Thesis Example

LEVEL OF STRESS AND ITS PREDICTORS AMONG BSED FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS IN SAMAR COLLEGE

_____________________

A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the College of Eduactaion Samar College Catbalogan City

______________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN SECONDARY EDUACATION (Biological Sciences) _______________________ LEOVA B. DASMARIÑAS JANESSA A.FRANCISCO NACIELYN A. LABRO HERSSON LLANERA JESTONY L. MATILLA

March 2017

Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND Introduction Stress is a non-specific response of the body to any demands made upon it. In otehr words, as demands are made on

Statement of the Problem This

study

will

determine

the

level

of

stress

experienced and identified the factors that are sgnificantly related to the level of academic stress of BSED Fourth Year students of Samar College during the School Year 2016-2017. Specifically,

this

study

sought

to

answer

the

following questions: 1. What

is

the

profile

of the student-respondents

in terms of the following variates:

1.1

age and sex;

1.2

civil status;

1.3

family size;

1.4

average monthly family income;

1.5

physical health; and

1.6

attitudes towards studies?

2. What

is

the

level of stress experienced by the

Fourth Year BSED students in Samar College? 3. Is there a significant relationship between

the

level of academic stress experienced by the studentrespondents and their personal variates? 4. What are the sources of pressure that the studentrespondents face in their studies?

5. Is

there

a

significant

student-respondents

relationship

sources

of

between

pressure

personal variates? 6. What implications may be derived

from

and

the

the

their

results

of this study? Hypotheses Based

on the

aforecited

specific

questions,

the

following hypotheses were drawn and tested: 1. There is

no

significant

difference

between

the

level of academic stress experienced by the studentrespondents and their personal variates. 2. There is no significant relationship between the student-respondents

sources

of

pressure

and

their

personal variates Theoretical Framework This study is anchored on the following theories and philosophy: (1) Richard Lazarus’s Theory of Stress Appraisal ; (2) Hans Selye’s Theory of General Adaptation Syndrome; and (3) Cox and Mackay’s Model of Stress. Richard Lazarus’s Theory of Stress has a great bearing in this study

because it

centers

on

the mental process

which is influenced by stressors. According to Richard Lazarus, stress is a two-way process; it involves the production of stressors by the

environment and the response of an individual subjected to these stressors.

Since external forces continually act on the individual, and internal forces continuously interact with them, continuous changes

in

added.

Moreover,

tensions

the

of

behavior

of

external

different

the

individual

forces

degrees

on

occur,

continuously intensity

Lewin

produce in

the

individual. These tensions serve as motivating forces for the individual to make adjustments to his environment. Another theory that strengthened this study is the Glasser’s Reality Theory (http://educ-reality.com/behaviourmanagement-theories/,November 20, 2014). This theory’s basis is on the

need

of

students

to

maintain their self-worth in order to continue with their improvement

in

behavior,

and

therefore,

academic

achievement. The foundation of the Reality Theory is the idea that regardless of what has happened in our lives, we are able to choose more appropriate behaviors that will help us meet our needs more effectively in the future. 11 Dewey’s pragmatism philosophy also reinforced the anchorage of this study. Dewey is probably most famous for his

role

in

what

is

called

progressive

education. Progressive education is essentially a view of

education that emphasizes the need to learn by doing. Dewey believed

that

human

beings

learn

approach. This places Dewey in the of

pragmatism

through

a

educational

'hands

on'

philosophy

(http://study.com/academy/lesson/john-dewey-

on-education-impacttheory.html October 12, 2014). Pragmatists believe that reality must be experienced. From Dewey's educational point of view, this means that students must interact with their environment in order to adapt and learn. Dewey felt that the same idea was true for teachers and that teachers and students must learn together. His view of the classroom was deeply rooted in democratic ideals, which promoted equal voice among all participants in the learning experience. Dewey’s philosophy tends to veer toward democratic style of classroom management. Finally, Gardner’s Theory on Multiple Intelligences also strengthened the anchorage of this study. Gardner of Harvard has identified seven distinct intelligences. This theory

has

emerged

from

recent

cognitive

research

and

documents the extent to which students possess different 12 kinds of minds and therefore learn, remember, perform, and understand

in

different

(http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html, 2014).

ways October

12,

According to this theory, all are able to know the world

through

language,

logical-mathematical

analysis,

spatial representation, musical thinking, the use of the body to solve problems or to make things, an understanding of other individuals, and an understanding of ourselves. Where

individuals

differ

is

in

the

strength

of

these

intelligences – the so-called profile of intelligences -and in the ways in which such intelligences are invoked combined

to

carry

out

different

tasks,

solve

and

diverse

problems, and progress in various domains. Gardner says that these differences "challenge an educational system that assumes that everyone can learn the same materials in the same way and that a uniform, universal measure suffices to

test

student

learning.

He

argues that a contrasting set of assumptions is more likely to be educationally effective. Students learn in ways that are identifiably distinctive. The broad spectrum of students – and perhaps the society as a whole- would be better served if disciplines could be presented in a number of ways and learning could be assessed through a 13 variety of means(http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html, October 12, 2014).

Gardner’s theory reinforced that dealing with the pupils requires an assortment of classroom management styles that would suit individual differences. Conceptual Framework Figure 1 presents the conceptual framework of the study. The base of the figure serves to represent the research environment which includes the BSED Fourth Year students of Samar College, Catbalogan City, Samar for School Year 20162017. The

different

arrows

guided

the

researcher

in

the

conduct of this study. At the top above the base arrow is the biggest box which contains two (2) major frames. The left and

major sex,

frame civil

contains status,

the student-respondents’ age

family

size,

average

monthly

familyincome, physical health,and attitude towards studies. These were correlated with the perceived level of stress and its predictors to determine if significant relationships existed for the School Year 2016-2017.

IMPROVED STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE

FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

STUDENTRESPONDENTS’ PROFILE F E E D B A C K

LEVEL OF STRESS AND ITS PREDICTORS AMONG BSED FOURTH YEAR

●Age and Sex ●Civil Status ●Family Size ●Average Monthly FamilyIncome ●Physical Health ●Attitude Towards Studies ●

STUDENTS IN SAMAR COLLEGE

School Year 2016-2017

BSED FOURTH YEAR STUDENTS SAMAR COLLEGE, CATBALOGAN CITY, SAMAR

Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework of the Study

F E E D B A C K

The findings of this study had drawn implications that provided feedback mechanism to the research environment of this study and was hoped to contribute to the ultimate goal of this study which is improved academic performance of the BSED

Fourth

Year

students.

Consequently,

the

concerned

student-respondents’ would perform much better in academicrelated activities. Significance of the Study The findings and results of this study gave significant inputs

to

help

predictors

that

Specifically, provide

identify impedes

it

valuable

the

will

the

be

benefits

level

hoped to

of

stress

and

its

academic

performance.

that

study

the

this

following

would

educational

stakeholders: BSED fourth year students, teachers, school administrators, parents, community, and future researchers. To

the

Students.

The

findings

of

this

study

would

enable the students to apply the varied and appropriate academic performance. To

the

School

classroom management help

Administrators. styles

of

Awareness

their

of

teachers

the would

the administrators plan mechanisms: strategies and

techniques

to

improve

the

appropriate

styles

that

their

teachers should embrace.

17

To the Pupils. The pupils are the direct beneficiaries of this study. This is due to the fact that the necessary adoption of

appropriate

classroom

management

styles

by

their teachers would improve the educative process; hence, better academic performance. To the Department of Education (DepEd) Officials . The DepEd officials are hoped to benefit from this study in crafting management

policies styles

that of

would

improve

teachers;

hence,

the

classroom

better

academic

performance of students. To the Parents. The parents could also benefit from this study because the research

results

would

help

them

understand the importance of partnering with teachers to improve the academic performance of their children. To the Community. Indirectly, the community would benefit from this study. Improved performance of the pupils as a consequence of improved teaching classroom management would produce future citizens who would be productive and even role models of the community. To the Future Researchers. The findings of this study would be of great importance to the future researchers who woul embark on similar or parallel study. This may also serve as a related material for them.

18

Scope and Delimitation This study will focus on determining the level of stress experienced by the BSED Fourth Year students in Samar College

and

identify

which

among

the

characteristics

of

these students affect their stress level. In terms of its place delimitation, this investigation was limited to the BSED Fourth Year students in Samar College, Catbalogan City, Samar. The study was conducted during SY 2016-2017.

19 Definition of Terms The following terms used in this study are hereunder defined

conceptually and operationally for a common

frame

of reference. Attitude toward Studies. Attitude means a state of mental

awareness

behavior.

It

is

which a

may

settled

influence manner

of

the acting

individual’s because

of

habitual feeling or opinion. In this study, this refers to the student-respondents’ overall disposition or behavior in relation to his/her academic work as a student. Behavior. This applies to our mode ofacting or to all type of responses made by the individual, especially those

that

can

be

observed.

It

may

include

physical

action,

physiological and emotional processes. Administrator. Average Monthly Family Income. Authoritarian. Authoritative. Civil Status. Classroom Management. Classroom Management Style. Democratic. Educational training

or

Qualification.

instruction

fitting

This a

means

person

the for

required particular

appointment (Webster, 1997:298). Influence. This means the effect of something on a person, thing, or event (Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 19932008 Microsoft Corporation).

As

used

in

this

study,

it

refers to the effect of the four classroom management styles such

as

authoritarian,

authoritative,

democratic

and

laissez-faire on the pupils’ academic performance. In-service Training. It refers to the activity intended to

boost

administrators’

and

teachers’

professional

qualities conducted after their pre-service 22

education and, in most cases, offered during teachers’ and administrators’ consignment or term of tenure as mentors and as administrators, respectively (Lardizabal, 1995:10). Laissez-faire. The laissez-faire teacher is not very involved in the classroom. This teacher places few demands, if any, on the students and appears generally uninterested. The laissez-faire teacher just doesn't want to impose on the students (hhttp://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle pdf,November 10, 2014). Perception. qualities,

etc.

comprehension

It

by

is

means

(Webster

the of

mental

the

Dictionary,

grasp

senses,

of

objects,

awareness,

1978:1054).

In

and this

study, it refers to the awareness of the respondents as regards

to

the

classroom

management

styles

whether

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic or laissez-faire. Pupil. It refers to the young student taught at school or by a private teacher (Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008

Microsoft

Corporation,

June

6,

2015).

Operationally, it refers to the group of learners whose academic performance were subjected to documentary analysis by the researcher. They were the elementary grade schoolers of the eleven elementary schools of Biri District, Northern Samar Division. 23

Teacher. It refers to the act of teaching or the person who

teaches

(The

New

Dictionary, 1997:1015).

Lexicon In

this

Webster’s study,

group of elementary school teachers who

Encyclopedic

it refers to the was

surveyed

by

the researcher. This group comes from the Biri District, Northern Samar Division.

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies which greatly helped the researcher enrich this study.

These

materials

were

carefully

perused

and

the

excerpts were hereby presented to strengthen this study. These

readings

were

taken

from

the

works

of

various

authorities and researchers and other authoritative sources. Related Literature The following set of literature was reviewed by the researcher in order to strengthen the anchorage of this study. These materials were found to be related to the study at hand. A perusal of the Philippine educational system would show

that

education

serves

as

focus

of

emphases

or

priorities of the leadership at certain periods or epochs in our national struggle as a race (Bilbao, et al., 2006:144). This

idea

of

Bilbao,

et

al.,

indeed,

supports

the

truism that education, as a prime concern of the government, considers organic

it

law

as of

its the

topmost land

priority

under

Article

as

stated

XIV,

paragraph 5 of the aforecited constitution states

in

Section

the 5,

that 25

“The State shall assign the highest budgetary priority to education and ensure that

teaching

will attract and retain

its rightful share of the best available talents through adequate remuneration and other means of job satisfaction and

fulfillment”

http://www.lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html,

November

26,

2014). Authorities agree that education may mean any or all of the

following

acquiring

definitions:

knowledge,

childhood

and

(1)

the

especially

adolescence;(2)

act

or

process

systematically

the

knowledge

or

of

during training

acquired by this process;(3) the act or process of imparting knowledge, especially at a school, college, or university; (4) the theory of teaching and learning; (5) a particular kind of instruction or training; (6) implies a discipline and development by means of study and learning; and (7) it is

the

development

of

the

abilities

of

the

mind

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/education,October 23, 2014). Along this line, education, therefore, must be pursued in

the

spirit

of

quality

and

excellence

so

that

the

gargantuan budget put into it will serve this purpose. The

Education

constitutional

Act

mandate

of on

1982,

which

quality

articulates

education,

in

the a 26

declaration of basic policy (Gellor, 1984:33) states that: a) It is the policy of the State to establish and maintain a

complete,

adequate

and

integrated

system

of

education

relevant to the goals of national development; b) The State shall promote the right of every individual to relevant quality education, regardless of sex, age, creed, socioeconomic status, physical and mental conditions, racial or ethnic origin, political or other affiliation. The State shall, therefore, promote and maintain equality of access to education

as

well

as

the

enjoyment

of

the

benefits

of

education by its citizens; and c) The State recognizes that formal education of the school system, is society’s primary learning

system

of

the

country’s

educational

goals

and

objectives. Morphet (1967:6) said that every society and nation has been and will continue to be confronted within the same basic problem: How can its members, especially the children and the youth, best learn what they must know and what they should

do

to

improvement

survive

of

the

and group

continue to

the

which

preservation

they

belong?

and This

necessitates for undertaking measures to achieve quality education. Quality education implies an upgrading of educational standards - a

process

that

refers

to

the attainment of 27

excellence

in

education

as

well

as

in

life.

There

are

elements to be considered in achieving quality education: 1)

curriculum

content

and

materials,

2)

instructional

strategies and aids, 3) evaluation, 4) teacher quality and 5)

physical

facilities.

Evaluation

is

also

important

quality education that is why pupil performance

in

needs

to

be evaluated as basis for improving instruction (Sutaria, 1984:20). Salandanan (2007:79) emphasized that classroom climate is a function of the learners’ attitudes and perceptions. This means that students are likely to form a mental climate that

is

conducive

to

learning.

