Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 173

LEVEL OF STRESS AND ITS PREDICTORS

AMONG BSED FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS

IN SAMAR COLLEGE

_____________________

A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of the College of Eduactaion
Samar College
Catbalogan City

______________________

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN SECONDARY EDUACATION

(Biological Sciences)

_______________________
LEOVA B. DASMARIAS
JANESSA A.FRANCISCO
NACIELYN A. LABRO
HERSSON LLANERA
JESTONY L. MATILLA

March 2017
Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

Stress is a non-specific response of the body to any


demands made upon it. In otehr words, as demands are made on
Statement of the Problem

This study will determine the level of stress

experienced and identified the factors that are sgnificantly

related to the level of academic stress of BSED Fourth Year

students of Samar College during the School Year 2016-2017.

Specifically, this study sought to answer the

following questions:

1. What is the profile of the student-respondents

in terms of the following variates:

1.1 age and sex;

1.2 civil status;

1.3 family size;

1.4 average monthly family income;

1.5 physical health; and

1.6 attitudes towards studies?

2. What is the level of stress experienced by the

Fourth Year BSED students in Samar College?


3. Is there a significant relationship between the

level of academic stress experienced by the student-

respondents and their personal variates?


4. What are the sources of pressure that the student-

respondents face in their studies?


5. Is there a significant relationship between the

student-respondents sources of pressure and their

personal variates?
6. What implications may be derived from the results

of this study?

Hypotheses

Based on the aforecited specific questions, the

following hypotheses were drawn and tested:

1. There is no significant difference between the

level of academic stress experienced by the student-

respondents and their personal variates.


2. There is no significant relationship between the

student-respondents sources of pressure and their

personal variates

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on the following theories and

philosophy: (1) Richard Lazaruss Theory of Stress Appraisal

; (2) Hans Selyes Theory of General Adaptation Syndrome;

and (3) Cox and Mackays Model of Stress.

Richard Lazaruss Theory of Stress has a great bearing

in this study because it centers on the mental process

which is influenced by stressors.

According to Richard Lazarus, stress is a two-way

process; it involves the production of stressors by the


environment and the response of an individual subjected to

these stressors.

Since external forces continually act on the individual, and

internal forces continuously interact with them, continuous

changes in the behavior of the individual occur, Lewin

added. Moreover, external forces continuously produce

tensions of different degrees on intensity in the

individual. These tensions serve as motivating forces for

the individual to make adjustments to his environment.

Another theory that strengthened this study is the

Glassers Reality Theory (http://educ-reality.com/behaviour-

management-theories/,November 20, 2014). This theorys basis

is on the need of students to

maintain their self-worth in order to continue with their

improvement in behavior, and therefore, academic

achievement. The foundation of the Reality Theory is the

idea that regardless of what has happened in our lives, we

are able to choose more appropriate behaviors that will help

us meet our needs more effectively in the future.

11

Deweys pragmatism philosophy also reinforced the

anchorage of this study. Dewey is probably most famous for

his role in what is called progressive

education. Progressive education is essentially a view of


education that emphasizes the need to learn by doing. Dewey

believed that human beings learn through a 'hands on'

approach. This places Dewey in the educational philosophy

of pragmatism (http://study.com/academy/lesson/john-dewey-

on-education-impacttheory.html October 12, 2014).

Pragmatists believe that reality must be experienced.

From Dewey's educational point of view, this means that

students must interact with their environment in order to

adapt and learn. Dewey felt that the same idea was true for

teachers and that teachers and students must learn together.

His view of the classroom was deeply rooted in democratic

ideals, which promoted equal voice among all participants in

the learning experience.

Deweys philosophy tends to veer toward democratic

style of classroom management.

Finally, Gardners Theory on Multiple Intelligences

also strengthened the anchorage of this study. Gardner of

Harvard has identified seven distinct intelligences. This

theory has emerged from recent cognitive research and

documents the extent to which students possess different

12

kinds of minds and therefore learn, remember, perform, and

understand in different ways

(http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html, October 12,

2014).
According to this theory, all are able to know the

world through language, logical-mathematical analysis,

spatial representation, musical thinking, the use of the

body to solve problems or to make things, an understanding

of other individuals, and an understanding of ourselves.

Where individuals differ is in the strength of these

intelligences the so-called profile of intelligences -and

in the ways in which such intelligences are invoked and

combined to carry out different tasks, solve diverse

problems, and progress in various domains.

Gardner says that these differences "challenge an

educational system that assumes that everyone can learn the

same materials in the same way and that a uniform, universal

measure suffices to test student learning. He

argues that a contrasting set of assumptions is more likely

to be educationally effective. Students learn in ways that

are identifiably distinctive. The broad spectrum of students

and perhaps the society as a whole- would be better served

if disciplines could be presented in a number of ways and

learning could be assessed through a

13

variety of means(http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html,

October 12, 2014).


Gardners theory reinforced that dealing with the

pupils requires an assortment of classroom management styles

that would suit individual differences.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 presents the conceptual framework of the

study.

The base of the figure serves to represent the research

environment which includes the BSED Fourth Year students of

Samar College, Catbalogan City, Samar for School Year 2016-

2017.

The different arrows guided the researcher in the

conduct of this study. At the top above the base arrow is

the biggest box which contains two (2) major frames. The

left major frame contains the student-respondents age

and sex, civil status, family size, average monthly

familyincome, physical health,and attitude towards studies.

These were correlated with the perceived level of stress and

its predictors to determine if significant relationships

existed for the School Year 2016-2017.

IMPROVED STUDENTS PERFORMANCE


FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

STUDENT-
RESPONDENTS LEVEL OF STRESS AND
PROFILE ITS PREDICTORS AMONG
F
F Age and Sex BSED FOURTH YEAR E
E Civil Status STUDENTS IN SAMAR E
E Family Size D
D Average Monthly COLLEGE B
B FamilyIncome A
A Physical Health C
C Attitude Towards K
K Studies School Year

2016-2017

BSED FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS

SAMAR COLLEGE, CATBALOGAN CITY, SAMAR

Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework of the Study


The findings of this study had drawn implications that

provided feedback mechanism to the research environment of

this study and was hoped to contribute to the ultimate goal

of this study which is improved academic performance of the

BSED Fourth Year students. Consequently, the concerned

student-respondents would perform much better in academic-

related activities.

Significance of the Study

The findings and results of this study gave significant

inputs to help identify the level of stress and its

predictors that impedes the academic performance.

Specifically, it will be hoped that this study would

provide valuable benefits to the following educational

stakeholders: BSED fourth year students, teachers, school

administrators, parents, community, and future researchers.

To the Students. The findings of this study would

enable the students to apply the varied and appropriate

academic performance.

To the School Administrators. Awareness of the

classroom management styles of their teachers would

help the administrators plan mechanisms: strategies and

techniques to improve the appropriate styles that their

teachers should embrace.

17
To the Pupils. The pupils are the direct beneficiaries

of this study. This is due to the fact that the necessary

adoption of appropriate classroom management styles by

their teachers would improve the educative process; hence,

better academic performance.

To the Department of Education (DepEd) Officials . The

DepEd officials are hoped to benefit from this study in

crafting policies that would improve the classroom

management styles of teachers; hence, better academic

performance of students.

To the Parents. The parents could also benefit from

this study because the research results would help them

understand the importance of partnering with teachers to

improve the academic performance of their children.

To the Community. Indirectly, the community would

benefit from this study. Improved performance of the pupils

as a consequence of improved teaching classroom management

would produce future citizens who would be productive and

even role models of the community.

To the Future Researchers. The findings of this study

would be of great importance to the future researchers who

woul embark on similar or parallel study. This may also

serve as a related material for them.

18
Scope and Delimitation

This study will focus on determining the level of

stress experienced by the BSED Fourth Year students in Samar

College and identify which among the characteristics of

these students affect their stress level. In terms of its

place delimitation, this investigation was limited to the

BSED Fourth Year students in Samar College, Catbalogan City,

Samar.

The study was conducted during SY 2016-2017.

19

Definition of Terms

The following terms used in this study are hereunder

defined conceptually and operationally for a common frame

of reference.

Attitude toward Studies. Attitude means a state of

mental awareness which may influence the individuals

behavior. It is a settled manner of acting because of

habitual feeling or opinion. In this study, this refers to

the student-respondents overall disposition or behavior in

relation to his/her academic work as a student.

Behavior. This applies to our mode ofacting or to all

type of responses made by the individual, especially those


that can be observed. It may include physical action,

physiological and emotional processes.

Administrator.

Average Monthly Family Income.

Authoritarian.

Authoritative.

Civil Status.

Classroom Management.

Classroom Management Style.

Democratic.

Educational Qualification. This means the required

training or instruction fitting a person for particular

appointment (Webster, 1997:298).

Influence. This means the effect of something on a

person, thing, or event (Microsoft Encarta 2009. 1993-

2008 Microsoft Corporation). As used in this study, it

refers to the effect of the four classroom management styles

such as authoritarian, authoritative, democratic and

laissez-faire on the pupils academic performance.

In-service Training. It refers to the activity intended

to boost administrators and teachers professional

qualities conducted after their pre-service

22
education and, in most cases, offered during teachers and

administrators consignment or term of tenure as mentors and

as administrators, respectively (Lardizabal, 1995:10).

Laissez-faire. The laissez-faire teacher is not very

involved in the classroom. This teacher places few demands,

if any, on the students and appears generally uninterested.

The laissez-faire teacher just doesn't want to impose on the

students

(hhttp://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle

pdf,November 10, 2014).

Perception. It is the mental grasp of objects,

qualities, etc. by means of the senses, awareness, and

comprehension (Webster Dictionary, 1978:1054). In this

study, it refers to the awareness of the respondents as

regards to the classroom management styles whether

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic or laissez-faire.

Pupil. It refers to the young student taught at school

or by a private teacher (Microsoft Encarta 2009.

1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation, June 6, 2015).

Operationally, it refers to the group of learners whose

academic performance were subjected to documentary analysis

by the researcher. They were the elementary grade schoolers

of the eleven elementary schools of Biri District, Northern

Samar Division.

23
Teacher. It refers to the act of teaching or the person

who teaches (The New Lexicon Websters Encyclopedic

Dictionary, 1997:1015). In this study, it refers to the

group of elementary school teachers who was surveyed by

the researcher. This group comes from the Biri District,

Northern Samar Division.

Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the review of related literature

and studies which greatly helped the researcher enrich this

study. These materials were carefully perused and the

excerpts were hereby presented to strengthen this study.

These readings were taken from the works of various

authorities and researchers and other authoritative sources.

Related Literature

The following set of literature was reviewed by the

researcher in order to strengthen the anchorage of this

study. These materials were found to be related to the study

at hand.

A perusal of the Philippine educational system would

show that education serves as focus of emphases or

priorities of the leadership at certain periods or epochs in

our national struggle as a race (Bilbao, et al., 2006:144).

This idea of Bilbao, et al., indeed, supports the

truism that education, as a prime concern of the government,

considers it as its topmost priority as stated in the

organic law of the land under Article XIV, Section 5,

paragraph 5 of the aforecited constitution states that

25

The State shall assign the highest budgetary priority to

education and ensure that teaching will attract and retain


its rightful share of the best available talents through

adequate remuneration and other means of job satisfaction

and fulfillment

http://www.lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html, November 26,

2014).

Authorities agree that education may mean any or all of

the following definitions: (1) the act or process of

acquiring knowledge, especially systematically during

childhood and adolescence;(2) the knowledge or training

acquired by this process;(3) the act or process of imparting

knowledge, especially at a school, college, or university;

(4) the theory of teaching and learning; (5) a particular

kind of instruction or training; (6) implies a discipline

and development by means of study and learning; and (7)

it is the development of the abilities of the mind

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/education,October

23, 2014).

Along this line, education, therefore, must be pursued

in the spirit of quality and excellence so that the

gargantuan budget put into it will serve this purpose.

The Education Act of 1982, which articulates the

constitutional mandate on quality education, in a

26

declaration of basic policy (Gellor, 1984:33) states that:

a) It is the policy of the State to establish and maintain a


complete, adequate and integrated system of education

relevant to the goals of national development; b) The State

shall promote the right of every individual to relevant

quality education, regardless of sex, age, creed, socio-

economic status, physical and mental conditions, racial or

ethnic origin, political or other affiliation. The State

shall, therefore, promote and maintain equality of access to

education as well as the enjoyment of the benefits of

education by its citizens; and c) The State recognizes that

formal education of the school system, is societys primary

learning system of the countrys educational goals and

objectives.

Morphet (1967:6) said that every society and nation has

been and will continue to be confronted within the same

basic problem: How can its members, especially the children

and the youth, best learn what they must know and what they

should do to survive and continue the preservation and

improvement of the group to which they belong? This

necessitates for undertaking measures to achieve quality

education.

Quality education implies an upgrading of educational

standards - a process that refers to the attainment of

27

excellence in education as well as in life. There are

elements to be considered in achieving quality education: 1)


curriculum content and materials, 2) instructional

strategies and aids, 3) evaluation, 4) teacher quality and

5) physical facilities. Evaluation is also important in

quality education that is why pupil performance needs to

be evaluated as basis for improving instruction (Sutaria,

1984:20).

Salandanan (2007:79) emphasized that classroom climate

is a function of the learners attitudes and perceptions.

This means that students are likely to form a mental climate

that is conducive to learning. Moreover, attitude and

perceptions greatly affect the learners mental climate that

could either hinder or facilitate their learning. She

further said that teacher quality is a major element in

achieving quality education.

There are several factors that affect the delivery of

mastery learning toward quality education but the teachers,

of course, are the most vital. It follows the general dictum

that the quality of education cannot rise above the quality

of teachers (Cortes, 1994:195).

As a quality teacher in delivering quality teaching

toward quality education, Bilbao, et al. (2006:58)

28

asserted that classroom management is an integral part

of the teaching process. It suggests at providing a


classroom environment that is conducive to learning such as

appropriate time scheduling for various activities and an

orderly placement of furnitures and instructional materials.

A clean and well-lighted area, together with a comfortable

seating arrangement, make the classroom an inviting place

for promoting interaction and a much welcomed feeling of

togetherness.

The aforecited authors emphasize that teachers play

various roles in a typical classroom, but surely one of the

most important is that of being a classroom manager.

Effective teaching and learning cannot take place in a

poorly managed classroom. If students are disorderly and

disrespectful, and no apparent rules and procedures guide

behavior, chaos becomes the norm. In these situations, both

teachers and students suffer. Teachers struggle to teach,

and students most likely learn much less than they should.

In contrast, well-managed classrooms provide an environment

in which teaching and learning can flourish. But a well-

managed classroom doesn't just appear out of nowhere. It

takes a good deal of effort to createand the person who is

most responsible for creating it is the teacher.

According to Castillon-Boiser ( 2003:4-5), effective

29

teachers are expected to do well in the area of classroom

management. Here, the teacher develops good managerial


techniques. They make students know what to expect; they

need students to know what to do if they need help; they

impose rules and follow through with reminders and rewards;

and they dont respond to discipline problems emotionally.

Bilbao, et al. (2006:67) further stressed that

discipline constitutes the next important concern of

teachers as part of classroom management. Discipline is

controlled behavior. No matter how well-managed a learning

environment is, students will occasionally misbehave.

Teachers must be ready to deal with them with utmost care

and consideration.

Basically, when a supervisor initially walks into a

classroom, he/she does not assess its effectiveness based on

the students grades, writing skills, or state test scores

(https://blog.udemy.com/effective-classroom-management-2/,

November 20, 2014). Instead, he/she looks to see how

effective the classroom management is. Such as how well the

students conduct themselves, how well they can work

collaboratively with each other, and how effective the

teachers discipline is on them. All of these factors are a

result of effective classroom management, and every great

teacher will tell you that you must first learn how to

30
maintain classroom discipline before honing in on students

academic goals and needs. After all, how can you

effectively teach and learn in an ineffective environment?

