PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents the review of literature relevant to the present study.

2.1 Conceptual Literature

This chapter presents a review of concepts and researches reviewed from books,

published thesis, journal, electronics and other publications which have significant

bearing and relevance to the recent study that have direct bearing to the present study, the

review is divided into two sections: Conceptual Literature and Research Literature.

2.1.1 Rationale of K-12 Mathematics Curriculum

Mathematics from K-10 is a skills subject. By itself, it is all about quantities,

shapes and figures, functions, logic and reasoning. It is also a tool of science and a

language complete with its own notations and symbols and “grammar” rules, with which

concepts and ideas are effectively expressed (K to 12 Curriculum Guide Mathematics,

2012).

The contents of mathematics include Numbers and Number Sense, Measurement,

Geometry, Patterns & Algebra and Statistics, and Probability. Numbers and Number

Sense as a strand includes concepts of numbers, properties, operations, estimation and

their applications; Measurement as a strand includes the use of numbers and measures to

describe, understand and compare mathematical and concrete objects. It focuses on

attributes such as length, mass and weight, capacity, time, money and temperature among

others, as well as applications involving perimeter, area, surface area, volume and angle

measure (K to 12 Curriculum Guide Mathematics, 2012).

 15

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

Additionally, Geometry as a strand includes properties of two- and three-

dimensional figures and their relationships, spatial visualization, reasoning and geometric

modelling and proofs. Meanwhile, Patterns and Algebra as a strand studies patterns,

relationships and changes among shapes and quantities and includes the use of algebraic

notations and symbols, equations and most importantly, functions, to represent and

analyze relationships (K to 12 Curriculum Guide Mathematics, 2012).

Moreover, Statistics and Probability as a strand is all about developing skills in

collecting and organizing data using charts, tables and graphs, understanding, analyzing

and interpreting data, dealing with uncertainty and making predictions and outcomes (K

to 12 Curriculum Guide Mathematics, 2012).

Overall, the K to 10 Mathematics Curriculum provides a solid foundation for

Mathematics at Grades 11 to 12. More importantly, it provides necessary concepts and

life skills needed by Filipino learners as they proceed to the next stage in their life as

learners and as citizens of the Philippines (K to 12 Curriculum Guide Mathematics,

2012).

The twin goals of mathematics in the basic education levels are Critical Thinking

and Problem Solving Skills. According to Scriven and Paul (1987), critical thinking: is

the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skilfully conceptualizing, applying,

analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by,

observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and

action.

10
 16

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

On the other hand, Problem Solving in Mathematics is defined as “finding a way

around a difficulty, around an obstacle, and finding a solution to a problem that is

unknown” (Polya 1943, 1962).

These two goals are to be achieved with in an organized and rigorous curriculum

content, a well-defined set of high-level skills and processes, desirable values and

attitudes, and appropriate tools, recognizing as well the different contexts of Filipino

learners.

There are five content areas in the curriculum, as adopted from the framework

prepared by MATHTED & SEI (2010): Numbers and Number Sense, Measurement,

Geometry, Patterns and Algebra, and Probability and Statistics (K to 12 Curriculum

Guide Mathematics, 2012). The specific skills and processes to be developed are:

knowing and understanding; estimating, computing and solving; visualizing and

modelling; representing and communicating; conjecturing, reasoning, proving and

decision-making; and Applying and Connecting. Moreover, the following values and

attitudes are to be honed as well: accuracy, creativity, objectivity, perseverance, and

productivity (K to 12 Curriculum Guide Mathematics, 2012).

2.1.2 Rationale of K-12 in the Philippines

The Philippines must catch up with the rest of the world. Among the members of

the ASEAN, Philippines is ranked 5th in Quality of education, is ranked 8 th in the quality

of Science and last in Mathematics education and capacity for innovation and is the last

10
 17

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

country in Asia and one of only three countries in the world with a 10-year pre-univesity

program (Baldevarona, 2013).

K to 12 addresses multiple priorities in President Aquino’s 10-point basic

education agenda inclusive of 12-year basic education cycle, universal pre-schooling for

all, Madaris education as a sub-system within the education system, technical Vocational

education as an alternative stream in senior high school, “Every child a reader” by Grade

1, Science and Math proficiency, assistance to private schools as essential partners in

basic education, Medium of instruction rationalized, Quality textbooks, and Covenant

with the local governments to build more schools, as enunciated in the Philippine

Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016.

