Assessment of Mathematics Teachers in a Public and a Private School: Implications to the Quality of Teaching Secondary Mathematics
Mathematics teachers’ quality continues as an enduring concern until now. This study attempts to address this concern by considering private and public schools. It measured the quality of Mathematics teachers using three indicators: teaching methods, teaching competencies, and students’ Mathematics performance. It used two schools in Nasipit, Agusan del Norte, Philippines, namely, Nasipit National Vocational School (NNVS)—a public school—and St. Michael’s College of Caraga (SMCC)—a private school. The data were gathered using survey questionnaire, a researchers-made teaching methods inventory, and the Competency-Based Performance Appraisal System for Teachers Form (CBPAST) used by the Department of Education. Data revealed that teachers from NNVS and SMCC practiced frequently the teaching methods identified in the questionnaire. Their teaching competencies were high in all domains. These imply that the teachers of both schools possess the skill to teach with quality. Furthermore, data revealed that NNVS teachers’ and SMCC teachers’ extent of practice of teaching methods has no significant difference. Their levels of teaching competencies were also comparable. As to students’ performance, t-test showed a significant difference between their grades which further showed that SMCC students performed better (Fair) than NNVS students (Poor). This could be due to other moderating variables on the side of the NNVS students that affected their performance. The findings suggest teachers should continually improve their teaching methods, more preferably focusing on all learning domains. They should provide rooms for their own holistic development as Mathematics teachers. A deeper scrutiny of this issue would be interesting with larger samples and extensive analyses.
Riel Reuben O. Sogillo,
Wardah D. Guimba,
Jerryk C. Alico,
Assessment of Mathematics Teachers in a Public and a Private School: Implications to the Quality of Teaching Secondary Mathematics, Advances in Sciences and Humanities.
Vol. 2, No. 2,
2016, pp. 7-16.
Abraao, L. (2006). Improving Methods of Teaching Mathematics in Middle School. An Interactive Qualifying Project. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-042406-060014/unrestricted/Abraao_Lourenco_IQP_report_NTH2368.pdf. Retrieved: March 29, 2013.
Alberta. (2004) Alberta Learning. Learning and Teaching Resources Branch. Focus on inquiry: a teacher’s guide to implementing inquiry-based learning. http://www.learning.gov.ab.ca. Retrieved on March 29, 2013
Ali, R., Hukamdad, Akhter, A., & Khan, A. (2010). The Effect of Using Problem Solving Method in Teaching Mathematics on the Achievement of the Mathematics Students. Asian Social Sciences.Vol. 6, No. 2. Retrieved: March 29, 2013.
Al-Qaisi, T. (2010). The Role of Mathematics Teachers towards Enhancing Students’ Participation in Classroom Activities. Journal of Social Sciences, 22 (1), 39-46.
Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). (2001).
Battista, M. (1999).The Mathematical Miseducation of America’s Youth. Phil Delta Kappan, 80 (6).
Bellon, Jerry; Bellon, Elner, & Blank, Mary Ann, Teaching from a Research Knowledge Base (1992), New York: McMillan.
Bents, M. & Bents, R. (1990).Perceptions of Good Teaching among Novice, Advanced Beginner and Expert Teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, USA.
Cai, J. (n. d.). What research tells us about teaching mathematics through problem solving. Department of Math Sciences. University of Delaware. http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ass/article/download/5040/4181. Retrieved: March 29, 2013
Cavaye, J. (n. d.). Strengthening Links Between Schools and Community. Retrieved: march 21, 2013 from www.communitydevelopment.com.au
Cheng, H. (2011). A Case Study of Cooperative Learning in Mathematics: Middle School Course Design. Xianyang Normal University, China. Journal of Mathematics Education. Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 75–78.
Clancy, W. C. (1997). Situated cognition: On human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Corpuz, B. and Salandanan, G. (2007). Principles of Teaching I. Quezon City, Metro Manila. Lorimar Publishing Inc.
Current Perspectives in Assessment. (2005). Retrieved on 17 March 2013 from www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/teachlearn/student/assessment_current_per.pdf
Damodharan, V. S. & Rengarajan, V. (n. d.).Innovative Methods of Teaching.
Department of Education. (2002). Operations Handbook in Mathematics 2002 Basic Education Curriculum in the Secondary Level. Pasig City: Bureau of Secondary Education.
Demirel, M. Tuncel, I. Tuncel, Z. A. (2010). A Study on Quality Teaching-Learning Process in Elementary Education in Turkey: A Case Study. American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research 5 (1).
Eggen, P. D. & Kauchak, D. P. (2000). Educational Psychology: Windows on Classroom (5th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fernandez-Santander, A. (2008). Cooperative learning combined with short periods of lecturing: a good alternative in teaching biochemistry. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 36(1), 34-38.
Fulk, B., & King, K. (2001). Classwide Peer Tutoring at Work. Teaching Exceptional Children. Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 49 – 53.
GLEF (George Lucas Educational Foundation). (2001). Project-based learning research. Edutopia online. Retrieved July 12, 2004, from http://www.glef.org/php/article.php?id=Art_887
http://www.pcer.ac.in/B.Ed._20notes/Paper_20V/math/unit_203.pdf. Retrieved: March 29, 2013
http://www.peersupport.nl/Media/view/20585/UsingPeerTutoringforMath06-06-2.pdf: Retrieved: March 29, 2013.
Ingvarson, L. Beavis, A. Bishop, A. Peck, R. Elsworth, G. (2004). Investigation of Effective Mathematics Teaching and Learning in Australian Secondary Schools. www.acer.edu.au/document/Ingvarson_EffectiveMathematicsTeachingLearningAUSecsch.pdf. 01March2012.
INTIME. (2001). Pedagogy. Retrieved on 16 March 2013 from http://www.intime.uni.edu/model/teacher/pedagogysummary.html
Kilpatrick, J. (1992). A history of research in mathematics education. In D. Grouws (ed.). Handbook of research on mathematics research and teaching. (pp. 3-39). New York: MacMillan.
Kolb, D. & Boyatzis, R. (1999). Experiential Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Direction. Department of Organizational Behavior. Case Western Reserve University.
Kühne, B. (1995). The Barkestorp project: Investigating school library use. School Libraries Worldwide, 1(1), 13–27.
Lardizabal, A, (2002). Principles and Methods of Teaching. Phoenix Publishing House Inc.
Larsson, J. (2009). Discerning Competence within a Teaching Profession. European Masters in Early Childhood Education and Care (EMEC).
Lin, R. Xie, J. Jeng, Y. & Huang, S. (2010). The Relationship between Teaching Quality and Teaching Effectiveness Perceived by Students from Industrial Vocational High Schools. Asian Journal of Arts and Sciences, 1 (2), 167-187.
Lucas, M.R. and Corpuz, B. (2007).Facilitating Learning: A Metacognitive Process. Quezon City, Metro Manila. Lorimar Publishing Inc.
Manullang, M. (n.d.). Quality of Teaching and Learning Interaction for Mathematics Teacher: A Case Study.
N. A. (2008). Inspired Issue Brief: Inquiry Based Teaching. Center for Inspired Teaching. www.inspiredteaching.org. Retrieved: March 29, 2013
National Staff Development Council. (2005). A Study of Professional Development for Public School Educators in West Virginia. Oxford, OH: Author.
Overbaugh, R. (2005). An Overview of Jerome Brunner His Theory of Constructivism.
Parsons, S., Croft, T., & Harrison, M. (2009). Does Students' confidence in their ability in Mathematics matter? Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 28(2), 53-68.
Penano-Ho, L. (2004). The Science and Mathematics Teachers: Key Players in the Classroom. In Ibe, M., Ogena, E., & Brawner, F. (Eds.). Effective Practices in Science and Mathematics Education: A Benchmarking Project (Major Report). Quezon City: Vibal Publishing House, Inc.
Peterson, P., Carpenter, T., & Fennema, S. (1989). Teacher’s Knowledge of Students’ Knowledge in Mathematics Problem Solving: Correlational and Case Analyses. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 558–569.
Pine, G., & Horne, P., (1990). “Principles and Conditions of Learning in Adult Education”, Carmela D. Ortigas, ed. Handbook for Facilitators – Group Process and the Inductive Method – Theory and Practice in the Philippines, pp. 138–140.
Prince, M. & Felder R. (2006). Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons and Research Bases. J. Engr. Education, 95(2), 123–138.
Prokop, P., Tuncer, G., & Chuda, J. (2007). Slovakian Students’ Attitude Toward Biology. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(4), 287–295.
Romberg, T. (2000). Changing the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. AMT, 56 (4), 6-9.
Sabean, M. P., & Bavaria, R. (2005). Sylvan Learning Center Math Research. Sylvan Learning, Inc.
Salandanan, G. (2009). Methods of Teaching. Quezon City, Metro Manila. Lorimar Publishing Inc.
Schoenfeld, A. (2005). Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Effective Math Teaching Method. http://www.eHow.com/info_7927064_effective-math-teaching-method.html. 10March2012.
Seehorn, A. (n.d). The Effectiveness of Varying Delivery Methods in Teaching Math. http://eHow.com/info_8031437_effectiveness-delivery-methods-teaching-math.html. 01March2012.
Segers, M., Dochy, F. & Cascallar, E. (2003).Optimizing New Models of Assessment: In Search of Qualities and Standards. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht.
Seiler, M., Ken, C., Alexander, A., Loody, B., Nelson, D., Olds, S., White, K., & Young, P. (2009). Mathematics Study Part 2: Educator Preparation and Teacher Quality. Legislative Research Commission, Research Report No. 369.
Slavin, R. (2003). Educational Psychology. Theory and Practice, 7/E. http://www.pearsonhighered.com/samplechapter/0205351433.pdf.Retrieved: March 29, 2013.
Stigler, J. & Hiebert, J. (2004). Improving Mathematics Teaching. Educational Leadership, 61 (5).
Torno, B. (n. d.). Teacher Education and Development Program (TEDP) –National Competency-Based Teacher Standards (NCBTS) Philippine Education Reform. http://www.cfo-pso.org.ph/pdf/8thconferencepresentation/day2/Overseas_presentation_NCBTS_and_TSNA.pdf. Retrieved: March 29, 2013
Ulep, S. (n.d.). Good Mathematics Teaching Practices – In the Making: A Philippine Experience. National Institute for Sciences and Mathematics Education Development, UP.
Uy, F. (n. d.). Teaching Mathematics Concepts Using Multicultural Approach. California State University – Los Angeles. Retrieved: March 21, 2013 from http://www.ccd.rpi.edu/eglash/nasgem/ncsm04/Uy,_20Fred_20Teaching_20Concepts.pdf
Vega, V., Prieto, N. and Carreon, M. (2009).Social Dimensions of Education. Quezon City, Metro Manila. Lorimar Publishing Inc.
Walker, E. N. (2007). The Structure and culture of developing a mathematics tutoring collaborative in an urban high school. The High School Journal, 91(1), 57-67.
Whitty, G., (n. d.) “Professional competences and professional characteristics: The Northern Ireland approach to the reform of teacher education. In D. Hustler and D, McIntyre (2001), developing competent teachers; approaches to professional competence in Teacher Education, London: David Fulton.
Zebenbergen. (n. d.). Reforming Mathematics Education: A Case Study within the Context of New Times. Retrieved: November 2, 2011.