CAUSES OF NON-SUBMISSION OF PERFORMANCE TASK/S IN MAPEH 7

(PRINTED MODALITY)

Action Research Study

NORAYDA T. DOMINGO
A School-based Action Researcher
San Jose City National High School- Nueva Ecija
June 2022

ABSTRACT

Based in this study, majority of the students enrolled at San Jose City

National High School were females with an average of three (3) siblings.

Also, more than half of the students’ parent’s educational attainment were

high school level. In terms of their monthly income, most of the students

were earning 2001-3000 pesos.

The results of this study also showed that the students prefer on doing their

performance task with their classmates rather than doing it by themselves. Also, this

study showed a negative significant relationship between the factors affecting the

non-submission of performance task and the number of siblings of the respondents.

This relationship implies that many siblings may lead to non-submission of the

performance task.

1
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................6

2. LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................................................7

2.1.Socio Demographic Characteristics................................................................................8

2.1.1.Sex.........................................................................................................................8

2.1.2. Number of siblings................................................................................................8

2.1.3.Performance Task..................................................................................................9

2.2. Conceptual Framework...............................................................................................10

Figure 1. Conceptual Paradigm of the Study...........................................................................10

2.3. Research Questions....................................................................................................11

2.4.Hypothesis of the Study...............................................................................................11

2.5.Significance of the Study..............................................................................................12

2.6.Scope and Limitation..................................................................................................12

3. METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................13

3.1. Type of Research.........................................................................................................13

3.2. Respondents of the Study...........................................................................................13

3.3.Sampling Method.........................................................................................................14

3.4.Sources of Data............................................................................................................14

3.5. Instrument/s...............................................................................................................14

3.6. Data Collection............................................................................................................15

3.7. Ethical Considerations.................................................................................................15

3.8. Data Analysis..............................................................................................................15

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..................................................................................................16

4.1. Socio – Demographic Characteristics..........................................................................16

4.1.1. Sex......................................................................................................................16

4.1.2. Number of Siblings.............................................................................................16

4.1.3. Mother’s Educational Attainment.......................................................................16

4.1.4. Father’s Educational Attainment........................................................................16

Table 1. Socio – Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents........................................17

4.1.5. Monthly Income..................................................................................................17

2
 4.2. Causes of Non-submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality)
Questionnaire....................................................................................................................18

Table 2. Causes of Non-submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality)

Questionnaire.........................................................................................................................18

4. 3. Relationship between Socio – Demographic Characteristics and Causes of Non-

submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality)..................................19

Table 3. Correlation between Socio – Demographic Characteristics and Causes of Non-

submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality).......................................20

4.4. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................20

4.5. DISSEMINATION AND ADVOCACY PLANS....................................................................21

5. REFERENCES........................................................................................................................22

6. Financial Report..................................................................................................................24

7. APPENDICES........................................................................................................................25

3
List of Tables
Table1.....................................................................................................................................17

Table2.....................................................................................................................................18

Table3.....................................................................................................................................20

Table4.....................................................................................................................................21

Table5.....................................................................................................................................24

Table6.....................................................................................................................................25

Table7.....................................................................................................................................28

Table8.....................................................................................................................................28

Table9.....................................................................................................................................29

Table10...................................................................................................................................29

4
Table of Figures
Picture 8..................................................................................................................................28

Picture 7..................................................................................................................................28

Picture 6..................................................................................................................................29

Picture 9..................................................................................................................................29

5
1. INTRODUCTION

Performance task has been one of the ways to assess the learnings of students.

In fact, McTighe (2015) defines performance task as any learning activity or

assessment that asks students to perform to demonstrate their knowledge,

understanding and proficiency. It yields a tangible product and/or performance that

serve as evidence of learning. Unlike a selected-response item that asks students to

select from given alternatives, a performance task presents a situation that calls for

learners to apply their learning in context. Performance tasks are routinely used in

certain disciplines, such as visual and performing arts, physical education, and career-

technology where performance is the natural focus of instruction. In our new normal

setting, performance tasks are great way to provide students with something to do at

home that will keep them focused on important learning (Alberta Assessment

Consortium, 2020).