Additionally, classroom management is important because

of the following reasons (https://blog.udemy.com/effective-

classroom-management-2/, November 20, 2014):

Firstly, it engages students. This means that students

who are engaged in lessons and the learning material will be

able to register the information better and be able to apply

their knowledge when it comes to test taking.


Secondly, it keeps students prepared. When teachers

and students are prepared to learn, lessons and learning

will be easier to be administered and the results will be

more effective.
Finally, it boosts confidence. In an effective

classroom, teachers are able to give more attention to each

student and structure lesson plans to meet certain needs.

All of these factors will help in boosting the

confidence of students.

Lardizabal (1991:69) suggested that learning becomes

interesting and enjoyable under a helpful working condition

so much so that managing a classroom necessitates foresight

and planning.

31

The author opined that classroom management includes

operation and control of activities involving even the


smallest of elements as seating arrangement and utilization

of instructional materials. The creation of a favorable

condition in the classroom is difficult to attain if

attention is not likewise directed to details such as the

ones mentioned. Those and classroom courtesies, discipline,

attendance, and even the classroom teacher himself make up

the system.

It is suggested that success of the teaching activities

in the classroom depends largely on the skill of the teacher

in managing such activity.

The above-cited idea of Lardizabal is corroborated by

Zulueta (1991:65) who asserted that regardless of a

teachers potential little learning will take place in the

classroom if he is unable to manage his students. This

assertion was attested by Weinstein and Mignano, Jr.

(2003:174) in saying that classroom management is the single

greatest influence on student learning.

In this regard, Weinstein and Mignano, Jr.(2003:174)

asserted that the promotion of learning is the fundamental

purpose of classroom management. It is not about attaining

order for its own end but achieving order so that learning

can happen.

32

The authors assumed that for a teacher to be truly

effective, he must be ready to direct the classroom behavior


of students aiming for an environment in which they behave

properly not out of fear of punishment but out of a sense of

personal duty.

This will happen most likely if the teacher views

classroom management as a process of guiding and structuring

events while downplaying his disciplinary role. The emphasis

is on averting misbehavior rather than on coping with it.

Singh and Padilla (1990:87) listed five major concerns

in classroom management, to wit: (1) individual concern

which means using time effectively so that individual help

can be provided for all students. It connotes directing

ones attention to individual characteristics; (2)

harnessing self-direction which means helping students

become responsible to form their own behavior in the

completion and performance of assignments; (3) encouragement

which means stimulating students interest and curiosity to

learn. Motivation process should be employed; (4)reaching

out to students which means helping students to cooperate

in changing negative attitude to positive classroom

behavior; and (5) disciplining students behavior. Teachers

who cannot attain the standard behavior

33

of students inside the classroom cannot become effective.


Singh and Padilla stressed that a teacher should

possess the qualities of controlling students in a positive

and consistent way.

It is for this reason that Tauber (1999:154), urged

teachers to read more often books and articles on classroom

management as part of their professional development in

order to enhance their effectiveness through increased

knowledge and skills. He further commented that No

classroom management technique will be effective for as long

as effective teaching is absent.

Tauber explained that classroom management models, and

their accompanying strategies are not substitutes for good

teaching. He regarded effective teaching as a preventive

discipline measure that really keeps students actively

participating and wanting to learn more that they are not

likely to create problems.

Undeniably, effective, stimulating, and interesting

teaching can help prevent discipline problems in the

classroom.

Teachers have different attitudes towards how they

handle a classroom. While differing personalities have a

definite impact on how classrooms are run, these are not the

only factors. Teachers adopt certain classroom

34
management styles that may display much about both their

personality and their personal beliefs on how students

should be taught. Classroom management is consistently

identified as an essential component of effective teaching.

Knowing the difference in classroom management styles is

crucial in finding what works and does not work in the

classroom. Having a specific teaching style, or

incorporating a mix of styles and pulling from what you deem

best from each, only benefits the student and makes your job

that much easier. But before you decide on what works for

you, and what you want to avoid altogether, it is integral

to know the differing classroom management styles

(http://edglossary.org/classroom-management/, November 25,

2014).

The following items are the different classroom

management styles

(http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p

df, November 15, 2014):

Authoritarian. The authoritarian teacher places firm

limits and controls on the students. Students will often

have assigned seats for the entire term. The desks are
usually seats for the entire term. The desks are usually in

straight rows and there are no deviations. Students must be

in their seats at the beginning of class and they


35
frequently remain there throughout the period. This teacher

rarely gives hall passes or recognizes excused absences.


Often, it is quiet. Students know they should not

interrupt the teacher. Since verbal exchange and discussion

are discouraged, the authoritarian's students do not have

the opportunity to learn and/or practice communication

skills.

This teacher prefers vigorous discipline and expects

swift obedience. Failure to obey the teacher usually results

in detention or a trip to the principal's office. In this

classroom, students need to follow directions and not ask

why (http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html

3, November 15, 2014).

At the extreme, the authoritarian teacher gives no

indication that he/she cares for the students. His students

receive praise and encouragement infrequently, if at all.

Also, he makes no effort to organize activities such as

field trips. He feels that these special events only

distract the students from learning. After all, he believes

that students need only to listen to his lecture to gain

the necessary knowledge.

Students in this class are likely to be reluctant to

initiate activity, since they may feel powerless. He tells

36

the students what to do and when to do it. He makes all

classroom decisions. Therefore, his style does little to


increase achievement motivation or encourage the setting of

personal goals.

Authoritative. The authoritative teacher places limits

and controls on the students but simultaneously encourages

independence. This teacher often explains the reasons behind

the rules and decisions. If a student is disruptive, the

teacher offers a polite, but firm, reprimand. This teacher

sometimes metes out discipline, but only after careful

consideration of the circumstances.

The authoritative teacher is also open to considerable

verbal interaction, including critical debates. The students

know that they can interrupt the teacher if they have a

relevant question or comment. This environment offers

the students the opportunity to learn and practice

communication skills.

The teacher exhibits a warm and nurturing attitude

toward the students and expresses genuine interest and

affection. His classroom abounds with praise and

encouragement. He often writes comments on homework and

offers positive remarks to students. This authoritative

teacher encourages self-reliant and socially competent

behavior and fosters higher achievement motivation. Often,

37

he will guide the students through a project, rather than

lead them
(http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html 4,

November 15, 2014).

Democratic. The democratic teacher places few demand or

controls on the students. "Do your own thing, describes

this classroom. This teacher accepts the student's impulses

and actions and is less likely to monitor their behavior. He

uses a democratic style. He strives to not hurt the

student's feelings and has difficulty saying no to a student

or enforcing rules. If a student disrupts the class, he may

assume that he is not giving that student enough attention.

When a student interrupts a lecture, the teacher accepts the

interruption with the belief that the


student must surely have something valuable to add. When he

does offer discipline, it is likely to be inconsistent.

The democratic teacher is very involved with his

students and cares for them very much. He is more concerned

with the students' emotional well-being than he is with

classroom control. He sometimes bases classroom decisions

on his students feelings rather than on their academic

concerns.

The teacher wants to be the students' friend. He may

even encourage contact outside the classroom. He has a

38

difficult time establishing boundaries between his

professional life and his personal life. However, this

overindulgent style is associated with students lack of


social competence and self-control. It is difficult for

students to learn socially acceptable behavior when the

teacher is so permissive. With few demands placed upon them,

these students frequently have lower motivation to achieve.

Regardless, students often like this teacher.

Laissez-faire. The laissez-faire teacher is not very

involved in the classroom. This teacher places few demands,

if any, on the students and appears generally uninterested.

Furthermore, the laissez-faire teacher just does not want

to impose on the students. As such, he often feels that

class preparation is not worth the effort. Things like field

trips and special projects are out of the question. This

teacher simply will not take the necessary preparation time.

Sometimes, he will use the same materials, year after year.

Also, classroom discipline is lacking.


This teacher may lack the skills, confidence, or

courage to discipline students. The students sense and

reflect the teacher's laissez-faire attitude. Accordingly,

very little learning occurs. Everyone is just "going through

the motions" and killing time. In this aloof environment,

the students have very few opportunities to


39
observe or practice communication skills. With few demands

placed on them and very little discipline, students have low

achievement motivation and lack self-control

(http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html 5,

November 15, 2014).


All of the abovecited literature provided the

researcher important inputs in strengthening the concepts

and processes of this study.

Related Studies

The following items are some of the related studies

which were thoroughly reviewed by the researcher that were

found to be relevant to this study. Similarities to this

study are hereby presented.

In the study of Reballos-Gabon (2013) who conducted a

study on Teaching Effectiveness of Secondary School

Teachers of Wright National School: Basis for an

Intervention Scheme, among the findings relevant to this

study include: 1) The three groups of respondents arrived

at the same consensus. They assessed the secondary school

teachers as highly effective along classroom

management; 2) The three groups of adjectival rating

assessment on the teaching effectiveness of the secondary

school teachers along teaching strategies. They considered

them highly effective; 3) Of the profile

40

variates of the secondary school teachers, educational

qualification and attitude towards teaching posed

significant influence to their teaching effectiveness while

the other variates did not significantly influence it; and

4) Of the profile variates of the school administrators,


only the strategies in monitoring classes posed significant

influence to the teaching effectiveness of the secondary

school teachers.

The study of Reballos-Gabon bears similarity with this

study because they both deal on the area of effective

teaching, hence, effective learning on the part of the

learners. However, they greatly differ in terms of locale

of the study, responding learners, and the variables on

teaching strategies and management.

Maghanoys (2008) study entitled Learning Styles of

Secondary Students as Correlates to Their Capacity Level

has also bearing to this study. One of her conclusions was

that The strong learning styles of the respondents lies on

the visual and tactile teaching-learning situation. This

simply means that in this particular study, the students

learn more if the teaching-learning process is done with the

appropriate instructional materials with concrete and

tangible examples.

41

The similarity between Maghanoys study and this study

lies on the aspect of learning styles of the students which

the teachers must look into vis-a-vis his classroom

management style which is the major aspect of this current

study.
In another study conducted by Laboc (2008) entitled,

Classroom Learning Environment and Attitude Towards Reading

English Language of Grade VI Pupils, she found out that: 1)

The overall impression of the pupil-respondents regarding

their classroom learning environment in English classses was

slightly felt. Meaning, they only slightly experienced

those factors conducive to learning; 2) There was an

inverse, negligible, and insignificant association

with regard to classroom learning environment and age,

fathers educational background, mothers educational

background, and size of the family; and 3) Classroom

learning environment showed a direct or positive,

negligible, significant association towards sex and average

monthly family income.

Both Labocs study and the study at hand are similar in

terms of pupil-respondents except the locale because the

former was conducted in Wright District while the latter was

conducted in Biri District. Furthermore, both deal on the

area of learning environment. However, this study is

42

more specific on classroom management styles of the teacher-

respondents.

In his study with the title, Scholastic Performance of

Grade Six Pupils in Science Among Private and Public Schools

in Catbalogan, Perez (2005) concluded, among other things,


that: 1) The pupils scholastic performance was average or

satisfactory; 2) Pupil-related, teacher-related and

administrator-related factors affected or influenced the

pupils scholastic performance in science; 3) Among the

pupil-related factors, reading comprehension and language

facility, surfaced to have greater influence on the pupils

scholastic performance; and 4) the following problems were

commonly perceived by the respondents: (a) lack of knowledge

on the use of the apparatuses and equipment; (b) inadequacy

of pupils activities; and (c) teachers personality and

attitude.

Perez study is similar with the current study on the

area of pupils scholastic or academic performance as

affected by certain factors or variates specifically those

of the personality of the teachers and attitude which are

major contributory factors on how they manage the classroom

activities.

They differ on the aspects of locale of the study,

group of pupil-respondents and factors that have bearing

43

on the academic performance of the pupils. The former

having Catbalogan as its locale while the latter had Biri

District and the factors on classroom management styles for

the latter and personality and attitude for the former.


Perez study was limited only to Grade VI pupils while this

study covered all elementary grade levels.

Enderio (2004), in her thesis Performance of Grade III

Pupils in Mathematics: Basis for an Enhancement Program,

concluded that: 1) The higher the magnitude of interest of

pupils in Math, the higher the achievement obtained by the

pupils in Mathematics; 2) The achievement of the pupils were

essentially the same irregardless of the sex of their

teachers; 3) The achievement of the pupils in Math was

significantly influenced by the educational attainment of

their teachers; 4) The achievement of the pupils was

significantly influenced by the teachers teaching

experience; 5) The achievement of the pupils in Math was

significantly influenced by the educational attainment of

their teachers; and 6) The achievement of the pupils in Math

was not significantly influenced by their teachers in-

service trainings attended.

This study is similar with that of Enderios since both

deal on the academic achievement of the pupils. However,

Enderios study dealt more on the association

44

between the teacher-respondents personal variates

and pupils performance while this study dealt more on

the correlations among the teacher-respondents classroom


management styles with that of the pupils academic

performance.

Tan-Payos (2004) research entitled: Filipino

Management Styles of Secondary School Administrators and

Teachers Performance: The Northern Samar Experience, has

also a bearing on this study.

In her study, she found out that: 1) There was a

variation of the perceptions of the secondary school

administrators and secondary school teachers relative to

the extent of Filipino management styles employed by the

former; 2) The Filipino management style employed by the

secondary school administrators in the implementation of the

policies greatly influenced the performance of the secondary

school teachers; and 3) The exercise of the Filipino

management styles was dependent also upon the personal

characteristics of the administrators.

Both Tan-Payos and the current study are similar on

the aspect of correlating management styles with

performance in the teaching-learning process. However, the

former was more on the management styles of the

administrators vis-a-vis teachers performance while the

45

latter is on the correlation among the classroom management

styles of the teachers with the achievement of the pupils.

In the published thesis of Keohan (2013) (


http://educ-reality.com/behaviour-management-

theories/,November 20, 2014) entitled, The Effect of

Teacher-Identified Classroom Management, he found out that:

1) Classroom management should never be thought of as one

size fits all; the individuality of every student

necessitates the need to adapt, modify, or omit activities,

homework, course content, seating, and assessments, which

all heavily play into classroom management; 2) Classroom

rules, routines, policies, and consequences should be well

thought out and

part of a unified school-wide plan put in place the first

day of school; 3) Lesson planning that focuses on academic

learning and practicing skills while at the same time

teaching social skills and sustaining the emotional

wellbeing of students; 4) The teachers with the best

classroom management were experts in their fields (what to

teach), and outstanding in their interactions with students

(how to teach); and 5) Reflection and the sharing of ideas

with peers, counselors, and others resolve problems in

ways not thought of before.

The similarity in the study of Keohan and the current

study lies on the focal point of both studies, i. e., the

46

effect of teachers classroom management. However, Keohans

study treated classroom management more on a wider scope,


while this study centered on the styles of classroom

management. Additionally, the central goal of his thesis

was to provide research-based teaching techniques and

behavior management strategies that can be used by novice

teachers in urban middle schools (Nevada) to improve the

behavior in their classrooms. Furthermore, Keohans study

correlated teachers classroom management with student

behavior while this study is on pupils academic

achievement.

In another published thesis entitled Classroom

Management and Learners Achievement in Secondary Schools in

Kitgum Town Council, Obwoya (2013) revealed that there is

low level of: classroom management in secondary schools in

Kitgum Town Council and teachers ineffectiveness in

planning, employing teaching methodologies, class control

and record management was found to be very high. The finding

further revealed that there is very low level of learners

achievement as characterized by: The low levels of academic

performance in tests and examinations, poor time

management, lack of attention during lesson conductions and

poor class-hygiene management. Finally, the finding revealed

significant positive relationship between

47

classroom management and learners achievement in secondary

schools in Kitgum Town Council.


Obwoyas thesis and this study are similar in that both

deal on classroom management and academic performance of the

learners. They differ in the scope wherein the former

studied the relationship of classroom management in general

while the latter is more specific on classroom management

styles as correlated with the pupils academic achievement.

Finally, in the published study of Florin (2011)

entitled: Kindergarten Teachers' Classroom Management

Beliefs and Practices and Their Implications on Students'

Social and Academic Outcomes, the results revealed that all

educators reported themselves to be authoritative using the

online questionnaire. Furthermore, the case study teachers

also all reported themselves to be authoritative in the

interview and the questionnaire; however, observations

revealed seven teachers to be authoritative, one to be

authoritarian, and one to be negative directive, a newly

created style.

