Home⇛Asia-Pacific Journal of Advanced Research and Innovation⇛vol. 1 no. 1 (2025)

Effectiveness Of Contextualized Worksheet In Improving Mathematics Performance Of Grade Iv Learners

Reyma Balingway | Felicisimo Felix

Discipline: Mathematics

 

Abstract:

This study sought to determine the effectiveness of contextualized worksheet in improving the Math performance of the Grade IV learners. This study utilized a quantitative type of research using quasi-experimental research design. The result of the pre and post-test of the Grade 4 learners in Anonang Elementary school were analyzed to determine if there were any significant difference between the control group who used purely lecture and the experimental group who used contextualized worksheets which was used as an indicator to determine if contextualized worksheets have an impact on the learner’s academic performance in Mathematics. The study reveals that the use of contextualized teaching and learning resources is effective in enhancing the performance of Grade IV pupils of Anonang Elementary School. Grade IV pupils who experienced the implementation of contextualization received better mathematics performance than pupils who were taught using the traditional lecture method in mathematics.



References:

  1. Adonis, A. B. (2020). CONTEXTUALIZED STRATEGIC INTERVENTION MATERIALS IN GRADE 9 MATHEMATICS.
  2. Agu, C. F., Stewart, J., McFarlane‐Stewart, N., & Rae, T. (2021). COVID‐19 pandemic effects on nursing education: looking through the lens of a developing country. International nursing review, 68(2), 153-158.
  3. Alipio, M. (2020). Predicting academic performance of college freshmen in the Philippines using psychological variables and expectancy-value beliefs to outcomes-based education: a path analysis.
  4. Andamon, J. C., & Tan, D. A. (2018). Conceptual understanding, attitude and performance in mathematics of grade 7 students. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 7(8), 96-105.
  5. Andaya, O. J. F. (2014). Factors that affect mathematics achievements of students of Philippine Normal University-Isabela Campus. Researchers World, 5(4), 83.
  6. Balagtas, M. U., Garcia, D. C. B., & Ngo, D. C. (2019). Looking through Philippine’s K to 12 Curriculum in Mathematics and Science vis-a-vis TIMSS 2015 Assessment Framework. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(12), em1788.
  7. Banerjee, P. A. (2016). A systematic review of factors linked to poor academic performance of disadvantaged students in science and maths in schools. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1178441.
  8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
  9. Bobis, J. (2020). The role of manipulatives in mathematics learning. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(2), 9-14.
  10. Bugay, A. U. (2021). Learnings from a Lesson Study in Using Discovery Learning in Teaching the Mean of Grouped Data. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(3), 3847-3855.
  11. Casinillo, L., Camulte, M. C., Raagas, D., & Riña, T. S. (2020). Cultural factors in learning mathematics: the case on achievement level among Badjao students. IJIET (International Journal of Indonesian Education and Teaching), 4(1), 71-81.
  12. Doruk, B. K., Aktümen, M., & Aytekin, C. (2013). Pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ opinions about using GeoGebra in mathematics education with reference to ‘teaching practices’. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 32(3), 140-157.
  13. English, L. D., & Halford, G. S. (2012). Mathematics education: Models and processes. Routledge.
  14. Epstein, D., & Miller, R. T. (2011). Slow off the Mark: Elementary School Teachers and the Crisis in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education. Center for American Progress.
  15. Etcuban, J. O., & Pantinople, L. D. (2018). The effects of mobile application in teaching high school mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(3), 249-259.
  16. Eze, U. N., Sefotho, M. M., Onyishi, C. N., & Eseadi, C. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Education in Nigeria: Implications for Policy and Practice of e-learning. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1-36.
  17. Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. Zdm, 45(5), 633-646.
  18. Fuente, J. A. D. (2019). Driving Forces of Students’ Choice in specializing science: a science education context in the Philippines Perspective. The Normal Lights, 13(2).
  19. Ghefaili, A. (2003). Cognitive apprenticeship, technology, and the contextualization of learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing, Design & Online Learning, 4(1), 1-27.
  20. Gillo, M. D. (2019). DEVELOPMENT OF A CONTEXTUALIZED WORKSHEET FOR TEACHING GRADE TEN MATHEMATICS. DEVELOPMENT, 2(03sp).
  21. Gillo, M. D. (2019). DEVELOPMENT OF A WORKSHEET FOR ENHANCING THE FUNDAMENTAL MATHEMATICAL OPERATION SKILLS OF SEVENTH GRADERS. DEVELOPMENT, 2(03sp).
  22. Gravemeijer, K., Stephan, M., Julie, C., Lin, F. L., & Ohtani, M. (2017). What mathematics education may prepare students for the society of the future?. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 105-123.
  23. Hart, L. C., Alston, A. S., & Murata, A. (2011). Lesson study research and practice in mathematics education (p. 10). Dordrecht: Springer.
  24. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2017). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
  25. Herrera Jr, R. V., & Palomo, E. G. (2022). Linking Community and Pedagogy: Ethnomodels from Coastal Villages in Panay, Philippines. Philippine Social Science Journal, 5(2), 72-82.
  26. Hizon, I. (2019). PROJECT CLMM (Contextualized Learner Material in Mathematics) an Input on Pupils Academic Performance. JPAIR Institutional Research, 13(1), 15-27.