Moreover,

attitude

and

perceptions greatly affect the learners’ mental climate that could

either

hinder

or

facilitate

their

learning.

further said that teacher quality is a major

She

element in

achieving quality education. There are several factors that affect the delivery of mastery learning toward quality education but the teachers, of course, are the most vital. It follows the general dictum that the quality of education cannot rise above the quality of teachers (Cortes, 1994:195). As a quality teacher in delivering quality teaching toward quality education,

Bilbao, et al. (2006:58)

28 asserted that classroom of

the

teaching

management

process.

It

is

an

suggests

integral at

part

providing

a

classroom environment that is conducive to learning such as appropriate time scheduling for various activities and an orderly placement of furnitures and instructional materials. A clean and well-lighted area, together with a comfortable seating arrangement, make the classroom an inviting place for promoting interaction and a much welcomed feeling of togetherness. The aforecited authors emphasize that teachers play various roles in a typical classroom, but surely one of the most

important

Effective

is

teaching

that and

of

being

learning

a

classroom

cannot

take

manager.

place

in

a

poorly managed classroom. If students are disorderly and disrespectful, and no apparent rules and procedures guide behavior, chaos becomes the norm. In these situations, both teachers and students suffer. Teachers struggle to teach, and students most likely learn much less than they should. In contrast, well-managed classrooms provide an environment in which teaching and learning can flourish. But a wellmanaged classroom doesn't just appear out of nowhere. It takes a good deal of effort to create—and the person who is most responsible for creating it is the teacher. According to

Castillon-Boiser ( 2003:4-5),

effective 29

teachers are expected to do well in the area of classroom management.

Here,

the

teacher

develops

good

managerial

techniques. They make students know what to expect; they need students to know what to do if they need help; they impose rules and follow through with reminders and rewards; and they don’t respond to discipline problems emotionally. Bilbao, discipline teachers

et

al.

constitutes

as

part

of

(2006:67) the

further

next

classroom

stressed

important

management.

that

concern

of

Discipline

is

controlled behavior. No matter how well-managed a learning environment

is,

students

will

occasionally

misbehave.

Teachers must be ready to deal with them with utmost care and consideration. Basically, when a supervisor initially walks into a classroom, he/she does not assess its effectiveness based on the students’ grades, writing skills, or state test scores (https://blog.udemy.com/effective-classroom-management-2/, November

20,

2014).

Instead,

he/she

effective the classroom management is. students

conduct

collaboratively

themselves,

with

each

how

other,

looks

to

see

how

Such as how well the well

and

they

how

can

work

effective

the

teacher’s discipline is on them. All of these factors are a result of effective classroom management, and teacher will tell you that you

must

first

every learn

great how

to 30

maintain classroom discipline before honing in on students’ academic

goals

and

needs.

After

all,

how

can

you

effectively teach and learn in an ineffective environment? Additionally, classroom management is important because of the following reasons (https://blog.udemy.com/effectiveclassroom-management-2/, November 20, 2014): Firstly, it engages students. This means that students who are engaged in lessons and the learning material will be able to register the information better and be able to apply their knowledge when it comes to test taking. Secondly, it keeps students prepared. When teachers and students are prepared to learn, lessons and learning will be easier to be administered and the results will be more effective. Finally, it

boosts

confidence.

In

an

effective

classroom, teachers are able to give more attention to each student and structure lesson plans to meet certain needs. All

of

these

factors

will

help

in

boosting

the

confidence of students. Lardizabal (1991:69) suggested that learning becomes interesting and enjoyable under a helpful working condition so much so that managing a classroom necessitates foresight and planning. 31 The author opined that classroom management includes operation

and

control

of

activities

involving

even

the

smallest of elements as seating arrangement

and utilization

of

of

instructional

condition

in

the

materials. classroom

The is

creation difficult

a

to

favorable attain

if

attention is not likewise directed to details such as the ones mentioned. Those and classroom courtesies, discipline, attendance, and even the classroom teacher himself make up the system. It is suggested that success of the teaching activities in the classroom depends largely on the skill of the teacher in managing such activity. The above-cited idea of Lardizabal is corroborated by Zulueta

(1991:65)

who

asserted

that

regardless

of

a

teacher’s potential little learning will take place in the classroom if he is unable to manage his students. This assertion

was

attested

by

Weinstein

and

Mignano,

Jr.

(2003:174) in saying that classroom management is the single greatest influence on student learning. In this regard, Weinstein and Mignano, Jr.(2003:174) asserted that the promotion of learning is the fundamental purpose of classroom management. It is not about attaining order for its own end but achieving order so that learning can happen. 32 The authors assumed that for a teacher to be truly effective, he must be ready to direct the classroom behavior

of students aiming for an environment in which they behave properly not out of fear of punishment but out of a sense of personal duty. This will happen most likely if the teacher views classroom management as a process of guiding and structuring events while downplaying his disciplinary role. The emphasis is on averting misbehavior rather than on coping with it. Singh and Padilla (1990:87) listed five major concerns in

classroom

management,

to

wit:

(1)

individual

concern

which means using time effectively so that individual help can

be

one’s

provided for all students. It connotes directing attention

harnessing become

to

individual

self-direction

responsible

to

which

form

characteristics; means

their

own

helping behavior

(2)

students in

the

completion and performance of assignments; (3) encouragement which means stimulating student’s interest and curiosity to learn. Motivation process should be employed; (4)reaching out to students which means helping students to cooperate in

changing

negative

attitude

to positive classroom

behavior; and (5) disciplining student’s behavior. Teachers who cannot attain the standard behavior 33 of students inside the classroom cannot become effective.

Singh and Padilla stressed that a teacher should possess the qualities of controlling students in a positive and consistent way. It is for this reason that Tauber (1999:154), urged teachers management

to read more often books and articles on classroom

order

to

knowledge

as

part

enhance and

of

their

their

skills.

professional

effectiveness He

further

development

through

commented

in

increased that

“No

classroom management technique will be effective for as long as effective teaching is absent”. Tauber explained that classroom management models, and their accompanying strategies are not substitutes for good teaching. He regarded effective teaching as a preventive discipline

measure

that

really

keeps

students

actively

participating and wanting to learn more that they are not likely to create problems. Undeniably, effective, stimulating, and interesting teaching

can

help

prevent

discipline

different

attitudes

problems

in

the

classroom. Teachers have

towards how

they

handle a classroom. While differing personalities have a definite impact on how classrooms are run, these are not the only

factors.

Teachers

adopt

certain

classroom 34

management styles that may display much about both their personality should

be

and their personal beliefs on how students taught.

Classroom

management

is

consistently

identified as an essential component of effective teaching. Knowing the

difference in classroom management styles is

crucial in finding what works and does not classroom.

Having

a

specific

teaching

work in the style,

or

incorporating a mix of styles and pulling from what you deem best from each, only benefits the student and makes your job that much easier. But before you decide on what works for you, and what you want to avoid altogether, it is integral to

know

the

differing

classroom

management

(http://edglossary.org/classroom-management/,

styles

November

25,

2014). The

following

items

are

the

different

management

classroom styles

(http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df, November 15, 2014): Authoritarian. The authoritarian teacher places firm limits and controls on the students. Students will often have assigned seats for the entire term. The desks are usually seats for the entire term. The desks are usually in straight rows and there are no deviations. Students must be in their seats

at

the

beginning

of

class

and

they

35 frequently remain there throughout the period. This teacher rarely gives hall passes or recognizes excused absences.

Often, it is quiet. Students know they should not interrupt the teacher. Since verbal exchange and discussion are discouraged, the authoritarian's students do not have the

opportunity

to

learn

and/or

practice

communication

skills. This teacher prefers vigorous discipline and expects swift obedience. Failure to obey the teacher usually results in detention or a trip to the principal's office. In this classroom, students need to follow directions and not ask why

(http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html

3, November 15, 2014). At the extreme, the authoritarian teacher gives no indication that he/she cares for the students. His students receive praise and encouragement infrequently, if at all. Also, he makes no effort to organize activities such as field

trips.

He

feels

that

these

special

events

only

distract the students from learning. After all, he believes that students need only to listen to his lecture to

gain

the necessary knowledge. Students in this class are likely to be reluctant to initiate activity, since they may feel powerless. He tells 36 the students what to do and when to do it. He makes all classroom decisions. Therefore, his style does little to

increase achievement motivation or encourage the setting of personal goals. Authoritative. The authoritative teacher places limits and controls on the students but simultaneously encourages independence. This teacher often explains the reasons behind the rules and decisions. If a student is disruptive, the teacher offers a polite, but firm, reprimand. This teacher sometimes

metes

out

discipline,

but

only

after

careful

consideration of the circumstances. The authoritative teacher is also open to considerable verbal interaction, including critical debates. The students know that they can interrupt the teacher if they have a relevant the

question

students

or

the

comment.

opportunity

This to

environment offers learn

and

practice

communication skills. The teacher exhibits a warm and nurturing attitude toward

the

affection.

students His

and

expresses

classroom

encouragement. He often writes offers teacher

positive

remarks

encourages

to

genuine

abounds comments students.

self-reliant

and

with on This

interest

and

praise

and

homework

and

authoritative

socially

competent

behavior and fosters higher achievement motivation. Often, 37 he will guide the students through a project, rather than lead

them

(http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html

4,

November 15, 2014). Democratic. The democratic teacher places few demand or controls on the students. "Do your own thing,” describes this classroom. This teacher accepts the student's impulses and actions and is less likely to monitor their behavior. He uses

a

democratic

style.

He

strives

to

not

hurt

the

student's feelings and has difficulty saying no to a student or enforcing rules. If a student disrupts the class, he may assume that he is not giving that student enough attention. When a student interrupts a lecture, the teacher accepts the interruption with the belief that the student must surely have something valuable to add. When he does offer discipline, it is likely to be inconsistent. The

democratic

teacher

is

very

involved

with

his

students and cares for them very much. He is more concerned with the students' emotional well-being than he is with classroom control. He sometimes bases on his students

feelings

rather

classroom

than

on their

decisions academic

concerns. The teacher wants to be the students' friend. He may even

encourage

contact

outside

the classroom. He has a 38

difficult

time

professional overindulgent

life

establishing and

style

is

his

boundaries

personal

associated

life.

with

between

his

However,

this

students

lack

of

social

competence

students

to

and

learn

self-control.

socially

It

acceptable

is

difficult

behavior

when

for the

teacher is so permissive. With few demands placed upon them, these students frequently have lower motivation to achieve. Regardless, students often like this teacher. Laissez-faire. The laissez-faire teacher is

not

very

involved in the classroom. This teacher places few demands, if any, on the students and appears generally uninterested. Furthermore, the laissez-faire to impose on the

teacher

students. As such,

just

he

does not want

often

feels that

class preparation is not worth the effort. Things like field trips and special projects are out of the question. This teacher simply will not take the necessary preparation time. Sometimes, he will use the same materials, year after year. Also, classroom discipline is lacking. This teacher may lack the skills, courage to discipline

students.

The

confidence,

students

sense

or and

reflect the teacher's laissez-faire attitude. Accordingly, very little learning occurs. Everyone is just "going through the motions" and killing time. In this aloof environment, the students have very

few

opportunities

to

39 observe or practice communication skills. With few demands placed on them and very little discipline, students have low achievement

motivation

and

lack

self-control

(http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html 5, November 15, 2014).

All

of

the

abovecited

literature

provided

the

researcher important inputs in strengthening the concepts and processes of this study. Related Studies The following items are some of the related studies which were thoroughly reviewed by the researcher that were found to be relevant to this study. Similarities to this study are hereby presented. In the study of Reballos-Gabon (2013) who conducted a study

on

Teachers

“Teaching of

Wright

Effectiveness National

of

Secondary

School:

Basis

School for

an

Intervention Scheme”, among the findings relevant to this study include: 1) The at

the

three groups of

respondents

arrived

same consensus. They assessed the secondary school

teachers

as

management;

“highly

2)

The

effective”

three

groups

of

along

classroom

adjectival

rating

assessment on the teaching effectiveness of the secondary school teachers along teaching strategies. They considered them

“highly effective”;

3) Of

the

profile 40

variates

of

qualification

the

secondary

and

school

attitude

teachers,

towards

educational

teaching

posed

significant influence to their teaching effectiveness while the other variates did not significantly influence it; and 4) Of the profile variates of the school administrators,

only the strategies in monitoring classes posed significant influence to the teaching effectiveness of the secondary school teachers. The study of Reballos-Gabon bears similarity study because they both teaching,

hence,

effective

with this

deal on the area of effective learning

on

the

learners. However, they greatly differ in

part

terms of

of

the

locale

of the study, responding learners, and the variables on teaching strategies and management. Maghanoy’s (2008) study entitled “Learning Styles of Secondary Students as Correlates to Their Capacity Level” has also

bearing to this study. One of her conclusions was

that “The strong learning styles of the respondents lies on the visual and tactile teaching-learning situation”. This simply means that in this

particular

study,

the students

learn more if the teaching-learning process is done with the appropriate

instructional

materials

with

concrete

and

tangible examples.

41 The similarity between Maghanoy’s study and this study lies on the aspect of learning styles of the students which the

teachers

must

look

into

vis-a-vis

his

classroom

management style which is the major aspect of this current study.

In another study conducted by Laboc (2008) entitled, “Classroom Learning Environment and Attitude Towards Reading English Language of Grade VI Pupils”, she found out that: 1) The overall impression of the pupil-respondents regarding their classroom learning environment in English classses was “slightly felt”. Meaning, they only slightly experienced those

factors

conducive

inverse, negligible, and with

regard

father’s

and

size

environment

learning;

insignificant

classroom

educational

background, learning

to

to

learning

background, of

the

showed

There

was

an

association

environment mother’s

family; a

2)

and

direct

and

age,

educational 3)

or

Classroom positive,

negligible, significant association towards sex and average monthly family income. Both Laboc’s study and the study at hand are similar in terms of pupil-respondents except the locale because the former was conducted in Wright District while the latter was conducted in Biri District. Furthermore, both deal on the area of learning

environment.