Overall, the teachers understood their classroom

management strategies and where they originated from, and

believed their styles to positively impact both their

students' social and academic skills, regardless of the

48

style they utilized. The classroom management styles did not

show any statistical significance regarding student

outcomes; however, ranking the teachers based on their


students' academic and social skills did reveal

authoritative teachers to have students with higher social

skills but not academic skills.

Florins study is similar with the study at hand

because both deal on classroom management styles of

teachers. They differ in that Florins research associated

management styles with the learners social skills and

academic skills while this study associated management

styles of teachers with the academic achievement of the

learners.

The above-cited studies reviewed were instrumental in

helping the researcher in gaining insights as to the

processes that were involved in this study.

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY
This chapter enumerates, describes and discusses the

procedure used in undertaking this study which includes the

research design, locale of the study, instrumentation,

validation of the instruments, sampling procedure, data

gathering procedure, and statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

This study made use of the descriptive-correlational

research method. This is descriptive in nature because of

the presentation of the personal variates of the teacher-

respondents and those of the administrator-respondents; the

former groups variates include age and sex, civil status,

educational qualification, average monthly family income,

number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years

in teaching. Those of the latter group include the age and

sex, civil status, educational qualification, number of

years as administrators, average monthly family income,

number of family members and number of relevant in-service

trainings attended.

Included also was the presentation of the four (4)

classroom management styles such as authoritarian,

authoritative, democratic and laissez-faire. Moreover,

50

the academic performance of the pupils as shown by their

general average for School Year 2014-2015 was considered.


On the other hand, this research study is correlational

because the profile variates of the teacher-respondents and

their perceived classroom management styles were associated.

Their perceived classroom management styles and the academic

performance of the pupil-respondents were also associated.

The data were organized, tabulated and statistically

presented.

The needed data to answer all the specific questions

were generated as contained in the accomplished survey

questionnares for the teacher-respondents and the

administrator-respondents.

Descriptive and inferential statistical tools were

employed in the analysis of the data. These tools are the

frequency count, percentage, arithmetic mean, standard

deviation, t-test for independent samples, Pearson Product-

Moment Coefficient of Correlation and Fishers t-test.

Locale of the Study

This research was conducted in Biri District of the

Division of Northern Samar as shown in Figure 2.

Currently, the District includes eleven (11) elementary

schools: four (4) complete, monograde and seven

51

(7)complete, combination. These eleven (11) schools have

a total of six (6) administrators, seventy two (72)

teachers and 2,552 pupils.


The 11 schools are composed of four (4) complete,

monograde and seven (7) complete, combined elementary

schools. The school is said to be complete, monograde if it

offers Kindergarten and Grades 1 to VI and each grade level

is handled in each classroom.

On the other hand, the school is said to be complete,

combined if the school caters to Kindergarten and Grades 1

to VI pupils but the Kindergarten, Grade 1 and Grade 2

levels are combined, so with Grade 3 and Grade IV, and Grade

V and Grade VI.

There are only six (6) administrators because some

schools are grouped into three (3) clusters. Each cluster is

headed by only one administrator. The clustered schools are

the elementary schools of: 1) Bagong Silang and Langub-

langub; 2) Basud, Talisay, and Tampipi; and 3) Cawayan,

Macaret, and Salvacion.

The District of Biri is in the municipality of Biri,

province of Northern Samar. It is a group of islands and

islets located in the northernmost tip of the Province,

facing the blue sea of the Pacific Ocean to the east and the

famous San Bernardino Strait to the west.

52
Figure 2. The Map of the Locale of the Study

53

Biri (Biri Municipal Tourism Office Hand-out, 2015) was

once a barrio (barangay) of the municipality of

Bobon established in 1649, and had this barangay, until its

conversion into a new and independent municipality under


Republic Act No. 5500 sponsored by then Congressman Eusebio

B. Moore and passed by the Sixth Congress on June 21, 1969.

Thus, Biri became the 21st municipality and its first

municipal officials were elected in the November 1969

special election.

This island used to be Tingiao, as referred to in

the navigational maps of the Spanish galleons, was the

entry point to Luzon and Visayas. As a navigational

landmark, the name Biri was derived from the Spanish word

barrer meaning to sweep.

It covers a land area of 2,488,485 hectares with a

population of 12,877 as per 2011 Community-Based Monitoring

System (CBMS) Survey held in May 2010. The town has eight

(8) barangays, namely: Poblacion, Sto. Nino, Progress, San

Antonio, Pio del Pilar, MacArthur, Kauswagan, and San Pedro.

Instrumentation

The main instruments used were two sets of survey

questionnaire: one set was for the teacher-

54

respondents and another set for the administrator-

respondents.

The survey questionnaire for the teacher-respondents

had two (2) parts. Part I captured the personal variates

such as: age and sex, civil status, educational


qualification, average monthly family income, number of

relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in

teaching. Part II generated data on their perception

regarding their classroom management styles, to wit:

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire.

Likewise, the survey questionnaire for the

administrator-respondents was composed of two (2) parts.

Part I elicited their personal circumstances such as: age

and sex, civil status, educational qualification, number of

years as administrators, average monthly family income,

number of family members, and number of relevant in-service

trainings attended. Part II gathered data on their

perception as to what classroom management styles their

teachers practiced. These styles are authoritarian,

authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire.

The researcher utilized the School Form 5 (SF 5) as the

primary source of data as regards to the academic

performance of the pupil-respondents. This

55

covered their general average for the School Year 2014-

2015.

The researcher personally fielded and retrieved the

accomplished survey questionnaires to ensure 100 percent

collection of said instruments and verified any dubious or

vague answers by the respondents.


Validation of Instrument

There was no need to validate the questionnaires which

were distributed to the teacher- and administrator-

respondents because the researcher adopted the validated

survey instrument used by Padilla (2006) in his study

Students Achievement in Science and Technology in the

Secondary Education Development Program (SEDP): The Eastern

Visayas Experience. Only the portion that elicited the

personal variates of the teacher-respondents and

administrator-respondents was adopted. These variates were

age and sex, civil status, educational qualification,

average monthly family income, number of relevant in-service

trainings and number of years in teaching for the teacher-

respondents. On the other hand, the adopted administrator-

respondents include the age and sex, civil status,

educational qualification, number of years as school

administrators, average monthly family income, number of

family members and number of relevant in-service

56

trainings attended.

On the other hand, the part of the survey instrument

that generated the classroom management styles data was

adopted from that of Indian University

(http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p

df, November 10, 2014).


Sampling Procedure

The researcher resorted to total enumeration. This

means that all of the elementary school teachers of seventy

two (72) and six (6) administrators were surveyed. In

addition, documentary analysis of the Report on Promotions

(School Form 5) of all the pupils of 2,552 was done.

Table 1 shows the respondents of this study.

Data Gathering Procedure

Strict protocols were observed during the gathering of

data. The researcher first solicited the permission/approval

of the Schools Division Superintendent (SDS) of Northern

Samar Division to field the questionnaires to all of the

elementary school teachers and administrators. Same

approval was sought from said office for the access of the

School Form 5 or the Report on Promotions of the pupils of

all of the eleven elementary schools.

57

Table 1

Respondents of the Study

Number Numbe
School of r Type of School
Teachers of
(N) Pupil
s
(N)
1. Bagong Silang 3 35 Complete,combinatio
Elementary n
School
2. Basud 3 102 Complete,combinatio
Elemementary n
School
3. Biri Central 21 749 Complete, monograde
Elem. School
4. Cawayan 3 79 Complete,combinatio
Elementary n
School
5. Langub-langub 7 268 Complete,monograde
Elementary
School
6. Macaret 4 91 Complete,combinatio
Elementary n
School

7. Palhugan 10 381 Complete,monograde


Elementary
School

8. Salvacion 3 127 Complete,combinatio


Elementary n
School

9. San Antonio 10 437 Complete monograde


Elementary
School

10. Talisay 4 153 Complete,combinatio


Elementary n
School
11. Tampipi 4 130 Complete,combinatio
Elementary n
School
TOTAL 72 2,552 4 complete,monograde
7 complete,
combination

58

The approved fielding of the questionnaires and

accessing of the data on pupils grades served as reference

for further solicitation of permission by the District

Supervisor and then by the school administrators.


As a matter of protocol the researcher found a way to

express her gratitude to all of the approving authorities

and the faculty members.

All of the abovecited activities were personally done

by the researcher. This mechanism ensured the efficient

retrieval of the instruments and that the researcher was

able to validate/probe dubious or incomplete responses.

All of the above-cited undertakings were done from June

2015 to July 2015.

Statistical Treatment of Data

All of the collected data were organized, collated,

tallied, analyzed and interpreted by using the appropriate

descriptive and inferential statistical tools,

namely: frequency count and percentage, arithmetic mean,

weighted mean, standard deviation, t-test for independent

sample means, Pearson Product-Moment Coefficient of

Correlation, and the Fishers t-test.

These statistical tools are hereby described as

follows:

Frequency and Percentage Distribution. These were used

59

to establish the profile of the teacher- and administrator-

respondents in terms of their occurence and magnitude of

occurence for every variate.


Arithmetic Mean. This statistics gave an idea as to the

typical occurence of specific variates in the profile of the

respondents of this study.


Weighted Mean. This was used to describe the extent of

respondents perceptions as to the style of classroom

management employed by the teachers using the five-point

Likert scale (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2003:108) as follows:


Scale Range Interpretation
5 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)
4 3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
3 2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
2 1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1 1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
Standard Deviation. This statistical tool showed as to

the standard difference of each of the categories

as compared with the other categories with reference to the

mean.
Pearson Product-Moment Coefficient of Correlation. It

was the tool used to measure the relationship between the

personal variates of the teacher-respondents and their


perceived style of classroom management and the measurement
60
of the relationship between these perceptions and the

academic performance of the pupil-respondents. This was used

to test hypotheses numbers 2 and 3.

The coefficient value was interpreted as follows

(Calmorin, 1994:256):

Value Interpretation

0.00 to + 0.20 Negligible Correlation

+ 0.21 to + 0.40 Low/Slight Correlation

+ 0.41 to + 0.70 Marked/Moderate


Correlation

+ 0.71 to + 0.90 High Correlation

+ 0.91 to + 0.91 Very High Correlation

+ 1.00 Perfect Correlation

Fishers t-test (Freund and Simon, 1992:468). This tool

used to measure the significance of the computed correlation

coefficient. The decision rule followed as that of the one

cited under the t-test for independent samples.

Finally, in determining the region of acceptance or the

region of rejection of each of the three (3) null

hypotheses, the .05 level of significance () was used.

t-test for Independent Sample Means (Walpole,

1982:306). This was used to compare the two groups

perceptions as regards to the classroom management styles


of the teacher-respondents, such as authoritarian,
61
democratic, authoritative, and laissez-faire. This served as

the basis for accepting or rejecting null hypothesis number

1, with the following decision rule: accept the null

hypothesis if the computed value turned lesser than the

critical value or the p-value turned greater than the and

reject the null hypothesis if the computed value turned

equal or greater than the critical value or the p-value

turned equal or lesser than the .


Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the data gathered with the

corresponding analysis and interpretation. Included in this

chapter are the presentation, analyses and interpretations

of the following: profile of teacher-respondents; profile of

administrator-respondents; classification of classroom

management styles of teacher-respondents based on the

perceptions of the two groups of respondents; comparison of

the classification of the classroom management styles of

teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the two


groups of respondents; relationship between the teacher-

respondents classroom management styles and their personal

variates; academic performance of pupils; relationship

between the academic performance of pupils and classroom

management styles of teachers; and implications derived from

the findings of the study.

Profile of Teacher-Respondents

Tables 2 to 7 present the profile of teacher-

respondents in terms of their age and sex, civil status,

educational qualification, average monthly family income,

number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years

in teaching.

Age and Sex. Table 2 presents the age and sex distri-

63

bution of the teacher-respondents.

It can be gleaned from the table that a number of

teacher-respondents were aged 31 35 years old accounting

for 16 or 22.22 percent while 14 or 19.44 percent of them

were aged 26 30 years old, 10 or 13.90 percent were aged

41 45 years old, eight or 11.11 per cent were aged 21 25

years old, six or 8.33 percent were aged 56 60 years

Table 2

Age and Sex of Teacher-Respondents

Age Sex Total %


Bracket Male Female (f)
61 65 1 1 2 2.78
56 60 0 6 6 8.33
51 55 0 3 3 4.17
46 50 4 2 6 8.33
41 45 3 7 10 13.90
36 40 1 5 6 8.33
31 35 4 12 16 22.22
26 30 4 10 14 19.44
21 25 2 6 8 11.11
Not Stated 0 1 1 1.39
Total 19 53 72 100.00

% 26.39 73.61 100.00

Mean 37.85 years old

S. D. 11.20 years

C. V. 0.30

old, another six or 8.33 percent were aged 46 50

64

years old, still another six or 8.33 pecent were aged 36

40 years old, three or 4.17 percent were aged 51 55 years

old, and two or 2.78 percent were aged 61 65 years old.

One or 1.39 per cent of the teacher-respondents did not

disclose her age.

The mean age of this group of respondents was

calculated at 37.85 years old with a standard deviation (SD)

of 11.20 years and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.30.

The data suggested that the teacher-respondents were on

their late 30s but relatively young and at the prime of

their age.
Furthermore, majority of the teacher-respondents were

female with 53 or 73.61 pecent. The male counterpart was

composed of 19 or 26.39 per cent only.

The data showed that the teacher-respondents were

dominated by the female sex, an indication that in the past,

if not up to the present, majority of those who took up the

teacher education course belonged to this sex and only few

of the males embraced the teaching profession.

Civil Status. Table 3 provides the information

regarding the civil status of the teacher-respondents. From

the table, it can be noted that majority of the teacher-

respondents, that is, 46 or 63.89 per cent were married

while 23 or 31.94 percent were single, and two or 2.78

65

Table 3

Civil Status of Teacher-Respondents

Civil Status f %
Single 23 31.94
Married 46 63.89
Widowed 2 2.78
Not Stated 1 1.39
Total 72 100.00

Percent were widowed. Still, there was one teacher-

respondent or 1.39 percent who failed to disclose his civil

status.
The foregoing data suggested that most of the teacher-

respondents had conjugal family responsibilities which they

raise and maintain by the income they derived from teaching.

Educational Qualification. Table 4 shows the

educational qualification of the teacher-respondents.

Table 4 provides that majority of the teacher-

respondents had baccalaureate degree as the highest

educational qualification, accounting for 45 or 62.50

percent. Nineteen of them or 26.39 percent had obtained

their masters degree and six or 8.33 were in the masters

level. Two or 2.78 percent of the teacher-respondents held

their anonymity as to their educational qualification.

66

The data presented signifies that the teacher-

Table 4

Educational Qualification of Teacher-Respondents

Educational
F %
Qualification
Masters Degree 19 26.39
Masters Level
6 8.33
(including CAR)
Baccalaureate
45 62.50
Degree
Not Stated 2 2.78
Total 72 100.00

respondents were educationally qualified having obtained the

minimum educational requirement required for the teaching


position. Some, however, recognized the value of advance

education that they pursued the masters level or even

obtaining a masters degree.

Average Monthly Family Income. Table 5 discloses the

average monthly family income of the teacher-respondents.

It can be gleaned from Table 5 that a number of the

teacher-respondents, that is, 30 or 41.66 percent had earned

a monthly family income of Php20,000 Php24,999 while 22

or 30.56 percent of them earned Php15,000

Php19,999, five or 6.94 pecent earned Php30,000Php34,999,

four or 5.56 per cent earned Php25,000 to Php29,999,

two or 2.78 percent earned Php35,000Php39,999 and another

67

two or 2.78 percent earned Php10,000Php14,999. Seven of

Table 5

Average Monthly Family Income of Teacher-Respondents

Income Bracket f %
35,000 39,999 2 2.78
30,000 34,999 5 6.94
25,000 29,999 4 5.56
20,000 24,999 30 41.66
15,000 19,999 22 30.56
10,000 14,999 2 2.78
Not Stated 7 9.72
Total 72 100.00

Mean Php 19,895.38

S. D. Php 8,269.52

C. V. 0.42
teacher-respondents or 9.72 percent did not disclose their

monthly family income for anonymity.