In relation to this, Academic performance is among the several components of

academic success. Many factors, including socioeconomic status, student

temperament and motivation, peer, and parental support influence academic

performance. According to Lamas (2015), academic performance study of students is,

due to its relevance and complexity, one of the issues of major controversy in the

educational research, and it has been given special attention in the last decades. It is

used interchangeably with “student success,” and, it encompasses academic

achievement, attainment of learning objectives, acquisition of desired skills and

competencies, satisfaction, persistence, and post-college performance (Kuh et al.,

2006; York et al., 2015).

6
 On the other hand, performance-based assessments have recently

experienced a re-emergence in education literature and curricula. During the

1990’s, performance -based assessments became a valid alternative to

traditional multiple-choice tests. In the years that followed, legislative

requirements shifted the emphasis to standardized testing, which caused a

decline in non-traditional testing methods(darling-Hammond & Adamson,

2013).

Educators know that meaningful learning requires an active participation of

the learner (Fetsco and McClure, 2005). Although positive outcomes of performance

assessment have been demonstrated at the primary and secondary levels, few studies

to date have examined the impact of performance assessment in graduate-level

environments. In addition, few studies have explored the impact of performance

assessment on the motivation of graduate students to learn. Because student

motivation is such an important but poorly understood issue in higher education, the

current study was conducted to investigate the impact of performance assessment on

graduate students’ achievement and motivation to learn (Hancock, 2007)

Thus, this study was conceptualized to determine the factors affecting Grade 7

learners’ non-submission of performance task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality).

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
This part will determine the causes of non-submission of performance task/s in

MAPEH 7. Those that were included the socio-demographic characteristics of the

learner’s information that are relevant and like the present study.

7
2.1.Socio Demographic Characteristics
2.1.1.Sex
In an Australian study conducted with a sample of over 880 prep (equivalent

to first grade) students, Boardman (2006) found that student sex was a factor in

overall academic success, particularly in the area of reading.

2.1.2. Number of siblings

Empirical research has repeatedly revealed the persistence of educational

inequalities caused by families’ human capital, economic, and cultural resources (e.g.,

Baumert et al. 2001; Prenzel et al. 2004; Becker 2004). Current research increasingly

focuses on characteristics influencing a child’s educational success in addition to

classical social background characteristics as well as on underlying mechanisms

leading to resource-specific educational outcomes.

One prominent explanation on why sibship structure should be relevant for

educational outcomes has been contributed by the resource dilution hypothesis, which

states that the availability of family resources is dependent on the number of children.

In larger families, resources (e.g., parental time or monetary resources) have to be

distributed among more children, which could negatively affect their educational

outcomes. Furthermore, additional effects on family resources are expected for birth

spacing and birth order, as, for instance, smaller birth gaps may additionally reduce

parental attention paid to each child, and first-born children could potentially benefit

more from time spent with their parents than later-born siblings.

Younger siblings benefit from the guidance and support offered by older

siblings and tend to maintain a higher level of intimacy with them (Oliva & Arranz,

2005). Researchers have found that as adolescents reported higher levels of sibling

8
relationship quality, they also reported higher levels of emotional support available

from their sibling (Alfaro & Umana-Taylor, 2010; Yeh & Lempers, 2004).

Male children often seem to be the focus of studies on gender differences in

the classroom. In preschool classrooms across nine different states, teachers rated

inappropriate behaviors such as aggression toward others, lack of attention, refusal to

obey, and turning inward for both boys and girls between the ages of three and six

(Feil, Severson, & Walker, 1998). Fifty-five percent of boys versus 45% of girls fell

within these categories for inappropriate behaviors, causing the authors to propose a

more effective screening measurement to reduce the overrepresentation of boys (Feil,

Severson, & Walker, 1998).

2.1.3.Performance Task
According to the DepEd Order No. 8, (2015), classroom assessment is an

integral part on the implementation of the curriculum. It becomes the bases for

measuring the performance and progression of the students. This also acts as

parameter for the necessary adjustments on the teaching strategies as set in the policy

guidelines. According to Russell (2001), there is no difference in the achievement of

learning outcomes as measure in grades or exams between the face to face and e-

learning modality. The same was the results of the study conducted by Francescucci

& Rohani (2018) on the 698 undergraduate students in North America. The specific

statistical comparison between the face to face and the virtual, interactive, real-time,

instructor-led (VIRI) showed same level of students’ performance in both methods.

Given the results of the previous studies, the adaption of the e-learning at the current

state may not be similar in the outcomes. There are various considerations such as the

attention span of the children, the assessment mode, monitoring and supervision

9
during assessment and other social and environmental factors (Ancheta & Ancheta,

2020).

Performance tasks may either be products or performance-based activities

such as YouTube campaign videos, multimedia productions uploaded on social

media, investigatory projects, musical arrangements, online debates or presentation,

interviews, panel discussions and skills demonstration (Mateo, 2020)

2.2. Conceptual Framework

This study was conceptualized to determine the relationship between

independent and dependent variables. The independent variable is amount of

performance tasks given to the students. It is believed that the amount of performance

task given to the students affects their academic performance. The conceptual

framework of this study is shown in figure 1.

Independent Variables Dependent Variable

Socio Demographic
Characteristics
 Sex Causes of Non-Submission
 Number of Siblings of Performance Task
 Parents’ Educational
Attainment
 Monthly Income

Figure 1. Conceptual Paradigm of the Study

10
2.3. Research Questions
This study will determine the causes of non-submission of performance tasks

in MAPEH 7.

Specifically, it will answer the following questions:

1. How may the socio-demographic characteristics of the learners be described in

terms of:

a. Sex

b. Number of Siblings

c. Parents’ Educational Attainment

d. Monthly Income

2. What are the challenges faced by Grade 7 learners in submitting their

performance tasks?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the socio demographic

characteristics of the learners and their submission/non-submission of

performance tasks in MAPEH 7?

4. Based on the foregoing, what intervention can be considered to address Grade

7 learners’ non-submission of performance tasks in MAPEH 7?

2.4.Hypothesis of the Study

The following hypothesis will be tested in the study:

1. There is no significant difference between any of the socio-demographic

characteristics of the respondents and their submission of performance tasks in

MAPEH 7.

11
2.5.Significance of the Study
The result of this study will provide vital information regarding student

organization. Specifically, it may be significant to the following:

Department of Education (DepEd). This study will help them to determine the

importance and effects of performance tasks to the student

Teachers/ Instructors. This serves as an awakening factor for the teachers to give

chances discover and explore students, talents, ideas and other capabilities of the

students.

Students. The students are the direct beneficiaries of the findings of the study. It will

serve as their source for motivation and guide to go in knowledge and eagerness to

finish their study.

Future Researchers. They will help future researchers to gain knowledge about this

study, and it will also serve as their reference for more studies in the future.

2.6.Scope and Limitation

This study is limited to Grade 7 learners in Printed Modality of San Jose City

National High School during the School Year 2021-2022. Also, this study will focus

only on sex, number of sibling/s, parents’ educational attainment and monthly income

as socio-demographic characteristics and the learners’ non-submission of performance

tasks in MAPEH 7 only.

12
3. METHODOLOGY
This part deals on the type of research, the respondents of this study, sampling

method, sources of data, instruments, data collection procedure, timetable, cost

estimates and plans for dissemination and advocacy used in this study.

3.1. Type of Research

A descriptive approach was followed. Quantitative research is a formal,

objective, systematic process to describe and test relationships and examine cause and

effect interactions among variables (Grove, 1993). The researcher chose quantitative

approach because it quantifies the data so that it can be treated statistically.

Furthermore, Delan (2009) states that quantitative research is a better method than

qualitative research because it is more simplified and numerical results can be easier

to understand. A descriptive survey design was also used in this study. This design

has been chosen to meet the objectives of the study, namely, to design an instrument

in measuring the limitations of performance tasks in MAPEH to the academic

performance of learners under printed modality.

3.2. Respondents of the Study

The respondents of this study were taken from San Jose City National High

School (SJCNHS). The sample of this study was only consisting of 30 printed

modular learners enrolled at San Jose City National High School – JHS for the S.Y.

2021-2022.

13
3.3.Sampling Method
The researcher made use of purposive sampling to select 30 learners. Only

those learners who are notoriously not submitting performance tasks in MAPEH 7

since quarter 1 was selected. The purposive sampling technique, also called judgment

sampling, is the deliberate choice of a participant due to the qualities the participant

possesses. It is a non-random technique that does not need underlying theories or a set

number of participants. The researcher decided what needs to be known and sets out

to find people who can and are willing to provide the information by virtue of

knowledge or experience.

3.4.Sources of Data
The data of this study was gathered through survey forms that were given to the

learners in printed modality. After the data were gathered, it was subjected for

analysis.

3.5. Instrument/s
This study used a researcher-made survey questionnaire which was divided

into three parts. Part I dealt with the socio-demographic characteristics of the

respondents which include sex, number of siblings, parents’ educational attainment

and monthly income. Part II and Part III focused on the limitations of performance

task on printed modality. The following scale was used in the study.

4 – Strongly Agree

3 – Agree

2 – Disagree

1 – Strongly Disagree

14
3.6. Data Collection
In gathering the data, a written request was submitted to the principal of San

Jose City National School for the permission to conduct the study. After the approval,

the researcher administered a survey questionnaire to the respondents. Then the

responses were treated using appropriate statistical tools for data analysis.

3.7. Ethical Considerations

The researcher sent a consent letter to the parents of the respondents. The

consent included sufficient information about the study, assurances on the level of

confidentiality, implication of the learner’s participation, statement about possible

discomforts or risks (if there’s any), duration of the participation and the incentives

that the child may get from participating in the study. This was to ensure a fully

informed, considered and freely given decision about whether or not the parent allows

his/her child to participate in the study.

3.8. Data Analysis

Frequency distribution and percentage were used to describe the gathered data

from the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. Weighed mean was

used to interpret the answers of the respondents, which was measured the limitations

of performance tasks and academic performance in MAPEH of learners in printed

modality

Pearson Product Moment Correlation (r) was used to determine the

relationship between socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents and their

non-submission of performance tasks in MAPEH 7.

15
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Socio – Demographic Characteristics
4.1.1. Sex
It can be seen in table 1 that majority (60.00%) of the respondents were

female. There were only forty percent of the males. Result was similar to the findings

of Villacorta (2022) that there were more female students enrolled in the Division of

San Jose City during the School Year 2021 – 2022.

4.1.2. Number of Siblings

The average number of siblings was 3, and many of them (33.30%) have only

2 siblings. There is only about 6.70 percent who have 6 siblings. Result indicates that

the respondents’ parents were aware of family planning.

4.1.3. Mother’s Educational Attainment

Result showed that less than half (46.70%) of the mothers were high school

level in terms of their education. About 23.30 percent of them finished high school.

There is only 1 (3.30%) of the mothers graduated from college. Result indicates that

the mothers of the respondents don’t have much appreciation or were not given the

chance to pursue higher or better education.

4.1.4. Father’s Educational Attainment

Similar result was obtained from the educational attainment of the fathers.

More than half (56.70%) of them were in high school level, and about 23.30 percent

of them were high school graduates. Same with the mothers, there was only 1 who

graduated college from the fathers.

16
Table 1. Socio – Demographic Characteristics of
the Respondents
Characteristics Frequency Percentage
Sex
Male 12 40.00
Female 18 60.00

Number of Siblings
1 2 6.70
2 10 33.30
3 7 23.30
4 5 16.70
5 4 13.30
6 2 6.70
Mean = 3.00
Mother’s Educational Attainment
Elementary Level 1 3.30
Elementary Graduate 2 6.70
High School Level 14 46.70
High School Graduate 7 23.30
College Level 5 16.70
College Graduate 1 3.30

Father’s Educational Attainment

Elementary Level 2 6.70
Elementary Graduate 2 6.70
High School Level 17 56.70
High School Graduate 7 23.30
College Level 1 3.30
College Graduate 1 3.30
Monthly Income
1,000 – 2,000 4 13.30
2,001 – 3,000 10 33.30
3,001 – 4,000 5 16.70
4,001 – 5000 4 13.30
5,001 and above 7 23.30

4.1.5. Monthly Income

Result showed that one – third (33.30%) of the respondents’ family income

belongs to the bracket 2,001 – 3,000. There was about 16.70 percent belonging to the

bracket of 3,001 – 4,000. Only a little closer to one – fourth (23.30%) of them have

17
income of more than 5,000. Result can be associated with their educational

attainment, since majority of them were only in the high school level, they were not

able to land a better job which can pay a better salary.

4.2. Causes of Non-submission of Performance Task/s

in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality) Questionnaire

Result showed that the over – all mean (2.60) described the respondents’

agreement that the following statements in table were factors affecting their non –

submission of performance tasks. The respondents also agreed ( mean = 2.90) that

they prefer doing their performance tasks with their classmates.

They also agreed (mean = 2.60) that they don’t have the resources and gadgets

to do some of the performance in their subject, and no one guides them in their home

to accomplish their performance tasks. However, they disagree (mean = 2.27) that

they do not have the interest in doing their tasks. Likewise, they also disagree (mean =

2.47) that they cannot completely understand the directions/instructions for the

performance tasks in the module.

In totality, there were seven (7) statements (factors) where the respondents

agreed that these are the reasons why they were not able to submit their performance

tasks and three (3) disagreement.

Table 2. Causes of Non-submission of

Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed
Modality) Questionnaire

Statement Mean Description

I cannot completely understand the 2.47* Disagree
directions/instructions for the performance tasks in the
module

18
 I don’t have resources like gadgets to do some 2.60* Agree
performance tasks in MAPEH
I do not have the interest in doing it 2.27* Disagree
I prefer doing my performance tasks with my 2.90 Agree
classmates
No one guides me in our home to accomplish our 2.60* Agree
performance tasks
I cannot do the tasks alone. I’m hesitant to ask my 2.43* Disagree
teacher through text or chat
I do not have ample time to do performance tasks 2.70* Agree
because of the household chores
I cannot finish the performance tasks since we have a 2.77* Agree
lot of modules to be accomplished
Some performance tasks require equipment which I 2.70* Agree
cannot provide like art materials, construction tools,
etc.
All/some performance tasks require internet 2.87* Agree
connection which I or my parents cannot provide.
Over – all Mean 2.60 Agree
legend: 3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree *reversely coded
2.50 – 3.24 Agree
1.75 – 2.49 Disagree
1.00 – 1.74 Strongly Disagree

4. 3. Relationship between Socio – Demographic Characteristics and Causes of

Non-submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality)

It can be seen in table 3 that the only variable which was found to be

significantly related to the dependent variable is the number of siblings (r = -.323; p

= .036). Since the correlation is negative, this means that the more siblings the

respondents have the higher is the tendency that they cannot be able to submit their

performance tasks.

Table 3. Correlation between Socio – Demographic Characteristics and Causes

of Non-submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7 (Printed Modality)
Characteristics Factors
r p

19
 Sex 0.089 .765
Number of Siblings -0-.323* .036
Mother’s Educational Attainment 0.112 .812
Father’s Educational Attainment 0.109 .839
Monthly Income 0.097 .798
*significant at 0.05 level (2 – tailed)

Result can be attributed to the fact that if there were more children at home

parents cannot guide them properly, without the proper guidance of the parents at

home, there is a big possibility that learners cannot finish their performance tasks

which can result to their non – submission of output.

The hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship between the

socio – demographic characteristics of the respondents to their non – submission of

output was rejected based on the number of siblings.

4.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Teachers together with the Department of Education should assess the needs

of students by taking into consideration their social and economic status.

2. Activities and lessons should be discussed further on the module since

students only have minimal guidance during the new learning scheme.

3. Teacher-learner relationship should be strengthened to make consultation to

the teachers easy for the students.

4. Further study about academic performance of students with large number of

siblings should be conducted

20
 4.5. DISSEMINATION AND ADVOCACY PLANS
ACTIVITIES OBJECTIVES STRATEGIES PERSON/S FINANCIAL TIME SUCCESS
INVOLVED REQUIREMENT FRAME INDICATOR
S
CRAFTING 1.To monitor 1.Circulate a 1.Students Php 1,120.00 March- 1.Filled up
OF performance of monitoring sheet 2.Parents May monitoring
MONITORI MAPEH to the teachers 3.Teachers 2022 sheet
NG SHEET students.
2.To determine
areas that needs
to be strengthen
CONDUCT 1.To 1.Meetings/ 1.Teachers March- Meetings/
MEETINGS/ communicate consultations 2.Parents May consultation
CONSULTA with the parents with the 2022 s with the
TION WITH 2.To help the parents/guardian parents/guar
PARENTS parents as well s dians
as students on
their
performance in
their MAPEH
subject
FOLLOW 1.To identify if 1.Establish 1.Students March- Student
UP monitoring the strong 2.Teachers May output
ASSESSME learners is an communication 2022
NT ON effective with
LEARNERS intervention to learners/parents/
their guardians
performance.

21
5. REFERENCES
Alfaro, E., Umana-Taylor, A. (2010). Latino Adolescents’ Academic Motivation:
The Role of Siblings. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences -
HISPAN J BEHAV SCI. 32. 549-570. 10.1177/0739986310383165.

Ancheta, Ruel & Ancheta, Helen. (2020). The New Normal In Education:
A Challenge To The Private Basic Education Institutions In The
Philippines?.

Boardman, M. (2006). The Impact of Age and Gender on Prep Children’s Academic
Achievements. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 31(4), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1177/183693910603100402.
Darling-Hammond, L., Falk, B. (2014). Supporting Teacher Learning through
Performance Assessment. 10.1002/9781119210863.ch7.
Fetsco, T., & McClure, J. (2005). Educational Psychology: an integrated approach to
classroom decisions. The Influence of Project-based Learning Strategy and
Self-regulated Learning on Academic Procrastination of Junior High School
Students’ Mathematics Learning. American Journal of Educational
Research. 2017; 5(1):88-96. doi: 10.12691/education-5-1-14.

Hancock, D. R. (2007). Effects of performance assessment on the achievement and

motivation of graduate students. Active Learning in Higher
Education, 8(3), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787407081888\

Lamas, H. (2015). School Performance. Propósitos y Representaciones, 3(1), 313-

386. doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.20511/pyr2015.v3n1.74.

Lamas, H.(2015). School Performance. Journal of Educational

Psychology. Vol. 3 No. 1, 351-385. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1135350.

La Paro, K. M., & Pianta, R. C. (2000). Predicting children’s competence in the early
school years: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational
Research, 70, 443-484.http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543070004443

22
McTinghe, J.(2015). What is a Performance Task. Journal of Innovations in
Teaching and Learning. Vol. 2 No. 1, 1-9. Doi: 10.12691.
Oliva, A., Freijo, E. (2005). Sibling relationships during adolescence. European
Journal of Developmental Psychology - EUR J DEV PSYCHOL. 2.
10.1080/17405620544000002.
Oshima, T., Domaleski, C.(2006). Academic Performance Gap between Summer-
Birthday and Fall-Birthday Children in Grades K-8. Journal of Educational
Research. Vol. 99 No. 4, 212-217. ISSN-0022-0671.
Pizarro, D. (2001). Nothing More than Feelings? The Role of Emotions in Moral
Judgment. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 30. 355 - 375.
10.1111/1468-5914.00135.
Stipek, D., Byler, P. (2001). Academic achievement and social behaviors associated
with age of entry into kindergarten. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology. 22. 175-189. 10.1016/S0193-3973(01)00075-2.
Tomlinson, C.(2019). Student Assessment in Inclusive Environmnet.
Alberta Assessment Consortium. Retrieved from
https://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments.