The K to 12 framework aims to ensure that it will: a) meet legal and other formal

requirements of employment; b) pass the test of global standards; and c) prepare students

for the higher levels of learning and employability. Moreover, government shall also

reinforce career consciousness among students as well as provide guidance and

counseling throughout the K to 12 program (Baldevarona, 2013).

The DepEds policy paper on K to 12 suggested the poor quality of basic education

in the Philippines as reflected in the low achievement scores of its students. Moreover,

students have insufficient mastery of basic competencies due to congested curriculum

(Baldevarona, 2013).

The present curriculum is designed to be taught in a span of 12 years. This means

that kindergarten education shall be compulsory for 5-year old children before entering
 18

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

grade 1. With the enactment of RA 10157 or Kindergarten Education Act, the mandatory

kindergarten is now institutionalized as an integral part of the formal basic education

system in the country. Moreover, the two years of senior high school intend to enable

students to consolidate acquired academic skills and competencies. The curriculum allow

specializations in science and technology, music and arts, agriculture and fisheries,

sports, business and entrepreneurship, depending on the occupation or career that

students intend to pursue (Baldevarona, 2013).

With K to 12, graduates are expected to find it less harder to get a job. This is

because the employers are ready to hire K to 12 graduates, according to DepEd Secretary

Bro. Armin A. Luistro. In fact, DepEd has entered into an agreement with business

organizations such as the Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) and

Business Processing Association of the Philippines (BPAP) and other industries to

support the graduates of K to 12 by providing them with jobs. Business organizations

shall provide DepEd with their employment needs while DepEd shall ensure that the

schools competency standards shall be matched with the requirements of the employers

(Baldevarona, 2013).

2.1.3 Key Features of K-12 Program

A. Lengthened Secondary Education and Mandated Kindergarten

Under the K to 12 Program, the length of basic education has been expanded.

Two more years have been added to the existing four years of secondary education, which

will extend basic education to 12 years, and one year of kindergarten has been
 19

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

mandated as part of basic education. The extension of secondary education means that

students aged 16 and 17, will now be in senior high school, and entry into tertiary

education will be at age 18 (Okabe, 2013).

The extension of secondary education through age 17 will bring the Philippines

into conformity with the other countries of Southeast Asia. Its long-standing system with

high school ending at age 15 has been a cause for many problems both pedagogical and

socio-economic inclusive of congested curricula in order to fulfill mandated educational

requirements, the non-eligibility of graduates to immediately enter overseas tertiary

educational institutes because of the younger age of Filipino high school graduates, and

the ineligibility of graduates to take up employment because of being under the legally

employable age. Reform of the education system under the “K to 12 Program” is

expected to reduce these problems (Okabe, 2013).

B. Features of the Curriculum

Lengthening secondary schooling by two years will help decongest the

curriculum. Content that had to be taught within 4 years will now be taught over 6 years.

The “K to 12” Program also makes possible the seamless continuity of education from

kindergarten through elementary school to high school. Graduates will gain a high

school diploma, and they can also acquire a Certificate of Competencies or a National

Certification showing that they have acquires a mid-level of skill in their specialization

when going on for higher education or getting a job (Okabe , 2013).

 20

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

The learning goal in the new “K to 12” curriculum is the acquisition of 21 st

century skills, notably, 1)learning and innovation skills, 2) IT and media skills, 3)

effective communication skills, and 4) life and career skills (SEAMEO INNOTECH,

2012). The aim is to bring about “holistically developed Filipinos with 21st century

skills” who are ready for employment, have entrepreneurship, and who possess mid-level

skills and higher education upon graduation from high school. Prior to the “K to 12”

Program, two curricula were in effect: the Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) 20012 and

the Secondary Education Curriculum (SEC) 2010. These two curricula aimed at

promoting functional literacy and lifelong learning. With the new “K to 12” Program

introduced in 2012, the aim is to promote holistic skill development leading to

employment and higher education. The keywords of the “K to 12” Program can be

summed up as “preparation for higher education, “eligibility” for entrance to overseas

tertiary educational institute, and lawful “employability (Okabe , 2013).”

C. The Transition from the BEC/SEC to the “K to 12” Curriculum

The mandated kindergarten began in the School Year 2011-2012, and the Grade 1

of elementary school and grade 7 (the first year) of junior high school started in SY 2012-

13. In SY 2013-2014 Grade 2 and 8 are to start, and thereafter year by year Grade3 and

Grade 9, Grade 4 and Grade 10, Grade 5 an Grade 11, and Grade 6 and Grade 12 are

planned to start. Thus, the first cohort to complete elementary school and the first to

complete secondary school under the new “K to 12” Program will graduate in the year

2018 (Okabe, 2013).

