A teacher wants to know if there is a difference between the academic performance of pupils who have had

early exposure in Mathematics and pupils without such exposure. Academic performance is still a broad
measure, so let’s make it more specific. We’ll take summative test score in Mathematics as the variable in
focus. Early exposure in Mathematics means the child played games that are Mathematics-oriented in their pre-
school years.
To test for difference in performance, that is, after random selection of students with about equal aptitudes, the
same grade level, the same Math teacher, among others; the research question that will lend itself to analysis
can be written thus:

1. Is there a significant difference between the Mathematics test score of pupils who have had early
Mathematics exposure and those pupils without?
Notice that the question specifies a comparison of two groups of pupils: 1) those who have had early
Mathematics exposure, and, 2) those without. The Mathematics summative test score is the variable to compare.

Statistical Tests for Difference

What then should be the appropriate statistical test in the case described above? Two things must be considered:
1) sampling procedure, and 2) number of samples.

If the researcher is confident that he has sampled randomly and that the sample approaches a normal
distribution, then a t-test is appropriate to test for difference. If the researcher is not confident that the sampling
is random, or, that there are only few samples available for analysis and most likely the population
approximates a non-normal distribution, Mann-Whitney U test is the appropriate test for difference. The first
test is a parametric test while the latter is a non-parametric test. The nonparametric test is distribution-free,
meaning, it doesn’t matter if your population exhibits a normal distribution or not. Nonparametric tests are best
used in exploratory studies.

A random distribution is achieved if a lot of samples are used in the analysis. Many statisticians believe this is
achieved with 200 cases, but this ultimately depends on the variability of the measure. The greater the
variability, the greater the number required to produce a normal distribution.

Fig. 1. Shape of a normal distribution of scores.

A quick inspection of the distribution is made using a graph of the measurements, i.e., the Mathematics test
score of pupils who have had early Mathematics exposure and those without. If the scores are well-distributed
with most of the measures at the center tapering at both ends in a symmetrical manner, then it approximates a
normal distribution (Figure 1).

If the distribution is non-normal or if you notice that the graph is skewed to the left or to the right (leans either
to the left or to the right), then you will have to use a non-parametric test. A skewed distribution means that
most students have low scores or most of them have high scores. This means that you favor selection of a
certain group of pupils. Each pupil did not have an equal chance of being selected. This violates the normality
requirement of parametric tests such as the t-test although it is robust enough to accommodate skewness to a
certain degree. F-test may be used to determine the normality of a distribution.

Writing the Conclusion Based on the Statistical Analysis

Now, how do you write the results of the analysis? If it was found out in the above statistical analysis that there
is a significant difference between pupils who have had Mathematics exposure early in life compared to those
who did not, the statement of the findings should be written this way:
The data presents sufficient evidence that there is a significant difference in the Mathematics test score of pupils
who have had early Mathematics exposure compared to those without.
It can be written in another way, thus:

There is reason to believe that the Mathematics test score of pupils who have had early Mathematics exposure
is different from those without.

Do not say, it was proven that… Nobody is 100% sure that this conclusion will always be correct. There will
always be errors involved. Science is not foolproof. There are always other possibilities.

The Effect of the Teacher's Teaching Style on

Students' Motivation Action Research
Introduction
The teachers, being the focal figure in education, must be competent and knowledgeable in order to
impart the knowledge they could give to their students. Good teaching is a very personal manner.
Effective teaching is concerned with the student as a person and with his general development. The
teacher must recognize individual differences among his/her students and adjust instructions that
best suit to the learners. It is always a fact that as educators, we play varied and vital roles in the
classroom. Teachers are considered the light in the classroom. We are entrusted with so many
responsibilities that range from the very simple to most complex and very challenging jobs. Everyday
we encounter them as part of the work or mission that we are in. It is very necessary that we need to
understand the need to be motivated in doing our work well, so as to have motivated learners in the
classroom. When students are motivated, then learning will easily take place. However, motivating
students to learn requires a very challenging role on the part of the teacher. It requires a variety of
teaching styles or techniques just to capture students' interests. Above all, the teacher must himself
come into possession of adequate knowledge of the objectives and standards of the curriculum, skills
in teaching, interests, appreciation and ideals. He needs to exert effort to lead children or students
into a life that is large, full, stimulating and satisfying. Some students seem naturally enthusiastic
about learning, but many need or expect their instructors or teachers to inspire, challenge or stimulate
them. "Effective learning in the classroom depends on the teacher's ability to maintain the interest
that brought students to the course in the first place (Erickson, 1978). Not all students are motivated
by the same values, needs, desires and wants. Some students are motivated by the approval of
others or by overcoming challenges.

