Respondents Board Examination Performance in general Board Examination Performance Programs Respondents Frequency 32 15 Percentage 68.09% 31.91% Validation Passed Failed
Table 11 revealed that the respondents performance in passing the board examination has a higher percentage compared to the failing percentage. It denotes that in general the respondents performed well in the board examination without focusing in a specific program.
48
Problem 4. Is there significant relationship between mathematical foundations and board examination performance of the graduates across the years 2005-2012? Table 12 Significance Test on the Relationship between the Mathematical Foundations and Board Examination Performance Dependent variable Independent variable Total units in Mathematics Board Examination Performance GPA in Mathematics Level of Mathematics taken (University) Total units in College/Advanced Algebra p-value 0.328 0.007 0.024 0.285 Decision Failed to reject H0 Reject H0 Reject H0 Failed to reject H0 Conclusion Not Significant Significant Significant Not Significant Odds ratio 1.22 1.749 0.058 1.268
The independent variables that have a significant relationship to the dependent variable are the GPA in Mathematics and the level in Mathematics (University) because of its probability values less than the specified level of significance which is 0.05. This means that, if the students who have good foundation or good grade in Mathematics subject, they are more likely to pass the board examination. Using the odds ratio result, with the odds value equal to 1.749, this imply that the odds of the respondents who got higher grade point average in mathematics subjects is more likely to pass than he fail the board examination result. Or in other words, 74.9% of the students are more likely to pass than he/she fails the board examination, when he/she have good grades in mathematics subject.
49
The second independent variable that has a significant relationship of the board examination result is the Level of mathematics (University).The odds ratio of the students who took the mathematics in university level is less likely to pass than he/she fail the board examination. The reason for this result is due to the content of the subject under in the university level. Since the board examination does not require higher knowledge in mathematics and it needs only the basic skills and analytical skills in solving word problems. The total units in mathematics do not significantly affect the performance of the board examination result. This means that even if the students have numerous numbers of units in mathematics, it does not assure that he/she passed the board examination.
Chapter 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the summary, conclusions and recommendations based on the results of this study. Summary This study was focused to assess the success of their respective board examinations in determining the Mathematical Foundations of the respondents. This study used cross-sectional type of research. This attempted to analyze the success of the graduates to the board examination among selected programs in Caraga State University on the basis of Mathematical Foundation. The questionnaire only includes the profile of the respondents in terms of their gender, degree program, year graduated and year taken the board examination, level of mathematics, total units in mathematics, GPA in mathematics and the total units in college/advanced algebra taken. This study involved the graduates of Caraga State University on the following selected programs: Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics, Bachelor of Science in Electronics and Communications Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Engineering, Bachelor of Science in Geodetic Engineering and Bachelor of Science in Forestry; who at the same time takes the licensure examination on the school year 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2008-2009, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 as the respondents.
51
Frequency and percentage was used to describe the profile on the degree program of the graduates as well as the year they graduated and taken the board examination. Logistic Regression Analysis was used to analyze the board examination result (pass or fail) of the graduates on the basis of their GPA in Mathematics, University level of Mathematics taken, total number of units earned in Mathematics and total number of units in College/Advanced Algebra subject. The data revealed that majority of the respondents are females, and mostly graduated from the Bachelor of Science in Forestry. Nonetheless, in terms of the college, the College of Engineering and Information Technology has the most population of respondents. On the level of mathematics, data showed that majority of the respondents have taken the school level mathematics obtaining a high gain of the total percentage. On the other hand, only few of them have taken the university level mathematics which implies that they are more into the basic foundation courses of mathematics rather than into the higher level. Regarding on the GPA in mathematics, the data signified that from the total of forty-seven respondents there are 21% of them or mostly got a GPA that ranges from 2.26-2.50, 15% who got a GPA that ranges from 3.01-3.25, 13% who got a GPA that ranges from 2.51-2.75, 11% of which got a GPA ranges from 2.01-2.25, 2.76-3.00,and 3.26-3.50 respectively. There are 6% who got a GPA that ranges from 3.51-3.75, 4% who got a GPA that ranges from 3.76-4.00, and four of which have a percentage of 2%
52
who got a GPA that ranges from 1.26-1.50, 1.51-1.75, 1.76-2.00, and 4.01-4.25 correspondingly. However, none of the respondents got a GPA that ranges from 1.00-.25. In terms of total units in mathematics taken, the data illustrates that, 32% of the respondents or mostly got a total units in mathematics that ranges from 31-40 units, 28% got a range of 21-30 units, 21% got a range of 41-50 units, 9% got a range of 51-60 units, 6% rages from 71-80 units, 4% got a range of 10-20 units, and none of the respondents got a total number of units in mathematics that ranges from 61-70 units. In terms of the college/advanced algebra, all of the respondents have taken this course as a prerequisite course of the respective programs. However, the data shows that the respondents only differ from the total units in college/advanced algebra. The data revealed that 57% of the total population got a total units of five (5), 15% got a total units of ten (10), 13% got a total units of three (3), 11% got a total units of six (6), and 4% of them got a total units of fifteen (15). In terms of board examination performance of the respondents with regards to their program data revealed that there are 11 or 100% from BS G. E., 5 or 71% from BS A. E., 9 or 60% from BS F., 6 or 50% from BSEd-Math, and 1 or 50% from BS E. C. E. who passed the board examination. There are 32 or 68.09% of the respondents who passed the board examination and 15 or 31.91% of which who failed the board examination. From the general data gathered and analyzed, it has been observed that only two of the independent variables imply a significant relationship to the dependent variable,
53
these are the GPA in Mathematics and the level in Mathematics (University). Because of its probability values greater than the specified level of significance which is 0.05 this indicates that these two greatly affect the graduates performance on their program as well as to their performance in the board examination. This result of the study emphasizes that, if the students who have a good foundation or good grade in Mathematics subject, they are more likely to pass the board examination. Using the odds ratio result, with the odds value equal to 1.749, this entails that the odds of the respondents who got higher grade point average in mathematics subjects is more likely to pass than he/she fail the board examination result. In other words, 74.9% of the students are more likely to pass than he/she fails the board examination, when he/she have good grades in mathematics subject. Subsequently, the odds ratio of the students who took up university level mathematics is less likely to pass than he/she fails the board examination. The reason for this result is due to the content of the subject under in the university level. Since the board examination does not require higher knowledge in mathematics thus, it only needs the basic skills and analytical skills in solving word problems and the like. The total units in mathematics do not significantly affect the performance of the board examination result. This means that even if the students have numerous numbers of units in mathematics, it does not give him/her the assurance of passing the board examination. Moreover, good and deeper grasp and learning on the content of each Mathematics subject is more important than numerous numbers of units in Mathematics.
54
Conclusions Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn: The profile of the respondents shows that majority of the respondents are females, and mostly of them graduated from the Bachelor of Science in Forestry, and
most respondents according to college were coming from the College of Engineering and Information Technology. In terms of the level of mathematics, data revealed that all of the respondents have taken the school level mathematics which signifies a hundred percent. Consequently, the data varies on the university level mathematics which gains a 0.024 level of significance indicating a significant relationship towards the board examination result. However, the odds ratio of 0.058 of the students who took up university level mathematics is less likely to pass than he/she fails the board examination. The reason for this result is due to the content of the subject under in the university level. Since the board examination does not require higher knowledge in mathematics and it needs only the basic skills and analytical skills in solving word problems. In terms of total units in mathematics taken, data show a 0.328 level of significance which falls greater than p-value that indicates no significant relationship to the result of the board examination. In terms of the GPA in mathematics, the data revealed a 0.007 level of significance signifying a significant relationship with the board examination result of the respondents. Using the odds ratio result, with the odds value equal to 1.749, this imply
55
that the odds of the respondents who got higher grade point average in mathematics subjects is more likely to pass than he fail the board examination result. Or in other
words, 74.9% of the students are more likely to pass than he/she fails the board examination, when he/she have good grades in mathematics subject. In terms of the total units in College/Advanced Algebra, the data shows a 0.285 level of significance implying a greater value over the p-value which has no significant relationship towards the board examination result of the respondents. In general, the result revealed that the GPA in mathematics has a significant relationship towards the success in the board examination with a 0.007 level of significance rejecting the null hypothesis and an odds ratio of 1.749 suggesting that students who have a higher GPA is more likely to pass in the board examination. Furthermore, the university level mathematics has also a significant relationship gaining a 0.024 level of significance implying that it rejects the null hypothesis. There are 32 or 68.09% of the respondents who passed the board examination and 15 or 31.91% failed implying that the mathematical foundations of the respondents across the years 2005-2012 was good and has a great implications on their performance. It signifies that if the graduates have a good performance in their college years then it may give them a higher percentage of passing the board examination.
56
Recommendations Based from the conclusions, the researchers forwarded the following
recommendations: 1. Students must have a focus on their studies especially on their mathematics subject to gain a higher grade point average and to avoid failing grades that may greatly affect their over-all performance in their licensure examination. 2. Students must find help from any group of people who is in line with mathematics if there is any to address their problems in that course. Any tutorial activity may help them in answering this problem from Mathematics clubs or organizations. 3. They must also promote a series of remedial class activities especially in the mathematics courses in order to help the students with problems in Mathematics. 4. Students must perform well in the mathematics courses as a foundation of every course taken because it has significant role in the board examination as well as to our daily living.
5. Encourage enrollment on Upper Division (University) Level Mathematics in some courses which need such since University Level Mathematics is significant to programs as indicated in Table 10. 6. Further study should be made by future researchers to confirm further the findings
of the study and to exhaust other possible way to improve and sustain the students interests in mathematics as an important factor in the board examination. These factors could be the following:
57 a. The number of times does a mathematics subject and board examination
had been taken.