The mean monthly family income earned by the teacher-

respondents was pegged at Php19,895.38 with a SD of

Php8,269.52 and a CV of 0.42. The data implied that the

teacher-respondents had a regular family income which they

used to finance the basic and nutritional needs of the

family members.

Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings. Table 6

presents the number of relevant in-service trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents in the international,

68

national, regional, division and district levels.

Table 6

Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings


of the Teacher-Respondents

No. of Inter-
National Regional Division District
Relevant national
Training
f % f % f % f % f %
s
13 - 15 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.3 0 0.00
0 0 0 9
10 12 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 2.7 4 5.55
0 0 0 8
7 9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.3 1 1.39
0 0 0 9
4 6 0 0.0 1 1.3 4 5.5 1 23.6 1 25.00
0 9 6 7 1 8
1 3 2 2.7 1 23.6 1 20.8 3 48.6 3 41.67
8 7 1 5 3 5 1 0
None 7 9.7 3 4.1 7 9.7 0 0.0 0 0.00
2 7 2 0
Not 6 87.5 5 70.8 4 63.8 1 22.2 1
26.39
Stated 3 0 1 3 6 9 6 2 9
7 100.0 7 100.0 7 100.0 7 100.0 7
Total 100.00
2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2

In the international level, two of the teacher-

respondents or 2.78 percent disclosed to have attended 1-3

trainings in this level while seven or 9.72 percent

expressed that they had not attended any training in this

level and 63 or 87.50 percent did not give information

regarding this.

In the national level, 17 or 23.61 percent of the

teacher-respondents attended 1-3 trainings while one or 1.39

per cent attended 4-6 trainings, three or 4.17 percent

disclosed to have not attended any training in this level,

and 51 or 70.83 percent failed to give information regarding

this.

In the regional level, 15 or 20.83 percent of the

69

teacher-respondents had attended 1-3 trainings while four

or 5.56 per cent attended 4-6 trainings, seven or 9.72 per

cent were not able to attend any training in this level, and

46 or 63.89 percent failed to give information regarding

this.

In the division level, 35 or 48.61 pecent had attended

1-3 trainings while 17 or 23.61 per cent attended 4-6

trainings, two or 2.78 percent attended 10-12 trainings, one


or 1.39 per cent attended 13-15 trainings, another one or

1.39 percent attended 7-9 trainings, and 16 or 22.22 percent

did not disclose any information regarding this.

In the district level, 30 or 41.67 percent had attended

1-3 trainings while 18 or 25.00 percent attended 4-6

trainings, four or 5.55 percent attended 10-12 trainings,

one or 1.39 percent attended 7-9 trainings, and 19 or 26.39

per cent did not give any information

regarding this.

The data presented suggested that the teacher-

respondents considered in-service trainings as their avenue

for professional growth that a number of them strove to

attend in the different levels as their chances warranted

them to attend.

Number of Years in Teaching. Table 7 reveals the number

of years in teaching of the teacher-respondents.

70

From the said table, it can be noted that 32 of the

teacher-respondents or 44.46 percent had been in the

Table 7

Number of Years in Teaching of Teacher-Respondents

No. of Years in
F %
Teaching
31 35 4 5.56
26 30 5 6.94
21 25 5 6.94
16 20 6 8.33
11 15 5 6.94
6 10 15 20.83
1 5 32 44.46
Total 72 100.00

Mean 10.78 years

S. D. 9.64 years

C. V. 0.89

service for 1-5 years while 15 or 20.83 percent had been

teaching for 6-10 years, six or 8.33 percent had been with

the DepEd as teachers for 16-20 years, five or 6.94

percent had been teaching for 26-30 years, another five

or 6.94 percent for 21-25 years, still another five or 6.94

per cent for 11-15 years, and four or 5.56 percent for 31-35

years.

The mean number of years in teaching of the teacher-

respondents was 10.78 years with a SD of 9.64 years and CV

71

of 0.89. The data suggested that the teacher-respondents had

been teaching for quite a number of years, however, a number

of them were newly hired.

Profile of Administrator-Respondents

Tables 8 14 present the profile of administrator-

respondents in terms of their age and sex, civil status,

educational qualification, number of years as school


administrators, average monthly family income, number of

family members, and number of relevant in-service trainings.

Age and Sex. Table 8 contains the age and sex

distribution of the administrator-respondents.

The table shows that of the six administrator-

respondents, one or 16.67 percent each were aged 57, 49,

48, 45, 44, and 43 years old.

The mean age of the administrator-respondents was

calculated at 47.67 years old with a SD of 5.12 years and CV

of 0.11. This signified that the administrator- respondents

were on their late 40s but at the prime of their age.

Moreover, majority of the administrator-respondents

were female accounting for four or 66.67 percent while the

male counterpart was composed of only two or 33.33 percent.

72

Table 8

Age and Sex of Administrator-Respondents

Sex Total
Age %
Male Female (f)
57 1 0 1 16.67
49 0 1 1 16.67
48 0 1 1 16.67
45 0 1 1 16.67
44 1 0 1 16.67
43 0 1 1 16.67
Total 2 4 6 100.00*

% 33.33 66.67 100.00


Mean 47.67 years old

S. D. 5.12 years

C. V. 0.11
*May not add up to total due to rounding off.

The data also showed that female dominance existed

among administrator-respondents as the result of the

observation in the past that women mostly embraced teaching

as a profession so that in the event of promotion to

administrator positions, most of them rose from the ranks.

Civil Status. Table 9 provides the information on the

civil status of the administrator-respondents.

The table shows that all of the administrator-

respondents were married, signifying that most of them had

conjugal family responsibilities which they raise and

maintained by the income they derived from their

73

profession.

Table 9

Civil Status of Administrator-Respondents

Civil Status f %
Single 0 0.00
Married 6 100.00
Widowed 0 0.00
Total 6 100.00
Educational Qualification. Table 10 presents the educational

qualification of administrator-respondents.

Table 10 presents that three or 50.00 percent of the

administrator-respondents were in a doctoral level while two

of them or 33.33 percent were baccalaureate degree holders

and one or 16.67 percent was in a masteral level.

Table 10

Educational Qualification of Administrator-Respondents

Educational
f %
Qualification
Doctoral Level 3 50.00
Masteral Level
1 16.67
(including CAR)
Baccalaureate
2 33.33
Degree
Total 6 100.00

74

The data implied that a number of administrator-

respondents had earned educational qualification higher than

the minimum educational level required for the

teaching profession.

Number of Years as School Administrators. Table 11

shows the data on the number of years accumulated by the

administrator-respondents as school administrators.


The table shows that three of the administrator-

respondents or 50.00 percent had been an administrator for

five years while two or 33.33 percent had been a school

administrator for seven years, and one or 16.67 percent for

four years.

Table 11

Number of Years as School Administrators of


Administrator-Respondents

No. of Years as
School f %
Administrator
7 2 33.33
5 3 50.00
4 1 16.67
Total 6 100.00

Mean 5.50 years

S. D. 1.22 years

C. V. 0.22

75

The mean number of years as administrator of the

administrator-respondents was 5.50 years with a SD of 1.22

years and CV of 0.22.

The foregoing data suggested that the administrator-

respondents had been in the service as school administrators

for quite a number of years.

Average Monthly Family Income. Table 12 reveals the


average monthly family income of the administrator-

respondents.

Table 12

Average Monthly Family Income of


Administrator-Respondents

Income f %
55,000 1 16.67
50,000 2 33.33
27,000 1 16.67
25,000 2 33.33
Total 6 100.00

Mean Php 38,666.67

S. D. Php 14,375.91

C. V. 0.37

Table 12 reveals that of the six administrator-

respondent, two or 33.33 percent earned a monthly income of

Php50,000.00, another two or 33.33 percent earned

Php25,000.00, one or 16.67 percent earned Php55,000.00,

76

and another one or 16.67 percent earned Php27,000.00.

The mean monthly family income earned by the

administrator was Php38,666.67 with a SD of Php14,375.91 and

CV of 0.37. This information suggested that the

administrator-respondent had a regular income they earned to

finance the basic necessities of their respective family

members.
Number of Family Members. Table 13 presents the number

of family members of the administrator-respondents.

The table shows that of the six administrator-

respondents, three or 50.00 percent had five family members

while two or 33.33 percent had nine members, and one or

16.67 percent had six members in the family.

Table 13

Number of Family Members of


Administrator-Respondents

Family Members F %
9 2 33.33
6 1 16.67
5 3 50.00
Total 6 100.00

Mean 6

S. D. 2

C. V. 0.33

77

The mean number of family members of the administrator-

respondents was six with a SD of 2 members and CV of 0.33.

The foregoing data suggested that the administrator-

respondents had an ideal family size of six based on the

average family set in the calculation of the poverty

threshold that is composed of the couple and four children.


Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings. Table 14

presents the number of relevant in-service trainings

attended by the administrator-respondents in the

international, national, regional, division and district

levels.

Table 14

Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings


of the Administrator-Respondents

No. of Inter-
National Regional Division District
Relevant national
Training
f % f % f % f % f %
s
15 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 16.67
0 0
13 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 1 16.67 0 0.00
0 0
12 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 1 16.67 0 0.00
0 0
9 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 2 33.33 0 0.00
0 0
7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 1 16.67 0 0.00
0 0
6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 16.67
0 0
5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 33.33
0 0
3 0 0.0 1 16.6 4 66.67 0 0.00 0 0.00
0 7
1 3 50.0 0 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 16.67
0 0
0 0 0.0 1 16.6 1 16.67 0 0.00 0 0.00
0 7
Not 50.0 66.6
3 4 1 16.67 1 16.67 1 16.67
Stated 0 6
100.0 100.0 100.00 100.00
Total 6 6 6 6 6 100.00*
0 0 * *
*May not add up to total due to rounding off.

78
In the international level, three of the administrator-

respondents or 50.00 per cent disclosed to

have attended one training in this level while the remaining

three or 50.00 percent did not give information regarding

this.

In the national level, one or 16.67 percent of the

administrator-respondents attended one training while

another one or 16.67 percent attended three trainings, and

four or 66.66 percent failed to give information regarding

this.

In the regional level, two or 33.33 percent of the

administrator-respondents had attended nine trainings while

one or 16.67 percent attended 13 trainings, another one or

16.67 percent attended 12 trainings, still, another one or

16.67 percent attended seven trainings and one or 16.67

percent failed to give information regarding this.

In the division level, 2 or 33.33 percent had attended

nine trainings while one or 16.67 percent attended 13

trainings, another one or 16.67 percent attended 12

trainings, still another one or 16.67 percent attended seven

trainings, and one or 16.67 per cent did not disclose any

information regarding this.

In the district level, two or 33.33 percent had

attended five trainings while one or 16.67 percent

79
attended 15 trainings, another one or 16.67 percent attended

six trainings, still, another one or 16.67 percent attended

one training, and one or 16.67 percent did not give any

information regarding this.

The data presented suggested that the administrator-

respondents considered also in-service trainings as their

avenue for professional growth that a number of them had

attended trainings in the different levels which they were

required to attend.

Classification of Classroom Management


Styles of Teacher-Respondents

Tables 15 to 18 present the classification of the

classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on

their own perception and the perception of the

administrator-respondents along authoritarian,

authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire.

Authoritarian. Table 15 presents the classification of

the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based

on their own perception and the perception of the

administrator-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management style. There were three indicators depicting this

area.

Table 15 shows that of the three indicators, the

teacher-respondents agreed on one indicator stating, the

80
classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn,

with a weighted mean of 4.01 while they disagreed on the

remaining two indicators stating, I will not accept

excuses from a student who is tardy, and if a student is

disruptive during class, I send him/ her to the principals

office without further discussion, with weighted means of

2.31 and 2.03, respectively.

Table 15

Classification of Classroom Management Styles of


Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the
Two Groups of Respondents along
Authoritarian

Administrator
Teachers
Indicators s
WM I WM I
1. If a student is disruptive
during class, I send him/
her to the principals 2.03 D 2.08 D
office without further
discussion.
2. The classroom must be quiet
in order for students to 4.01 A 3.67 A
learn.
3. I will not accept excuses
2.31 D 2.35 D
from a student who is tardy.
Grand Weighted Mean 2.78 N 2.70 N

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation
81

Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents expressed

neutrality regarding the classification of their

classroom management styles they practiced along

authoritarian classroom management style. This was

manifested by the grand weighted mean of 2.78. This

signified that based on the perception of the teacher-

respondents, they practiced moderately authoritarianism in

the classroom.

On the other hand, Table 15 shows that from the view

point of the administrator-respondents, they too agreed on

one indicator stating, the classroom must be quiet in order

for students to learn, with a weighted mean of 3.67 as

their perception on the classification of the classroom

management styles of their teachers along authoritarian,

while they disagreed on the remaining two indicators

stating, I will not accept excuses from a student who is

tardy, and if a student is disruptive during class, I send

him/ her to the principals office without further

discussion, with weighted means of 2.35 and 2.00,

respectively.

Taken as a whole, the administrator-respondents

expressed neutrality regarding the classification of the

classroom management styles practiced by their teachers

along authoritarian classroom management style. This was


82

shown by the grand weighted mean of 2.70. This signified

that based on the perception of the administrator-

respondents, the teacher-respondents practiced moderately

authoritarianism in the classroom.

In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at

the same adjectival classification of the classroom

management styles of the teacher-respondents along

authoritarian classroom management style. However, they

slightly differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.78 while the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.70

with the same adjectival interpretation of neutral.

Authoritative. Table 16 depicts the classification of

the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based

on their own perception and the perception of the

administrator-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style. There were three indicators depicting this

area.

Table 16 presents that the teacher-respondents agreed

on all the three indicators along this area stating, I am

concerned about both what my students learn and how they

learn, I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules

and decisions, and my students understand that they can

interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant


83
question, with weighted means of 4.39, 4.18, and 3.73,

respectively.

Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents expressed

agreement regarding the classification of their classroom

management styles they practiced along authoritative

classroom management style. This was manifested by the grand

weighted mean of 4.10. This signified that based on the

perception of the teacher-respondents, they practiced highly

authoritative classroom management style.

Table 16

Classification of Classroom Management Styles of


Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the
Two Groups of Respondents along
Authoritative

Administrator
Teachers
Indicators s
WM I WM I
1. I am concerned about both
what my students learn and 4.39 A 3.83 A
how they learn.
2. I always try to explain the
reasons behind my rules and 4.18 A 3.68 A
decisions.
3. My students understand that
they can interrupt my
3.73 A 3.49 N
lecture if they have a
relevant question.
Grand Weighted Mean 4.10 A 3.67 A

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation
84

On the other hand, Table 16 presents that from the view

point of the administrator-respondents, they agreed on two

indicators stating, I am concerned about both what my

students learn and how they learn, and I always try to

explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions, with

weighted means of 3.83 and 3.68, respectively, as their

perception on the classification of the classroom management

styles of their teachers along authoritative classroom

management style, while they were neutral on the remaining

indicator stating, My students understand that they

can interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant question,

with a weighted mean of 3.49.

Taken as a whole, the administrator-respondents

expressed agreement regarding the classification of the

classroom management styles practiced by their teachers

along authoritative classroom management style. This was

shown by the grand weighted mean of 3.67. This signified

that based on the perception of the administrator-

respondents, the teacher-respondents practiced highly

authoritative classroom management style.

In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at

the same adjectival classification of the classroom


management styles of the teacher-respondents along

authoritative classroom management style. However, they

85

differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 4.10 while the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 3.67

with the same adjectival interpretation of agree.

Democratic. Table 17 shows the classification of the

classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on

their own perception and the perception of the

administrator-respondents along democratic classroom style.