However,

this study is 42

more specific on classroom management styles of the teacherrespondents. In his study with the title, “Scholastic Performance of Grade Six Pupils in Science Among Private and Public Schools in Catbalogan”, Perez (2005) concluded, among other things,

that: 1) The pupils’ scholastic performance was average or satisfactory;

2)

Pupil-related,

administrator-related pupil’s

scholastic

factors

teacher-related

affected

performance

in

or

science;

influenced 3)

Among

and the the

pupil-related factors, reading comprehension and language facility, surfaced to have greater influence on the pupils’ scholastic performance; and 4) the following problems were commonly perceived by the respondents: (a) lack of knowledge on the use of the apparatuses and equipment; (b) inadequacy of pupils’ activities; and (c) teachers’ personality and attitude. Perez’ study is similar with the current study on the area

of

pupils’

scholastic

or

academic

performance

as

affected by certain factors or variates specifically those of the personality of the teachers and attitude

which

are

major contributory factors on how they manage the classroom activities. They differ on the aspects of locale of the study, group of pupil-respondents and

factors that have

bearing 43

on

the academic performance of the pupils. The former

having Catbalogan as its locale while the latter had Biri District and the factors on classroom management styles for the latter and personality and attitude for the former.

Perez study was limited only to Grade VI pupils while this study covered all elementary grade levels. Enderio (2004), in her thesis “Performance of Grade III Pupils in Mathematics: Basis for an Enhancement Program”, concluded that: 1) The higher the magnitude of interest of pupils in Math, the higher the achievement obtained by the pupils in Mathematics; 2) The achievement of the pupils were essentially

the

same irregardless

of

the sex of their

teachers; 3) The achievement of the pupils in Math was significantly influenced by the educational attainment of their

teachers;

significantly

4)

The

achievement

influenced

by

the

of

the

pupils

teachers’

was

teaching

experience; 5) The achievement of the pupils in Math was significantly influenced by the educational attainment of their teachers; and 6) The achievement of the pupils in Math was

not

significantly

influenced

by

their

teachers’

in-

service trainings attended. This study is similar with that of Enderio’s since both deal on the academic achievement of the pupils. However, Enderio’s study

dealt

more

on

the

association 44

between the teacher-respondents’ and

personal

variates

pupils’ performance while this study dealt more on

the correlations among the teacher-respondents’ classroom

management

styles

with

that

of

the

pupils’

academic

performance. Tan-Payos’

(2004)

research

entitled:

“Filipino

Management Styles of Secondary School Administrators and Teachers’ Performance: The Northern Samar Experience”, has also a bearing on this study. In her study, she found out that: 1) There was a variation

of

the

perceptions

of

administrators and secondary school

the

secondary

teachers

school

relative

to

the extent of Filipino management styles employed by the former; 2) The Filipino management style employed by the secondary school administrators in the implementation of the policies greatly influenced the performance of the secondary school

teachers;

management

styles

and was

3)

The

exercise

dependent

also

of

the

Filipino

upon

the

personal

characteristics of the administrators. Both Tan-Payos’ and the current study are similar on the

aspect

of

correlating

management

styles

with

performance in the teaching-learning process. However, the former

was

more

on

the

management

styles

of

the

administrators vis-a-vis teachers’ performance while the 45 latter is on the correlation among the classroom management styles of the teachers with the achievement of the pupils. In the published thesis of Keohan (2013) (

http://educ-reality.com/behaviour-managementtheories/,November

20,

2014)

entitled,

“The

Effect

of

Teacher-Identified Classroom Management”, he found out that: 1) Classroom management should never be thought of as one size

fits

all;

the

individuality

of

every

student

necessitates the need to adapt, modify, or omit activities, homework, course content, seating, and assessments, which all heavily play into classroom management; 2) Classroom rules, routines, policies, and consequences should be well thought out

and

part of a unified school-wide plan put in place the first day of school; 3) Lesson planning that focuses on academic learning

and

practicing

teaching

social

wellbeing

of

skills

skills

students;

and 4)

while

at

the

sustaining

the

The

teachers

with

same

time

emotional the

best

classroom management were experts in their fields (what to teach), and outstanding in their interactions with students (how to teach); and 5) Reflection and the sharing of with peers, counselors, and

others

resolve

problems

ideas in

ways not thought of before. The similarity in the study of Keohan and the current study lies on the focal point of both studies, i. e., the 46 effect of teachers’ classroom management. However, Keohan’s study treated classroom management more on a wider scope,

while

this

study

centered

on

the

styles

of

management. Additionally, the central goal of was

to

provide

research-based

teaching

classroom his thesis

techniques

and

behavior management strategies that can be used by novice teachers in urban middle schools (Nevada) to improve the behavior in their classrooms. Furthermore, Keohan’s study correlated behavior

teachers’ while

classroom

this

study

management is

on

with

pupils’

student academic

achievement. In

another

published

thesis

entitled

“Classroom

Management and Learners’ Achievement in Secondary Schools in Kitgum Town Council,” Obwoya (2013) revealed that there is low level of: classroom management in secondary schools in Kitgum

Town

Council

and

teachers’

ineffectiveness

in

planning, employing teaching methodologies, class control and record management was found to be very high. The finding further revealed that there is very low level of learners’ achievement as characterized by: The low levels of academic performance

in

tests

and

examinations,

poor

time

management, lack of attention during lesson conductions and poor class-hygiene management. Finally, the finding revealed significant positive relationship between 47 classroom management and learners’ achievement in secondary schools in Kitgum Town Council.

Obwoya’s thesis and this study are similar in that both deal on classroom management and academic performance of the learners.

They

differ

in

the

scope

wherein

the

former

studied the relationship of classroom management in general while the latter is more specific on classroom management styles as correlated with the pupils’ academic achievement. Finally, in the published study of Florin (2011) entitled:

“Kindergarten Teachers'

Classroom

Management

Beliefs and Practices and Their Implications on Students' Social and Academic Outcomes,” the results revealed that all educators reported themselves to be authoritative using the online questionnaire. Furthermore, the case study teachers also all reported themselves to be authoritative in the interview

and

revealed

seven

the

questionnaire;

teachers

to

be

however,

observations

authoritative,

one

to

be

authoritarian, and one to be negative directive, a newly created style. Overall,

the

teachers

understood

their

classroom

management strategies and where they originated from, and believed

their

styles

to

positively

impact

both

their

students' social and academic skills, regardless of the 48 style they utilized. The classroom management styles did not show

any

outcomes;

statistical however,

significance

ranking

the

regarding

teachers

based

student on

their

students'

academic

and

social

skills

did

reveal

authoritative teachers to have students with higher social skills but not academic skills. Florin’s study is similar with the study at hand because

both

teachers. management

deal

on

classroom

management

styles

of

They differ in that Florin’s research associated styles

academic skills

with

while

the this

learners’ study

social

associated

skills

and

management

styles of teachers with the academic achievement of the learners. The above-cited studies reviewed were instrumental in helping

the

researcher

in

gaining

insights

processes that were involved in this study.

Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY

as

to

the

This chapter enumerates, describes and discusses the procedure used in undertaking this study which includes the research

design,

validation

of

locale

the

of

the

instruments,

study, sampling

instrumentation, procedure,

data

gathering procedure, and statistical treatment of data. Research Design This study made use of the descriptive-correlational research method. This is descriptive in nature because of the presentation of the personal variates of the teacherrespondents and those of the administrator-respondents; the former group’s variates include age and sex, civil status, educational qualification, average monthly family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in teaching. Those of the latter group include the age and sex,

civil

years

as

status,

educational

administrators,

qualification,

average

monthly

number

family

of

income,

number of family members and number of relevant in-service trainings attended. Included also was the presentation of the four (4) classroom

management

styles

authoritative, democratic and

such

as

laissez-faire.

authoritarian, Moreover,

50 the academic performance of the pupils as shown by their general average for School Year 2014-2015 was considered.

On the other hand, this research study is correlational because the profile variates of the teacher-respondents and their perceived classroom management styles were associated. Their perceived classroom management styles and the academic performance of the pupil-respondents were also associated. The data were organized, tabulated and

statistically

presented. The needed data to answer all the specific questions were

generated

questionnares

as

contained

for

the

in

the

accomplished

teacher-respondents

survey

and

the

tools

were

administrator-respondents. Descriptive

and

inferential

statistical

employed in the analysis of the data. These tools are the frequency

count,

percentage,

arithmetic

mean,

standard

deviation, t-test for independent samples, Pearson ProductMoment Coefficient of Correlation and Fisher’s t-test. Locale of the Study This research was conducted in Biri District of the Division of Northern Samar as shown in Figure 2. Currently, the District includes eleven (11) elementary schools: four (4) complete, monograde and

seven 51

(7)complete, combination. a

total

of

These

eleven (11)

schools

have

six (6) administrators, seventy two (72)

teachers and 2,552 pupils.

The 11 schools are composed of four (4) complete, monograde

and

seven

(7)

complete,

combined

elementary

schools. The school is said to be complete, monograde if it offers Kindergarten and Grades 1 to VI and each grade level is handled in each classroom. On the other hand, the school is said to be complete, combined if the school caters to Kindergarten and Grades 1 to VI pupils but the Kindergarten, Grade 1 and Grade 2 levels are combined, so with Grade 3 and Grade IV, and Grade V and Grade VI. There

are

only

six

(6)

administrators

because

some

schools are grouped into three (3) clusters. Each cluster is headed by only one administrator. The clustered schools are the elementary schools of: 1) Bagong Silang and Langublangub; 2) Basud, Talisay, and Tampipi; and 3) Cawayan, Macaret, and Salvacion. The District of Biri is in the municipality of Biri, province of Northern Samar. It is a group of islands and islets located in the northernmost

tip

of

the

Province,

facing the blue sea of the Pacific Ocean to the east and the famous San Bernardino Strait to the west. 52

Figure 2. The Map of the

Locale of the Study 53

Biri (Biri Municipal Tourism Office Hand-out, 2015) was once

a

barrio

(barangay)

of

the

municipality

of

Bobon established in 1649, and had this barangay, until its conversion into a new and independent municipality under

Republic Act No. 5500 sponsored by then Congressman Eusebio B. Moore and passed by the Sixth Congress on June 21, 1969. Thus,

Biri

municipal

became

the

officials

21st

were

municipality

elected

in

and

the

its

first

November

1969

special election. This island used to be “Tingiao”, as referred to in the navigational maps of the Spanish galleons, was entry

point

to

Luzon

and

Visayas.

As

a

the

navigational

landmark, the name Biri was derived from the Spanish word “barrer” meaning to “sweep”. It covers a land area of 2,488,485 hectares with a population of 12,877 as per 2011 Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) Survey held in May 2010. The town has eight (8) barangays, namely: Poblacion, Sto. Nino, Progress, San Antonio, Pio del Pilar, MacArthur, Kauswagan, and San Pedro. Instrumentation The main instruments used were two sets of survey questionnaire:

one

set

was

for

the

teacher-

54 respondents

and

another

set

for

the

administrator-

respondents. The survey questionnaire for the teacher-respondents had two (2) parts. Part I captured the personal variates such

as:

age

and

sex,

civil

status,

educational

qualification, relevant

average

in-service

teaching.

Part

regarding

their

monthly

family

trainings,

II

generated

classroom

and data

income,

number on

management

of

their

number

of

years

in

perception

styles,

to

wit:

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire. Likewise,

the

survey

questionnaire

for

the

administrator-respondents was composed of two (2) parts. Part I elicited their personal circumstances such as:

age

and sex, civil status, educational qualification, number of years

as

administrators,

average

monthly

family

income,

number of family members, and number of relevant in-service trainings

attended.

perception

as

teachers

to

Part

what

practiced.

II

gathered

classroom These

data

management

styles

are

on

styles

their their

authoritarian,

authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire. The researcher utilized the School Form 5 (SF 5) as the primary

source

performance of the

of

data

as

regards to the academic

pupil-respondents. This 55

covered

their general average for the School Year 2014-

2015. The researcher personally fielded and retrieved the accomplished survey questionnaires to ensure 100 percent collection of said instruments and verified any dubious or vague answers by the respondents.

Validation of Instrument There was no need to validate the questionnaires which were

distributed

to

the

teacher-

and

administrator-

respondents because the researcher adopted the validated survey

instrument

“Students’

used

Achievement

by in

Padilla Science

(2006) and

in

his

Technology

study in

the

Secondary Education Development Program (SEDP): The Eastern Visayas

Experience”.

personal

variates

Only

the

of

the

portion

that

elicited

teacher-respondents

the and

administrator-respondents was adopted. These variates were age

and

sex,

civil

status,

educational

qualification,

average monthly family income, number of relevant in-service trainings and number of years in teaching for the teacherrespondents. On the other hand, the adopted administratorrespondents

include

the

educational

qualification,

age

and

number

sex, of

administrators, average monthly family

civil

years

status,

as

school

income, number

of

family members and number of relevant in-service 56 trainings attended. On the other hand, the part of the survey instrument that

generated

adopted

from

the

classroom that

management of

styles

Indian

data

was

University

(http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df, November 10, 2014).

Sampling Procedure The researcher resorted to total enumeration. This means that all of the elementary school teachers of seventy two

(72)

and

six

(6)

administrators

were

surveyed.

In

addition, documentary analysis of the Report on Promotions (School Form 5) of all the pupils of 2,552 was done. Table 1

shows the respondents of this study.

Data Gathering Procedure Strict protocols were observed during the gathering of data. The researcher first solicited the permission/approval of the Schools Division Superintendent (SDS) of Northern Samar Division to field the questionnaires to all of the elementary school approval

teachers

and

administrators.

Same

was sought from said office for the access of the

School Form 5 or the Report on Promotions of the pupils of all of the eleven elementary schools. 57 Table 1 Respondents of the Study School

1. Bagong Silang Elementary School

Number of Teachers (N)

3

Numbe r of Pupil s (N) 35

Type of School

Complete,combinatio n

2. Basud Elemementary School 3. Biri Central Elem. School 4. Cawayan Elementary School 5. Langub-langub Elementary School 6. Macaret Elementary School

3

102

Complete,combinatio n

21

749

Complete, monograde

3

79

Complete,combinatio n

7

268

4

91

7. Palhugan Elementary School

10

381

Complete,monograde

8. Salvacion Elementary School

3

127

Complete,combinatio n

9. San Antonio Elementary School

10

437

Complete monograde

4

153

Complete,combinatio n

4

130

Complete,combinatio n

72

2,552

4 complete,monograde 7 complete, combination

10. Talisay Elementary School 11. Tampipi Elementary School TOTAL

Complete,monograde

Complete,combinatio n

58 The

approved

fielding

of

the

questionnaires

and

accessing of the data on pupils’ grades served as reference for

further

solicitation

of

permission

by

the

Supervisor and then by the school administrators.

District

As a matter of protocol the researcher found a way to express her gratitude to all of the approving authorities and the faculty members. All of the abovecited activities were personally done by

the

researcher.

This

mechanism

ensured

the

efficient

retrieval of the instruments and that the researcher was able to validate/probe dubious or incomplete responses. All of the above-cited undertakings were done from June 2015 to July 2015. Statistical Treatment of Data All of the collected data were organized, collated, tallied, analyzed and interpreted by using the appropriate descriptive

and

inferential

statistical

tools,

namely: frequency count and percentage, arithmetic mean, weighted mean, standard deviation, t-test for independent sample

means,

Pearson

Product-Moment

Coefficient

of

Correlation, and the Fisher’s t-test. These

statistical

tools

are

hereby

described

as

follows: Frequency and Percentage Distribution. These were used 59 to establish the profile of the teacher- and administratorrespondents in terms of their occurence and magnitude of occurence for every variate.

Arithmetic Mean. This statistics gave an idea as to the typical occurence of specific variates in the profile of the respondents of this study. Weighted Mean. This was used to describe the extent of respondents’

perceptions

as

to

the

style

of

classroom

management employed by the teachers using the five-point Likert scale (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2003:108) as follows: Scale Range Interpretation 5 4.51 – 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA) 4 3.51 – 4.50 Agree (A) 3 2.51 – 3.50 Neutral (N) 2 1.51 – 2.50 Disagree (D) 1 1.00 – 1.50 Strongly Disagree (SD) Standard Deviation. This statistical tool showed as to the

standard

difference

of

each

of

the

categories

as compared with the other categories with reference to the mean. Pearson Product-Moment Coefficient of Correlation. It was the tool used to measure the relationship between the personal variates of the teacher-respondents and their perceived style of classroom management and the measurement 60 of the relationship between these perceptions and the academic performance of the pupil-respondents. This was used to test hypotheses numbers 2 and 3. The coefficient value was interpreted as follows (Calmorin, 1994:256): Value

Interpretation

0.00 to + 0.20

Negligible Correlation

+ 0.21 to + 0.40

Low/Slight Correlation

+ 0.41 to + 0.70

Marked/Moderate

Correlation + 0.71 to + 0.90

High Correlation

+ 0.91 to + 0.91

Very High Correlation

+ 1.00

Perfect Correlation

Fisher’s t-test (Freund and Simon, 1992:468). This tool used to measure the significance of the computed correlation coefficient. The decision rule followed as that of the one cited under the t-test for independent samples. Finally, in determining the region of acceptance or the region

of

rejection

of

each

of

the

three

(3)

null

hypotheses, the .05 level of significance (ɑ) was used. t-test 1982:306).

for This

Independent was

used

to

Sample

Means

compare

the

two

(Walpole, groups’

perceptions as regards to the classroom management styles of the teacher-respondents, such as authoritarian, 61 democratic, authoritative, and laissez-faire. This served as the basis for accepting or rejecting null hypothesis number 1,

with

the

following

decision

rule:

accept

the

null

hypothesis if the computed value turned lesser than the critical value or the p-value turned greater than the ɑ and reject the null hypothesis if the computed value turned equal or greater than the critical value or the p-value turned equal or lesser than the ɑ.

Chapter 4 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA This

chapter

presents

the

data

gathered

with

the

corresponding analysis and interpretation. Included in this chapter are the presentation, analyses and interpretations of the following: profile of teacher-respondents; profile of administrator-respondents; management

styles

of

classification

teacher-respondents

of based

classroom on

the

perceptions of the two groups of respondents; comparison of the classification of the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents

between

the

perceptions

of

the

two

groups of respondents; relationship between the teacherrespondents’ classroom management styles and their personal variates;

academic

performance

of

pupils;

relationship

between the academic performance of pupils and classroom management styles of teachers; and implications derived from the findings of the study. Profile of Teacher-Respondents Tables

2

to

7

present

the

profile

of

teacher-

respondents in terms of their age and sex, civil status, educational qualification, average monthly family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in teaching. Age and Sex. Table 2 presents the

age and sex distri63

bution of the teacher-respondents. It can be gleaned from the table that a number of teacher-respondents were aged 31 – 35 years old accounting for 16 or 22.22 percent while 14 or 19.44 percent of them were aged 26 – 30 years old, 10 or 13.90 percent were aged 41 – 45 years old, eight or 11.11 per cent were aged 21 – 25 years old, six or 8.33 percent were aged 56 – 60

years

Table 2 Age and Sex of Teacher-Respondents Age

Sex

Total

%

Bracket 61 – 65 56 – 60 51 – 55 46 – 50 41 – 45 36 – 40 31 – 35 26 – 30 21 – 25 Not Stated

Male 1 0 0 4 3 1 4 4 2 0

Female 1 6 3 2 7 5 12 10 6 1

(f) 2 6 3 6 10 6 16 14 8 1

Total

19

53

72

%

26.39

73.61

100.00

Mean

37.85 years old

S. D.

11.20 years

C. V.

0.30

old,

another six

or

8.33

percent

were

2.78 8.33 4.17 8.33 13.90 8.33 22.22 19.44 11.11 1.39 100.00

aged

46 – 50 64

years old, still another six or 8.33 pecent were aged 36 – 40 years old, three or 4.17 percent were aged 51 – 55 years old, and two or 2.78 percent were aged 61 – 65 years old. One or 1.39 per cent of the teacher-respondents did not disclose her age. The

mean

age

of

this

group

of

respondents

was

calculated at 37.85 years old with a standard deviation (SD) of 11.20 years and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.30. The

data

suggested

that

the

teacher-respondents

were

on

their late 30’s but relatively young and at the prime of their age.

Furthermore, majority of the teacher-respondents were female with 53 or 73.61 pecent. The male counterpart was composed of 19 or 26.39 per cent only. The

data

showed

that

the

teacher-respondents

were

dominated by the female sex, an indication that in the past, if not up to the present, majority of those who took up the teacher education course belonged to this sex and only few of the males embraced the teaching profession. Civil

Status.

Table

3

provides

the

information

regarding the civil status of the teacher-respondents. From the table, it can be noted that majority of the teacherrespondents, that is, 46 or 63.89

per cent

were

married

while 23 or 31.94 percent were single, and two or 2.78 65 Table

3

Civil Status of Teacher-Respondents Civil Status Single Married Widowed Not Stated Total

Percent

were

widowed.

f

%

23 46 2 1

31.94 63.89 2.78 1.39

72

100.00

Still,

there

was

one

teacher-

respondent or 1.39 percent who failed to disclose his civil status.

The foregoing data suggested that most of the teacherrespondents had conjugal family responsibilities which they raise and maintain by the income they derived from teaching. Educational

Qualification.

Table

4

shows

the

educational qualification of the teacher-respondents. Table

4

provides

that

respondents

had

educational

qualification,

majority

baccalaureate

percent. Nineteen of them

degree

accounting or

of as for

26.39 percent

the

teacher-

the 45

highest or

had

62.50

obtained

their master’s degree and six or 8.33 were in the master’s level. Two or 2.78 percent of the teacher-respondents held their anonymity as to their educational qualification. 66 The

data

presented

signifies Table

that

the

teacher-

4

Educational Qualification of Teacher-Respondents Educational Qualification Master’s Degree Master’s Level (including CAR) Baccalaureate Degree Not Stated Total

F

%

19

26.39

6 45 2 72

8.33 62.50 2.78 100.00

respondents were educationally qualified having obtained the minimum educational requirement required for the teaching

position. Some, however, recognized the value of advance education

that

they

pursued

the

master’s

level

or

even

obtaining a master’s degree. Average Monthly Family Income. Table 5 discloses the average monthly family income of the teacher-respondents. It can be gleaned from Table 5 that a number of the teacher-respondents, that is, 30 or 41.66 percent had earned a monthly family income of Php20,000 – Php24,999 while or

30.56

percent

of

them

22

earned Php15,000–

Php19,999, five or 6.94 pecent earned Php30,000–Php34,999, four

or

5.56

per cent

earned

Php25,000

to

Php29,999,

two or 2.78 percent earned Php35,000–Php39,999 and

another 67

two or 2.78 percent earned

Php10,000–Php14,999.

Table

Seven

5

Average Monthly Family Income of Teacher-Respondents Income Bracket 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 Not

– 39,999 – 34,999 – 29,999 – 24,999 – 19,999 – 14,999 Stated

Total

f

%

2 5 4 30 22 2 7

2.78 6.94 5.56 41.66 30.56 2.78 9.72

72

100.00

Mean

Php 19,895.38

S. D.

Php 8,269.52

C. V.

0.42

of

teacher-respondents or 9.72 percent did not disclose their monthly family income for anonymity. The mean monthly family income earned by the teacherrespondents

was

pegged

at

Php19,895.38

Php8,269.52 and a CV of 0.42. The

data

with

implied

a

SD

of

that

the

teacher-respondents had a regular family income which they used to finance the basic

and

nutritional

needs

of

the

family members. Number presents

of

the

Relevant number

In-Service

of

relevant

Trainings. in-service

attended by the teacher-respondents in

the

Table

6

trainings

international, 68

national, regional, division and district levels. Table 6 Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings of the Teacher-Respondents No. of Relevant Training s 13 - 15

International

National

Regional

Division

District

f

%

f

f

f

f

%

0

0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 2.7 8 9.7 2

0

0

0.00

4

5.55

1

1.39

1 8 3 0 0

25.00

10 – 12

0

7 – 9

0

4 – 6

0

1 – 3

2

None

7

0 0 1 1 7 3

% 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 1.3 9 23.6 1 4.1 7

0 0 0 4 1 5 7

% 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 5.5 6 20.8 3 9.7 2

1 2 1 1 7 3 5 0

% 1.3 9 2.7 8 1.3 9 23.6 1 48.6 1 0.0 0

41.67 0.00

Not Stated Total

In

6 3 7 2

87.5 0 100.0 0

the

5 1 7 2

70.8 3 100.0 0

international

4 6 7 2

63.8 9 100.0 0

level,

two

1 6 7 2

22.2 2 100.0 0

of

the

1 9 7 2

26.39 100.00

teacher-

respondents or 2.78 percent disclosed to have attended 1-3 trainings

in

this

level

while

seven

or

9.72

percent

expressed that they had not attended any training in this level and 63 or 87.50 percent did not give information regarding this. In the national level, 17 or 23.61 percent of the teacher-respondents attended 1-3 trainings while one or 1.39 per cent attended 4-6 trainings,

three

or

4.17

percent

disclosed to have not attended any training in this level, and 51 or 70.83 percent failed to give information regarding this. In

the

regional

level,

15

or 20.83 percent of the 69

teacher-respondents had attended 1-3 trainings

while

four

or 5.56 per cent attended 4-6 trainings, seven or 9.72 per cent were not able to attend any training in this level, and 46 or 63.89 percent failed to give information regarding this. In the division level, 35 or 48.61 pecent had attended 1-3

trainings

while

17

or

23.61

per

cent

attended

4-6

trainings, two or 2.78 percent attended 10-12 trainings, one

or 1.39 per cent attended 13-15 trainings, another one or 1.39 percent attended 7-9 trainings, and 16 or 22.22 percent did not disclose any information regarding this. In the district level, 30 or 41.67 percent had attended 1-3

trainings

while

18

or

25.00

percent

attended

4-6

trainings, four or 5.55 percent attended 10-12 trainings, one or 1.39 percent attended 7-9 trainings, and 19 or 26.39 per cent

did

not

give

any

information

regarding this. The

data

presented

suggested

that

the

teacher-

respondents considered in-service trainings as their avenue for professional growth that a number of them strove to attend in the different levels as their chances warranted them to attend. Number of Years in Teaching. Table 7 reveals the number of years in teaching of the teacher-respondents. 70 From the said table, it can be noted that 32 of the teacher-respondents or

44.46

percent

had

been

in

the

Table 7 Number of Years in Teaching of Teacher-Respondents No. of Years in Teaching 31 – 35 26 – 30 21 – 25 16 – 20

F 4 5 5 6

% 5.56 6.94 6.94 8.33

11 – 15 6 – 10 1 – 5

5 15 32

6.94 20.83 44.46

Total

72

100.00

Mean

10.78 years

S. D.

9.64 years

C. V.

0.89

service for 1-5 years while 15 or 20.83 percent had been teaching for 6-10 years, six or 8.33 percent had been with the DepEd as teachers for

16-20

percent had been teaching for 26-30

years, years,

five

or 6.94

another

five

or 6.94 percent for 21-25 years, still another five or 6.94 per cent for 11-15 years, and four or 5.56 percent for 31-35 years. The mean number of years in teaching of the teacherrespondents was 10.78 years with a SD of 9.64 years and

CV 71

of 0.89. The data suggested that the teacher-respondents had been teaching for quite a number of years, however, a number of them were newly hired. Profile of Administrator-Respondents Tables 8 – 14 present the profile of administratorrespondents in terms of their age and sex, civil status, educational

qualification,

number

of

years

as

school

administrators, average monthly family income, number of family members, and number of relevant in-service trainings. Age

and

Sex.

Table

8

contains

the

age

and

sex

distribution of the administrator-respondents. The

table

shows

that

of

the

six

respondents, one or 16.67 percent each were

administratoraged

57, 49,

48, 45, 44, and 43 years old. The

mean

age

of

the

administrator-respondents

was

calculated at 47.67 years old with a SD of 5.12 years and CV of 0.11. This signified that the administrator- respondents were on their late 40’s but at the prime of their age. Moreover,

majority

of

the

administrator-respondents

were female accounting for four or 66.67 percent while the male counterpart was composed of only two or 33.33 percent.

72 Table 8 Age and Sex of Administrator-Respondents

57 49 48 45 44 43

Male 1 0 0 0 1 0

Female 0 1 1 1 0 1

Total (f) 1 1 1 1 1 1

Total

2

4

6

%

33.33

66.67

100.00

Age

Sex

% 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 100.00*

Mean

47.67 years old

S. D.

5.12 years

C. V.

0.11

*May not add up to total due to rounding off.

The among

data

also

showed

that

administrator-respondents

female as

dominance

the

result

existed of

the

observation in the past that women mostly embraced teaching as

a

profession

so

that

in

the

event

of

promotion

to

administrator positions, most of them rose from the ranks. Civil Status. Table 9 provides the information on the civil status of the administrator-respondents. The

table

shows

that

all

of

the

administrator-

respondents were married, signifying that most of them had conjugal

family

maintained

by

responsibilities the

income

they

which

they

derived

raise from

and

their 73

profession. Table 9 Civil Status of Administrator-Respondents

Civil Status Single Married Widowed Total

f

%

0 6 0

0.00 100.00 0.00

6

100.00

Educational Qualification. Table 10 presents the educational qualification of administrator-respondents. Table 10 presents that three or 50.00 percent of the administrator-respondents were in a doctoral level while two of them or 33.33 percent were baccalaureate degree holders and one or 16.67 percent was in a masteral

level.

Table 10 Educational Qualification of Administrator-Respondents Educational Qualification Doctoral Level Masteral Level (including CAR) Baccalaureate Degree Total

f

%

3

50.00

1

16.67

2

33.33

6

100.00

74 The

data

implied

that

a

number

of

administrator-

respondents had earned educational qualification higher than the

minimum

educational

level

required

for

the

teaching profession. Number

of

Years

as

School

Administrators.

Table

11

shows the data on the number of years accumulated by the administrator-respondents as school administrators.

The

table

shows

that

three

of

the

administrator-

respondents or 50.00 percent had been an administrator for five years while two or 33.33 percent had been a school administrator for seven years, and one or 16.67 percent for four years. Table 11 Number of Years as School Administrators of Administrator-Respondents No. of Years as School Administrator 7 5 4 Total

f

%

2 3 1

33.33 50.00 16.67

6

100.00

Mean

5.50 years

S. D.

1.22 years

C. V.

0.22

75 The

mean

number

of

years

as

administrator

of

the

administrator-respondents was 5.50 years with a SD of 1.22 years and CV of 0.22. The foregoing data suggested that the administratorrespondents had been in the service as school administrators for quite a number of years. Average Monthly Family Income. Table

12

reveals

the

average

monthly

family

income

of

the

administrator-

respondents. Table 12 Average Monthly Family Income of Administrator-Respondents Income

f

%

55,000 50,000 27,000 25,000

1 2 1 2

16.67 33.33 16.67 33.33

Total

6

100.00

Mean

Php 38,666.67

S. D.

Php 14,375.91

C. V.

0.37

Table

12

reveals

that

of

the

six

administrator-

respondent, two or 33.33 percent earned a monthly income of Php50,000.00,

another

two

or

33.33

Php25,000.00, one or 16.67 percent

earned

percent

earned

Php55,000.00, 76

and another one or 16.67 percent earned Php27,000.00. The

mean

monthly

family

income

earned

by

the

administrator was Php38,666.67 with a SD of Php14,375.91 and CV

of

0.37.

This

information

suggested

that

the

administrator-respondent had a regular income they earned to finance the basic necessities of their respective family members.

Number of Family Members. Table 13 presents the number of family members of the administrator-respondents. The

table

shows

that

of

the

six

administrator-

respondents, three or 50.00 percent had five family members while two or 33.33 percent had nine members, and one or 16.67 percent had six members in the family. Table 13 Number of Family Members of Administrator-Respondents Family Members

F

%

9 6 5

2 1 3

33.33 16.67 50.00

Total

6

100.00

Mean

6

S. D.

2

C. V.

0.33

77 The mean number of family members of the administratorrespondents was six with a SD of 2 members and CV of 0.33. The foregoing data suggested that the administratorrespondents had an ideal family size of six based on the average

family

set

in

the

calculation

of

the

poverty

threshold that is composed of the couple and four children.

Number presents

of

the

attended

Relevant number

by

international,

the

In-Service

Trainings.

Table

relevant

in-service

trainings

of

administrator-respondents

national,

regional,

division

in

and

14

the

district

levels. Table 14 Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings of the Administrator-Respondents No. of Relevant Training s 15

International

National

f

%

f

%

f

%

f

%

f

0

0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 50.0 0 0.0 0 50.0 0 100.0 0

0

0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 16.6 7 0.0 0 16.6 7 66.6 6 100.0 0

0

0.00

0

0.00

1

16.67

0

0.00

1

16.67

0

0.00

0

0.00

1

16.67

0

0.00

0

0.00

2

33.33

0

0.00

0

0.00

1

16.67

0

0.00

0

0.00

0

0.00

1

16.67

0

0.00

0

0.00

2

33.33

4

66.67

0

0.00

0

0.00

0

0.00

0

0.00

1

16.67

1

16.67

0

0.00

0

0.00

1

16.67

1

16.67

1

16.67

6

100.00 *

6

100.00 *

6

100.00*

13

0

12

0

9

0

7

0

6

0

5

0

3

0

1

3

0

0

Not Stated

3

Total

6

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 6

Regional

Division

District %

*May not add up to total due to rounding off.

78

In the international level, three of the administratorrespondents or 50.00 per cent

disclosed

to

have attended one training in this level while the remaining three or 50.00 percent did not give information regarding this. In the national level, one or 16.67 percent of the administrator-respondents

attended

one

training

while

another one or 16.67 percent attended three trainings, and four or 66.66 percent failed to give information regarding this. In the regional level, two or 33.33 percent of the administrator-respondents had attended nine trainings while one or 16.67 percent attended 13 trainings, another one or 16.67 percent attended 12 trainings, still, another one or 16.67 percent attended seven trainings and one or 16.67 percent failed to give information regarding this. In the division level, 2 or 33.33 percent had attended nine

trainings

trainings,

while

another

one

one

or or

16.67 16.67

percent percent

attended

13

attended

12

trainings, still another one or 16.67 percent attended seven trainings, and one or 16.67 per cent did not disclose any information regarding this. In attended

the

district

five

level,

trainings

two

while

or

one

33.33 or

percent

16.67

had

percent 79

attended 15 trainings, another one or 16.67 percent attended six trainings, still, another one or 16.67 percent attended one training, and one or 16.67 percent did not give any information regarding this. The data presented suggested that the administratorrespondents considered also in-service trainings as their avenue for professional growth that a number of them had attended trainings in the different levels which they were required to attend. Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents Tables

15

to

18

present

the

classification

of

the

classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on their

own

perception

and

the

administrator-respondents

perception

along

of

the

authoritarian,

authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire. Authoritarian. Table 15 presents the classification of the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on

their

own

perception

administrator-respondents

and along

the

perception

authoritarian

of

the

classroom

management style. There were three indicators depicting this area. Table

15

shows

that

of

the

three

indicators,

the

teacher-respondents “agreed” on one indicator stating, “the 80

classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn,” with a weighted mean of 4.01 while they “disagreed” on remaining

two

indicators

stating,

“I

will

not

the

accept

excuses from a student who is tardy,” and “if a student is disruptive during class, I send him/ her to the principal’s office without further discussion,” with weighted means of 2.31 and 2.03, respectively. Table 15 Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the Two Groups of Respondents along Authoritarian Teachers

Indicators 1. If a student is disruptive during class, I send him/ her to the principal’s office without further discussion. 2. The classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn. 3. I will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 3.51 2.51 1.51 1.00 WM I

– – – – –

5.00 4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

Administrator s WM I

WM

I

2.03

D

2.08

D

4.01

A

3.67

A

2.31

D

2.35

D

2.78

N

2.70

N

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean Interpretation

(SA) (A) (N) (D) (SD)

81 Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents expressed “neutrality” classroom

regarding management

authoritarian

the styles

classroom

manifested

by

the

signified

that

classification

grand

they

management weighted

of

their

practiced style.

mean

of

along

This

was

2.78.

This

based on the perception of the teacher-

respondents, they practiced moderately authoritarianism in the classroom. On the other hand, Table 15 shows that from the view point of the administrator-respondents, they too “agreed” on one indicator stating, “the classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn,” with a weighted mean of 3.67 as their

perception

on

the

classification

of

the

classroom

management styles of their teachers along authoritarian, while

they

“disagreed”

on

the

remaining

two

indicators

stating, “I will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy,” and “if a student is disruptive during class, I send him/

her

to

discussion,”

the

principal’s

with

weighted

office means

of

without 2.35

further

and

2.00,

respectively. Taken

as

a

whole,

the

administrator-respondents

expressed “neutrality” regarding the classification of the classroom

management

styles

along authoritarian classroom

practiced management

by

their

teachers

style. This

was

82 shown by the grand weighted mean of 2.70. This signified that

based

on

respondents,

the

the

perception

of

teacher-respondents

the

administrator-

practiced

moderately

authoritarianism in the classroom. In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at the

same

management

adjectival styles

classification

of

the

of

the

classroom

teacher-respondents

authoritarian classroom management

along

style. However, they

slightly differed in the numerical assessment. The teacherrespondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.78 while the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.70 with the same adjectival interpretation of “neutral.” Authoritative. Table 16 depicts the classification of the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on

their

own

perception

administrator-respondents

and along

the

perception

authoritative

of

the

classroom

management style. There were three indicators depicting this area. Table 16 presents that the teacher-respondents “agreed” on all the three indicators along this area stating, “I am concerned about both what my students learn and how they learn,” “I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions,” and “my students understand that they can interrupt

my lecture if they have a relevant

83 question,” with weighted means of 4.39, 4.18, and 3.73, respectively. Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents expressed “agreement” regarding the classification of their classroom management

styles

they

practiced

along

authoritative

classroom management style. This was manifested by the grand weighted mean of 4.10. This signified that based on the perception of the teacher-respondents, they practiced highly authoritative classroom management style. Table 16 Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the Two Groups of Respondents along Authoritative Teachers

Indicators 1. I am concerned about both what my students learn and how they learn. 2. I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions. 3. My students understand that they can interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant question. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 3.51 2.51 1.51 1.00

– – – – –

5.00 4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

Administrator s WM I

WM

I

4.39

A

3.83

A

4.18

A

3.68

A

3.73

A

3.49

N

4.10

A

3.67

A

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

(SA) (A) (N) (D) (SD)

WM I

Weighted Mean Interpretation

84 On the other hand, Table 16 presents that from the view point of the administrator-respondents, they “agreed” on two indicators

stating,

“I

am

concerned

about

both

what

my

students learn and how they learn,” and “I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions,” with weighted means of 3.83 and 3.68, respectively, as their perception on the classification of the classroom management styles

of

their

teachers

along

authoritative

classroom

management style, while they were “neutral” on the remaining indicator

stating,

“My students

understand that

they

can interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant question,” with a weighted mean of 3.49. Taken

as

a

whole,

the

administrator-respondents

expressed “agreement” regarding the classification of the classroom

management

styles

practiced

by

their

teachers

along authoritative classroom management style. This was shown by the grand weighted mean of 3.67. that

based

on

respondents,

the

the

perception

of

This

the

teacher-respondents

signified

administrator-

practiced

highly

authoritative classroom management style. In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at the

same

adjectival

classification

of

the

classroom

management

styles

authoritative

of

classroom

the

teacher-respondents

management

style.

along

However, they 85

differed

in

the

numerical

assessment.

The

teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 4.10 while the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 3.67 with the same adjectival interpretation of “agree.” Democratic. Table 17 shows the classification of the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on their

own

perception

and

the

perception

of

the

administrator-respondents along democratic classroom style. There were three indicators depicting this area. Table 17 presents that the teacher-respondents “agreed” on one indicator along

this

area

stating, “The emotional

well-being of my students is more important than classroom control,” with a weighted mean of 3.80. On the remaining two indictors, this group of respondents expressed “neutrality.” These indicators were: “If a student requests a hall pass, I always honor the request,” and “I don’t want to reprimand a student because

it

might hurt his/her feelings,” with

weighted means of 3.15 and 2.86, respectively. Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents expressed “neutrality” regarding the classification of their classroom management styles they practiced along democratic classroom

management style. This was manifested by the grand weighted mean of 3.27.

This

signified that based on 86 Table 17

Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the Two Groups of Respondents along Democratic Teachers

Indicators 1. I don’t want to reprimand a student because it might hurt his/her feelings. 2. The emotional well-being of my students is more important than classroom control. 3. If a student requests a hall pass, I always honor the request. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 3.51 2.51 1.51 1.00 WM I

– – – – –

5.00 4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

Administrator s WM I

WM

I

2.86

N

2.57

N

3.80

A

2.81

N

3.15

N

3.32

N

3.27

N

2.90

N

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean Interpretation

(SA) (A) (N) (D) (SD)

the perception of the teacher-respondents, they practiced moderately democratic classroom management style. On the other hand, Table 17 presents that from the view point of the administrator-respondents, they were “neutral” on the three indicators stating, “If a student requests a

hall pass, I always honor the request”, “The emotional wellbeing

of

my

students

is

more

important

than

classroom

control” and “I don’t want to reprimand a student 87 because it might hurt his/her feelings,” with weighted means of 3.32, 2.81, and 2.57, respectively, as their perception on the classification of the classroom management styles of their teachers along democratic classroom management style. Taken

as

a

whole,

the

administrator-respondents

expressed “neutrality” regarding the classification of the classroom

management

styles

practiced

by

their

teachers

along democratic classroom management style. This was shown by the grand weighted mean of 2.90. This signified that based on the perception of the administrator-respondents, the

teacher-respondents

practiced

moderately

democratic

classroom management style. In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived at the

same

adjectival

management

styles

democratic

classroom

differed

in

the

classification of

the

the

classroom

teacher-respondents

management

numerical

of

style.

assessment.

along

However, The

they

teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 3.27 while the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.90 with the same adjectival interpretation of “neutral.”

Laissez-Faire. Table 18 shows the classification of the classroom management styles of teacher-respondents based on their own perception

and

the

perception

of the 88

administrator-respondents

along

laissez-faire

classroom

style. There were three indicators depicting this area. Table

18

presents

that

the

teacher-respondents

“disagreed” on the three indicators along this area stating, “If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not my problem,” “Class preparation isn’t worth the effort,” and “I don’t want to impose any rules on my students,” with weighted means of 2.21, 2.08, and 1.74, respectively. Taken as a whole, the teacher-respondents “disagreed” regarding the classification of their classroom management styles

they

practiced

along

laissez-faire

classroom

management style. This was manifested by the grand weighted mean of 2.01. This signified that based on the perception of the teacher-respondents, they practiced slightly laissezfaire classroom management style. On the other hand, Table 18 presents that from the view point

of

the

administrator-respondents,

they

“disagreed” on the three indicators along this area stating, “If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not my

problem,”

“I

don’t

want

to

impose

any

rules

on

my

students,” and “Class preparation isn’t worth the effort,” with weighted means of 2.42, 1.94, and 1.86, respectively. 89 Table 18 Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents as Perceived by the Two Groups of Respondents along Laissez-Faire Teachers

Indicators 1. I don’t want to impose any rules on my students. 2. If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not my problem. 3. Class preparation isn’t worth the effort. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 3.51 2.51 1.51 1.00 WM I

Taken

– – – – –

as

5.00 4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

a

WM

I

1.74

D

1.94

D

2.21

D

2.42

D

2.08

D

1.86

D

2.01

D

2.07

D

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean Interpretation

whole,

Administrator s WM I

the

(SA) (A) (N) (D) (SD)

administrator-respondents

expressed “disagreement” regarding the classification of the classroom

management

styles

practiced

by

their

along laissez-faire classroom management style.

teachers This

was

shown by the grand weighted mean of 2.07. This signified that

based

on

the

perception

of

the

administrator-

respondents,

the

teacher-respondents

practiced

slightly

laissez-faire classroom management style. In summary, the two groups of respondents arrived the

same

adjectival

classification

of

the

at

classroom 90

management styles of the teacher-respondents along laissezfaire classroom management style. However, they differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand

weighted

mean

of

2.01

while

the

administrator-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.07 with the same adjectival interpretation of “disagree.” Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perceptions of the Two Groups of Respondents Tables 19 to 22 contain the result of the comparison of the

classification

teacher-respondents

of

classroom

between

the

management perceptions

styles of

the

of two

groups of respondents, namely: teacher- and administratorrespondents along authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire classroom management styles. Authoritarian.

Table

19

provides

the

result

of

the

comparison of the classification of classroom management styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the two

groups

of

respondents,

namely:

teacher-

and

administrator-respondents

along

authoritarian

classroom

management style. It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents arrived at the classroom

same

adjectival

management

styles

of

classification the

of

the

teacher-respondents 91

along they

authoritarian slightly

classroom

differed

in

the

management numerical

style.

However,

assessment.

The

teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.78 while the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of

2.70. In

comparing

the

authoritarian

classroom

management

style, between the perception of the teacher-respondents themselves and the administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was 0.0105 mean of 2.70 with the same adjectival interpretation

of

difference

0.08.

of

“neutral,” To

which

ascertain

resulted whether

to

the

a

mean

observed

disparity was significant, the t-test for independent sample means was employed. As presented in Table 19, in comparing the perceptions of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators, indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of -0.322 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of 0.748 which turned greater than the α = .05. This signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was

not significant. Along indicator number 2, the computed tvalue was 1.957 which turned lesser than the critical tvalue of

+1.992 and the p-value was 0.052 which turned

greater than the α. This signified that the perceptions of the two groups in

this

indicator

was

not 92

Table 19 Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception of the Two Groups of Respondents along Authoritarian WM/I Adminis Teacher s trators

Indicators 1. If a student is disruptive during class, I send him/ her to the principal’s office without further discussion. 2. The classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn. 3. I will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 3.51 2.51 1.51 1.00 WM

– – – – –

5.00 4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

t

pvalue

Evaluation/ Interpretation

2.03 (D)

2.08 (D)

-0.322

0.748

NS

4.01 (A)

3.67 (A)

1.957

0.052

NS

2.31 (D)

2.35 (D)

-0.238

0.812

NS

2.78 (N)

2.70 (N)

0.0105

0.921

NS

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean

(SA) (A) (N) (D) (SD)

I S NS tcritical = +1.992;

Interpretation Significant Not Significant df = 76; α = .05

significant. Furthermore, in comparing indicator number 3, the t yielded a value of -0.238 which obviously turned lesser

than the

critical

t-value

of

+1.992 and

the

p 93

yielded a value of 0.812 which turned greater than the α. This signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was not significant. Moreover, in comparing the classification

of

the

classroom

management

style

of

the

teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style

between

the

perception

of

the

teacher-respondents

themselves and the administrator-respondents, the t yielded a value of 0.0105 which turned lesser than the critical tvalue of

+1.992 with the p-value of 0.921 which turned

greater than the α which is equal to .05. This signified that the perceptions of the two groups of respondents regarding the classification of the classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the authoritarian classroom management style was essentially similar. Thus, the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant

difference

in

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the authoritarian classroom management style between the

perception of

the

teacher-respondents

themselves

and

the administrator-respondents, was accepted. This meant that both

the

teacher-respondents

and

the

administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced slightly authoritarian classroom management style. 94 Authoritative.

Table

20

contains

the

result

of

the

comparison of the classification of classroom management styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the two

groups

of

respondents,

administrator-respondents

along

namely:

teacher-

authoritative

and

classroom

management style. It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents arrived classroom along they

at

the

same

management

authoritative differed

in

adjectival style

classroom

the

of

classification the

the

teacher-respondents

management

numerical

of

style.

assessment.

The

However, teacher-

respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 4.10 while the administrator-respondents gave a grand

weighted

mean

of

3.67 with the same adjectival interpretation of “agree,” which resulted to a mean difference of 0.43. To ascertain whether the observed disparity was significant, the t-test for independent sample means was employed. As presented in Table 20, in comparing the perceptions of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators,

indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of 3.652 which turned greater than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of

0.000

which

turned

lesser

than the

α = .05.

This

signified

that the perceptions of the two groups

in

this

indicator

was

in

the

significant. On

the

other

hand,

95 Table 20 Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception of the Two Groups of Respondents along Authoritative

Indicators

WM/I Adminis Teacher s trators

1. I am concerned about both what my students learn and how they learn. 2. I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions. 3. My students understand that they can interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant question. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 – 5.00

t

pvalue

Evaluation/ Interpretation

4.39 (A)

3.83 (A)

3.652

0.00 0

S

4.18 (A)

3.68 (A)

3.157

0.00 2

S

3.73 (A)

3.49 (A)

1.247

0.21 4

NS

4.10 (A)

3.67 (A)

1.987

0.118

NS

Strongly Agree

(SA)

3.51 – 2.51 – 1.51 – 1.00 – WM I S NS tcritical

4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean Interpretation Significant Not Significant = +1.992; df = 76; α = .05

(A) (N) (D) (SD)

comparison of indicator number 2, the computed t-value was 3.157 which turned greater than

the

critical

t-value

of 96

+1.992 and the p-value was 0.002 which turned lesser than the α. This signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was significant. Furthermore, in comparing indicator number 3, the t yielded a value of 1.247 which obviously turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 and the p yielded a value of 0.214 which turned greater than the α. This signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was not significant. Moreover,

in

comparing

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the authoritative classroom management style,

between

the

perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was 1.987 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with the p-value of 0.118 which turned greater than the α which is equal to .05. This signified that the perception of the two groups of respondents regarding the classification of

the classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the

authoritative

classroom

management

style

was

essentially similar. Hence, the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant

difference

in

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along 97 the authoritative classroom management style between the perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the administrator-respondents, both

the

respondents

was

accepted.

teacher-respondents perceived

that

the

and

This

the

former

meant

that

administrator-

practiced

highly

authoritative classroom management style. However,

despite

the

similarity

in

the

general

perception of the two groups along this area, the teacherrespondents highly expressed concerned with the learning of their

students

behind

and

their

highly

rules

and

compelled

to

regulations in

explain

reasons

school

which

the administrator-respondents failed to notice such concern and compulsion. Democratic.

Table

21

reveals

the

result

of

the

comparison of the classification of classroom management styles of teacher-respondents between the perceptions of the two

groups

of

respondents,

namely:

teacher-

and

administrator-respondents

along

democratic

classroom

management style. It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents arrived

at

the

same

adjectival

classification

of

the

classroom management styles of the teacher-respondents along democratic classroom management style.

However, they 98

differed

in

the

numerical

respondents gave a grand the

assessment.

weighted

mean

The of

teacher3.27

while

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of

2.90 with the same adjectival interpretation of “neutral,” which

resulted

whether

the

to a mean difference of 0.37. To ascertain

observed

disparity

was significant, the t-

test for independent sample means was employed. As presented in Table 21, in comparing the perceptions of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators, indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of 1.055 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of 0.542

which

turned

greater

than

the α = .05.

This

signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was not significant. On the other hand, in the comparison of indicator number 2, the computed t-value was 1.275

which

turned

lesser

than

the

critical

t-value

of

+1.992 and the p-value was 0.524 which turned greater than the α. This signified that the perception of the two groups

in

this

indicator

was

not

significant.

comparing indicator number 3,

the

Furthermore,

in

t yielded a value of

-1.029 which obviously turned lesser than the critical tvalue of +1.992 and the p yielded a value of 0.305 which turned

greater

than

the

α.

This signified

that

the 99

perceptions of the two groups in

this

indicator

was

not

Table 21 Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception of the Two Groups of Respondents along Democratic

Indicators

1. I don’t want to reprimand a student because it might hurt his/her feelings. 2. The emotional well-being of my students is more important than classroom control. 3. If a student requests a hall pass, I always honor the request. Grand Weighted Mean

WM/I Adminis Teacher s trators

t

pvalue

Evaluation/ Interpretation

2.86 (N)

2.57 (N)

1.055

0.54 2

NS

3.80 (A)

2.81 (N)

1.275

0.52 4

NS

3.15 (N)

3.32 (N)

-1.029

0.30 5

NS

3.27 (N)

2.90 (N)

1.042

0.356

NS

Legend:

4.51 – 3.51 – 2.51 – 1.51 – 1.00 – WM I S NS tcritical

5.00 4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean Interpretation Significant Not Significant = +1.992; df = 76; α = .05

(SA) (A) (N) (D) (SD)

significant. 100 Moreover, in

comparing

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the

democratic

classroom

management

style,

between

the

perception of the teacher-respondents themselves and the administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was 1.042 which turned lesser than

the critical t-value of +1.992

with the p-value of 0.356 which turned greater than the α which is equal to .05. This signified that the perception of the two groups of respondents regarding the classification of the

classroom

management

style

of the teacher-

respondents along the democratic classroom management style was essentially similar. Therefore, the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant

difference

in

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the

democratic

classroom

management

style

between

the

perceptions of the teacher-respondents themselves and the administrator-respondents,

was

accepted.

This

meant

that

both

the

teacher-respondents

and

the

administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced moderately democratic classroom management style. Laissez-Faire. Table

22

presents

the

result of the

comparison of the classification of classroom management styles of

teacher-respondents

between

the perceptions of 101

the

two

groups

of

respondents,

administrator-respondents

along

namely:

teacher-

laissez-faire

and

classroom

Table 22 Comparison of the Classification of Classroom Management Styles of Teacher-Respondents Between the Perception of the Two Groups of Respondents along Laissez-Faire

Indicators

WM/I Adminis Teacher s trators

1. I don’t want to impose any rules on my students. 2. If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not my problem. 3. Class preparation isn’t worth the effort. Grand Weighted Mean Legend:

4.51 – 5.00

T

pvalue

Evaluation/ Interpretation

1.74 (D)

1.94 (D)

-1.278

0.20 3

NS

2.21 (D)

2.42 (D)

-1.414

0.16 0

NS

2.08 (D)

1.86 (D)

1.558

0.12 2

NS

2.01 (D)

2.07 (D)

-0.283

0.791

NS

Strongly Agree

(SA)

3.51 – 2.51 – 1.51 – 1.00 – WM I S NS tcritical

4.50 3.50 2.50 1.50

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Weighted Mean Interpretation Significant Not Significant = +1.992; df = 76; α = .05

(A) (N) (D) (SD)

management style. It can be recalled that the two groups of respondents 102 arrived

at

the

same

adjectival

classification

of

the

classroom management styles of the teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management differed

in

respondents

the

numerical

style.

assessment.

However, they The

gave a grand weighted mean of 2.01

teacherwhile

the

administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.07 with the same adjectival interpretation of “disagree,” which resulted

to

a

mean

difference

of -0.06.

To ascertain

whether the observed disparity was significant, the t-test for independent sample means was employed. As presented in Table 22, in comparing the perceptions of the two groups of respondents on the three indicators, indicator number 1 yielded a t-value of -1.278 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with a p-value of 0.203 which turned greater than the α = .05. This signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was not significant. On the other hand, in the comparison of

indicator number 2, the computed t-value was -1.414 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 and the pvalue

was

0.160

which

turned

greater

than

the

α.

This

signified that the perception of the two groups in this indicator was not significant. Furthermore, in comparing indicator

number 3, the t yielded

a

value

of

1.558 which obviously turned lesser than the critical t103 value of +1.992 and the p yielded a value turned

greater

than

the

α.