Teachers must recognize the diversity and complexity in the classroom, be it the ethnicity, gender,
culture, language abilities and interests. Getting students to work and learn in class is largely
influenced in all these areas. Classroom diversity exists not only among students and their peers but
may be also exacerbated by language and cultural differences between teachers and students.

Since 2003, many foreign professional teachers, particularly from the Philippines, came to New York
City to teach with little knowledge of American school settings. Filipino teachers have distinct styles
and expressions of teaching. They expect that: education is interactive and spontaneous; teachers
and students work together in the teaching-learning process; students learn through participation and
interaction; homework is only part of the process; teaching is an active process; students are not
passive learners; factual information is readily available; problem solving, creativity and critical
thinking are more important; teachers should facilitate and model problem solving; students learn by
being actively engaged in the process; and teachers need to be questioned and challenged.
However, many Filipino teachers encountered many difficulties in teaching in NYC public schools.
Some of these problems may be attributed to: students' behavior such as attention deficiency,
hyperactivity disorder, and disrespect among others; and language barriers such as accent and poor
understanding of languages other than English (e.g. Spanish).

As has been said, what happens in the classroom depends on the teacher's ability to maintain
students' interests. Thus, teachers play a vital role in effecting classroom changes.

As stressed in the Educator's Diary published in 1995, "teaching takes place only when learning
does." Considering one's teaching style and how it affects students' motivation greatly concerns the
researchers. Although we might think of other factors, however, emphasis has been geared towards
the effect of teacher's teaching style and student motivation.

Hypothesis:
If teacher's teaching style would fit in a class and is used consistently, then students are motivated to
learn.

Purpose of the Study

The main thrust of the study was to find out the effect of the teacher's teaching style on students'
motivation.

Action Research Questions

This paper attempted to answer specific questions such as: 1. What is the effect of teacher's teaching
style using English As A Second Language Strategies on student's motivation? 2. How does
teacher's teaching style affect students' motivation? 3. What could be some categories that make
one's teaching style effective in motivating students?

Research Design/Methods of Collecting Data

The descriptive-survey method was used in this study, and descriptive means that surveys are made
in order to discover some aspects of teacher's teaching style and the word survey denotes an
investigation of a field to ascertain the typical condition is obtaining. The researchers used
questionnaires, observations, interviews, students' class work and other student outputs for this
study. The questionnaires were administered before and after ESL strategies were applied.
Observation refers to what he/she sees taking place in the classroom based on student's daily
participation. Student interviews were done informally before, during, and after classes. Several
categories affecting motivation were being presented in the questionnaire.

Research Environment and Respondents

The research was conducted at IS 164 and IS 143 where three teachers conducting this research
were the subjects and the students of these teachers selected randomly specifically in the eighth and
sixth grade. The student respondents were the researchers' own students, where 6 to 7 students from
each teacher were selected. Twenty students were used as samples.

To measure students' motivation, researchers used questionnaires which covered important

categories, namely: attitudes, student's participation, homework, and grades. Open-ended questions
were also given for students' opinion, ideas and feelings towards the teacher and the subject. The
teacher's teaching style covers the various scaffolding strategies. The data that were collected from
this research helped the teachers to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses so as to improve
instruction. The results of this study could benefit both teachers and students.

Research Procedure
Data Gathering
The researchers personally distributed the questionnaires. Each item in each category ranges from a
scale of 5-1 where 5 rated as Strongly Agree while 1 as Strongly Disagree. The questionnaires were
collected and data obtained were tabulated in tables and interpreted using the simple percentage.
While the open ended questions, answers that were given by the students with the most frequency
were noted.

Review of Related Literature

Helping students understand better in the classroom is one of the primary concerns of every teacher.
Teachers need to motivate students how to learn. According to Phil Schlecty (1994), students who
understand the lesson tend to be more engaged and show different characteristics such as they are
attracted to do work, persist in the work despite challenges and obstacles, and take visible delight in
accomplishing their work. In developing students' understanding to learn important concepts, teacher
may use a variety of teaching strategies that would work best for her/his students. According to
Raymond Wlodkowski and Margery Ginsberg (1995), research has shown no teaching strategy that
will consistently engage all learners. The key is helping students relate lesson content to their own
backgrounds which would include students' prior knowledge in understanding new concepts. Due
recognition should be given to the fact that interest, according to Saucier (1989:167) directly or
indirectly contributes to all learning. Yet, it appears that many teachers apparently still need to accept
this fundamental principle. Teachers should mind the chief component of interest in the classroom. It
is a means of forming lasting effort in attaining the skills needed for life. Furthermore teachers need to
vary teaching styles and techniques so as not to cause boredom to the students in the classroom.
Seeking greater insight into how children learn from the way teachers discuss and handle the lesson
in the classroom and teach students the life skills they need, could be one of the greatest
achievements in the teaching process.

Furthermore, researchers have begun to identify some aspects of the teaching situation that help
enhance students' motivation. Research made by Lucas (1990), Weinert and Kluwe (1987) show that
several styles could be employed by the teachers to encourage students to become self motivated
independent learners. As identified, teachers must give frequent positive feedback that supports
students' beliefs that they can do well; ensure opportunities for students' success by assigning tasks
that are either too easy nor too difficult; help students find personal meaning and value in the
material; and help students feel that they are valued members of a learning community. According to
Brock (1976), Cashin (1979) and Lucas (1990), it is necessary for teachers to work from students'
strengths and interests by finding out why students are in your class and what are their expectations.
Therefore it is important to take into consideration students' needs and interests so as to focus
instruction that is applicable to different groups of students with different levels.

CHAPTER II PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents and analyzes data that answer the subsidiary problems of the study. Table I
showed that out of the 20 student respondents, 50% were males and 50% females. Of the male
students respondents, only 2 males belong to the high group while 8 males from the low group. For
the females, each of the group had 5 respondents. It also showed that there were 7 respondents from
the high group and 13 came from the low group.

Table 1:Respondents by Gender

Gender Group Male Female Total

High 2 5 7

Low 8 5 13

Total 10 10 20

Respondents

Table 2 showed that out of the 20 students respondents, 80% of students were of Hispanic origin;
10% of respondents were White (not of Hispanic origin); and 10% were Black (not of Hispanic origin);
while 0% were of American Indian, Asian or Pacific Islander ethnicity. The results also showed that
among the Hispanic, 40% came from the low and 40% came from the high group. There were only
10% White respondents from both groups. There were 10% respondents who were Black from both
groups.
Table 2: Respondents by Ethnicity
Ethnicity White (not of Black (not of Asian or Pacific
Group American Hispanic Hispanic origin) Hispanic origin) Islander Others Total

High 0 8 1 1 0 0 10

Low 0 8 1 1 0 0 10

Total 0 16 2 2 0 0 20

Respondents by Ethnicity

Table 3 showed that 15% of the respondents had grades between 96-100 in Science, 0% between
91-95, while 15% scored between 86-90, the same as the range between 81-85. However, on the low
group 25% of the respondents had grades between 71-75, 5% each had a range between 66-70 and
61-65; while 15% of the respondents did not have Science last year.

Table 3: Grades in Science

Grades 100- 95- 90- 85- 80- 75- 70- 65- Below No Science last
Group 96 91 86 81 76 71 66 61 60 year Total

High 3 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 10

Low 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 3 10

Total 3 0 3 3 1 5 1 1 0 3 20

Grades

Table 4 revealed that for students' motivation-attitude, more than half of the respondents agreed that
they are always excited to attend classes this school year. 75% of the students believed that Science
is fun and interesting. Similarly, 80% of the respondents agreed that Science is important for them
and 60% said that they love Science.

For student motivation-participation, it showed that more than half of the respondents affirm that they
are always prepared in their Science classes. 75% of the students participated in Science activities;
50% did their Science assignments consistently.

For student motivation-homework, it could be noted that 60% of the students completed their
homework on time and 50% found homework useful and important. 85% of the students said that
they got enough support to do homework at home and 90% said that the teachers checked their
homework.