There were three indicators depicting this area.

Table 17 presents that the teacher-respondents agreed

on one indicator along this area stating, The emotional

well-being of my students is more important than classroom

control, with a weighted mean of 3.80. On the remaining two

indictors, this group of respondents expressed neutrality.

These indicators were: If a student requests a hall pass, I

always honor the request, and I dont want to reprimand a

student because it might hurt his/her feelings, with

weighted means of 3.15 and 2.86, respectively.

Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents expressed

neutrality regarding the classification of their classroom

management styles they practiced along democratic classroom


management style. This was manifested by the grand weighted

mean of 3.27. This signified that based on

86

Table 17

Classification of Classroom Management Styles of


Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the
Two Groups of Respondents along
Democratic

Administrator
Teachers
Indicators s
WM I WM I
1. I dont want to reprimand a
student because it might 2.86 N 2.57 N
hurt his/her feelings.
2. The emotional well-being of
my students is more
3.80 A 2.81 N
important than classroom
control.
3. If a student requests a hall
pass, I always honor the 3.15 N 3.32 N
request.
Grand Weighted Mean 3.27 N 2.90 N

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation

the perception of the teacher-respondents, they practiced

moderately democratic classroom management style.

On the other hand, Table 17 presents that from the view

point of the administrator-respondents, they were neutral

on the three indicators stating, If a student requests a


hall pass, I always honor the request, The emotional well-

being of my students is more important than classroom

control and I dont want to reprimand a student

87

because it might hurt his/her feelings, with weighted means

of 3.32, 2.81, and 2.57, respectively, as their perception

on the classification of the classroom management styles of

their teachers along democratic classroom management style.

Taken as a whole, the administrator-respondents

expressed neutrality regarding the classification of the

classroom management styles practiced by their teachers

along democratic classroom management style. This was shown

by the grand weighted mean of 2.90. This signified that

based on the perception of the administrator-respondents,

the teacher-respondents practiced moderately democratic

classroom management style.

In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at

the same adjectival classification of the classroom

management styles of the teacher-respondents along

democratic classroom management style. However, they

differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 3.27 while the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.90

with the same adjectival interpretation of neutral.


Laissez-Faire. Table 18 shows the classification of the

classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on

their own perception and the perception of the

88

administrator-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

style. There were three indicators depicting this area.

Table 18 presents that the teacher-respondents

disagreed on the three indicators along this area stating,

If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not

my problem, Class preparation isnt worth the effort, and

I dont want to impose any rules on my students, with

weighted means of 2.21, 2.08, and 1.74, respectively.

Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents disagreed

regarding the classification of their classroom management

styles they practiced along laissez-faire classroom

management style. This was manifested by the grand weighted

mean of 2.01. This signified that based on the perception of

the teacher-respondents, they practiced slightly laissez-

faire classroom management style.

On the other hand, Table 18 presents that from the view

point of the administrator-respondents, they

disagreed on the three indicators along this area stating,

If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not

my problem, I dont want to impose any rules on my


students, and Class preparation isnt worth the effort,

with weighted means of 2.42, 1.94, and 1.86, respectively.

89

Table 18

Classification of Classroom Management Styles of


Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the
Two Groups of Respondents along
Laissez-Faire

Administrator
Teachers
Indicators s
WM I WM I
1. I dont want to impose any
1.74 D 1.94 D
rules on my students.
2. If a student turns in a late
homework assignment, it is 2.21 D 2.42 D
not my problem.
3. Class preparation isnt
2.08 D 1.86 D
worth the effort.
Grand Weighted Mean 2.01 D 2.07 D

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation

Taken as a whole, the administrator-respondents

expressed disagreement regarding the classification of the

classroom management styles practiced by their teachers

along laissez-faire classroom management style. This was

shown by the grand weighted mean of 2.07. This signified

that based on the perception of the administrator-


respondents, the teacher-respondents practiced slightly

laissez-faire classroom management style.

In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at

the same adjectival classification of the classroom

90

management styles of the teacher-respondents along laissez-

faire classroom management style. However, they differed in

the numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a

grand weighted mean of 2.01 while the administrator-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.07 with the same

adjectival interpretation of disagree.

Comparison of the Classification of Classroom


Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents
Between the Perceptions of the Two Groups
of Respondents

Tables 19 to 22 contain the result of the comparison of

the classification of classroom management styles of

teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the two

groups of respondents, namely: teacher- and administrator-

respondents along authoritarian, authoritative, democratic,

and laissez-faire classroom management styles.

Authoritarian. Table 19 provides the result of the

comparison of the classification of classroom management

styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the

two groups of respondents, namely: teacher- and


administrator-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management style.

It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents

arrived at the same adjectival classification of the

classroom management styles of the teacher-respondents

91

along authoritarian classroom management style. However,

they slightly differed in the numerical assessment. The

teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.78 while

the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of

2.70.

In comparing the authoritarian classroom management

style, between the perception of the teacher-respondents

themselves and the administrator-respondents, the computed

t-value was 0.0105 mean of 2.70 with the same adjectival

interpretation of neutral, which resulted to a mean

difference of 0.08. To ascertain whether the observed

disparity was significant, the t-test for independent sample

means was employed.

As presented in Table 19, in comparing the perceptions

of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators,

indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of -0.322 which turned

lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of

0.748 which turned greater than the = .05. This signified

that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was


not significant. Along indicator number 2, the computed t-

value was 1.957 which turned lesser than the critical t-

value of +1.992 and the p-value was 0.052 which turned

greater than the . This signified that the perceptions of

the two groups in this indicator was not

92

Table 19

Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management


Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception
of the Two Groups of Respondents along
Authoritarian

WM/I Evalua-
Adminis p- tion/
Indicators Teacher t
- value Interpre-
s
trators tation
1. If a student is
disruptive
during class, I
send him/ her to 2.03 2.08
-0.322 0.748 NS
the principals (D) (D)
office without
further
discussion.
2. The classroom
must be quiet in
4.01 3.67
order for 1.957 0.052 NS
(A) (A)
students to
learn.
3. I will not
accept excuses 2.31 2.35
-0.238 0.812 NS
from a student (D) (D)
who is tardy.
Grand Weighted 2.78 2.70
0.0105 0.921 NS
Mean (N) (N)

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation
S Significant
NS Not Significant
tcritical = +1.992; df = 76; = .05

significant. Furthermore, in comparing indicator number 3,

the t yielded a value of -0.238 which obviously turned

lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 and the p

93

yielded a value of 0.812 which turned greater than the .

This signified that the perception of the two groups in this

indicator was not significant. Moreover, in comparing the

classification of the classroom management style of the

teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management

style between the perception of the teacher-respondents

themselves and the administrator-respondents, the t yielded

a value of 0.0105 which turned lesser than the critical t-

value of +1.992 with the p-value of 0.921 which turned

greater than the which is equal to .05.

This signified that the perceptions of the two groups

of respondents regarding the classification of the classroom

management style of the teacher-respondents along

the authoritarian classroom management style was essentially

similar.

Thus, the null hypothesis stating that there is no

significant difference in the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the authoritarian classroom management style between the


perception of the teacher-respondents themselves and

the administrator-respondents, was accepted. This meant that

both the teacher-respondents and the administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced slightly

authoritarian classroom management style.

94

Authoritative. Table 20 contains the result of the

comparison of the classification of classroom management

styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the

two groups of respondents, namely: teacher- and

administrator-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style.

It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents

arrived at the same adjectival classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents

along authoritative classroom management style. However,

they differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 4.10 while the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of

3.67 with the same adjectival interpretation of agree,

which resulted to a mean difference of 0.43. To ascertain

whether the observed disparity was significant, the t-test

for independent sample means was employed.

As presented in Table 20, in comparing the perceptions

of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators,


indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of 3.652 which turned

greater than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value

of 0.000 which turned lesser than the = .05. This

signified that the perceptions of the two groups in this

indicator was significant. On the other hand, in the

95

Table 20

Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management


Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception
of the Two Groups of Respondents along
Authoritative

WM/I Evalua-
Adminis p- tion/
Indicators Teacher t
- value Interpre-
s
trators tation
1. I am concerned
about both
what my 4.39 3.83 0.00
3.652 S
students learn (A) (A) 0
and how they
learn.
2. I always try
to explain the
4.18 3.68 0.00
reasons behind 3.157 S
(A) (A) 2
my rules and
decisions.
3. My students
understand
that they can
interrupt my 3.73 3.49 0.21
1.247 NS
lecture if (A) (A) 4
they have a
relevant
question.
Grand Weighted 4.10 3.67
1.987 0.118 NS
Mean (A) (A)

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation
S Significant
NS Not Significant
tcritical = +1.992; df = 76; = .05

comparison of indicator number 2, the computed t-value was

3.157 which turned greater than the critical t-value of

96

+1.992 and the p-value was 0.002 which turned lesser than

the . This signified that the perception of the two groups

in this indicator was significant. Furthermore, in comparing

indicator number 3, the t yielded a value of 1.247 which

obviously turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992

and the p yielded a value of 0.214 which turned greater than

the . This signified that the perception of the two groups

in this indicator was not significant.

Moreover, in comparing the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the authoritative classroom management style, between the

perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the

administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was 1.987

which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with

the p-value of 0.118 which turned greater than the which

is equal to .05. This signified that the perception of the

two groups of respondents regarding the classification of


the classroom management style of the teacher-respondents

along the authoritative classroom management style was

essentially similar.

Hence, the null hypothesis stating that there is no

significant difference in the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

97

the authoritative classroom management style between the

perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the

administrator-respondents, was accepted. This meant that

both the teacher-respondents and the administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced highly

authoritative classroom management style.

However, despite the similarity in the general

perception of the two groups along this area, the teacher-

respondents highly expressed concerned with the learning of

their students and highly compelled to explain reasons

behind their rules and regulations in school which

the

administrator-respondents failed to notice such concern and

compulsion.

Democratic. Table 21 reveals the result of the

comparison of the classification of classroom management

styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the

two groups of respondents, namely: teacher- and


administrator-respondents along democratic classroom

management style.

It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents

arrived at the same adjectival classification of the

classroom management styles of the teacher-respondents along

democratic classroom management style. However, they

98

differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 3.27 while

the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of

2.90 with the same adjectival interpretation of neutral,

which resulted to a mean difference of 0.37. To ascertain

whether the observed disparity was significant, the t-

test for independent sample means was employed.

As presented in Table 21, in comparing the perceptions

of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators,

indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of 1.055 which turned

lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of

0.542 which turned greater than the = .05. This

signified that the perception of the two groups in this

indicator was not significant. On the other hand, in the

comparison of indicator number 2, the computed t-value was

1.275 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of

+1.992 and the p-value was 0.524 which turned greater than

the . This signified that the perception of the two groups


in this indicator was not significant. Furthermore, in

comparing indicator number 3, the t yielded a value of

-1.029 which obviously turned lesser than the critical t-

value of +1.992 and the p yielded a value of 0.305 which

turned greater than the . This signified that the

99

perceptions of the two groups in this indicator was not

Table 21

Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management


Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception
of the Two Groups of Respondents along
Democratic

WM/I Evalua-
Adminis p- tion/
Indicators Teacher t
- value Interpre-
s
trators tation
1. I dont want
to reprimand a
student
2.86 2.57 0.54
because it 1.055 NS
(N) (N) 2
might hurt
his/her
feelings.
2. The emotional
well-being of
my students is 3.80 2.81 0.52
1.275 NS
more important (A) (N) 4
than classroom
control.
3. If a student
requests a
3.15 3.32 0.30
hall pass, I -1.029 NS
(N) (N) 5
always honor
the request.
Grand Weighted 3.27 2.90
1.042 0.356 NS
Mean (N) (N)
Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)
3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation
S Significant
NS Not Significant
tcritical = +1.992; df = 76; = .05

significant.

100

Moreover, in comparing the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the democratic classroom management style, between the

perception of the teacher-respondents themselves and the

administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was 1.042

which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992

with the p-value of 0.356 which turned greater than the

which is equal to .05. This signified that the perception of

the two groups of respondents regarding the classification

of the classroom management style of the teacher-

respondents along the democratic classroom management style

was essentially similar.

Therefore, the null hypothesis stating that there is no

significant difference in the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the democratic classroom management style between the

perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the

administrator-respondents, was accepted. This meant that


both the teacher-respondents and the administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced moderately

democratic classroom management style.

Laissez-Faire. Table 22 presents the result of the

comparison of the classification of classroom management

styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of

101

the two groups of respondents, namely: teacher- and

administrator-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

Table 22

Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management


Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception
of the Two Groups of Respondents along
Laissez-Faire

WM/I Evalua-
Adminis p- tion/
Indicators Teacher T
- value Interpre-
s
trators tation
1. I dont want
to impose any 1.74 1.94 0.20
-1.278 NS
rules on my (D) (D) 3
students.
2. If a student
turns in a
late homework 2.21 2.42 0.16
-1.414 NS
assignment, it (D) (D) 0
is not my
problem.
3. Class
preparation 2.08 1.86 0.12
1.558 NS
isnt worth (D) (D) 2
the effort.
Grand Weighted 2.01 2.07
-0.283 0.791 NS
Mean (D) (D)

Legend: 4.51 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)


3.51 4.50 Agree (A)
2.51 3.50 Neutral (N)
1.51 2.50 Disagree (D)
1.00 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD)
WM Weighted Mean
I Interpretation
S Significant
NS Not Significant
tcritical = +1.992; df = 76; = .05

management style.

It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents

102

arrived at the same adjectival classification of the

classroom management styles of the teacher-respondents along

laissez-faire classroom management style. However, they

differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.01 while the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.07

with the same adjectival interpretation of disagree, which

resulted to a mean difference of -0.06. To ascertain

whether the observed disparity was significant, the t-test

for independent sample means was employed.

As presented in Table 22, in comparing the perceptions

of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators,

indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of -1.278 which turned

lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of

0.203 which turned greater than the = .05. This signified

that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was

not significant. On the other hand, in the comparison of


indicator number 2, the computed t-value was -1.414 which

turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 and the p-

value was 0.160 which turned greater than the . This

signified that the perception of the two groups in this

indicator was not significant. Furthermore, in comparing

indicator number 3, the t yielded a value of

1.558 which obviously turned lesser than the critical t-

103

value of +1.992 and the p yielded a value of 0.122 which

turned greater than the . This signified that the

perception of the two groups in this indicator was not

significant.

Finally, in comparing the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the laissez-faire classroom management style, between the

perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the

administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was -0.283

which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with

the p-value of 0.791 which turned greater than the which

is equal to .05. This signified that the perception of the

two groups of respondents regarding the classification of

the classroom management style of the teacher-respondents

along the laissez-faire classroom management style was

essentially similar.
Thus, the null hypothesis stating that there is no

significant difference in the classification of the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the laissez-faire classroom management style between the

perception of the teacher-respondents themselves and the

administrator-respondents, was accepted. This meant that

both the teacher-respondents and the administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced slightly

104

laissez-faire classroom management style.

Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents


Classroom Management Styles and Their
Personal Variates

Tables 23 to 26 contain the result of the correlational

analysis between the teacher-respondents classroom

management styles and their personal variates along

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire

classroom management styles.

Authoritarian. Table 23 presents the result of the

correlation between the teacher-respondents classroom

management style along authoritarian classroom management

style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex,

civil status, educational qualification, average monthly

family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and

number of years in teaching.


