## Home⇛International Journal of Advances in Education, Social Sciences and Innovation⇛vol. 2 no. 1 (2023)

### Teaching Selected Topics in Geometry Using Manipulative Instructional Materials Among Grade 7 Students in Community Vocational High School

Rubelyn Ramos

Discipline: Education

#### Abstract:

With the advancement of learning management, the researcher employed quasi-experimental method of research using the pretest and posttest group design with sixty Grade 7 students, of whom thirty were taught using manipulative materials and other thirty were taught without manipulative materials. The level of pretest performance of the control group for the undefined terms, angles and polygons are 6.63, 6.50 and 6.97 which described as low while the posttest of the control group are 12.83 high, 11.53 average and 12.93 high. Also, the experimental group, 9.13 average, 6.50 low and 10.23 average while the posttest of the experimental group are 17.93 very high, 15.73 high and 14.23 high. Moreover, the difference in the level of pretest and posttest performances of the control group for the three indicators mentioned is shown by the computed t-value of 7.68, 8.11 and 7.96. While, in experimental group the computed tvalue of 15.77, 18.47 and 6.66 which both group exceeded the critical-t value of 1.70 with 29 degrees of freedom. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is significant difference between the variables. In addition, the difference in the level of pretest performance of the control and experimental groups for the three indicators are 3.19 rejected for the undefined terms, 0 accepted for the angles, and 4.58 rejected for polygons. There is no significant difference in the level of pretest performance of control and experimental groups in angle, while the two indicators have significant difference. For posttest level, there is a significant difference in undefined terms and angles with 5.12 and 5.35, and no significant difference in terms of polygons with 1.64 compared with critical-t value of 1.67 of 58 degrees of freedom. Considering the results, the instructional design was crafted to help the teachers in managing day to day lessons in Geometry.

#### References:

1. Cope, L. (2015). Math Manipulatives: Making the Abstract Tangible. (Retrieved from http://www.deltastate.edu/PDFFiles/DJE/spring-2015/dje_spring_2015_cope-final.pdf on July 26, 2018).
2. Deped Order #73, s. 2012: Guidelines on the Assessment and Rating of Learning Outcomes Under the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum
3. Deped Order #8, s. 2015: Table 10 Descriptor, Grading Scale and Remarks
4. Evangelista, E. V. et al. (2014). Development and Evaluation of Grade 7 and Grade 8 BIOKIT.(Retrieved from http://po.pnuresearchportal.org/ejournal/index.php/normallights/article/viewFile/28/21 on July 26, 2018).
5. Gapuz, C. (2012). Manipulation of Expressions. Educator Magazine For Teachers. January-February. 48.
6. Gates, B. (2011). Interesting Things Happening Around the World. Educator Magazine For Teachers. January-February.6.
7. Hidalgo, F. (2011).Teacher Effectiveness. Educator Magazine For Teachers. January-February.26-27.
8. Ilagan, A. (2012). Pursue New Styles of Teaching. Educator Magazine For Teachers. January-February.34-35.
9. Janer, S. S. &Deri, R. A. (2016).Utilization and Acceptability of Learning Guides in Field Study 1 and Study 2.Sorsogon State College School of Graduates studies, Sorsogon City, Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4 (4): Part II.
10. Luz, M. (2012).Essays on Philippine Education. Educator Magazine For Teachers. January-February. 23.
11. Munter, C. &Correnti, R. (2017).Examining Relations between Mathematics Teachers’ Instructional Vision and Knowledge and Change in Practice. American Journal of Education, 123 (2): 171-197.
12. Pascuala, N. T. (2014). Impact of Mathematics and Science Instructional Practices, Curriculum and Academic Achievement to the Career Choice of Laboratory School Graduates of University of Rizal System-Morong, Rizal. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 4 (5): 39-42. (in Rosales, 2017).
13. Pelonia, A. G. et al. (2014). The Use of Manipulative in Teaching Basic Mathematics.(Retrieved from http://www.e-journaldirect.com/journal-doi.php?View/j=2&XYxyzuHdgasj=12&art_id=227 on July 26, 2018).
14. Short, E. C. (2011). The Use of Multiple Theories of Inquiry in Educational Research. A Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Atlanta, Georgia, USA. April 12-16, 2011. (in Dolor, 2016).
15. Sulistyaningsih, D. et al. (2017). Manipulatives Implementation For Supporting Learning of Mathematics For Prospective Teachers. The 3rd International Conference on Mathematics, Science and Education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 824012047.
16. Teves, G. et al. (2011). A Look at the Aquino Administration’s Flagship Program in Basic Education. Educator Magazine For Teachers. January-February.