For student motivation-grades, 65% got good grades in Science. 65% of the respondents said that
they study their lessons before a test or a quiz. More than half of the respondents disagreed that the
terms or words used in the test were difficult to understand. Less than half of the respondents agreed
tests measure their understanding of Science concepts and knowledge, while 80% thought that
grading is fair. On the other hand, the data under teaching style as noted on table 4 showed that 65%
of the students strongly agreed that they have a good relationship with their Science teacher and no
one disagreed. 75% noted that their Science teachers used materials that were easy to understand.
60% said that their teachers presented the lessons in many ways. More than half of the students said
that they understood the way their Science teachers explained the lesson while 25% were not sure of
their answer. 75% said that they got feedback from their Science teacher.
Table 4: Data on the Five Categories
5 Strongly 4 3 Not 2 1 Strongly
CATEGORIES Agree Agree Sure Disagree Disagree

A. ATTITUDE

1. I am always excited to attend my science class

this school year. 10 45 30 10 0

2. Science is fun and interesting. 15 60 15 5 5

3. I hate Science. It is not important for me. 5 0 15 20 60

4. I don't like Science at all. It is difficult to learn. 0 0 10 30 55

5. I love Science. It gives me opportunities to

experiment, discover and explore the things around
me. 15 45 30 5 5

B. PARTICIPATION

1. I'm always prepared in my Science class. 20 35 30 5 5

2. I participate actively in Science activities by

asking questions. 35 40 15 10 0

3. I do my Science assignments consistently. 25 25 45 5 0

4. Science activities do not help me understand

concepts easily. 5 5 10 40 40

5. I feel bored in my Science class. 0 15 25 20 40

C.HOMEWORK

1. I complete my Science homework on time. 15 45 20 20 0

2. I find homework very useful and important. 25 25 30 10 10

3. Science homework is difficult to do. 0 15 25 40 20

4. I don't get enough support to do my homework

at home. 0 5 10 40 45

5. My teacher does not check my homework at all. 0 10 0 30 60

D. GRADES

1. I got good grades in Science. 25 40 30 5 0

2. I study my lessons before a test or quiz. 20 45 25 5 5

3. The terms/words used in the test are difficult to
understand. 0 15 30 45 10

4. The test always measures my understanding of

Science concepts and knowledge learned. 10 30 20 20 20

5. The grading is not fair. 0 10 10 35 45

E. TEACHING STYLE

1. I have a good relationship with my Science

teacher. 65 20 15 0 0

2. My Science teacher uses materials that are easy

to understand. 45 30 15 5 5

3. My Science teacher presents the lesson in a

variety of ways. 30 30 15 20 5

4. I don't understand the way my Science teacher

explains the lesson. 10 10 25 40 15

5. I don't get any feedback about my understanding

of the lesson from my Science teacher. 15 5 5 5 2

Data
Quantitative Research
Quantitative research is considered to have as its main purpose the quantification of data. This
allows generalizations of results from a sample to an entire population of interest and the
measurement of the incidence of various views and opinions in a given sample. Yet,
quantitative research is not infrequently followed by qualitative research which then aims
to explore select findings further.
Qualitative Research
Qualitative research is considered to be particularly suitable for gaining an in-depth
understanding of underlying reasons and motivations. It provides insights into the setting of a
problem. At the same time, it frequently generates ideas and hypotheses for later
quantitative research.

The main differences between quantitative

and qualitative research consist in respect to
data sample, data collection, data analysis,
and last but not least in regard to outcomes.
Data collection in qualitative research is not seldom based on unstructured or semi-structured, but
methodologically flexible techniques, e.g. individual depth interviews or group discussions,
that are suited to elicit great detail and a comprehensive view. Quantitative research uses
highly structured, rigid techniques such as online questionnaires, on-street or telephone
interviews. Unlike qualitative research, which allows unlimited expression from
respondents, quantitative research relies responses to pre-formulated questions.

Outcomes: Qualitative research typically is exploratory and/or investigative in nature. Its

findings are often not conclusive and cannot automatically be used to make
generalizations. However, it is indispensable in developing a deep understanding of a
given thematic complex and sound rationale for further decision making. Quantitative
research is essential for providing a broad base of insight on which typically a final course
of action is recommended.
Sample selection in qualitative research is usually based on a
smaller number of not-necessarily representative cases.
Respondents are frequently selected with the expectation that they fulfill certain criteria. In
quantitative research, sample selection seeks out a large number of cases that are
expected to best represent the population of interest. Individual respondents are selected
at random.

Qualitative data analysis is non-statistical, its methodological approach is primarily guided

by the concrete material at hand. In quantitative research, the sole approach to data is
statistical and takes places in the form of tabulations. Findings are usually descriptive in
nature although conclusive only within the numerical framework.
 AN ACTION RESEARCH O N THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIATED
INSTRUCTION IN TEACH ING ENGLISH FOR GRAD E FOUR CLASSES

I. INTRODUCTION

Like Science and Math, English is a difficult but an important subject because the curriculum
considers it as a tool subject needed to understand the different content subjects. Basically, it is
concerned with developing competencies in listening, speaking, reading, writing, and viewing.
Speaking includes skills in using the language expressions and grammatical structures correctly in
oral communication while writing skill includes readiness skills, mechanics in guided writing,
functional and creative writing (K to 12 Curriculum Guide for Grade 4).
You are here: Home / Teaching & Education / Sample Action Research About Education

SAMPLE ACTION RESEAR CH ABOUT

EDUCATION
By Mark Anthony Llego 29 Comments

Share

Tweet

Sample Action Research courtesy of Sir Kenneth D. Hernandez,CAR-PhD. (Admin TeacherPH Facebook
Group)

This is my promised Action Research by one of the teachers at Victoria Reyes Elementary School.
Notice that it was conducted only for a week and the Statistics used are very simple yet the
interpretation is meaty.

VICTORIA REYES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

DASMARIÑAS CITY

AN ACTION RESEARCH ON THE

EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIATED
INSTRUCTION IN TEACH ING ENGLISH FOR
GRADE FOUR CLASSES
By

Mary Joy V. Olicia

Researcher

I. INTRODUCTION
Like Science and Math, English is a difficult but an important subject because the curriculum considers it as a
tool subject needed to understand the different content subjects. Basically, it is concerned with developing
competencies in listening, speaking, reading, writing, and viewing. Speaking includes skills in using the
language expressions and grammatical structures correctly in oral communication while writing skill includes
readiness skills, mechanics in guided writing, functional and creative writing (K to 12 Curriculum Guide for
Grade 4).

The K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum aims to help learners understand that English language is involved in
the dynamic social process which responds to and reflects changing social conditions. It is also inextricably
involved with values, beliefs and ways of thinking about the person and the world people dwell. The curriculum
aims that pupils are given an opportunity to build upon their prior knowledge while utilizing their own skills,
interests, styles, and talents.

However, teachers find difficulties in teaching different kinds of pupils with different intellectual capacities,
talent or skills, interest, and learning styles especially in heterogeneous groupings of pupils. This situation calls
for teachers to create lessons for all pupils based upon their readiness, interests, and background knowledge.
Anderson (2007) noted that it is imperative not to exclude any child in a classroom, so a differentiated learning
environment must be provided by a teacher.

Differentiated instruction is based on the concept that the teacher is a facilitator of information, while students
take the primary role of expanding their knowledge by making sense of their ability to learn differently
(Robinson, Maldonado, & Whaley, 2014).

Wilson (2009) argued that differentiated instruction is the development of the simple to the complex tasks, and
a difference between individuals that are otherwise similar in certain respects such as age or grade are given
consideration. Additionally, Butt and Kusar (2010) stated that it is an approach to planning, so that one lesson
may be taught to the entire class while meeting the individual needs of each child.

According to Tomlinson (2009), DI as a philosophy of teaching is based on the premise that students learn best
when their teachers accommodate the differences in their readiness levels, interests, and learning profiles. It
sees the learning experience as social and collaborative. The responsibility of what happens in the classroom is
first to teacher, but also to the learner (Subban, 2006). Additionally, DI presents an effective means to address
learner’s variance which avoids the pitfalls of the one-size-fits-all curriculum. Stronge (2004) and Tomlinson
(2004b) claimed that addressing student differences and interest enhance their motivation to learn and make
them to remain committed and to stay positive as well.

Stravroula (2011) conducted a study in investigating the impact of DI in mixed ability classrooms and found out
that the implementation of differentiation had made a big step in facing the negative effects of socio-economic
factors on students’ achievement by managing diversity effectively, providing learning opportunities for all
students. The positive change in students’ achievement had shown that differentiation can be considered as an
effective teaching approach in mixed ability classrooms.

Furthermore, Servilio (cited by Robinson, 2014) studied the effectiveness of using DI to motivate students to
read and found out that an average of 83.4% of the students’ grades improved in reading, 12.5% remained the
same, and 41% of the grades decreased.

As educator, the teacher-researcher was motivated to conduct this action research on the effectiveness of DI in
teaching English on Grade Four pupils for a week-long lesson. She also she wanted to know the effect of this
method on the academic performance of the pupils from results of the diagnostic and achievement test.
II. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This study determined the effectiveness of conducting DI to Grade Four English class. Specifically, it answered
the following.

1. What is the performance of the two groups of respondents in the pretest?

1.1. Control group

1.2. Experimental group

2. What is the performance of the two groups of respondents in the posttest?

1.1. Control group

1.2. Experimental group

3. Is there a significant difference between the pretest scores of the control and experimental group?

4. Is there a significant difference between the posttest scores of the control and experimental group?

5. Is there a significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the control and experimental group?

III. HYPOTHESES
The following null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance.

1. There is no significant difference between the pretest result of the experimental and control group.

2. There is no significant difference between the posttest result of the experimental and control group.

3. There is no significant difference between the pretest and posttest result of the experimental and control group.

IV. METHODOLOGY
This action research utilized the experimental design since its main purpose was to determine the effectiveness
of DI and its possible effect to the mean gain scores on achievement of pupils on a one-week lesson in Grade 4
English.

Two groups were taught the same lessons for one week. The control group was taught using the single teaching
with similar activities approach while the experimental group was taught using DI with three sets of activities
and three sets of evaluation and facilitation for the three groupings of pupils for the one-week duration. Two
regular sections were included in the study out of the five Grade 4 sections that the school have.

Both groups were given the diagnostic test on Friday, September 25, 2015 to identify the classification of pupils
whether they belong to the above average group, average group, and below average group. The achievement
test was administered on Monday, October 5, 2015 the following week using parallel teacher-made tests. The
number of pupils was again identified to know whether there was change in their classification. The results of
the pretest and the posttest were compared to determine whether using DI is effective or not.
Data Gathering

After seeking the approval from the principal, the teacher-researcher started the experiment for a week.

The scores of both the pretest and the posttest were taken and these data were coded, tallied, and were
statistically treated using the mean, standard deviation, and t-test of significant difference.

The mean and the standard deviation were used to determine the level of performance of control and
experimental groups and the classification of pupils, while the t-test was employed to determine the significant
difference of the mean scores on pretest and posttest of both groups.

V. RESULTS AND DISCU SSIONS

The following are the results and the analysis done from the data.

A. Performance of the Two Groups of Respondents in the Diagnostic Test (Pretest)

The result of the pretest of the two class groups is presented in Table 1.

Diagnostic scores reveal that the control group has a mean of 11.76 (Sd=4.06) while the experimental group
reported a mean score of 12.07 (sd=3.56) which is a little higher.

Table 1

Pretest Results of the Control and the Experimental

Groups Prior to the Experiment

Groups N Mean Standard Deviation

Control Group 49 11.76 4.06

Experimental Group 51 12.07 3.56

The variance results of 4.06 and 3.56 are not that big which signify that both classes are heterogeneous;
meaning the pupils were of differing level of intelligence. This is indeed a good baseline since the results
suggest that the two sections included in the study are almost the same in the manner that the scores are
scattered. This means that the pupil’s grouping are mixed as to their abilities.

Tomlinson (2009) claimed that pupil’s differences should be addressed and the two groups became an ideal
grouping for which the experiment was conducted concerning DI.

B. Performance of the Two Groups of Respondents in the Achievement Test (Posttest)

Table 2

Pretest Results of the Control and the Experimental

Groups Prior to the Experiment
Groups N Mean Standard Deviation

Control Group 49 13.82 3.53

Experimental Group 51 16.45 2.34

The level of performance of the two groups in the posttest is presented in Table 2.

The experimental group of pupils who were exposed to DI obtains a mean score of 16.45 (Sd=2.34) while the
control group who were taught using the traditional method obtain a mean score of 13.82 (Sd=3.53).

The result showed that the posttest scores of the experimental groups taught with DI is remarkably better as
compared to those which were taught the traditional approach. Looking at the standard deviation scores, it
signifies that the variance of the experimental group was smaller than that of the control group which suggest
that the pupils’ intellectual ability were not scattered unlike in the pretest result.

The finding is supported by Stravroula’s (2011) study on DI where was able to prove that DI is effective as it
positively effects the diverse pupils characteristics. Stronge’s (2004) contention that DI can enhance motivation
and performance also supports the result.

C. Classification of Pupils in the Control and Experimental Group Based on the Pretest and Posttest
Scores Results

Table 3

Classification of Pupils Before and After the Differentiated Instruction

Table 3 presents the grouping of the pupils both in the control and in the experimental group As per
classification of students based on the mean and standard deviation results, a majority of the pupils were on the
average group for the control and experimental group prior to the treatment. However, after the experiment,
there was a big increase in number of pupils for the average group for the control group and a larger number
now belongs to the above average group. There were no pupils reported to be in the below average group for
both the control and the experimental group.

Data suggest that both approach in teaching increased the achievement but remarkable increase was noted in the
group taught with DI.

D. Classification of Pupils in the Control and Experimental Group Based on the Pretest and Posttest
Scores Results
 Table 3.1

Classification of Pupils Before and After the Differentiated Instruction

Table 3.1 shows that as per classification of students based on the mean and standard deviation results, a
majority of the pupils were on the average group for the control and experimental group prior to the treatment
of using DI to the experimental group.

It could be noticed that the percentages of classification are not far from each other. The idea presented by
Tomlinson (2009) that differences of pupils should be addressed by the teacher in the classroom is good and
according to Robinson, et.al, the teachers are the best facilitators of learning for pupils of diverse background
and abilities.

Table 3.2

Classification of Pupils After the Differentiated Instruction

Table 3.2 presents that after the experiment, there was a big increase in number of pupils for the average group
for the control group and a larger number now belongs to the above average group. There were no pupils
reported to be in the below average group for both the control and the experimental group.

Data suggest that both approach in teaching increased the achievement but remarkable increase was noted in the
group taught with DI. This improvement in the classification or grouping of pupils in both groups assumes the
principle that both groups who are taught by the same teacher with the same lesson could normally have a
change in aptitude especially if the teacher has addressed the differences as averred by Anderson (2007).
However, the notable changes in the experimental group is surely brought about by the DI exposed to them as
supported by Stravroula (2011), Subban (2006), and Stronge (2004). With the DI, the teacher’s approach to the
teaching and the activities may have affected very well the acquisition of the learning competencies as was
mentioned by Wilson (2009). Specifically however, in English, the contentions of Sevillano (cited by Robinson
et al, 2014) directly supports the result.

READ: Research Paper Writing Service

E. Results of Significant Difference Between the Pretest Scores of the Control and Experimental Group

Table 4

Significant Difference Between the Pretest Scores of the Control Group and Experimental Group

Table 4 presents the significant difference in the pretest scores of the two groups.

The computed t-ratio of 0.8109 is lesser than the tabular of 1.9845 at 98 degrees of freedom. Hence the
hypothesis of no significant difference is accepted. There is no significant difference in the pretest scores of the
class groups.

This result is good since the baseline data prior to the use of DI suggest that the pupils have similar intellectual
abilities which will be very crucial for trying out the experiment in the teaching approach. The data suggest that
the groups are very ideal for the experiment since they possess similarities prior to the experiment.

F. Significant Difference Between the Posttest Scores of the Control and Experimental Group

Table 5 presents the significant difference of the posttest scores between the control and the experimental
group.

Table 5

Results of Post-test the Control and Experimental Group

From the data, it is very clear that the difference in scores in the achievement favor the experimental group
which was taught using DI. Hence, it is safe to say that DI is effective based on the data generated.

G. Significant Difference Between the Pre-test and Post-test Scores of the Control and Experimental
Group
 Table 6

Significant Difference Between the Pretest and Posttest Scores of the Control and Experimental Group

Table 6 presents the comparison of the pretest and post test scores of the control and the control groups.

Clearly, for the control, there is no significant difference as signified by the computed t coefficient of 0.09
which is lesser than the tabular value of 1.9850 using 96 degrees of freedom. However, for the control group, it
is very obvious that the calculated t-ratio of 1.02 is greater than the tabular value of 1.9840. Hence, the
hypothesis of no significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores for the control group is accepted
but is rejected for the experimental group.

The results are very significant since the group exposed without DI did not report difference in score unlike in
the group taught using DI which showed significant difference. This then makes it safe to conclude that DI is
effective in teaching English.

VI. FINDINGS
The following are the findings of this action research.

1. The mean scores of both control (11.76, Sd=4.06) and the experimental (12.07, Sd=3.56) groups do not
significantly differ based on the t-coefficient result of 0.8109 which is lesser than the tabular of 1.9845 at 98
degrees of freedom.

2. The mean scores of the control (16.45, Sd=2.34) and the experimental (13.82, Sd=3.53) significantly differ which
favor the use of DI from the t-ratio of 3.423 is greater than the tabular value of 1.9845 at 0.05 level of significance
using 98 degrees of freedom.

3. During the pretest, majority of the pupils are average (control group, 35 or 71.43% and 37 or 72.55%). After the
treatment, however, majority of the pupils in the control group became average (34 or 69.39%) and above
average (35 or 68.63%).

4. There is no significant difference between the control group’s pretest and posttest scores based on the computed
t coefficient of 0.09 which is lesser than the tabular value of 1.9850 using 96 degrees of freedom but significant
difference exists for the experimental group as signified by the calculated t-ratio of 1.02 is greater than the tabular
value of 1.9840 using 98 degrees of freedom.

VII. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings, the following are the conclusions.

1. The pretest scores of the control and the experimental group do not differ significantly.
 2. The posttest scores of the groups significantly differ resulting to higher scores for the experimental group.

3. No significant difference exists in the pretest and posttest scores of the control group, but significant difference is
noted for the experimental group.

4. There is an improvement in the groupings of pupils both in the control and experimental group but significant
improvement was shown for the pupils taught using DI.

5. Use of DI is effective considering the higher scores of the experimental group compared to the control group.

VIII. RECOMMEND ATION

Based on the above findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are suggested.

1. DI should be used in teaching pupils in English especially in heterogeneous classes because it improved their
classroom performance.

2. Teachers should be given in-service trainings on DI for them to gain more knowledge and clear understanding of
the approach.

3. Although tedious on the part of the teachers, they should be encouraged to prepare and use DI to motivate pupils
to participate in class discussions.

4. This action research should be continued.

Research Designs

the design is the structure of any scientific work. It gives direction and systematizes
the research. Different types of research designs have different advantages and
disadvantages.

The method you choose will affect your results and how you conclude the findings. Most scientists are interested in
getting reliable observations that can help the understanding of a phenomenon.
There are two main approaches to a research problem:

 Quantitative Research
 Qualitative Research

Different Research Methods

There are various designs which are used in research, all with specific advantages and disadvantages. Which one
the scientist uses, depends on the aims of the study and the nature of the phenomenon:
Descriptive Designs

Aim: Observe and Describe

 Descriptive Research
 Case Study
 Naturalistic Observation
 Survey, also see our Survey Guide
Correlational Studies

Aim: Predict
 Case Control Study
 Observational Study
 Cohort Study
 Longitudinal Study
 Cross Sectional Study
 Correlational Studies in general
Semi-Experimental Designs

Aim: Determine Causes

 Field Experiment
 Quasi-Experimental Design
 Twin Studies
Experimental Designs

Aim: Determine Causes

 True Experimental Design

 Double-Blind Experiment
Reviewing Other Research

Aim: Explain

 Literature Review
 Meta-analysis
 Systematic Reviews
Test Study Before Conducting a Full-Scale Study

Aim: Does the Design Work?

 Pilot Study

Typical Experimental Designs

Simple Experimental Techniques

 Pretest-Posttest Design
 Control Group
 Randomization
 Randomized Controlled Trials
 Between Subjects Design
 Within Subject Design
Complex Experimental Designs

 Factorial Design
 Solomon Four-Group Design
 Repeated Measures Design
 Counterbalanced Measures Design
 Matched Subjects Design
 Bayesian Probability
 Which Method to Choose?
What design you choose depends on different factors.

 What information do you want? The aims of the study.

 The nature of the phenomenon - Is it feasible to collect the data, and if so, would it be valid/reliable?
 How reliable should the information be?
 Is it ethical to conduct the study?
 The cost of the design

 Is there little or much current scientific theory and literature on the topic?

Survey Guide
The full guide - How to create a Survey / Questionnaire
Introduction

 Research and Surveys

 Advantages and Disadvantages of Surveys
 Survey Design
 Methods of Survey Sampling
Planning a Survey

 Planning a Survey
 Defining Survey Goals
Questions and Answers

 Constructing Survey Questions

 Questionnaire Layout
 Types of Survey Questions
 Survey Response Scales
 Survey Response Formats
Types of Surveys

 Selecting the Survey Method

 Types of Survey
 Paper-and-pencil Survey

 Personal Interview Survey

 Telephone Survey
 Online Surveys
 Preparing an Online Survey
 Web Survey Tools
 Focus Groups - Pros and Cons
 Panel Study
Conducting the Survey

 Pilot Survey
 How to Conduct a Survey
 Increasing Survey Response Rates
After the Survey

 Analysis and Handling Survey Data

 Conclusion of a Survey
 Presenting Survey Results