In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of 0.057 which denoted

negligible positive correlation. In testing the significance

of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-test was

employed whereby the computed value was 0.478 with a p-value

of 0.638. In comparing the computed value

with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the

105

, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser

Table 23

Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents


Classroom Management Styles and their
Personal Variates along
Authoritarian

Coeffi-
Degree of Fisher Evalua-
cient of p-
Variate Correlatio s t- tion /
Correla- Value
n value Decision
tion
NS /
Age 0.057 Negligible 0.638 0.478
Accept Ho
NS /
Sex -0.197 Negligible 0.097 1.681
Accept Ho
NS /
Civil Status -0.077 Negligible 0.523 0.646
Accept Ho
Educational
NS /
Qualifi- 0.038 Negligible 0.752 0.318
Accept Ho
cation
Average
Monthly NS /
-0.133 Negligible 0.289 1.123
Family Accept Ho
Income
Number of 0.133 Negligible 0.555 1.123 NS /
Relevant Accept Ho
In-Service
Trainings
Number of
NS /
Years in -0.073 Negligible 0.545 0.612
Accept Ho
Teaching

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256) :

Coefficient of Correlation Degree of Correlation


0.00 to +0.20 Negligible Correlation
+0.21 to +0.40 Low or Slight Correlation
+0.41 to +0.70 Marked or Moderate Relationship
+0.71 to +0.90 High Relationship
+0.91to +0.99 Very High Relationship
+1.00 Perfect Correlation

Fishers t-critical Value +1.994; df = 70


S = Significant p-value < = .05 or
Computed > Critical Values
NS = Not Significant p-value > = .05 or
Computed < Critical Values

106

than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than

the . This signified that the correlation between the

aforesaid variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their age was accepted. This

meant that age had nothing to do with the authoritarian

classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of -0.197 which denoted


negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance

of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-test was

employed whereby the computed value was 1.681 with a p-value

of 0.097. In comparing the computed value with the critical

value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted

that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical

value and the p-value turned greater than the . This

signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom

107

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their sex was accepted. This

meant that sex had no influence to the authoritarian

classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their civil status, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.077 which

denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-

test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.646 with

a p-value of 0.523. In comparing the computed value with the


critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management style and their civil status was accepted.

This meant that civil status had no influence to the

authoritarian classroom management style practiced by

108

the teacher-respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their educational

qualification, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of 0.038 which denoted negligible positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 0.318 with a p-value of 0.752. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that


the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

In this case, the null hypothesis that states that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their educational

qualification was accepted. This meant that educational

qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence to

the authoritarian classroom management style they

practiced.

In associating relationship between the classroom

109

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

-0.133 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

1.123 with a p-value of 0.289. In comparing the

computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-

value with the , it can be noted that the computed t-value

turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned

greater than the . This signified that the correlation

between the aforesaid variables was not significant.


Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly

family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do

with the authoritarian classroom management style practiced

by them.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their number of relevant in-

110

service trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of 0.133 which denoted negligible positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 1.123 with a p-value of 0.555. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management


style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management style and the number of relevant in-service

trainings of the teacher-respondents was accepted. This

meant that the number of relevant in-service trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the

authoritarian classroom management style practiced by them.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian

classroom management style and their number of years in

teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

-0.073 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

111

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

0.612 with a p-value of 0.545. In comparing the computed

value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with

the , it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned

greater than the . This signified that the

correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management style and their number of years in teaching was


accepted. This meant that the number of years accumulated by

the teacher-respondents in teaching had nothing to do with

the authoritarian classroom management style practiced by

the teacher-respondents.

In summary, of the personal variates of the teacher-

respondents, none of them significantly influenced the

authoritarian classroom management style they practiced in

school.

Authoritative. Table 24 reveals the result of the

correlation between the teacher-respondents classroom

management style along authoritative classroom management

112

style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex,

civil status, educational qualification, average monthly

family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and

number of years in teaching.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of -0.064 which denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance

of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-test was

employed whereby the computed value was 0.537 with a p-value

of 0.596. In comparing the computed value with the critical

value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted


that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical

value and the p-value turned greater than the . This

signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their age was accepted. This

meant that age had nothing to do with the authoritative

classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents.

113

Table 24

Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents


Classroom Management Styles and their
Personal Variates along
Authoritative

Coeffi-
Degree of Fisher Evalua-
cient of p-
Variate Correlatio s t- tion /
Correla- Value
n value Decision
tion
NS /
Age -0.064 Negligible 0.596 0.537
Accept Ho
NS /
Sex -0.066 Negligible 0.580 0.553
Accept Ho
NS /
Civil Status -0.135 Negligible 0.263 1.140
Accept Ho
Educational
NS /
Qualifi- -0.204 Low 0.091 1.743
Accept Ho
cation
Average
Monthly NS /
-0.013 Negligible 0.917 0.109
Family Accept Ho
Income
Number of
Relevant NS /
0.168 Negligible 0.471 1.426
In-Service Accept Ho
Trainings
Number of
NS /
Years in -0.078 Negligible 0.515 0.655
Accept Ho
Teaching

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256) :

Coefficient of Correlation Degree of Correlation


0.00 to +0.20 Negligible Correlation
+0.21 to +0.40 Low or Slight Correlation
+0.41 to +0.70 Marked or Moderate Relationship
+0.71 to +0.90 High Relationship
+0.91to +0.99 Very High Relationship
+1.00 Perfect Correlation

Fishers t-critical Value +1.994; df = 70


S = Significant p-value < = .05 or
Computed > Critical Values
NS = Not Significant p-value > = .05 or
Computed < Critical Values

In associating relationship between the classroom

114

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of -0.066 which denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance

of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers

t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.553

with a p-value of 0.580. In comparing the computed value

with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the ,

it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than

the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the
. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style and their sex was accepted. This meant that

sex had no influence to the authoritative classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their civil status, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.135 which

denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the

115

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-

test was employed whereby the computed value was 1.140 with

a p-value of 0.263. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom


management style and their civil status was accepted. This

meant that civil status had no influence to the

authoritative classroom management style practiced by the

teacher-respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their educational

qualification, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of -0.204 which denoted negligible negative

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 1.743 with a p-value of 0.091. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

116

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

In this case, the null hypothesis that states that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their educational

qualification was accepted. This meant that educational


qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence to

the authoritative classroom management style they practiced.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

0.013 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

0.109 with a p-value of 0.917. In comparing the

computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-

value with the , it can be noted that the computed t-value

turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value

117

turned greater than the . This signified that the

correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly

family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do

with the authoritative classroom management style practiced

by them.
In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their number of relevant in-

service trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of 0.168 which denoted negligible positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 1.426 with a p-value of 0.471. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

118

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style and the number of relevant in-service

trainings of the teacher-respondents was accepted. This

meant that the number of relevant in-service trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the

authoritative classroom management style practiced by them.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative


classroom management style and their number of years in

teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

-0.078 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

0.655 with a p-value of 0.515. In comparing the computed

value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with

the , it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser than the critical value and the p-value

turned greater than the . This signified that the

correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

119

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style and their number of years in teaching

was accepted. This meant that the number of years

accumulated by the teacher-respondents in teaching had

nothing to do with the authoritative classroom management

style practiced by the teacher-respondents.

In summary, of the personal variates of the teacher-

respondents, none of them significantly influenced the

authoritative classroom management style they practiced in

school.
Democratic. Table 25 reveals the result of the

correlation between the teacher-respondents classroom

management style along democratic classroom management style

and their personal variates in terms of age, sex, civil

status, educational qualification, average monthly family

income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number

of years in teaching.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of 0.037 which denoted

negligible positive correlation. In testing the

120

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-

test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.310 with

a p-value of 0.760. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their age was accepted. This


meant that age had nothing to do with the democratic

classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of -0.171 which denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance

of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-test was

employed whereby the computed value was 1.452 with a p-value

of 0.151. In comparing the computed value with the critical

value of 1.994 and the p-value with the

121

Table 25

Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents


Classroom Management Styles and their
Personal Variates along
Democratic

Coeffi-
Degree of Fisher Evalua-
cient of p-
Variate Correlatio s t- tion /
Correla- Value
n value Decision
tion
NS /
Age 0.037 Negligible 0.760 0.310
Accept Ho
NS /
Sex -0.171 Negligible 0.151 1.452
Accept Ho
NS /
Civil Status -0.043 Negligible 0.719 0.360
Accept Ho
Educational
NS /
Qualifi- -0.090 Negligible 0.457 0.756
Accept Ho
cation
Average 0.144 Negligible 0.254 1.217 NS /
Monthly Accept Ho
Family
Income
Number of
Relevant NS /
0.089 Negligible 0.693 0.748
In-Service Accept Ho
Trainings
Number of
NS /
Years in -0.058 Negligible 0.628 0.486
Accept Ho
Teaching

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256) :

Coefficient of Correlation Degree of Correlation


0.00 to +0.20 Negligible Correlation
+0.21 to +0.40 Low or Slight Correlation
+0.41 to +0.70 Marked or Moderate Relationship
+0.71 to +0.90 High Relationship
+0.91to +0.99 Very High Relationship
+1.00 Perfect Correlation

Fishers t-critical Value +1.994; df = 70


S = Significant p-value < = .05 or
Computed > Critical Values
NS = Not Significant p-value > = .05 or
Computed < Critical Values

, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser

122

than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than

the . This signified that the correlation between the

aforesaid variables was not significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along democratic classroom

management style and their sex was accepted. This meant that

sex had no influence to the democratic classroom management

style practiced by the teacher-respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic


classroom management style and their civil status, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.043 which

denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-

test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.360 with

a p-value of 0.719. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no significant relationship between the classroom management

style teacher-respondents along democratic

123

classroom management style and their civil status was

accepted. This meant that civil status had no influence to

the democratic classroom management style practiced by the

teacher-respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their educational

qualification, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of -0.090 which denoted negligible negative

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation


coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 0.756 with a p-value of 0.457. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

In this case, the null hypothesis that states that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their educational

qualification was accepted. This meant that educational

qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence

124

to the democratic classroom management style they practiced.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

0.144 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

1.217 with a p-value of 0.254. In comparing the computed

value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with
the , it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned

greater than the . This signified that the correlation

between the aforesaid variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly

family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do

with the democratic classroom management style practiced by

them.

125

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

classroom management style and their number of relevant in-

service trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of 0.089 which denoted negligible positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 0.748 with a p-value of 0.693. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that


the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along democratic classroom

management style and the number of relevant in-service

trainings of the teacher-respondents was accepted. This

meant that the number of relevant in-service trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the

democratic classroom management style practiced by them.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along democratic

126

classroom management style and their number of years in

teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

-0.058 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

0.486 with a p-value of 0.628. In comparing the computed

value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with

the , it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned

greater than the . This signified that the correlation

between the aforesaid variables was not significant.


Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along democratic classroom

management style and their number of years in teaching

was accepted. This meant that the number of years

accumulated by the teacher-respondents in teaching had

nothing to do with the democratic classroom management

style practiced by the teacher-respondents.

In summary, of the personal variates of the teacher-

respondents, none of them significantly influenced the

democratic classroom management style they practiced in

school.

127

Laissez-Faire. Table 26 reveals the result of the

correlation between the teacher-respondents classroom

management style along laissez-faire classroom management

style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex,

civil status, educational qualification, average monthly

family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and

number of years in teaching.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of -0.007 which denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance


of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-test was

employed whereby the computed value was 0.059 with a p-value

of 0.956. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their age was accepted. This

128

Table 26

Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents


Classroom Management Styles and their
Personal Variates along
Laissez-Faire

Coeffi-
Degree of Fisher Evalua-
cient of p-
Variate Correlatio s t- tion /
Correla- Value
n value Decision
tion
NS /
Age -0.007 Negligible 0.956 0.059
Accept Ho
NS /
Sex -0.136 Negligible 0.254 1.149
Accept Ho
NS /
Civil Status -0.077 Negligible 0.522 0.646
Accept Ho
Educational
NS /
Qualifi- 0.106 Negligible 0.383 0.892
Accept Ho
cation
Average -0.190 Negligible 0.130 1.619 NS /
Monthly Accept Ho
Family
Income
Number of
Relevant NS /
0.106 Negligible 0.616 0.892
In-Service Accept Ho
Trainings
Number of
NS /
Years in -0.109 Negligible 0.362 0.917
Accept Ho
Teaching

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256) :

Coefficient of Correlation Degree of Correlation


0.00 to +0.20 Negligible Correlation
+0.21 to +0.40 Low or Slight Correlation
+0.41 to +0.70 Marked or Moderate Relationship
+0.71 to +0.90 High Relationship
+0.91to +0.99 Very High Relationship
+1.00 Perfect Correlation

Fishers t-critical Value +1.994; df = 70


S = Significant p-value < = .05 or
Computed > Critical Values
NS = Not Significant p-value > = .05 or
Computed < Critical Values

meant that age had nothing to do with the laissez-faire

129

classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of

correlation yielded a value of -0.136 which denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance

of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-test was

employed whereby the computed value was 1.149 with a p-value

of 0.254. In comparing the computed value with the critical


value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted

that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical

value and the p-value turned greater than the . This

signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

management style and their sex was accepted. This meant that

sex had no influence to the laissez-faire classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

130

classroom management style and their civil status, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.077 which

denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fishers t-

test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.646 with

a p-value of 0.522. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.


Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

management style and their civil status was accepted. This

meant that civil status had no influence to the laissez-

faire classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their educational

qualification, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of 0.106 which denoted negligible positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

131

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 0.892 with a p-value of 0.383. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

In this case, the null hypothesis that states that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire


classroom management style and their educational

qualification was accepted. This meant that educational

qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence to

the laissez-faire classroom management style they practiced.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their average monthly

family income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of -0.190 which denoted negligible negative

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 1.619 with a p-value of 0.130. In

132

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their average monthly family

income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly

family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do


with the laissez-faire classroom management style practiced

by them.

In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their number of relevant in-

service trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a

value of 0.106 which denoted negligible positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fishers t-test was employed whereby the

computed value was 0.892 with a p-value of 0.616. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

133

computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and

the p-value turned greater than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

management style and the number of relevant in-service

trainings of the teacher-respondents was accepted. This

meant that the number of relevant in-service trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the

lassiez-faire classroom management style practiced by them.


In associating relationship between the classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style and their number of years in

teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of

-0.109 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the

Fishers t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

0.917 with a p-value of 0.362. In comparing the computed

value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with

the , it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned

greater than the . This signified that the

134

correlation between the aforesaid variables was not

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

management style and their number of years in teaching was

accepted. This meant that the number of years accumulated by

the teacher-respondents in teaching had nothing to do with

the laissez-faire classroom management style practiced by

the teacher-respondents.

In summary, of the personal variates of the teacher-

respondents, none of them significantly influenced the


lassiez-faire classroom management style they practiced in

school.

Academic Performance of Pupils Based on


Their General Average During the
School Year 2014 2015

Table 27 provides the data on the academic performance

of pupils based on their general average during the School

Year 2014 2015.

Table 27 shows that a number of the pupil-respondents

garnered academic performance of 80.00 82.99 based on

their final grade during the School Year 2014 2015,

accounting for 38 or 52.78 percent. Sixteen of them or 22.22

percent obtained academic performance of 77.00

135

79.99 while seven or 9.72 per cent got 83.00 85.99,

one or 1.39 percent obtained academic performance of

Table 27

Academic Performance of Pupils Based on Their


General Average During S. Y 2014 2015

Academic Rating f %
89.00 91.99 1 1.39
86.00 88.99 1 1.39
83.00 - 85.99 7 9.72
80.00 82.99 38 52.78
77.00 79.99 16 22.22
Not Stated 9 12.50
Total 72 100.00

Mean 81.15
S. D. 2.33

C. V. 0.03

89.00 91.99 and another one or 1.39 percent got 86.00

88.99 percent.

The mean academic performance of the pupil-respondents

based on their final grade during the School Year 2014

2015 was pegged at 81.15 with a SD of 2.33 and CV of 0.03.

This signified that more or less the pupil-respondents

were homogeneously performing academically with a slight

variation in their academic performance as compared with the

average. Furthermore, the pupil-respondents showed a

136

favorable academic performance during the school year being

shown by the mean which turned higher than the required

mastery level of 75.00 per cent (DepEd).

Relationship Between the Academic Performance


of the Pupil-Respondents and the Classroom
Management Style of Teacher-Respondents

Table 28 reveals the result of the correlation between

the academic performance of the pupil-respondents based on

their final general average during the School Year 2014

2015 and the classroom management styles practiced by the

teacher-respondents along authoritarian, authoritative,

democratic, and laissez-faire.