b. The General average of mathematics subject gained in secondary education. c. Mathematics grade obtained in the entrance examination d. Total units in University Level Mathematics e. Number of hours in College Algebra
58
REFERENCES CITED Books Anderson, A. (2011). Engagement in Education: Identity Narratives and Agency in the Contexts of Mathematics Education. The International Doctoral School of Technology and Science Aalborg University.
Ben Nebres, S. J.(2010). The Role of Mathematicians in K-12 Mathematics Education. Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City 1108, Philippines.
Benford, R. & Newsome, J. (2006).Factors Affecting Student Academic Success in Gateway Courses. Northern Arizona University. Center for Science Teaching and Learning.
Cucker, F. & Smale, S. (2001). On the Mathematical Foundations of Learning. Department of Mathematics, City University of Hong Kong.
Flawn, T. (2008). Foundations for Success. US Department of Education. Education Publications Center. French, B. (2005). An Examination of Indicators of Engineering Students Success and Persistence.
Ginsburg , G., Manly, M., Schmitt, M., Chernus, C., Fowler, D. & Gardner, D.( 2011). Building on Foundations for Success: Guidelines for Improving Adult Mathematics Instruction, Berkeley, CA Washington, DC. MPR Associates, Inc.
Gouthro, M. (2004). Leading Math Success: Mathematical Literacy, Curriculum and Assessment Policy Branch, Ministry of Education. Queens Printer for Ontario.
59
Katz, V. (2007).Algebra: Gateway to a Technological Future. United States of America, published by Mathematical Association of America.
McGraner , K., Van Der Heyden, A. & Holdheide, L.( 2011). Preparation of Effective Teachers in Mathematics. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality 1000 Thomas Jefferson Street, Washington DC.
Lee, B. & Lee, J. (2009). Mathematics and Academic Success in three Disciplines: Engineering, Business and the Humanities. USA, Academy of Educational Leadership Journal Publisher: The Dream Catchers Group, LLC.
NAEYC/NCTM Joint Position Statement (2006). Early Childhood Mathematics: Promoting Good Beginnings. Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, National Association for the Education of Young Children Copyright.
Olsen, C. (2001). Cross-Sectional Study Design and Data Analysis Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.
Reisel, J., Jablonski, M., Munson, E. and Hosseini, H.( 2010). Evaluation of Factors Affecting the Success of Improving Math course placement for Incoming Freshmen in a Summer Bridge program College of Engineering and Applied Science, Louisville, KY, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Richardson, R. (2008). An Examination of Teacher Qualifications and Student Achievement in Mathematics. Auburn, Alabama, Auburn University.
Suzzane, Wilson Martin, G., Hansen, L., Pugalee, D., Webb, W. & Wilhelm, J. (2010). The Common Core State Standards and Teacher Preparation: The Role of Higher Education. Science and Mathematics Teacher Imperative (SMTI) / the Leadership Collaborative (TLC).
60
Electronic Sources Anderson, A. 2011 retrieved on January 24,2013http://ncm.gu.se/media/ncm/forskning/a_andersson_avhandling
Cady, B.2013 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.nae.edu/casee.
Davis, R. 1984 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=CbJ_uxtS6rAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=educatio n+approach+in+math&hl=en#v=onepage&q=education%20approach%20in%20math&f= false.
Dream Catchers Group 2009 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Academy-Educational-LeadershipJournal/219062371.html
Katz, V. 2012 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.gateway-algebra-tech-future(3)
Mr. Fry retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.state.nj.us/education/frameworks/math/math15
Olsen, C. 2004 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/yes/4297_MODULE_05
University of Cincinnati retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.google.com.ph/search?q=FACTORS+OF+THE+SUCCESS+OF+ENGINEE RING+GRADUATES+IN+MATH&hl=en-PH&gbv=2&gs_l=heirloom.
University of Cincinnati retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.uc.edu/DegreePrograms/Program.aspx?program=20BSCHE-CHE
61
Walk, K.1998 retrieved on January24,2013 http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CompAnalysis.html
Published Journals, Magazine, and Blogs Sources Benford, R. and N ewsome J. (2006) Factors Affecting Student Academic Success in Gateway Courses at Northern Arizona University. Center for Science Teaching and Learning, Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5697. French, B., Immekus, J., Oakes, J. and William C. (2005) An Examination of Indicators of Engineering Students Success and Persistence Journal of Engineering Education. Ginsburg, L., Manly, M., Schmitt, M.and Chernus, K. (2011) Building on Foundations for Success: Guidelines for Improving Adult Mathematics Instruction by MPR Associates, Inc Katz, V. (2007) Algebra Gateway to a Technological Future. Publish by the Mathematical Association of America.
APPENDICES
63
Content Page Appendix 1 Researchers Letters of Communication 1 a. For the Vice President for Academic Affairs 1b. For the CSE Dean 1c. For the CEIT Dean 1d. For the CASNR Dean 1e. For the University Registrar 2 3
4
Page
65 66 67 68 69 70 73
77 81
Survey Instrument for the Graduates Computations in selecting the respondents of the study
Significance test on the Relationship between Mathematical Foundation and the Board Examination Performance Curriculum vitae
64
Appendix 1a Researchers Letter to the Vice President for Academic Affairs February 11, 2013 LUISITO I. TABADA, Ph. D.
Vice-President for Academic Affairs
Sir: Warmest Greetings! The undersigned are currently conducting a study entitled, MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS AS PREDICTORS TO THE BOARD EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE AMONG SELECTED PROGRAMS IN CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY in partial fulfillment for the requirements of the degree Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics. In this connection, we would like to request your favorable permission to allow us to float our questionnaire to all graduates of the college who have taken the Licensure Examination for Teachers as our respondents. Rest assured that the data will be keep with utmost confidentiality. We are anticipating for your kind consideration on this matter and may this request merit your favorable approval. Respectfully Yours, (SGD) MARJUN C. ABEAR Researcher Noted: (SGD) ROSIE C. LOPEZ-CONDE
Adviser
(SGD) MARVIN H. SIEGA Researcher
(SGD)NATIVIDAD R. MAMAOAG, ED. D

Dean, CSE
Approved: (SGD) LUISITO I. TABADA, Ph. D.

Vice-President for Academic Affairs
65
Appendix 1b Researchers Letter to the CSE Dean February 11, 2013 NATIVIDAD R. MAMAOAG, Ed. D Dean, College of Science Education Madame: Warmest Greetings! The undersigned are currently conducting a study entitled, MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS AS PREDICTORS TO THE BOARD EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE AMONG SELECTED PROGRAMS IN CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY in partial fulfillment for the requirements of the degree Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics. In this connection, we would like to request your favorable permission to allow us to float our questionnaire to all graduates of the college who have taken the Licensure Examination for Teachers as our respondents. Rest assured that the data will be keep with utmost confidentiality. We are anticipating for your kind consideration on this matter and may this request merit your favorable approval. Respectfully Yours, (SGD) MARJUN C. ABEAR Researcher Noted: (SGD) ROSIE C. LOPEZ-CONDE
Adviser Approved:
NATIVIDAD R. MAMAOAG, ED. D

Dean, CSE
66
Appendix 1c Researchers Letter to the CEIT Dean February 11, 2013 ALEXANDER T. DEMITILLO, MSECE
Dean, College of Engineering and Information Technology
Adviser Approved:
(SGD) ALEXANDER T. DEMITILLO, MSECE

Dean, CEIT
67
Appendix 1d Researchers Letter to the CASNR Dean February 11, 2013 TOMAS AUSTRAL, Ph. D.
Dean, College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
Adviser Approved:
(SGD) TOMAS M. AUSTRAL, Ph. D.

Dean, CASNR
68
Appendix 1e Researchers Letter to the University Registrar February 11, 2013 MERINESSA D. GONZAGA
Registrar III
Madame: Warmest Greetings! The undersigned are currently conducting a study entitled MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS AS PREDICTORS TO THE BOARD EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE AMONG SELECTED PROGRAMS IN CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY in partial fulfillment for the requirements of the degree Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics. In this connection, we would like to request your favorable permission to allow us to access the records in terms of the number of units in mathematics earned and the G.P.A in mathematics of all graduates of the programs; BS G.E, BS E.C.E, BS Ag Eng., BSF, BSEdmath who have taken the Licensure Examination from the School year 2006 to 2012 as our respondents. Rest assured that the data will be keep with utmost confidentiality. We are anticipating for your kind consideration on this matter and may this request merit your favorable approval. Respectfully Yours, (SGD) MARJUN C. ABEAR Researcher Noted: (SGD) ROSIE C. LOPEZ-CONDE
Adviser Approved:
(SGD) MERINESSA D. GONZAGA Registrar III
69
Appendix 2 Survey Instrument for the Graduates
Part I. The Profile of the Graduate Respondent Direction: Please furnish the following by filling up the required information and checking the responses. Name: Gender: Degree: Year Graduated: Year Taken the Licensure Examination:
QUESTIONNAIRES 1. What is your G.P.A in mathematics? ( ) 1.00-1.25 ( ) 1.26-1.50 ( ) 1.51-1.75 ( ) 1.76-2.00 ( ) 2.01-2.25 ( ) 2.26-2.50 ( ) 2.51-2.75 ( ) 2.76-3.00 ( ) 3.01-3.25 ( ) 3.26-3.50 ( ) 3.51-3.75 ( ) 3.76-4.00
70
2. What is the level of mathematics you have taken? Direction: Please put a check () the mathematical foundation you have studied. Indicators A. School level Mathematics 1. Numbers (e.g. whole numbers, fractions, decimal, integer, rational and real number concept, number theory, estimation ratio and proportion) 2. Measurement (e.g. measurement units, congruence and properties of length, perimeter, area, and volume, estimation and error) 3. Geometry (e.g. 1-D ,2-D coordinate geometry, Euclidean geometry, transformational geometry, congruence and similarity, constructions with straightedge and compass, 3-d geometry, vector geometry) 4. Function, relation equations (e.g. algebra, trigonometry, analytic geometry,) 5. Data representation , probability and statistics 6. Calculus (e.g. infinite processes change, differentiation, integration) 7. Validation, structuring, and abstracting (e.g. Boolean algebra mathematical induction, logical connectives sets, groups, fields, linear space, isomorphism, homomorphism) Studied Not Studied
71
Indicators A. University Level Mathematics 1. Linear Algebra (e.g. vector spaces, matrices, dimension,) 2. Number theory (e.g. divisibility, prime numbers, structuring integers) 3. Analytic coordinate Geometry (e.g. equation of lines, curves, conic sections, rigid transformation or isometrics)
Studied
Not Studied
4. Beginning calculus topics(limits, series, sequence Calculus (e.g. derivative and integrals) 5. Probability 6. Theoretical or Applied statistics 7. Discrete mathematics
( ) School level mathematics
( ) University level mathematics
3. What is the total number of units you have earned in mathematics? ( ) 10-20 ( ) 21-30 ( ) 31-40 ( ) 41-50 ( ) 51-60 ( ) 61-70
4. Have you taken college/advanced algebra? How many units? a. ( ) Yes b. ( ) 3 units ( ) 5 units ( ) No ( ) 6 units
5. What is the result of your board examination? ( ) Passed ( ) Failed
72
Appendix 3 Computations in selecting the respondents of the study Bachelor of Science in Geodetic Engineering Strata: Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Number 9 2 5 14 11 5 3 7 54 Computation
54/8=6.75 7
Population Sample: Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Size of each School Year 9 2 5 14 11 5 3 7 54 Proportion 9/54=1/6 2/54=1/27 5/54=5/54 14/54=7/27 11/54=11/54 5/54=5/54 3/54=3/54 7/54=7/54 No. of graduates to be selected at random 1/6*7 = 1.72 1/27*7= 0.261 5/54*7= 0.651 7/27*7= 1.812 11/54*= 1.432 5/54*7= 0.651 3/54*7= 0.381 7/54*7= 0.211 11
73
Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Engineering Strata Year 2010 2011 2012 Total Number 4 4 7 15 Computation