York, T., Gibson, C., and Rankin, S. (2015) "Defining and Measuring Academic
Success," Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation: Vol. 20 ,
Article 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7275/hz5x-tx03

23
6. Financial Report
ITEMS QUANTITY COST

BOND PAPERS 2 reams Php. 500.00

INK 2 bottles black, 1 bottle cyan, 1 bottle Php. 600.00
magenta, 1 bottle yellow
STAPLE WIRES 2 boxes Php. 20.00
Total Php. 1120.00

24
7. APPENDICES
Appendix A

CAUSES OF NON-SUBMISSION OF PERFORMANCE TASK/S IN MAPEH 7

(PRINTED MODALITY)

I. Socio-demographic Characteristics

Number of Siblings: Sex:____Female ____Male

Monthly Income: 1000-2000
2001-3000
3001-4000
4001-5000
5001-above

Mother’s Educational Attainment Father’s Educational Attainment

 Elementary level
 Elementary level  Elementary Graduate
 Elementary Graduate  High School Level
 High School Level  High School Graduate
 High School Graduate  College Level
 College Level  College Graduate
 College Graduate  Post-graduate
 Post-graduate  Vocational
 Vocational

II. Causes of Non-submission of Performance Task/s in MAPEH 7

(Printed Modality) Questionnaire

Directions: Put a check () on the number that corresponds to your answer.

4-Strongly Agree 2-Disagree

3-Agree 1-Strongly Disagree

Statement 4 3 2 1
1. I cannot completely understand the
directions/instructions for the
performance tasks in the module.

25
2. I don’t have resources like gadgets to do
some performance tasks in MAPEH.
3. I do not have the interest in doing it.
4. I prefer doing my performance tasks with
my classmates.
5. No one guides me in our home to
accomplish our performance tasks.
6. I cannot do the task alone. I’m hesitant to
ask my teacher through text or chat.
7. I do not have ample time to do
performance tasks because of the
household chores.
8. I cannot finish the performance tasks
since we have a lot of modules to be
accomplished.
9. Some performance tasks require
equipment which I cannot provide like
art materials, construction tools, etc.
10. All/some performance tasks require
internet connection which I or my
parents cannot provide.

26
 Appendix B

Declaration of Anti – Plagiarism and Absence of Conflict of Interest

DECLARATION OF ANTI-PLAGIARISM

1. I, NORAYDA T. DOMINGO, understand that plagiarism is the act of taking and

using another’s ideas and works and passing them off as one's own. This includes
explicitly copying the whole work of another person and/or using some parts of their
work without proper acknowledgement and referencing.

2. I hereby attest to the originality of this research proposal and has cited properly all
the references used. I further commit that all deliverables and the final research study
emanating from this proposal shall be of original content. I shall use appropriate
citations in referencing other works from various sources.

3. I understand that violation from this declaration and commitment shall be subject
to consequences and shall be dealt with accordingly by the Department of Education
and (insert grant mechanism)

PROPONENT:

PRINTED NAME: NORAYDA T. DOMINGO

SIGNATURE: ___________________
DATE: April 29, 2022

27
 Appendix C
Consent and Assent Letters

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region III
Schools Division of San Jose City
San Jose City National High School
San Jose City, Nueva Ecija

CONSENT FORM

This is to certify that I, _____________________________________ allow

my son/daughter,
____________________________________, to serve as a respondent in the research
entitled “CAUSES OF NON-SUBMISSION OF PERFORMANCE TASK/S IN
MAPEH 7” considering that the abovementioned study will not bring any moral,
intellectual, and social harm or injustice and that no fee will be collected from
him/her.

(Signature Over Printed Name)

(Date of signing)

28
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
Region III
Schools Division of San Jose City
San Jose City National High School
San Jose City, Nueva Ecija

ASSENT FORM

This is to certify that I, ______________________________, am willing to

participate and cooperate as a respondent of the study entitled: “CAUSES OF NON-

SUBMISSION OF PERFORMANCE TASK/S IN MAPEH 7” considering that the

abovementioned study will not bring any moral, intellectual and social harm or

injustice on my part as a learner and that no fee will be collected from me.

(Signature Over Printed

Name)

(Date of signing)

29
ALPHABETICAL INDEX
performance tasks........................................................................................6, 10 ff., 18 ff., 25 f.

Performance tasks..............................................................................................................6, 10

Printed Modality.....................................................................................................................12

socio – demographic characteristics.......................................................................................20

Socio – Demographic Characteristics...................................................................2 f., 16 f., 19 f.

socio demographic characteristics..........................................................................................11

Socio Demographic Characteristics.......................................................................................2, 8

30