  27. Hopfenbeck, T. N., Lenkeit, J., El Masri, Y., Cantrell, K., Ryan, J., & Baird, J. A. (2018). Lessons learned from PISA: A systematic review of peer-reviewed articles on the programme for international student assessment. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(3), 333-353.
  28. Huang, M. H. (2013). After-school tutoring and the distribution of student performance. Comparative Education Review, 57(4), 689-710.
  29. Ibrokhimovich, F. J., & Mirzaxolmatovna, X. Z. (2022). THE MOST IMPORTANT ROLE OF MATHEMATICS IN PRIMARY SCHOOL. Galaxy International Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(3), 652-655.
  30. Jaudinez, A. S. (2019). Teaching Senior High School Mathematics: Problems and Interventions. Pedagogical Research, 4(2).
  31. Langat, A. C. (2015). Students’ attitudes and their effects on learning and achievement in Mathematics: A Case study of public secondary schools in Kiambu County, Kenya. Unpublished a Reserch Project, submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Education of Kenyatta University. Available online also at: https://ir-library. ku. ac. ke/bitstream/handle/123456789/10911/Students [accessed in Manila, the Philippines: June 22, 2018].
  32. LAPINID, J. G. (2021). Effectiveness of Budget of Lessons (BOL) & Learners Activity Sheets (LAS) To the Performance of Grade 2 Pupils in Mathematics.
  33. Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215-243.
  34. Lomibao, L. S., Luna, C. A., & Namoco, R. A. (2016). The influence of mathematical communication on students’ mathematics performance and anxiety. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(5), 378-382.
  35. Mong, M. D., Doggett, R. A., Mong, K. W., & Henington, C. (2012). An evaluation of the math to mastery intervention package with elementary school students in a school setting. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 13(1), 61-79.
  36. Montero, J. C., & Geducos, D. T. (2022). Improved Conceptual Understanding in Learning Biology through Local-ized and Contextualized Learning Activities. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 3(7), 1231-1238.
  37. Mseleku, Z. (2020). A literature review of E-learning and E-teaching in the era of Covid-19 pandemic. SAGE, 57(52), 588-597.
  38. Ngiwas, F. D. C. A., Mariano, D. L. F., Barsana, J. G., Cruz, M. P., & Elipane, L. (2022). Example--Conclusion Map in Teaching Simple Interest: A Lesson Study. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11(1), 377-384.
  39. Noori, A. Q. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on students’ learning in higher education in Afghanistan. Heliyon, 7(10), e08113.
  40. Ong, M., Palompon, D. R., & Bañico, L. (2012). Predictors of nurses’ licensure examination performance of graduates in Cebu Normal University, Philippines. Asian Journal of Health, 2(1), 130-141.
  41. Owens, D. B. (2014). Elementary teachers' perceptions of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education in K-5 schools (Doctoral dissertation, University of Phoenix).
  42. Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of evidence. Community College Review, 39(3), 268-295.
  43. Root, J. R., Cox, S. K., Davis, K., & Hammons, N. (2020). Contextualizing mathematical problem-solving instruction for secondary students with extensive support needs: A systematic replication. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45(4), 241-255.
  44. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (2021). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 121-143). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  45. Schleicher, A. (2019). PISA 2018: Insights and Interpretations. oecd Publishing.
  46. Schmittau, J. (2010). The relevance of Russian elementary mathematics education. Russian mathematics education: History and world significance, 253-278.
  47. Silver, E. A. (2013). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: Looking back, looking around, and looking ahead. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 157-162.
  48. Simba, N. O., Agak, J. O., & Kabuka, E. K. (2016). Impact of Discipline on Academic Performance of Pupils in Public Primary Schools in Muhoroni Sub-County, Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(6), 164-173.
  49. Skemp, R. R. (2002). Mathematics in the primary school. Routledge.
  50. Sowder, J. T. (2017). The role of manipulative materials in the learning of mathematical concepts. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 173-196). Information Age Publishing.
  51. Tan, E., Barton, A. C., Turner, E., & Gutiérrez, M. V. (2012). Empowering science and mathematics education in urban schools. University of Chicago Press.
  52. Thompson, C., & Davis, S. (2013, March). Predictive relationships among uses of technology in elementary mathematics classrooms and student achievement: Graduate mathematics education students engaged in community-based observational research. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2466-2472). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  53. Topping, K. J. (2015). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645.
  54. Tran, D., Nguyen, D. T., Nguyen, A. T. T., Nguyen, G. N. T., & Ta, P. M. (2020). Bridging to mathematical modelling: Vietnamese students’ response to different levels of authenticity in contextualized tasks. International journal of mathematical education in science and technology, 51(6), 893-912.
  55. Weiland, T. (2019). The contextualized situations constructed for the use of statistics by school mathematics textbooks. Statistics Education Research Journal, 18(2), 18-38

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic