1. Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents, analyzes and interprets the data gathered from the students
of Laboratory High School at Laguna State Polytechnic University in determining factors
affecting Performance in Mathematics.
Extent of Interest of the students in Mathematics
Students’ level of interest in Mathematics was rated based on the students’ self-
perceived level of preparation for the Mathematics subject, attention given to teacher’s
lectures, active participation in class, their desire to get good grades and their desire to
listen to discussions or attention class. Table 1 shows the weighted mean of students’
interest in Mathematics.
The students gave a unifying perception on their level of interest in Mathematics.
The item “I want to get good grades on tests, quizzes, assignments and projects.” ranked
first with an average weighted mean of 4.77. The item “I get frustrated when the
discussion is interrupted or the teacher is absent.” got the lowest rating with an average
weighted mean of 2.88.

2. Table 1. Extent of Interest in Mathematics as Perceived by the Students
Weighted Verbal
Interest Rank
Mean Interpretation
1. I make myself prepared for the math subject 3.79 4 Often
2. I listen attentively to the lecture of my math
4.10 2 Often
teacher.
3. I actively participate in the discussion,
answering exercises and/or clarifying things 3.93 3 Often
I did not understand.
4. I want to get good grades on tests, quizzes,
4.77 1 Always
assignments and projects.
5. I get frustrated when the discussion is
2.88 5 Sometimes
interrupted or the teacher is absent.
Average Weighted Mean 3.90 Often
The overall weighted mean of interest in Mathematics is 3.90. This means
students are “often” interested in this subject. Among questionnaire items, the desire to
get good grades is the most interesting to students but the desire to attend discussion
received the lowest extent of interest.
Extent of Study Habits
The criteria in obtaining students’ level of study habits were based on their
personal tendency or pattern of action in studying when they are in school days. Table 2
shows the lists of ten (10) items about situational/action statements used in the data
gathering and the corresponding weighted means of the students’ responses ranked from
the highest to lowest weighted mean together with the verbal interpretation.

3. Table 2. Extent of Study Habits as Perceived by the Students
Weighted Verbal
Study Habits Rank
Mean Interpretation
1. I do my assignments regularly. 4.09 2 Often
2. I exert more effort when I do difficult
3.88 4 Often
assignments.
3. I spend my vacant time in doing assignments
3.08 9 Sometimes
or studying my lessons.
4. I study the lessons I missed if I was absent
3.65 5 Often
from the class
5. I study and prepared for quizzes and tests. 4.07 3 Often
6. I study harder to improve my performance
4.34 1 Often
when I get low grades.
7. I spend less time with my friends during
school days to concentrate more on my 2.97 10 Sometimes
studies.
8. I prefer finishing my studying and my
assignments first before watching any 3.10 8 Sometimes
television program.
9. I see to it that extracurricular activities do not
3.37 7 Sometimes
hamper my studies.
10. I have a specific place of study at home
3.45 6 Often
which I keep clean and orderly.
Average Weighted Mean 3.60 Often
Overall, the extent of study habits as perceived by the students themselves gained
an “often” result with an overall weighted mean of 3.60. Among each situational/action
statements or items given, the item “I study harder to improved my performance when I
get low grades.” ranked first with an average weighted mean of 4.34 but the item “I spend
less time with my friends during school days to concentrate more on my studies.” got the
lowest extent of study habits in Mathematics.

4. Extent of Teachers’ Personality Traits
Extent of teachers’ personality traits were ranked based on their relationship with
the students, their smartness, confidence and firmness in making decisions, their
imposing proper discipline and not lenient in following the prescribed rules, their
personality with good sense of humor and their appreciation to suggestions and opinions
and their worthy of praise. Table 3 shows the data on the extent of personality traits of the
teachers with the computed weighted mean, rank and interpretation.
Table 3. Extent Teachers’ Personality Traits as Perceived by the Students
Weighted Verbal
Personality Traits
Mean Rank Interpretation
1. Has a good relationship with the students and
4.60 1 always
teachers.
2. Shows smartness, confidence and firmness in
4.58 2 always
making decisions.
3. Imposes proper discipline and is not lenient
4.43 4 often
in following the prescribed rules.
4. Has an appealing personality with good sense
4.41 5 often
of humor.
5. Is open to suggestions and opinions and is
4.48 3 often
worthy of praise.
Average Weighted Mean 4.50 always
The table reveals that item number 1 ranked first with an average weighted mean
of 4.60 and interpreted as “always” which means that the teacher always has a good
relationship with the students. The item number 2 ranked second with an average
weighted mean of 4.58 also interpreted as “always” which means that the teacher always
shows their smartness, confidence and firmness in making decisions. Items 3, 4, and 5
interpreted as “often” with the weighted means of 4.48, 4.43, and 4.41 for ranks 3, 4, and
5 respectively.

5. Extent of Teaching Skills
Table 4 presents the extent of teaching skills acquired by the teachers in
Mathematics as perceived by the students. The overall weighted mean of the teachers in
terms of teaching skills is 4.41 which is interpreted as “often”.
Table 4. Extent of Teaching Skills as Perceived by the Students
Weighted Verbal
Teaching Skills
Mean Rank Interpretation
1. Explains the objectives of the lesson clearly at
4.51 2 always
the start of each period.
2. Has mastery of the subject matter. 4.70 1 always
3. Is organized in presenting subject matters by
4.40 4 often
systematically following course outline.
4. Is updated with present trends, relevant to the
4.46 3 often
subject matter.
5. Uses various strategies, teaching aids/devices
3.96 5 often
and techniques in presenting the lessons.
Average Weighted Mean 4.41 often
Looking closely at the table item per item, it was observed that the “The teacher
has mastery of the subject matter” has the highest average weighted mean among the five
items and interpreted as “always” followed by the item “The teacher explains the
objectives of the lesson clearly at the start of each period” also interpreted as “always”.
Items “The teacher is updated with present trends, relevant to the subject matter” , “The
teacher is organized in presenting subject matter by systematically following course
outline”, and “The teacher uses various strategies, teaching aids/devices and techniques
in presenting the lessons” interpreted as “often” with the average weighted means of
4.46, 4.40 and 3.96 for ranks 3, 4. and 5 respectively.

6. Extent of Instructional Materials
Table 5 presents the extent of instructional materials used by the teachers in
Mathematics. It shows that the teachers “always”used chalk and blackboard in explaining
the lessons with an average weighted mean of 4.93. The teachers used
workbooks/textbooks and materials for project development interpreted as “sometimes”
with the average weighted means of 3.45 and 2.55 for ranks 2 and 3. The teachers used
articles interpreted as “rarely” with an average weighted mean of 2.48. Lastly, used of
power point presentation got the lowest extent of instructional materials with an average
weighted mean of 1.49 interpreted as “sometimes”.
Table 5. Extent of Instructional Materials used by the Math Teachers
Weighted
Instructional Materials Verbal Interpretation
Mean Rank
1. Chalk and blackboard in
4.93 1 always
explaining the lessons.
2. workbooks/textbooks 3.45 2 sometimes
3. PowerPoint presentations (visual
1.49 5 never
aids)
4. articles 2.48 4 rarely
5. materials for project development 2.55 3 sometimes
Average Weighted Mean 2.98 sometimes
The overall extent of instructional materials used by the Math teachers as
perceived by the students gained “sometimes” result with an overall average weighted
mean of 2.98. This means that the teacher in Mathematics sometimes uses instructional
materials.

7. Level of Performance of Students in Mathematics
Table 6 presents the level of performance of Laboratory high school students in
Mathematics in terms of some measure as mean, median, mode, standard deviation,
skewness and kurtosis. The grades presented are the means of the grades of students-
respondents in third grading period obtained through documentary analysis of Form 138
provided by the adviser.
Statistics Value Verbal Interpretation
Mean 88.23 Satisfactory
Median 89.00 Satisfactory
Mode 91.00 Very Satisfactory
Standard Deviation 4.84
Kurtosis 2.10 Relatively Steep/leptokurtic
Skewness -1.13 Skewed to the left/negatively skewed
Table reveals that the mean performance of students in Mathematics was
“satisfactory” with an average of 88.23 median of 89 mode of 91 and standard deviation
of 4.84. The skewness of the level of students is -1.13 which, which skewed to the
left/negatively skewed while kurtosis is 2.10, which is leptokurtic or has a relatively
peaked distribution.
It reveals that several of the students really wanted the subject of Mathematics.
Only few of the students got low and the rest got the high grades.
Significant Relationship of the Mathematics Performance of the Students in
Student-related factors and Teacher-related factors
Table 7 presents the significant relationship of the factors affecting Mathematics
Performance of Laboratory High School. As seen on the table, the Pearson r of the five
(5) factors such as Interest, Study Habits, Personality Traits, Teaching Skills and

8. Instructional Materials have _______ degree of correlation but the t revealed the lesser
value of 2.01. It means that there is no significant relationship to Mathematics
performance of the students. It reveals that the interest, study habits, personality traits,
teaching skills and instructional materials do not affect the Mathematics performance of
the Students of Laguna State Polytechnic University.
Variables df T-Computed T- value Interpretation
Interest 0.544326 2.10 not significant
Study Habits -0.465262108 -2.10 not significant
Personality Traits -0.095499 -2.10 not significant
113
Teaching Skills 0.984864987 2.10 not significant
Instructional
-2.10
Materials -1.043867038 not significant