In associating the academic performance of pupil-

respondents based on their general average during the School

Year 2014 2015 and the authoritarian classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.082 denoting

a negligible positive correlation. Further test of the

significance of the coefficient value using the Fishers t-

test, the computed value resulted to 0.688 with a p-value of

0.524. In comparing the computed value with the critical

value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted

that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical

value and the p-value turned greater than the . This

signified that the correlation between the

137

aforesaid variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the academic

Table 28

Relationship Between the Academic Performance of the


Pupils Based on Their Final General Average During
S. Y 2014 2015 and the Teacher-Respondents
Classroom Management Styles

Coeffi-
Classroom Degree of Fisher Evalua-
cient of p-
Management Correlatio s t- tion /
Correla- Value
Styles n value Decision
tion
Authoritaria NS /
0.082 Negligible 0.524 0.688
n Accept Ho
Authoritativ 0.392 Low 0.001 3.565 S /
e Reject Ho
S /
Democratic 0.289 Low 0.014 2.526
Reject Ho
Lassiez- NS /
-0.201 Low 0.115 1.717
Faire Accept Ho

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256) :

Coefficient of Correlation Degree of Correlation


0.00 to +0.20 Negligible Correlation
+0.21 to +0.40 Low or Slight Correlation
+0.41 to +0.70 Marked or Moderate Relationship
+0.71 to +0.90 High Relationship
+0.91to +0.99 Very High Relationship
+1.00 Perfect Correlation

Fishers t-critical Value +1.994; df = 70


S = Significant p-value < = .05 or
Computed > Critical Values
NS = Not Significant p-value > = .05 or
Computed < Critical Values

performance of the pupil-respondents based on the final

general average during the School Year 2014 2015 and

authoritarian classroom management style practiced by the

138

teacher-respondents was accepted. This meant that the

academic performance of the pupil-respondents was not

influenced by the authoritarian classroom management style

of the teacher.

In associating the academic performance of pupil-

respondents based on their final general average during the

School Year 2014 2015 and the authoritative classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.392 denoting

a low positive correlation. Further test of the significance


of the coefficient value using the Fishers t-test, the

computed value resulted to 3.565 with a p-value of 0.001. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned greater than the critical value and

the p-value turned lesser than the . This signified that

the correlation between the aforesaid variables was

significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant relationship between the academic performance of

the pupil-respondents based on the final general average

during the School Year 2014 2015 and authoritative

classroom management style practiced by the teacher-

respondents was rejected. This meant that the

139

academic performance of the pupil-respondents was influenced

by the authoritative classroom management style of the

teacher.

The correlation being positive suggested a direct

proportional relationship. This meant that the more the

teacher-respondents practiced authoritative classroom

management style, the higher the performance of the

pupil-respondents. This implied that the teachers being

authoritative compelled the pupils to study harder thereby

manifesting better academic performance.


In associating the academic performance of pupil-

respondents based on their final general average during the

School Year 2014 2015 and the democratic classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.289 denoting

a low positive correlation. Further test of the significance

of the coefficient value using the Fishers t-test, the

computed value resulted to 2.526 with a p-value of 0.014. In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of

1.994 and the p-value with the , it can be noted that the

computed t-value turned greater than the critical value and

the p-value turned lesser than the . This signified

that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was

significant.

140

Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no significant relationship between the academic performance

of the pupil-respondents based on the final general average

during the School Year 2014 2015 and democratic classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents was

rejected. This meant that the academic performance of the

pupil-respondents was influenced by the democratic classroom

management style of the teacher.

The correlation being positive suggested a direct

proportional relationship. This meant that the more the


teacher-respondents practiced democratic classroom

management style, the higher the performance of the pupil-

respondents. This implied that the teachers being democratic

allowed the pupils to freely explore themselves with their

talents and thereby perform better academic performance.

In associating the academic performance of pupil-

respondents based on their final general average during the

School Year 2014 2015 and the laissez-faire classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.201

denoting a negligible negative correlation. Further test of

the significance of the coefficient value using the

141

Fishers t-test, the computed value resulted to 1.717 with a

p-value of 0.115. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the , it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the

critical value and the p-value turned greater than the .

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid

variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there

is no significant relationship between the academic

performance of the pupil-respondents based on the final

general average during the School Year 2014 2015

and lassiez-faire classroom management style practiced by


the teacher-respondents was accepted. This meant that the

academic performance of the pupil-respondents was not

influenced by the lassiez-faire classroom management style

of the teacher.

In summary, of the four identified classroom management

styles practiced by the teacher-respondents, authoritative

and democratic classroom management styles posed significant

influence to the academic performance of the pupil-

respondents based on the final general average during the

School Year 2014 2015. The other two identified

classroom management styles, namely: authoritarian

and laissez-faire proved no significant

142

influence to it.

Implications Derived from the


Findings of the Study

The following implications were drawn from the

findings/results this study:

Firstly, the finding that there is no significant

relationship between the teacher-respondents profile

variates with the classroom management styles they employed

implies that regardless of their age and sex, civil status,

educational qualification, average monthly family income,

number of relevant in-service trainings and number of years

in teaching, the academic performance of the pupils is not


affected. It further implies that said variables may not

play a major role in classroom instruction.


Secondly, it was found out in this study that the

classroom management styles of authoritative and democratic

had significant correlation with the academic performance of

the pupils. There was direct proportional correlation. This

implies that said two styles of classroom management tend to

favor a more positive influence on the pupils academic

performance.
Finally, the above-cited findings would suggest that

there is a need to re-examine the components of the RPAST


143
to give way for a possible greater weight for the classroom

management styles employed by the teachers in evaluating

their teaching performance.


Chapter 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of the findings of

the study with the corresponding analyses and

interpretations of the data.

Summary of Findings

The following were the major findings of the study:

1. The mean age of this group of respondents was

calculated at 37.85 years old with a standard deviation (SD)

of 11.20 years and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.30.

Furthermore, majority of the teacher-respondents were

female.

2. Majority of the teacher-respondents were married and

only few of them were single and widowed.


3. Majority of the teacher-respondents had baccalaureate degree

as the highest educational qualification. However, there

were a number of them who had advanced education.


4. The mean monthly family income earned by the teacher-

respondents was pegged at Php19,895.38 with a SD of

Php8,269.52 and a CV of 0.42.


5. The teacher-respondents attended several trainings in the

different levels national, regional, division, and

district. Most of their trainings were in the

145

regional and district levels.

6. The mean number of years in teaching of the teacher-

respondents was 10.78 years with a SD of 9.64 years and CV

of 0.89.
7. The mean age of the administrator-respondents was calculated

at 47.67 years old with a SD of 5.12 years and CV of 0.11

whereby majority of the them were female.


8. All of the administrator-respondents were married.
9. Half of the administrator-respondents were in the doctoral

level while few of them were in the masters level and

baccalaureate degree.
10. The mean number of years as administrator of the

administrator-respondents was 5.50 years with a SD of 1.22

years and CV of 0.22.


11. The mean monthly family income earned by the

administrator was Php38,666.67 with a SD of Php14,375.91 and

CV of 0.37.
12. The mean number of family members of the administrator-

respondents was six with a SD of two members and CV of 0.33.


13. The administrator-respondents attended several

trainings also in the different levels national,

regional, division, and district. Most of their trainings


146

were in the regional and district levels.

14. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same

adjectival classification of the classroom management styles

of the teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management style. However, they slightly differed in the

numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand

weighted mean of 2.78 while the administrator-respondents

gave a grand weighted mean of 2.70 with the same adjectival

interpretation of neutral.

15. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same

adjectival classification of the classroom management styles

of the teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style. However, they differed in the numerical

assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted

mean of 4.10 while the administrator-respondents gave a

grand weighted mean of 3.67 with the same adjectival

interpretation of agree.

16. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same

adjectival classification of the classroom management styles

of the teacher-respondents along democratic classroom

management style. However, they differed in the numerical

assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted


mean of 3.27 while the administrator-respondents gave a

grand weighted mean of 2.90 with the same adjectival

147

interpretation of neutral.

17. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same

adjectival classification of the classroom management styles

of the teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom management style. However, they differed in the

numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand

weighted mean of 2.01 while the administrator-respondents

gave a grand weighted mean of 2.07 with the same adjectival

interpretation of disagree.

18. None of the personal variates of the teacher-

respondents proved to have an influence to the classroom

management styles they practiced in school along

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire.

19. The mean academic performance of the pupil-

respondents based on their final grade during the School

Year 2014 2015 was pegged at 81.15 with a SD of 2.33 and

CV of 0.03.

20. In the association of the academic performance of

the pupil-respondents and the classroom management styles

practiced by the teacher-respondents, the following results

were arrived at: authoritarian, not significant;


authoritative, significant; democratic, significant;

laissez-faire, not significant.

148

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following

conclusions were drawn:

1. The teacher-respondents were on their late 30s but

relatively young and at the prime of their age, which were

dominated by the female sex, an indication that in the past,

if not up to the present, majority of those who took up the

teacher education course belonged to this sex and only few

of the males embraced the teaching profession.


2. Most of the teacher-respondents had conjugal family

responsibilities which they raise and maintain by the income

they derived from teaching.


3. The teacher-respondents were educationally qualified having

obtained the minimum educational requirement required for

the teaching position. Some, however, recognized the value

of advanced education that they pursued the masters level

or even obtaining a masters degree.


4. The teacher-respondents had a regular family income which

they used to finance the basic and nutritional needs of the

family members.
5. The teacher-respondents considered in-service trainings

as their avenue for professional growth that a number of

them strove to attend in the different levels as

149
their chances warranted them to attend.

6. The teacher-respondents had been teaching for quite a number

of years, however, a number of them were newly hired.


7. The administrator-respondents were on their late 40s but at

the prime of their age. Moreover, female dominance existed

among administrator-respondents as the result of the

observation in the past that women mostly embraced teaching

as a profession so that in the event of promotion to

administrator positions, most of them rose from the ranks.


8. Most of administrator-respondents had conjugal family

responsibilities which they raise and maintained by the

income they derived from their profession.


9. A number of administrator-respondents had earned educational

qualification higher than the minimum educational level

required for the teaching profession.


10. The administrator-respondents had been in the service

as school administrators for quite a number of years.


11. The administrator-respondent had a regular income they

earned to finance the basic necessities of their respective

family members.
12. The administrator-respondents had an ideal family
150

size of six based on the average family set in the

calculation of the poverty threshold that is composed of the

couple and four children.

13. The administrator-respondents considered also in-

service trainings as their avenue for professional growth

that a number of them had attended trainings in the

different levels which they were required to attend.


14. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same

classification of the classroom management style of the

teacher-respondents. Along authoritarian both groups of

respondents perceived the teacher-respondents as practicing

moderately; authoritative, highly; democratic, moderately;

and laissez-faire, slightly. Thus, the corresponding null

hypotheses to these effects were accepted.

15. The practice of the teacher-respondents with the

different classroom management styles was not influenced by

their personal characteristics.


16. More or less the pupil-respondents were homogeneously

performing academically with a slight variation in their

academic performance as compared with the average.

Furthermore, the pupil-respondents showed a favorable

academic performance during the school year being shown by

the mean which turned higher than the required mastery

level of 75.00 per cent (DepEd).

151

17. Of the four identified classroom management styles

practiced by the teacher-respondents, authoritative and

democratic classroom management styles posed significant

influence to the academic performance of the pupil-

respondents based on the final general average during the

School Year 2014 2015. The other two identified classroom

management styles, namely: authoritarian and laissez-faire

proved no significant influence to it.


Recommendations

Based on the conclusions drawn from the findings of the

study, the following are the recommendations:

1. As it is revealed in this study that pupils

academic performance was significantly influenced by both

the authoritative and democratic classroom management styles

practiced by the teachers, it is recommended that teachers

at all times should practice authoritative-democratic

classroom management styles in the classroom all the time as

a strategy to boost the academic performance of the pupils.

The greater extent the teachers assume authority in the

classroom and allow the pupils to explore their innate

abilities would compel the pupils to excel more in their

academic performance.

2. Although the other identified classroom management

styles did not prove significantly influencing the academic

152

performance of the pupils, they can still be practiced by

the teachers in moderation. As teachers, they should be

contingent in the use of classroom management styles, that

is, they should practice what is appropriate for a situation

and not practicing similar styles which might not be

appropriate for a certain situation.


3. The teachers should be encouraged to explore other classroom

management styles which may be effective in raising the

academic performance of the pupils.


4. This study could be of practical value in the light of the

implementation of the K to 12 Program of the government.


5. Another study may be conducted to validate the findings of

this study.
6. A sequel study may be conducted exploring other classroom

management styles which might influence the academic

performance of the pupils.


B I B L I O G R A P H Y

154
BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. BOOKS

Aquino, Gaudencio V., Curriculum Innovation, Mandaluyong


City: National Bookstore, 2009.

Bilbao, Purita P., et al., The Teaching Profession, Quezon


City: Lorimar Publishing, Inc., 2006.

Calderon, Jose F., Foundations of Education, Quezon City:


Rex Printing Company, Inc., 1999.

Calmorin, Laurentina P., Educational Research Measurement


and Evaluation, 2nd ed.,Manila: National Bookstore,
1994.

Castillon-Boiser, Diosdada, Strategies for Teaching: A


Modular Approach, Manila: Rex Bookstore, 2000.
Duka, Cecilio D., Philosophy of Education, Manila: Rex
Bookstore, 2006.

Ebel, R.L., Measuring Educational Achievement, New Jersey:


Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.

Freud, John E. and Gary A. Simon, Modern Elementary


Statistics, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1992.

Gellor, Jaime M., Readings on New Thrusts in Education,


Unnamed Publisher, 1984.

Lardizabal, Amparo S., Principles and Methods of Teaching,


3rd ed., Quezon City: Phoenix Publishing House, 1995.

Morphet, William H., Administrative Action: The Techniques


of Organization and Management, New York: Prentice-Hall,
1967.

Palma, Jesus C., Curriculum Development System: A Handbook


for School Practitioners in Basic Education, Mandaluyong
City: National Bookstore, 1992.

Palma, Jesus C., Curriculum Development System, Mandaluyong


City: National Bookstore, 2005.

Pila, Rowena A., et al., The Teaching Profession in the


Philippines, Mandaluyong City: Anvil Publishing, Inc.,
2003.
155
Salandanan, Gloria G. and Brenda Corpuz, Principles of
Teaching, Quezon City: Lorimar Publishing, Inc., 2007.

Singh, Rosario P., and Corazon P. Padilla, Innovative


Teaching and Evaluation, Mandaluyong City: National
Bookstore, 1990.

Sutaria, Minda C., et al., Philippine Education: Visions and


Perspectives, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore,
1989.

Tauber, Robert T., Classroom Management: Sound Theory and


Effective Practice, Mandaluyong City: National
Bookstore, 1999.

The New Lexicon Websters Encyclopedic Dictionary of the


English Language, Connecticut,USA: Lexicon Publications,
Inc., 1997.
Walpole, Ronald E., Introduction to Statistics,3rd ed., New
York: McMillan Publishing, Inc., 1982.

Weinstein, Carol S. and Andrew Mignano, Jr., Elementary


Classroom Management: Lessons from Research and
Practice, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 2003.

Zulueta, Francisco M., Principles and Methods of Teaching,


Manila: Rex Bookstore, 1991.

B. PUBLISHED MATERIALS

Florin, Lauren D., Kindergarten Teachers' Classroom


Management Beliefs and Practices and Their
ImplicationsOn the Social and Academic Outcomes,
Published Masters Thesis, Old Dominion University,
Norfolk, Virginia, USA, May 2011.

Keohan, David J., Middle School Classroom Management and


Student Behavior, Published Masters Thesis, Sierra
Nevada College, Nevada, USA, May 2013.

Obwoya, Martin F., Classroom Management and Learners


Achievement in Secondary Schools in Kitgum, Published
Masters Thesis, Gulu University, Gulu, Uganda,
April 2013.

156

C. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS

Enderio, Demetria R., Performance of Grade III Pupils in


Mathemetics: Basis for an Enhancement Program,
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan,
Samar, March 2004.

Laboc, Josefina M., Classroom Learning Environment and


Attitude Towards Reading English Language of Grade VI
Pupils, Unpublished Masters Thesis, Samar College,
Catbalogan City, Samar, 2008.

Maghanoy, Rosalia S., Learning Styles of Secondary Students


as Correlates to Their Reading Capacity Level,
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan
City, Samar, 2008.
Padilla, Pedrito G., Students Achievement in Science and
Technology in the Secondary Education Development
Program (SEDP): The Eastern Visayas Experience,
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Samar State University,
Catbalogan City, Samar, 2006.

Perez, Edwin S., Scholastic Performance of Grade Six Pupils


in Science Among Private and Public Schools in
Catbalogan, Samar: Inputs for Enrichment Program,
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan,
Samar, March 2005.

Reballos-Gabon, Ronila, Teaching Effectiveness of Secondary


School Teachers of Wright National High School: Basis
for an Intervention Scheme, Unpublished Masters
Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan City, 2013.

Tan-Payos, Christene, Filipino Management Styles of


Secondary School Administrators and Teachers
Performance: The Northern Samar Experience,
Unpublished Masters Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan,
Samar, 2004.

D.ELECTRONIC AND OTHER SOURCES

http://www.globalpartnership.org/education, November 22,


2014.

http://www.lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html, November 26,


2014.
157

http://www.unicef.org/education/files/QualityEducation.PDF
November 15, 2014.

http://teaching.about.com/od/classroommanagement/tp
/
Classroom-Management-Tips.htm, November 15, 2014.

http://www.edutopia.org/classroom-management-
relationships-strategies-tips November 15, 2014.

http://educ-reality.com/behaviour-management-theories/,
November 20, 2014.

http://study.com/academy/lesson/john-dewey-on-education-
impacttheory.html October 12, 2014.

http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html, October
12, 2014.

http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-97
80199756810/obo-9780199756810-0108.xml, November 20,
2014.

http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p
df,November 10, 2014.

http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p
df,November 10, 2014.

https://blog.udemy.com/classroom-management-styles/,
November 10, 2014).

http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p
df,November 10, 2014.

http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p
df,November 10, 2014.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/education,October 23,
2014.

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/103027/chapters/The-
Critical-Role-of-Classroom-Management.aspx,
November 20, 2014.

https://blog.udemy.com/effective-classroom-management-2/,
November 20, 2014.

158

https://blog.com/-classroom-management November 20, 2014.

http://edglossary.org/classroom-management/, November 25,


2014.

http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p
df, November 15, 2014.

http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html 3,
November 15, 2014.

http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/103027/chapters/The-
Critical-Role-of-Classroom-Management.aspx, January 20,
2015.
Biri Municipality Tourism Office Hand-out, February 2015.
A P P E N D I C E S

160

APPENDIX A

Republic of the Philippines


Commission on Higher Education
SAMAR COLLEGE
GRADUATE STUDIES
Catbalogan City

October 3, 2014

THE DEAN
Graduate Studies
Samar College
Catbalogan City

M a d a m:
With the desire of the undersigned researcher to start
writing her thesis proposal, she has the honor to submit for your
evaluation, suggestion, recommendation and approval three
proposed titles, preferably number 1, to wit:

1. Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Effect


on the Academic Performance of Pupils in the
Elementary Grade Schools in the District of Biri,
Division Of Northern Samar
2. K to 12 Year 3 Implementation: Issues and Concerns
Felt by School Heads and Teachers in the District of
Biri, Division of Northern Samar
3. Classroom Management and Academic Achievement of
Pupils in Biri Central Elementary Schools

I anticipate for your prompt and favorable consideration.

Very Truly yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Graduate Student

Recommended
Title:

____#1_______ (SGD.) BANELLO P. GABON, Ph. D.


Evaluator
____#1_______ (SGD.) NATALIA B. UY, Ph. D.
Evaluator
____#1_______ (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.
Evaluator

APPROVED TITLE No. _#1_

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
161

APPENDIX B

Republic of the Philippines


Commission on Higher Education
SAMAR COLLEGE
GRADUATE STUDIES
Catbalogan City

ASSIGNMENT OF ADVISER

NAME : IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO

COURSE : Master of Arts in Education

SPECIALIZATION : Educational Management


TITLE OF THESIS PROPOSAL : Classroom Management Styles:

Their Effect on the Academic

Performance Of the Pupils

in the Elementary Grade

Schools in the District of Biri,

Division of Northern Samar

NAME OF ADVISER : Pedrito G. Padilla, Ph. D.

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Graduate Student

CONFORME:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

APPROVED:

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies

162
APPENDIX C

Letter-Request for Permission to the Schools Division


Superintendent to Field Questionnaires and Have
Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


CRISTITO ACERO ECO,CESE
Schools Division Superintendent
Division Of Northern Samar
Catarman, Northern Samar

Sir:
Greetings!

The undersigned would like to seek permission from your good office to
conduct a study on her Masters Thesis entitled Classroom Management Styles of
Teachers: Their Influence on the Academic Performance of Pupils in the District
of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar.
The target respondents of the said study in which questionnaires will be
fielded are the six elementary administrators and all of the teachers of the
eleven elementary schools.
The undersigned would also like to seek permission for the access of
Form SF-5 (Report on Promotion), S.Y. 2014-2015 of all of the eleven schools as
part of the documentary analysis of this study.
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.)IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD,)PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD,) CRISTITO A. ECO,CESE


Schools Division Superintendent

163

APPENDIX D

Letter-Request for Permission to the Public Schools District


Supervisor to Field Questionnaires and Have
Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


ETHELINDA PAREDES-ASIS
Public Schools District Supervisor
Division Of Northern Samar
Catarman, Northern Samar

Madam:
Greetings!
The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis
entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.
In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 of the entire District of
Biri for documentary analysis.
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) ETHELINDA P. ASIS


Public Schools District Supervisor

164

APPENDIX E

Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Bagong


Silang Elem. School and Langub-Langub Elem. School
to Field Questionnaires and Have
Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


ROGELIO LABENIA CALVO
Head Teacher
Bagong Silang Elementary School and
Langub-Langub Elementary School

Sir:
Greetings!
The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis
entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.
In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis.
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) ROGELIO L. CALVO


Head Teacher I

165

APPENDIX F

Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Basud


Elem. School, Talisay Elem. School and Tampipi Elem.
School to Field Questionnaires and Have
Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


TERESITA ALBARIO-CANESO
Head Teacher
Basud Elementary School,
Talisay Elementary School and
Tampipi Elementary School

Madam:
Greetings!
The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis
entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.
In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis.
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.
Respectfully yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) TERESITA A. CANESO


Head Teacher-I
166

APPENDIX G

Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Biri


Central Elementary School to Field Questionnaires
and Have Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


MARIVIC AMOR-ESTAVILLO
Head Teacher
Biri Central Elementary School

Madam:
Greetings!
The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis
entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.
In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis.
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.)IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) MARIVIC A. ESTAVILLO


Principal-I

167

APPENDIX H

Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Cawayan


Elem. School, Macaret Elem. School and Salvacion Elem.
School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access
to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


PELAGIO BALAWANG ESTAVILLO
PRINCIPAL
Cawayan Elementary School,
Macaret Elementary School and
Salvacion Elementary School
Sir:
Greetings!
The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis
entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.
In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis.
82
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) PELAGIO B. ESTAVILLO


Principal-I

168

APPENDIX I

Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of


Palhugan Elementary School to Field Questionnaires
and Have Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


GLENDA ENGO-EVANGELISTA
Head Teacher
Palhugan Elementary School
Madam:
Greetings!

The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis


entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.
In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis.
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) GLENDA E. EVANGELISTA


Head Teacher-I

169

APPENDIX J

Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of San


Antonio Elementary School to Field Questionnaires
and Have Access to Report on Promotions

Republic of the Philippines


Department of Education
Region VIII
DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR
Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015


ELENA ESTAVILLO-FLORES
PRINCIPAL
San Antonio Elementary School

Madam:
Greetings!
The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Masters Thesis
entitled Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the
Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern
Samar.

In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office
that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have
access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis.

86
Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and
God bless.

Respectfully yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Teacher-Researcher

Recommending Approval:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D.


Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D.


Dean, Graduate Studies
Samar College

APPROVED:

(SGD.) ELENA E. FLORES


Principal-I

170

APPENDIX K

Republic of the Philippines


Commission on Higher Education
SAMAR COLLEGE
GRADUATE STUDIES
Catbalogan City

July 1, 2015

Dear Respondent:

Good day!

The undersigned researcher is currently conducting a


study entitled, Classroom Management Styles: Their
Influence on the Academic Performance of the Pupils in the
District of Biri, Division of Northern Samar, as a
requirement for the degree Master of Arts in Education with
the College of Graduate Studies of Samar College, Catbalogan
City.

Along this line, she would like to request for your


support and cooperation by answering the attached
questionnaire.

Rest assured that all the pieces of information you


provide in her study will be treated with utmost
confidentiality and that these will solely be used for
research purposes and would be presented without any
reference to a particular person.

Thank you.

Truly yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Researcher

171

APPENDIX L

QUESTIONNAIRE
(For the Teacher-Respondents)

PART I. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Direction: Kindly provide the information asked for by


writing in the space provided or by checking
the appropriate box. You may or may not
write your name (OPTIONAL ONLY).

Name:________________Age:_____ Sex: Male Female


Civil Status: Single Separated

Married Annulled

Widowed Others, Specify:___

Educational
Qualification: Doctoral Degree

Doctoral Level

Masters Degree

Masters Level (Including CAR)

Baccalaureate Degree

Others, specify:__________________

Average Monthly Family


Income:__________________________________

Number of Years in
Teaching:____________________________________

172

Number of Relevant In-service Trainings Attended:

Level Number of Trainings


International
National
Regional
Division
District
Others, specify:______________

PART II. CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES

Direction: Below are twelve statements on classroom


management styles. Read each statement
carefully. Respond to each statement based
upon your either actual or perceived/imagined
classroom experience. Write your
response to each statement and signify your
agreement by checking the appropriate column
using the following scale:

5 = Strongly Agree
4 = Agree
3 = Neutral (Not Certain)
2 = Disagree
1 = Strongly Disagree

Classroom Management Statements 5 4 3 2 1


(SA (A (N (D (SD
) ) ) ) )
1. If a student is disruptive
during class, I send him/her
to principals office,
without further discussion.
2. I don't want to impose any
rules on my students.
3. The classroom must be quiet
in order for students to
learn.
4. I am concerned about both
what my students learn and
how they learn.
Classroom Management Statements 5 4 3 2 1
(SA (A (N (D (SD
) ) ) ) )
5. If a student turns in a late
homework assignment, it is
not my problem.
6. I don't want to reprimand a
student because it might hurt
his/her feelings.

7. Class preparation isn't worth


the effort.

8. I always try to explain the


reasons behind my rules and
decisions.
9. I will not accept excuses
from a student who is tardy.
10. The emotional well-being
of my students is more
important than classroom
control.
11. My students understand
that they can interrupt my
lecture if they have a
relevant question.
12. If a student requests a
hall pass, I always honor the
request.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!

IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Researcher

174

APPENDIX M

QUESTIONNAIRE
(For Administrator-Respondents)
PART I. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Direction: Kindly provide the information asked for by


writing in the space provided or by checking
the appropriate box. You may or may not
write your name (OPTIONAL ONLY).

Name:___________________ Age:____Sex: Male Female

Civil Status: Single Separated

Married Annulled

Widowed Others, specify:____

Educational
Qualification: Doctoral Degree

Doctoral Level

Masters Degree

Masters Level (Including CAR)

Baccalaureate Degree

Others,Specify:___________________

Number of Years as
Administrator:_______________________________

Average Monthly Family


Income:__________________________________

175

Number of Family
Members:_______________________________________

Number of Relevant In-service Trainings Attended:

Level Number of Trainings


International
National
Regional
Division
District
Others, specify:______________

PART II. CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES

Direction: Below are twelve statements on classroom


Management styles. Read each statement
carefully. Respond to each statement based
upon your either actual observation or
perceived/imagined classroom management
style of your teachers. Write your
response to each statement and signify your
agreement by checking the appropriate column
using the following scale:

5 = Strongly Agree
4 = Agree
3 = Neutral (Not Certain)
2 = Disagree
1 = Strongly Disagree

Classroom Management Statements 5 4 3 2 1


(SA (A (N (D (SD
) ) ) ) )
1. If a student is disruptive
during class, he/she assigns
him/her to detention, without
further discussion.
2. He/She doesnt want to impose
any rules on his/her
students.
Classroom Management Statements 5 4 3 2 1
(SA (A (N (D (SD
) ) ) ) )
3. The classroom must be quiet
in order for students to
learn.
4. He/She is concerned about
both what his/her students
learn and how they learn.
5. If a student turns in a late
homework assignment, it is
not his/her problem.
6. He/She doesnt want to
reprimand a student because
it might hurt his/her
feelings.

7. Class preparation isn't worth


the effort.

8. He/She always tries to


explain the reasons behind
his/her rules and decisions.
9. He/She will not accept
excuses from a student who is
tardy.
10. The emotional well-being
of his/her students is more
important than classroom
control.
11. His/Her students
understand that they can
interrupt his/her lecture if
they have a relevant
question.
12. If a student requests a
hall pass, he/she always
honor the request.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO


Researcher
177

APPENDIX N

Classroom Management Profile/Sytle Statements

1. If a student is disruptive during class, I send him/her

to the principals office, without further discussion.


2. I dont want to impose any rules on m students.
3. The classroom must be quiet in order for students to

learn.
4. I am concerned about both what my students learn and

how they learn.


5. If a student turns in a late homework/assignment, it is

not my problem.
6. I dont want to reprimand a student because it might

hurt his/her feelings.


7. Class preparation is not worth the effort.
8. I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and

decisions.
9. I will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy.
10. The emotional well-being of my students is more

important than classroom control.


11. My students understand that they can interrupt my

lecture if they have a relevant question.

178
12. If a student requests a hall pass, i always honor

the request.

Note:

Numbers 1, 3 and 9 are authoritarian statements.


Numbers 4, 8 and 11 are authoritative statements.

Numbers 6, 10 and 12 are democratic statements.

Numbers 2, 5 and 7 are laissez-faire statements.

(http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyl

e pdf,November 10, 2014).


C U R R I C U L U M V I T A E

180

CURRICULUM VITAE

NAME : IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO

HOME ADDRESS : Pabanog, Paranas, Samar

DATE OF BIRTH : April 13, 1987

PLACE OF BIRTH : Las Navas, Northern Samar


CIVIL STATUS : Single

PRESENT POSITION : Teacher I

STATION : Basud Elementary School

DEGREE PURSUED : Master of Arts in Education

SPECIALIZATION : Educational Management

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

ELEMENTARY : Pabanog Elementary School


Pabanog, Paranas, Samar......1994-2000

SECONDARY : Samar State Polytechnic College


Catbalogan City, Samar ......2000-2004

TERTIARY : Bachelor of Elementary Education


University of Eastern Philippines
Catarman, Northern Samar ....2004-2009

GRADUATE STUDIES : Master of Arts in Education


Major in Educational Management
Samar College
Catbalogan City, Samar.....2010-present

ELIGIBILITY

Licensure Examination for


Teachers (LET) : 79.60%
: Legazpi City, Oct. 1, 2009

181

WORK EXPERIENCE

Public Elementary School Teacher I, Basud Elementary School


Biri, Northern Samar .............. 2010 - present

Municipal Paid School Teacher, Pabanog Elementary School


Pabanog, Paranas, Samar ........... Jan. 2010-Mar. 2010

TRAININGS/SEMINARS/WORKSHOPS ATTENDED
National Conference Workshop on Culture and Arts

Three-day Division-based Training on Instructional


Strategies in Multigrade Classes

Teachers Induction Program

Basic Computer Literacy Program