15/3=5
Population Sample Year 2010 2011 2012 Total size of each school year 4 4 7 15 Proportion 4/15= 4/15 4/15= 4/15 7/15= 7/15 No. of Graduates to be selected at Random 4/15*5=1.332 4/15*5=1.332 7/15*5=2.333 7
Bachelor of Science in Electronics and Communications Engineering Strata Year 2007 2008 Total Number 1 1 2 Computation 2/2=1
Population Sample Year 2007 2008 Total size of each school year 1 1 2 Proportion 1/2= 1/2 1/2= 1/2 No. of Graduates to be selected at Random 1/2*1=0.51 1/2*1=0.51 2
74
Bachelor of Science in Forestry Strata Year 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Number 2 2 11 19 23 57 Computation
57/5= 11.411
Year 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
size of each school year 2 2 11 19 23 57
Population Sample No. of Graduates to be selected at Proportion Random 2/57=2/57 2/57*11= 0.391 2/57=2/57 2/57*11= 0.391 11/57=11/57 11/57*11= 2.123 19/57=19/57 19/57*11= 4.675 23/57=23/57 23/57*11= 4.445 15
Bachelor of Secondary major in Mathematics Strata Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Number 17 2 2 5 19 8 3 10 66 Computation
67/8= 8.3758
75
Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
size of each school year 17 2 2 5 19 8 3 10 66
Population Sample No. of Graduates to be selected at Proportion Random 17/66=17/66 17/66*8= 4.063 2/66=1/33 1/33*8= 0.241 2/66=1/33 1/33*8= 0.241 5/66=5/66 5/66*8= 0.611 19/66=19/66 19/66*8= 2.303 8/66=4/33 4/33*8= 0.971 3/66=1/22 1/22*8= 0.361 10/66=5/33 5/33*8= 1.221 12
76
Appendix 4 RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA Mathematical and Statistical Computing Center (MSCC)
Title of Project:
Mathematical Foundations as predictors to on the Board Examination Performance among Selected Programs in Caraga State University Abear, Marjun C. and Siega, Marvin H.
Proponent/s:
Significance Test on the relationship of the Mathematical Foundations and Board Examination Performance using the Logistic Regression Analysis test A. What is the mathematics foundation taken in general across the years? Table 1
Level.Mathematics.school Frequency 47 Percent 100.0 Valid Percent 100.0 Cumulativ e Percent 100.0
Valid
Studied
From the above table it is clear that most the topics under in the school level had studied all by the 47 respondents. The topics that have been studied are the basic arithmetic, geometry, statistics, probability, and other topics which are under in the school level. Table 2
Level. University. Marthematics Frequency 13 34 47 Percent 27.7 72.3 100.0 Valid Percent 27.7 72.3 100.0 Cumulat iv e Percent 27.7 100.0
Valid
St udied Not St udied Total
77
Table 2; represented the University level mathematics in terms of the topics of linear algebra, number theory, probability theory and calculus, and discrete mathematics. There are 13 or 27.7% of the respondents studied the topic under in the University level, while 34 or 72.3% who did not studied. The reason why there are more respondents who did not study the topics under the university level, it is because the topics is under in mathematics major or any other related fields who deals with linear algebra, number theory and probability theory where in this topics are in their major subjects. Figure 1 Table 3
GPA in Mathematics
10
6 7
5 1 1 1
5
3 2
GPA in Mathematics Interval 1.25-1.50 1.51-1.75 1.76-2.00 2.01-2.25 2.26-2.50 2.51-2.75 2.76-3.00 3.01-3.25 3.26-3.50 3.51-3.75 3.76-4.00 4.01-4.25
Frequency
Percentage
1 1 1 5 10 6 5 7 5 3 2 1
2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 10.6% 21.3% 12.8% 10.6% 14.9% 10.6% 6.4% 4.3% 2.1%
Figure 1, is a graphical representation of the number of board examinees with their grade point average in Mathematics subject. As can be seen in this graph that, out of 47 examinees there are 10 or 21.3% have grade point average in mathematics fall in the interval 2.26-2.50 and 3 examinees whose grade point average is in the interval from 1.26-1.50, 1.51-1.75 and 1.76-2.00 respectively and only 5 or 5.6% examinees have grade point average fall in the interval 2.01-2.25 the same with 2.01-2.25 and 2.76-3.00. Table 4
Taken.C.algebra Frequency 47 Percent 100.0 Valid Percent 100.0 Cumulativ e Percent 100.0
Valid
YES
78
It is clear in table 4 that all of the respondents took college algebra during college days. Figure 2
Total Units in Mathematics