 21

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

D. Reforms at Each School Level

(1) Kindergarten

Republic Act No. 10157 (Act Institutionalizing Kindergarten Education into the

Basic Education System and Appropriating Funds Thereof) was enacted on January 20,

2012. This act declares,

In consonance with Millennium Development Goals on achieving Education

for All (EFA) by the year 2015, it is hereby declared the policy of the State to
provide equal opportunities for all children to avail of accessible mandatory
and compulsory kindergarten education ...to sufficiently prepare them for
formal elementary schooling.

With enactment of the Act, kindergarten education is now free and mandatory.

Kindergarten, i.e., Early Childhood Education (ECE), is the first level of the basic

educational system. During early childhood, the brain grows up to 60-70 percent of adult

size, so this period is crucial for a person's future physiological development and growth.

For this reason and for children to be better prepared for elementary education,

kindergarten is seen as highly important (Okabe, 2013).

(2) Elementary Education

Unlike secondary education, elementary education has not been lengthened under

the "K to 12" Program. However, the medium of instruction has changed significantly. It

is now "Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education" for grades 1-3. The previous

curriculum had provided for bilingual education, but "bilingual" referred to English and

Tagalog. This did not always work well in the Philippine context. The country is

multilingual/multiethnic. Tagalog, with 21.5 million speakers, is spoken over much of the
 22

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

main island of Luzon. However, Tagalog is not the only language spoken in the

Philippines. There are more than 170 languages, the major ones being Cebuano (18.5

million speakers), Iloilo (Ilocano, 7.7 million speakers), Hiligaynon (6.9 million

speakers), and Bikol (4.5 million speakers) (Ricardo, 2008). Thus, non-Tagalog speaking

children had difficulty or were burdened with additional costs when taking classes taught

in English and Tagalog (Ricardo, 2008). Besides their local language, they had to learn

Tagalog and English as second and third languages in order to attend school (Okabe,

2013).

The “K to 12” Program expands the number of local languages used as the

medium of instruction in grades 1-3. Along with Tagalog and English, eleven other

languages will be used. This is expected to better enable younger children to follow the

classroom instruction. From grades 4 to 6, the language will shift to Tagalog and

English(Okabe, 2013).

(3) The Secondary Education

The big change in the Philippine educational system under the “K to 12” Program

is in secondary education. As discussed in section II, access to elementary school has

largely been accomplished, but access to secondary education has not greatly improved.

In the context of educational development studies, secondary education has tended to be

less valued compared to elementary and tertiary education. Elementary education has

been emphasized because of the desire for universal education and the alleviation of

poverty while the focus on tertiary education is to promote industrial development and
 23

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

knowledge economies. Secondary education has been in between and its role less clear

(Lewin and Caillods, 2001).

Under the “K to 12” Program, the value and role of secondary education has been

revisited and is going through significant changes and reform. These changes and reform

are in structure, curriculum, and assessment. The most visible change is the lengthening

to six years and the division into junior and senior high school. Regarding curriculum and

assessment changes, the new curriculum focuses on a “spiral approach” that highlights

the building of knowledge on previously learned knowledge. Under the new curriculum,

assessment will be based on an examination at the end of Grade 10 and Grade 12. This

will replace the national assessment test that was taken by secondary students at the end

of the second year (Okabe, 2013).

The keyword “decongest” is embodied in the allotment of time in the new

curriculum for secondary election. Under the K-12 program, time allotted to the core

subjects of English, Filipino, and Math as well as to some courses that used to fall under

the category of “Makabayan” has decreased. Overall this decreased allotment of time per

week has decongested the curriculum. This has been made possible by addition of two

more years to secondary education. Moreover, although the allotment of time per week

is being decreased, with the lengthening of high school years, the sum total of time

allotted to courses will actually increase. Thus the amount that students learn overall will

increase while each week the amount of time students spend taking core courses and
 24

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

some other classes will decrease. This is a key feature of the new “decongested”

curriculum (Okabe, 2013).

2.1.4 Benefits of the K-12 Program

Prior to the implementation of the K-12 curriculum guide, the Philippines was one

of only three countries in the world and the only one in Asia that still had only 10 years in

basic education in the past four years. This has always been seen as a disadvantage for the

Filipino students who are competing in an increasingly global job market. The longer

educational cycle of the K-12 curriculum is seen as critical in giving Filipino students a

higher quality of education (Uyquiengco, 2013).

The Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization–Innotech (SEAMEO-Innotech)

found the previous 10-year educational cycle to be congested, with a 12-year curriculum

squished into 10 years. As a result, Filipino students have trailed behind students around

the world in the areas of Math, Languages and Science. The new curriculum is aimed to

fix that. The K-12 curriculum is designed to enable graduates to join the work force right

after high school, and suitably prepare those who want to go on to higher education

(Uyquiengco, 2013). The new curriculum will also support college

graduates seeking work abroad. Developed countries, according to the Department of

Education’s (DepEd) briefer, “view the 10-year education cycle as insufficient.”

All in all, the enhanced K-12 curriculum is designed to provide a holistic education for

all. Now decongested, it will give students ample time to master basic academic skills as

well as to participate in co-curricular and community activities.

 25

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

The transition began in 2011, when the universal kindergarten was introduced.

Starting in 2012, schools already implemented the curriculum decongestion mentioned in

the DepEd briefer. Public schools began having half-day classes for grade one students,

with the mother tongue as the medium of instruction. Private schools also made

adjustments in their own DepEd accredited curricula. The adaptation of the K-12

curriculum guide means that students will graduate older compared to those who

graduated under the 10-year education cycle (Uyquiengco, 2013).

Far from being disadvantageous, however, DepEd states that young adults

graduating at age 18 or so will be more prepared to take on their tertiary education.

Remedial classes during the first year of college will no longer be needed, as the high

school curriculum will already be aligned with the Commission on Higher Education’s

(CHED) guidelines.

The government also encourages parents to think of the K-12 curriculum guide not as

having two extra years of high school, but as two years less of higher education.

Graduates of the new educational system will already be equipped to join the workforce

right away with the help of the electives to be offered during grades 11 to 12

(Uyquiengco, 2013). The electives, or areas of specialization, will include academics for

those who wish to pursue higher studies, technical-vocational for those who want to

acquire employable skills after high school, and sports and arts for those who are inclined

in the two fields (Uyquiengco, 2013).

 26

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

2.2 Research Literature

This section presents the research literature that is related to the current study and

arrange thematically.

Many research and evaluation studies have addressed different aspects of K–12

standards. However, only a few systematic reviews have examined evidence that the

implementation of standards improves education outcomes. This section includes the

reviews of the literature on standards in particular content areas (mathematics, literacy,

and science), a review of the types of research designs used to study the influences of

standards, research generated through study of the National Science Foundation’s

(NSF’s) Systemic Initiatives (SIs), research on how standards apply to students with

special learning needs, policy analyses evaluating the nature of different states’ standards

and accountability systems, and research on educator and public attitudes about

standards-based education.

In Mathematics, Ross, McDougall, and Hogaboam-Gray (2002) conducted a

narrative review of studies conducted between 1993 and 2000 that investigated the effects

of mathematics education reforms on student outcomes and the difficulties in

implementing such reforms. They concluded that compared to students in traditional

classrooms, students in classrooms that have implemented Mathematics education

reforms have higher achievement on reform measures such as problem solving and are no

worse on traditional measures such as computation. Ross et al. (2002) also observed
 27

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

better attitudes toward Mathematics among the students in reform classrooms. The

researchers documented many barriers to implementing mathematics reforms, including

the challenges of delivering instruction of the type that teachers did not receive as

students and teachers’ lack of subject-matter knowledge.

In the area of literacy, Valencia and Wixson (2000) reviewed policy-related

research on standards and assessments. They found mixed evidence for positive

influences of literacy standards on teachers’ beliefs and practices and noted that effects

were mediated by many factors. These included the political, economic, and social

conditions of the schools and districts; the support teachers received from administrators;

and the stakes associated with the standards and assessment policies. The researchers

stated,

It is equally clear that policy by itself is not sufficient to promote desired change;
simply implementing new assessments or creating new standards does not insure
improved teaching or learning. What is less clear, however, is just what it would
take to promote change in the desired direction or to insure improved teaching or
learning.

Valencia and Wixson comment that few studies they reviewed included measures of

student achievement and that future research on standards-based education in literacy

needs to address this shortcoming (2000).

A report published by the National Academy of Sciences (Hollweg & Hill, 2003)

describes a workshop and research reviews on the influences of the National Science

Education Standards (NSES) on science curriculum, professional development,

assessment and accountability, teachers and teaching, and student achievement. The
 28

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

reviews were conducted by researchers of science education and varied in

comprehensiveness. Hollweg and Hill (2003) summarized the researchers’ assessments of

the literature related to standards-based science. There is evidence that the NSES have

influenced science curriculum, but the majority of instructional materials used by

teachers are not yet aligned with science standards. There has been some influence of the

NSES on professional development, but the evidence is weak, and there is less evidence

for influences on state-level policies related to professional development and teacher

preparation. Results related to the NS ES influences on assessment and accountability

were inconclusive due to the lack of research, but it was noted that assessments aligned

with the NSES should be different from traditional assessments. There is more evidence

that the NSES have influenced teachers’ beliefs and attitudes than their actual classroom

practices. Teachers agree with the science standards but many teachers, particularly in

lower grades, lack the necessary training to implement them in the classroom. There is

weak support for a link between the NSES and improved student achievement but no

evidence that the NSES have decreased the achievement gap. However, there was no

evidence that the science standards had negative impacts on student achievement. All the

reviewers mentioned the need for additional research studies.

Chatterji (2002) reviewed methods of inquiry about standards-based reform and

suggested that, to date, there has been little coherence in the research and evaluation of

the influence of standards. Chatterji’s review focuses on the designs used by research and

evaluation studies to examine systemic reform. The synthesis adds to this knowledge by
 29

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

describing and analyzing the results from extant research on the influence of standards on

teaching and student learning.

2.2.1 Research on National Science

Foundation Systemic Initiatives

The Research on National Science Foundation Systemic Initiatives (NSFSI’s) had

stimulated a body of research related to standards-based education in mathematics and

science. In 1990, NSF established a program to support systemic reform in mathematics

and science education, beginning with the Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSIs), followed

by the Urban Systemic Initiatives (USIs) and the Rural Systemic Initiatives (RSIs).

States, cities, and rural entities submitted proposals to NSF. Funded proposals were

managed through cooperative agreements with NSF that included both internal and

external evaluations (Kahle& Kelly, 2001). The NSF vision for these programs was one

of systemic reform that includes six central elements or “drivers”: (1) high standards-

based instruction for all students supported by curriculum, professional development, and

assessment; (2) aligned policies, practices, and accountability mechanisms; (3)

coordinated resources; (4) involvement of the community of stakeholders; (5) increased

student achievement in mathematics, science, and technology; (6) a reduction in the

achievement gap between disadvantaged students and their peers (Zucker et al.). Kahle

and Kelly observed that in general, most SIs began with a focus on reformed teaching

practice through teacher professional development, and they addressed policy changes in

the later years of their programs. McREL’s examination of the research revealed great

variation in methods and approaches in the evaluations of the SIs. Several of the studies
 30

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

are included in this research synthesis; however, in some of the studies, it was not

possible to make direct connections between the input variables of curriculum,

instructional guidelines, and assessment and the outcomes of teaching and student

learning.

2.2.2 Research on Learning Disabled Students

Research on the influence of standards-based education on students with learning

disabilities is an important area of inquiry but is in the early stages of development as an

area of research. McREL found valuable discourse on this topic but few empirical studies

that fit the conceptual framework for the synthesis. For example, based on case studies in

four states, Raber, Roach, and Fraser (1998) describe how standards-based reforms at the

state level interact with the efforts of local school districts to serve students with learning

disabilities. They recommend more involvement of special educators in the development

of state policies related to standards. The researchers also call for a discussion of

accountability measures for special education students and question whether state

standards and curriculum frameworks are appropriate for diverse students, including

those with learning disabilities (Lauer, 2015).

Cooney (2001) reports on the efforts of nine school districts to respond to

standards-based education policies in relation to special education in secondary schools.

Based on teacher interviews and observations, Cooney suggests that standards-based

reforms lead to standardization and inflexibility that hinder efforts to meet the needs of

special education students.

 31

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

Woodward and Montague (2002) discuss the tenets of mathematics reform and

describe studies that show the challenges that learning-disabled students face when taught

in ways consistent with NCTM standards, such as instruction on problem solving.

Other studies have addressed the issue of test accommodations for learning

disabled students participating in state assessments (Thompson, Blount, & Thurlow,

2002). There are many issues related to standards-based education and learning disabled

students. It is a complex area of concern, and although most of the issues are beyond the

scope of this synthesis, it is a topic that deserves attention by education researchers as

well as administrators and policymakers.

2.2.3 Policy Analyses

Another area of study that relates to the current synthesis concerns the “state of

state standards.” In recent years, several organizations have conducted descriptive

analyses of the rigor of state standards and the related system components of curriculum,

assessments, and accountability. Many of the studies in this synthesis examine teacher

and student outcomes in relation to state standards, so it is useful to consider the quality

of these standards in the approximate years that the research was conducted. However, it

should be noted that judgments of state standards are not uniform; the entities evaluating

those standards use differing criteria for quality, and consequently the same state

standards often are rated differently by different raters.

The Council of Basic Education (CBE) examined state standards for mathematics

and language in 1998 (Joftus & Berman). In their analysis, rigorous standards “address
 32

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

essential concepts and skills” and “require student understanding and application of these

essential concepts and skills at a level of sophistication or complexity that is appropriate

and challenging to students at a particular grade level.” At the time of the CBE study, 43

states had Mathematics standards ready for review, and 42 states had language arts

standards ready for review. Ratings for states’ mathematics standards were 37 percent

“very rigorous,” 56 percent “rigorous,” and 7 percent “low in rigor.” Ratings for states’

language arts standards were 17 percent “very rigorous,” 50 percent “rigorous,” and 33

percent “low in rigor.” CBE found state mathematics standards to be more rigorous than

state language arts standards. Mathematic standards addressed most major concepts and

skills, but most language arts standards addressed mainly basic skills and excluded

higher-order skills such as literature study.

In 2001, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) reported on state efforts to

implement standards-based education. In their analysis, 58 percent of the states had “clear

and specific” standards in the core subject areas of mathematics, language arts, science,

and social studies at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Seventy-six percent

of the states had begun to align their tests with their standards, and 18 percent had aligned

tests in the four core subjects at the different education levels. The AFT was particularly

concerned about states’ lack of fully developed curriculum models because they view

curriculum as the road map for guiding teachers to help students meet standards

According to the AFT, state curriculum models should include learning continua for

grade level progression, instructional resources, instructional strategies, performance

 33

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

indicators, and lesson plans. They found that 82 percent of the states had less than half of

the curriculum components fully developed across the core subject areas, with more state

curriculum support for language arts than the other subject areas (Lauer, 2015).

Quality Counts, published by Education Week, also reported on state standards in

2001, noting that 47 states had established standards in the core subject areas, although

not necessarily at all education levels. All 50 states administered student assessments,

with a majority using both multiple-choice and short answer formats, but only seven

states used essays questions for subjects other than language arts. For the “grades” that

Quality Counts assigned to states for their standards and accountability mechanisms, 46

percent of the states received As or Bs, 14 percent received Cs, and 40 percent received

Ds or Fs. Grades were determined by the clarity and specificity of standards in the four

core subject areas, the types of test items on the state assessments, the use of criterion-

referenced tests, and number of accountability mechanisms, including school report cards

and ratings, rewards, assistance, and sanctions. The Quality Counts report for 2005

indicates that 48 states and the District of Columbia have established standards in the four

core subject areas. In the “grades” assigned to states in 2005 for their standards and

accountability, 66 percent of the states received As or Bs, 14 percent received Cs, and 20

percent received Ds or Fs (Lauer, 2015).

2.2.4 Studies of Attitudes about standards-based Education

One final area of research that relates to the current synthesis is research on

educator and public attitudes towards standards-based education. Public Agenda

 35

34

PHILIPPINE NORMAL UNIVERSITY

The National Center for Teacher Education

summarized surveys of public opinions toward public education (Johnson & Duffet,

2003). In general, teachers, parents, and employers indicate strong support for high

academic standards, although they demonstrate less support for standardized tests. The

vast majority of teachers believed that standards can help students improve performance.

There are other studies of teachers’ attitudes toward standards, but McREL found few

attempts to link teacher attitudes to teacher instruction and/or student achievement. With

NCLB in place, teachers must address standards whether they support them or not.

However, an interesting question (although one that is beyond the scope of the current

synthesis) is whether teacher and principal attitudes towards standards-based reforms

influence instruction and student achievement.

The literature reviewed by the researchers will serve as basis in this study.

Moreover, in this investigation, teachers’ perceptions on the fourth year implementation

of Grade 6 Mathematics Curriculum, problems encountered and propose solutions to the

identified problems will be included in this research.