13 15 10 2 10 to 20 21-30 31-40 41-50 4 3
51-60
71-80
Based on figure above, there are 15 or 31.9% examinees having the total number of units in Mathematics from 21 to 40 units, 13 or 27.7% having a total number of units from21 to 30 and 10 or 21.3% having a total number of units from 41 to 50 units. And lastly there are 2, 3 and 4 examinees having the total number of units from 10-20, 71-80, and 51-60. Since the dependent variable is dichotomous, and independent variable is also a qualitative data, then the statistical tool that we used to analyze and determine if there is a significant relationship between board examination performance and total units in Mathematics, GPA in Mathematics, and Level of mathematics taken in university level is the logistic regression analysis. Table 5 Dependent variable Board Examination Performance Independent variable Total units Mathematics GPA in Mathematics Pvalue in 0.328 0.007 Decision Conclusion Odds ratio 1.220 1.749 0.058 1.268
Failed to Not Significant reject H 0 Significant Reject H

0
Level of Mathematics 0.024 taken (University) Total units in 0.285 College/Advanced Algebra
Reject H 0
Significant
Failed to Not Significant reject H 0
79
Note: independent variable is significant to the dependent variable when the p-value is less than or equal to 0.05 level of significance. Discussion: The independent variables that have a significant relationship to the dependent variable are the GPA in Mathematics and the level in Mathematics (University) because of its probability values less than the specified level of significance which is 0.05. This means that, if the students who have good foundation or good grade in Mathematics subject, they are more likely to pass the board examination. Using the odds ratio result, with the odds value equal to 1.749, this imply that the odds of the respondents who got higher grade point average in mathematics subjects is more likely to pass than he fail the board examination result. Or in other words, 74.9% of the students are more likely to pass than he/she fails the board examination, when he/she have good grades in mathematics subject. The second independent variable that has a significant relationship of the board examination result is the Level of mathematics (University). The odds of the students who took the mathematics in university level is less likely to pass than he/she fail the board examination. The reason for this result is due to the content of the subject under in the university level. Since the board examination does not require higher knowledge in mathematics and it needs only the basic skills and analytical skills in solving word problems. The total units in mathematics do not significantly affect the performance of the board examination result. This means that even if the students have numerous number of units in mathematics, it does not assure that he/she pass the board examination.
(SGD) CHETO A. BAJE Statistician (SGD) JOB H. DOMINGO Coordinator, CSU MSCC
80
Appendix 5 CURRICULUM VITAE
I. Personal Information Name: Date of Birth: Place of Birth: Civil Status: Address: Fathers Name: Mothers Name: II. Educational Qualification A. Tertiary Caraga State University Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics 2010-Present Abear, Marjun Carreon April 14, 1993 Simata, Molave, Zamboanga del Sur Single P13 San Mateo, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte Macario Albos Abear Norma Carillo Carreon-Abear
B. Secondary Tungao National High School Tungao, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte 2006-2010
C. Elementary Bagong Silang Integrated School San Mateo, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte 2000-2006
81
CURRICULUM VITAE
I. Personal Information Name: Date of Birth: Place of Birth: Civil Status: Address: Fathers Name: Mothers Name: Siega, Marvin Hatague November 03, 1992 EROM Hospital, Butuan City Single P-8 San Isidro, Las Nieves, Agusan del Norte Marcial Lim Siega Elvira Hatague Siega
II. Educational Qualification A. Tertiary Caraga State University Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics 2010-Present
B. Secondary Las Nieves National High School Poblacion, Las Nieves, Agusan del Norte 2006 - 2010
C. Elementary Las Nieves Central Elementary School Poblacion, Las Nieves, Agusan del Norte 2000 - 2006

Mathematical Foundations

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Mathematical Foundations

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS AS PREDICTORS TO THE BOARD EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE AMONG SELECTED PROGRAMS IN CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY

Abear, Marjun C. Siega, Marvin H.

Above all, To the almighty Father in heaven.

Jun & Vin

Marjun C. Abear Marvin H. Siega

Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Mathematics

Adviser Host Institution

Rosie C. Lopez-Conde Caraga State University Ampayon, Butuan City

Results and Interpretation of the data Curriculum vitae Certificate of Compliance

Board Examination Performance across the years in terms of Program

Figure1. The Research Paradigm

Chapter 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

AMPAYON NATIONAL HIGH WAY

CSU MAIN GATE

CSU GUARD HOUSE

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND NATURAL RESOURCES

COLLEGE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION T O A D M I N B L D G .

Figure 2. The map of the research locale

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

For the result of board examination Failed Passed 1 0

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

Female Male Total

53% 47% 100%

Figure 4: Graphical Presentation of the degree program

Figure 6: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundations in terms of School level Mathematics

Figure 8: Graphical presentation of Mathematical Foundations in terms of GPA in Mathematics

Percentage 4% 28% 32% 21% 9% 0% 6% 100%

Programs BS A.E BS E.C.E

Percentage 29% 50%

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

had been taken.

Electronic Sources Anderson, A. 2011 retrieved on January 24,2013http://ncm.gu.se/media/ncm/forskning/a_andersson_avhandling

Cady, B.2013 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.nae.edu/casee.

Davis, R. 1984 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=CbJ_uxtS6rAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=educatio n+approach+in+math&hl=en#v=onepage&q=education%20approach%20in%20math&f= false.

Dream Catchers Group 2009 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Academy-Educational-LeadershipJournal/219062371.html

Katz, V. 2012 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.gateway-algebra-tech-future(3)

Mr. Fry retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.state.nj.us/education/frameworks/math/math15

Olsen, C. 2004 retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/yes/4297_MODULE_05

University of Cincinnati retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.google.com.ph/search?q=FACTORS+OF+THE+SUCCESS+OF+ENGINEE RING+GRADUATES+IN+MATH&hl=en-PH&gbv=2&gs_l=heirloom.

University of Cincinnati retrieved on January 24, 2013 http://www.uc.edu/DegreePrograms/Program.aspx?program=20BSCHE-CHE

Walk, K.1998 retrieved on January24,2013 http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CompAnalysis.html

(SGD) MARVIN H. SIEGA Researcher

(SGD)NATIVIDAD R. MAMAOAG, ED. D

Approved: (SGD) LUISITO I. TABADA, Ph. D.

(SGD) MARVIN H. SIEGA Researcher

NATIVIDAD R. MAMAOAG, ED. D

(SGD) MARVIN H. SIEGA Researcher

(SGD) ALEXANDER T. DEMITILLO, MSECE

(SGD) MARVIN H. SIEGA Researcher

(SGD) TOMAS M. AUSTRAL, Ph. D.

(SGD) MARVIN H. SIEGA Researcher

(SGD) MERINESSA D. GONZAGA Registrar III

Appendix 2 Survey Instrument for the Graduates

( ) School level mathematics

( ) University level mathematics

5. What is the result of your board examination? ( ) Passed ( ) Failed

Year 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total

size of each school year 2 2 11 19 23 57

size of each school year 17 2 2 5 19 8 3 10 66

St udied Not St udied Total

Total Units in Mathematics

Failed to Not Significant reject H 0 Significant Reject H

Failed to Not Significant reject H 0

Appendix 5 CURRICULUM VITAE