This

of

0.122

signified

which

that

the

perception of the two groups in this indicator was not significant. Finally,

in

comparing

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the laissez-faire classroom management style, between the perceptions of the teacher-respondents

themselves

and

the

administrator-respondents, the computed t-value was -0.283 which turned lesser than the critical t-value of +1.992 with the p-value of 0.791 which turned greater than the α which is equal to .05. This signified that the perception of the two groups of respondents regarding the classification of the classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along

the

laissez-faire

essentially similar.

classroom

management

style

was

Thus, the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant

difference

in

the

classification

of

the

classroom management style of the teacher-respondents along the laissez-faire classroom management style between the perception of the teacher-respondents themselves and the administrator-respondents, both

the

was

accepted.

teacher-respondents

and

This

the

meant

that

administrator-

respondents perceived that the former practiced slightly 104 laissez-faire classroom management style. Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents’ Classroom Management Styles and Their Personal Variates Tables 23 to 26 contain the result of the correlational analysis management

between

the

styles

and

teacher-respondents’ their

personal

classroom

variates

along

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire classroom management styles. Authoritarian. correlation between

Table

23

presents

the

result

the

teacher-respondents’

of

the

classroom

management style along authoritarian classroom management style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex, civil

status,

educational

qualification,

average

monthly

family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in teaching.

In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

0.057

which

denoted

negligible positive correlation. In testing the significance of

the

correlation

coefficient,

the

Fisher’s

t-test

was

employed whereby the computed value was 0.478 with a p-value of 0.638. In comparing

the

computed

value

with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the 105 α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser Table 23 Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents’ Classroom Management Styles and their Personal Variates along Authoritarian Coefficient of Correlation

Degree of Correlatio n

pValue

Fisher’ s tvalue

Age

0.057

Negligible

0.638

0.478

Sex

-0.197

Negligible

0.097

1.681

Civil Status

-0.077

Negligible

0.523

0.646

0.038

Negligible

0.752

0.318

NS / Accept Ho

-0.133

Negligible

0.289

1.123

NS / Accept Ho

0.133

Negligible

0.555

1.123

Variate

Educational Qualification Average Monthly Family Income Number of Relevant

Evaluation / Decision NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho

NS / Accept Ho

In-Service Trainings Number of Years in Teaching

-0.073

Negligible

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256)

0.545

NS / Accept Ho

0.612

:

Coefficient of Correlation 0.00 to +0.20 +0.21 to +0.40 +0.41 to +0.70 +0.71 to +0.90 +0.91to +0.99 +1.00

Degree of Correlation Negligible Correlation Low or Slight Correlation Marked or Moderate Relationship High Relationship Very High Relationship Perfect Correlation

Fisher’s t-critical Value S = Significant

+1.994; df = 70 p-value < α = .05 or Computed > Critical Values p-value > α = .05 or Computed < Critical Values

NS = Not Significant

106

than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the

α.

This

signified

that

the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid variables was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their age was accepted. This meant that age had nothing to do with the authoritarian classroom

management

style

practiced

by

the

teacher-

respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.197

which

denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of

the

correlation

coefficient,

the

Fisher’s

t-test

was

employed whereby the computed value was 1.681 with a p-value of 0.097. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value

and

the

signified

that

p-value the

turned

greater

correlation

than

between

the the

α.

This

aforesaid

variables was not significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant

relationship

between

the

classroom 107

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their sex was accepted. This meant

that

classroom

sex

had

management

no

influence

style

to

practiced

the

authoritarian

by

the

teacher-

respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management

style

and

their

civil

status,

the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.077 which denoted

negligible

negative

correlation.

In

testing

the

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s ttest was employed whereby the computed value was 0.646 with a p-value of 0.523. In comparing the computed value with the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management

style

and

This

that

civil

meant

their civil status

status

had

was accepted.

no

influence

to

authoritarian classroom management style

practiced

by

the

108 the teacher-respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management

qualification, value

of

the

0.038

style

coefficient which

and of

denoted

their

educational

correlation negligible

yielded

a

positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed

value

was

0.318

with

a

p-value

of

0.752.

In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that

the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. In this case, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom

management

qualification

was

style

accepted.

and

This

their

meant

educational

that

educational

qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence to the

authoritarian

classroom

management

style

they

practiced. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom 109

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their average monthly family income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.133 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 1.123

with

a

p-value

of

0.289.

In comparing

the

computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the pvalue with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

relationship

between

the

management style of teacher-respondents along

classroom

authoritarian

classroom management style and their average monthly family income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do with the authoritarian classroom management style practiced by them. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their number of relevant in110 service trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value

of

0.133

which

denoted

negligible

positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed

value

was

1.123

with

a

p-value

of

0.555.

In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management

style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management trainings meant

style of

that

and

the

the

the

number

of

relevant

teacher-respondents

number

of

relevant

was

in-service

accepted.

in-service

This

trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the authoritarian classroom management style practiced by them. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their

number

of

years

in

teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.073 which

denoted

negligible

negative correlation. In 111

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.612 with a p-value of 0.545. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser greater

than

the

than

correlation

critical the

α.

between

the

value This

and

the

p-value

signified

aforesaid

variables

turned

that was

the not

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritarian classroom management style and their number of years in teaching was

accepted. This meant that the number of years accumulated by the teacher-respondents in teaching had nothing to do with the authoritarian classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In summary, of the personal variates of the teacherrespondents, none

of

them

significantly

influenced

the

authoritarian classroom management style they practiced in school. Authoritative. Table 24 correlation

between

the

reveals

the

result

teacher-respondents’

management style along authoritative

classroom

of

the

classroom management 112

style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex, civil

status,

educational

qualification,

average

monthly

family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in teaching. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.064

which

denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of

the

correlation

coefficient,

the

Fisher’s

t-test

was

employed whereby the computed value was 0.537 with a p-value of 0.596. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted

that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value

and

signified

the that

p-value the

turned

greater

correlation

than

between

the the

α.

This

aforesaid

variables was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant

relationship between the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their age was accepted. This meant that age had nothing to

do

classroom

practiced

management

style

with

the by

authoritative the

teacher-

respondents. 113 Table 24 Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents’ Classroom Management Styles and their Personal Variates along Authoritative Coefficient of Correlation

Degree of Correlatio n

pValue

Fisher’ s tvalue

Age

-0.064

Negligible

0.596

0.537

Sex

-0.066

Negligible

0.580

0.553

Civil Status

-0.135

Negligible

0.263

1.140

-0.204

Low

0.091

1.743

NS / Accept Ho

-0.013

Negligible

0.917

0.109

NS / Accept Ho

Variate

Educational Qualification Average Monthly Family Income

Evaluation / Decision NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho

Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings Number of Years in Teaching

0.168

Negligible

0.471

1.426

NS / Accept Ho

-0.078

Negligible

0.515

0.655

NS / Accept Ho

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256)

:

Coefficient of Correlation 0.00 to +0.20 +0.21 to +0.40 +0.41 to +0.70 +0.71 to +0.90 +0.91to +0.99 +1.00

Degree of Correlation Negligible Correlation Low or Slight Correlation Marked or Moderate Relationship High Relationship Very High Relationship Perfect Correlation

Fisher’s t-critical Value S = Significant

+1.994; df = 70 p-value < α = .05 or Computed > Critical Values p-value > α = .05 or Computed < Critical Values

NS = Not Significant

In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom 114

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.066

which

denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of the

correlation

coefficient, the Fisher’s

t-test was employed whereby

the computed

value

was 0.553

with a p-value of 0.580. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the

α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their sex was accepted. This meant that sex

had

no

influence

to

the

authoritative

classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their

civil

status,

the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.135 which denoted negligible

negative

correlation. In

testing

the 115

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s ttest was employed whereby the computed value was 1.140 with a p-value of 0.263. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management style and their civil status was accepted. This meant

that

civil

status

had

no

influence

to

the

authoritative classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management

qualification, value

of

the

-0.204

style

and

coefficient which

of

their

educational

correlation

denoted

yielded

negligible

a

negative

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 1.743 with a p-value comparing

the

of

computed value with the critical

0.091. In value

of 116

1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. In this case, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom

management

qualification

was

style

accepted.

and

This

their

meant

that

educational educational

qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence to the authoritative classroom management style they practiced. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their average monthly family income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of – 0.013

which

denoted

negligible

negative

correlation.

In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.109

with

a

p-value

of 0.917.

In

comparing

the

computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the pvalue with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser

than

the

critical value and

the

p-value 117

turned

greater

correlation

than

between

the the

α.

This

aforesaid

signified variables

that

the

was

not

significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their average monthly family income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do with the authoritative classroom management style practiced by them.

In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management style and their number of relevant inservice trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value

of

0.168

which

denoted

negligible

positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed

value

was

1.426

with

a

p-value

of

0.471.

In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the

aforesaid

variables

was

not 118

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management trainings meant

style of

that

and

the

the

the

number of

teacher-respondents

number

of

relevant

relevant was

in-service

accepted.

in-service

This

trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the authoritative classroom management style practiced by them. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative

classroom management style and their number of years in teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.078 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.655 with a p-value of 0.515. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser

than

turned

greater

correlation

the

critical than

the

between

the

value α.

and

This

the p-value signified

aforesaid

variables

that

the

was

not

significant. 119 Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along authoritative classroom management was

style

accepted.

accumulated

by

and

This the

their number of meant

that

the

years in teaching number

teacher-respondents

in

of

years

teaching

had

nothing to do with the authoritative classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In summary, of the personal variates of the teacherrespondents,

none

of

them

significantly

influenced

the

authoritative classroom management style they practiced in school.

Democratic. correlation

Table

between

25

the

reveals

the

result

teacher-respondents’

of

the

classroom

management style along democratic classroom management style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex, civil status, educational qualification, average monthly family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in teaching. In

associating

management

style

relationship

of

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic

classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of correlation negligible

yielded

a

positive

value

of

0.037

correlation.

which

In

denoted

testing

the 120

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s ttest was employed whereby the computed value was 0.310 with a p-value of 0.760. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value

with

the α, it can

be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Therefore,

the

null

hypothesis

that

states

that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom management

style

of

teacher-respondents

along

democratic

classroom management style and their age was accepted. This

meant

that

classroom

age

had

nothing

management

style

to

do

with

practiced

the

by

democratic

the

teacher-

respondents. In

associating

management

style

of

relationship

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic

classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.171

which

denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of

the

correlation

coefficient,

the

Fisher’s

t-test

was

employed whereby the computed value was 1.452 with a p-value of 0.151. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value

with

the 121

Table 25 Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents’ Classroom Management Styles and their Personal Variates along Democratic Coefficient of Correlation

Degree of Correlatio n

pValue

Fisher’ s tvalue

Age

0.037

Negligible

0.760

0.310

Sex

-0.171

Negligible

0.151

1.452

Civil Status

-0.043

Negligible

0.719

0.360

-0.090

Negligible

0.457

0.756

0.144

Negligible

0.254

1.217

Variate

Educational Qualification Average Monthly

Evaluation / Decision NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho

Family Income Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings Number of Years in Teaching

0.089

Negligible

0.693

0.748

NS / Accept Ho

-0.058

Negligible

0.628

0.486

NS / Accept Ho

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256)

:

Coefficient of Correlation 0.00 to +0.20 +0.21 to +0.40 +0.41 to +0.70 +0.71 to +0.90 +0.91to +0.99 +1.00

Degree of Correlation Negligible Correlation Low or Slight Correlation Marked or Moderate Relationship High Relationship Very High Relationship Perfect Correlation

Fisher’s t-critical Value S = Significant

+1.994; df = 70 p-value < α = .05 or Computed > Critical Values p-value > α = .05 or Computed < Critical Values

NS = Not Significant

α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser 122

than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the

α.

This

signified

that

the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid variables was not significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style

of

teacher-respondents

along

democratic

classroom

management style and their sex was accepted. This meant that sex had no influence to the democratic classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In

associating

management

style

of

relationship

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic

classroom

management

style

and

their

civil

status,

the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.043 which denoted

negligible

negative

correlation.

In

testing

the

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s ttest was employed whereby the computed value was 0.360 with a p-value of 0.719. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style

teacher-respondents

along

democratic 123

classroom

management

style

and

their

civil

accepted. This meant that civil status had no

status

was

influence to

the democratic classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In

associating

management classroom

style

of

of

the

-0.090

between

teacher-respondents

management

qualification, value

relationship

style

coefficient which

and of

denoted

the

along

their correlation

negligible

classroom democratic educational yielded

a

negative

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation

coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed

value

was

0.756

with

a

p-value

of

0.457.

In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. In this case, the null hypothesis

that

states

that,

there is no significant relationship between the classroom management

style

classroom

of

teacher-respondents

management

qualification

was

style

accepted.

and

This

along

their

meant

educational

that

qualification of the teacher-respondents had

democratic

no

educational influence 124

to the democratic classroom management style they practiced. In

associating

management

style

of

relationship

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic

classroom management style and their average monthly family income, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.144

which

denoted

negligible

negative

correlation.

In

testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 1.217 with a p-value of 0.254. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with

the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser

than

the

critical

value

and

the

p-value

turned

greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

management style of

relationship

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic

classroom management style and their average monthly family income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do with the democratic classroom management style practiced by them. 125 In

associating

management style of

relationship

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic

classroom management style and their number of relevant inservice trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value

of

0.089

which

denoted

negligible

positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed

value

was

0.748

with

a

p-value

of

0.693.

In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that

the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style

of

teacher-respondents

management

style

and

the

along

number

democratic

of

relevant

trainings of the teacher-respondents was meant

that

the

number

of

relevant

classroom in-service

accepted. This

in-service

trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the democratic classroom management style practiced by them. In

associating

management style of

relationship

between

teacher-respondents

the

along

classroom democratic 126

classroom management style and their number of years in teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.058 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.486 with a p-value of 0.628. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser

than

the

critical

value

and

the

p-value

turned

greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant.

Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style

of

teacher-respondents

along

democratic

management style and

their number of years

was

meant

accepted.

accumulated

by

nothing to do

This the

that

the

with

the

democratic

in

number

teacher-respondents

classroom

in

teaching of

years

teaching

classroom

had

management

style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In summary, of the personal variates of the teacherrespondents, democratic

none

of

classroom

them

significantly

management

style

influenced

they

practiced

the in

school. 127 Laissez-Faire. correlation

between

Table

26

the

reveals

the

result

teacher-respondents’

of

the

classroom

management style along laissez-faire classroom management style and their personal variates in terms of age, sex, civil

status,

educational

qualification,

average

monthly

family income, number of relevant in-service trainings, and number of years in teaching. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their age, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.007

which

denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance

of

the

correlation

coefficient,

the

Fisher’s

t-test

was

employed whereby the computed value was 0.059 with a p-value of

0.956.

In

comparing

the

computed

value

with

the

critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned

lesser

critical value and the p-value turned greater

than

the

than the α.

This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their age was accepted. This 128 Table 26 Relationship Between the Teacher-Respondents’ Classroom Management Styles and their Personal Variates along Laissez-Faire Coefficient of Correlation

Degree of Correlatio n

pValue

Fisher’ s tvalue

Age

-0.007

Negligible

0.956

0.059

Sex

-0.136

Negligible

0.254

1.149

Civil Status

-0.077

Negligible

0.522

0.646

0.106

Negligible

0.383

0.892

-0.190

Negligible

0.130

1.619

Variate

Educational Qualification Average Monthly

Evaluation / Decision NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho NS / Accept Ho

Family Income Number of Relevant In-Service Trainings Number of Years in Teaching

0.106

Negligible

0.616

0.892

NS / Accept Ho

-0.109

Negligible

0.362

0.917

NS / Accept Ho

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256)

:

Coefficient of Correlation 0.00 to +0.20 +0.21 to +0.40 +0.41 to +0.70 +0.71 to +0.90 +0.91to +0.99 +1.00

Degree of Correlation Negligible Correlation Low or Slight Correlation Marked or Moderate Relationship High Relationship Very High Relationship Perfect Correlation

Fisher’s t-critical Value S = Significant

+1.994; df = 70 p-value < α = .05 or Computed > Critical Values p-value > α = .05 or Computed < Critical Values

NS = Not Significant

meant that age had nothing to

do

with

the

laissez-faire 129

classroom

management

style

practiced

by

the

teacher-

respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their sex, the coefficient of correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.136

which

denoted

negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of

the

correlation

coefficient,

the

Fisher’s

t-test

was

employed whereby the computed value was 1.149 with a p-value of 0.254. In comparing the computed value with the critical

value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value

and

signified

the

p-value

that

the

turned

greater

correlation

than

between

the the

α.

This

aforesaid

variables was not significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their sex was accepted. This meant that sex

had

no

influence

to

the

laissez-faire

classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire 130 classroom management style and

their

civil

status,

the

coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.077 which denoted

negligible

negative

correlation.

In

testing

the

significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s ttest was employed whereby the computed value was 0.646 with a p-value of 0.522. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant.

Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their civil status was accepted. This meant that civil status had no influence to the laissezfaire classroom management style practiced by the teacherrespondents. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

management

qualification, value

of

the

0.106

style

and

coefficient which

of

denoted

their

educational

correlation

yielded

negligible

a

positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation 131 coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed computed

value

was

0.892

with

a

p-value

whereby of

0.383.

the In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. In this case, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire

classroom

management

qualification

was

style

accepted.

and

This

their

meant

educational

that

educational

qualification of the teacher-respondents had no influence to the laissez-faire classroom management style they practiced. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom

management

family

income,

value

of

the

-0.190

style

and

coefficient which

their

of

average

correlation

denoted

monthly

yielded

negligible

a

negative

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was

1.619

with

a

p-value

of

0.130.

In 132

comparing the computed value with

the

critical

value

of

1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their average monthly family income was accepted. This meant that the average monthly family income of the teacher-respondents had nothing to do

with the laissez-faire classroom management style practiced by them. In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their number of relevant inservice trainings, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value

of

0.106

which

denoted

negligible

positive

correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed

value

was

0.892

with

a

p-value

of

0.616.

In

comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the 133 computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management trainings meant

style of

that

and

the

the

the

number

of

teacher-respondents

number

of

relevant

relevant was

in-service

accepted.

in-service

This

trainings

attended by the teacher-respondents had no influence to the lassiez-faire classroom management style practiced by them.

In

associating

relationship

between

the

classroom

management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their number of years in teaching, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of -0.109 which denoted negligible negative correlation. In testing the significance of the correlation coefficient, the Fisher’s t-test was employed whereby the computed value was 0.917 with a p-value of 0.362. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser greater

than than

the the

critical α.

This

value

and

signified

the

p-value

that

turned

the 134

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

not

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the classroom management style of teacher-respondents along laissez-faire classroom management style and their number of years in teaching was accepted. This meant that the number of years accumulated by the teacher-respondents in teaching had nothing to do with the laissez-faire classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents. In summary, of the personal variates of the teacherrespondents,

none

of

them

significantly

influenced

the

lassiez-faire classroom management style they practiced in school. Academic Performance of Pupils Based on Their General Average During the School Year 2014 – 2015 Table 27 provides the data on the academic performance of pupils based on their general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015. Table 27 shows that a number of the pupil-respondents garnered academic performance of 80.00 – 82.99 based on their

final

grade

during

the

School

Year

2014

–

2015,

accounting for 38 or 52.78 percent. Sixteen of them or 22.22 percent obtained

academic

performance

of

77.00 – 135

79.99 while seven or 9.72 one

or

1.39

per cent

percent obtained

got

academic

83.00 – 85.99, performance

Table 27 Academic Performance of Pupils Based on Their General Average During S. Y 2014 – 2015 Academic Rating

f

%

89.00 86.00 83.00 80.00 77.00 Not

1 1 7 38 16 9

1.39 1.39 9.72 52.78 22.22 12.50

72

100.00

– 91.99 – 88.99 - 85.99 – 82.99 – 79.99 Stated

Total Mean

81.15

of

S. D.

2.33

C. V.

0.03

89.00 – 91.99 and another one or 1.39 percent got 86.00 – 88.99 percent. The mean academic performance of the pupil-respondents based on their final grade during the School Year 2014 – 2015 was pegged at 81.15 with a SD of 2.33 and CV of 0.03. This signified that more or less the pupil-respondents were homogeneously performing academically with a slight variation in their academic performance as compared with the average. Furthermore, the

pupil-respondents

showed

a 136

favorable academic performance during the school year being shown by the mean which turned higher than the required mastery level of 75.00 per cent (DepEd). Relationship Between the Academic Performance of the Pupil-Respondents and the Classroom Management Style of Teacher-Respondents Table 28 reveals the result of the correlation between the academic performance of the pupil-respondents based on their final general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015 and the classroom management styles practiced by the teacher-respondents

along

authoritarian,

democratic, and laissez-faire.

authoritative,

In

associating

the

academic

performance

of

pupil-

respondents based on their general average during the School Year

2014

–

2015

and

the

authoritarian

classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.082 denoting a

negligible

positive

correlation.

Further

test

of

the

significance of the coefficient value using the Fisher’s ttest, the computed value resulted to 0.688 with a p-value of 0.524. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. signified

that

the

correlation

between

This

the 137

aforesaid variables was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no

significant

relationship

between

the

academic

Table 28 Relationship Between the Academic Performance of the Pupils Based on Their Final General Average During S. Y 2014 – 2015 and the Teacher-Respondents’ Classroom Management Styles Classroom Management Styles Authoritaria n Authoritativ

Coefficient of Correlation

Degree of Correlatio n

pValue

Fisher’ s tvalue

0.082

Negligible

0.524

0.688

0.392

Low

0.001

3.565

Evaluation / Decision NS / Accept Ho S /

e Democratic

0.289

Low

0.014

2.526

LassiezFaire

-0.201

Low

0.115

1.717

Legend (Calmorin, 1994: 256)

Reject Ho S / Reject Ho NS / Accept Ho

:

Coefficient of Correlation 0.00 to +0.20 +0.21 to +0.40 +0.41 to +0.70 +0.71 to +0.90 +0.91to +0.99 +1.00

Degree of Correlation Negligible Correlation Low or Slight Correlation Marked or Moderate Relationship High Relationship Very High Relationship Perfect Correlation

Fisher’s t-critical Value S = Significant

+1.994; df = 70 p-value < α = .05 or Computed > Critical Values p-value > α = .05 or Computed < Critical Values

NS = Not Significant

performance

of

the

pupil-respondents

based

on

the

final

general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015 and authoritarian classroom management style practiced

by

the 138

teacher-respondents academic

was

performance

of

accepted. the

This

meant

pupil-respondents

that

the

was

not

influenced by the authoritarian classroom management style of the teacher. In

associating

the

academic

performance

of

pupil-

respondents based on their final general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015 and the authoritative classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.392 denoting a low positive correlation. Further test of the significance

of the coefficient value using the Fisher’s t-test, the computed value resulted to 3.565 with a p-value of 0.001. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned greater than the critical value and the p-value turned lesser than the α. This signified that the

correlation

between

the

aforesaid

variables

was

significant. Thus, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the academic performance of the pupil-respondents based on the final general during

the

classroom

School Year 2014 – 2015

management

respondents

was

style

rejected.

and authoritative

practiced This

average

meant

by

the

that

teacher-

the 139

academic performance of the pupil-respondents was influenced by

the

authoritative

classroom

management

style

of

the

teacher. The

correlation

proportional

relationship.

teacher-respondents management

being

style,

pupil-respondents.

positive This

practiced the This

higher

suggested

meant

that

the

authoritative the

implied

performance

that

the

a

direct

more

the

classroom of

the

teachers

being

authoritative compelled the pupils to study harder thereby manifesting better academic performance.

In

associating

the

academic

performance

of

pupil-

respondents based on their final general average during the School

Year

2014

–

2015

and

the

democratic

classroom

management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the coefficient of correlation yielded a value of 0.289 denoting a low positive correlation. Further test of the significance of the coefficient value using the Fisher’s t-test, the computed value resulted to 2.526 with a p-value of 0.014. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned greater than the critical value the

p-value

turned

lesser

than the α.

and

This signified

that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was significant. 140 Hence, the null hypothesis that states that, there is no significant relationship between the academic performance of the pupil-respondents based on the final general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015 and democratic classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents was rejected. This meant that the academic performance of the pupil-respondents was influenced by the democratic classroom management style of the teacher. The

correlation

proportional

being

relationship.

positive This

meant

suggested that

the

a

direct

more

the

teacher-respondents

practiced

democratic

classroom

management style, the higher the performance of the pupilrespondents. This implied that the teachers being democratic allowed the pupils to freely explore themselves with their talents and thereby perform better academic performance. In

associating

the

academic

performance

of

pupil-

respondents based on their final general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015 and the laissez-faire classroom management style practiced by the teacher-respondents, the coefficient

of

correlation

yielded

a

value

of

-0.201

denoting a negligible negative correlation. Further test of the

significance

of

the

coefficient

value

using

the 141

Fisher’s t-test, the computed value resulted to 1.717 with a p-value of 0.115. In comparing the computed value with the critical value of 1.994 and the p-value with the α, it can be noted that the computed t-value turned lesser than the critical value and the p-value turned greater than the α. This signified that the correlation between the aforesaid variables was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis that states that, there is

no

significant

performance general

of

the

average

relationship

between

pupil-respondents

during

the

School

based Year

the on

academic the

final

2014 – 2015

and lassiez-faire classroom management style practiced by

the teacher-respondents was accepted. This meant that the academic

performance

of

the

pupil-respondents

was

not

influenced by the lassiez-faire classroom management style of the teacher. In summary, of the four identified classroom management styles practiced by the teacher-respondents, authoritative and democratic classroom management styles posed significant influence

to

the

academic

performance

of

the

pupil-

respondents based on the final general average during School

Year

classroom and

2014 – 2015. management

The

laissez-faire

other

proved

styles, no

the

two identified

namely: authoritarian

significant 142

influence to it. Implications Derived from the Findings of the Study The

following

implications

were

drawn

from

the

findings/results this study: Firstly, relationship

the

finding

between

the

that

there

is

no

significant

teacher-respondents’

profile

variates with the classroom management styles they employed implies that regardless of

their age and sex, civil status,

educational qualification, average monthly family income, number of relevant in-service trainings and number of years in teaching, the academic performance of the pupils is not

affected. It further implies that said variables may not play a major role in classroom instruction. Secondly, it was found out in this study that the classroom management styles of authoritative and democratic had significant correlation with the academic performance of the pupils. There was direct proportional correlation. This implies that said two styles of classroom management tend to favor a more positive influence on the pupils’ academic performance. Finally, the above-cited findings would suggest that there is a need to re-examine the components of the RPAST 143 to give way for a possible greater weight for the classroom management styles employed by the teachers in evaluating their teaching performance.

Chapter 5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter presents the summary of the findings of the

study

with

the

corresponding

analyses

and

interpretations of the data. Summary of Findings The following were the major findings of the study: 1. The mean

age

of

this

group

of

respondents

was

calculated at 37.85 years old with a standard deviation (SD) of 11.20 years and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.30. Furthermore,

majority

of

the

teacher-respondents

were

female. 2. Majority of the teacher-respondents were married and only few of them were single and widowed.

3. Majority of the teacher-respondents had baccalaureate degree as the highest educational qualification. However, there were a number of them who had advanced education. 4. The mean monthly family income earned by the respondents

was

pegged

at

Php19,895.38

with

teachera

SD

Php8,269.52 and a CV of 0.42. 5. The teacher-respondents attended several trainings in different

levels

–

national,

regional,

division,

of the and

district. Most of their trainings were in the 145 regional and district levels. 6. The

mean

number

of

years

in

teaching

of

the

teacher-

respondents was 10.78 years with a SD of 9.64 years and CV of 0.89. 7. The mean age of the administrator-respondents was calculated at 47.67 years old with a SD of 5.12 years and CV of 0.11 whereby majority of the them were female. 8. All of the administrator-respondents were married. 9. Half of the administrator-respondents were in the doctoral level while few of them were in the master’s level and baccalaureate degree. 10. The mean number

of

years

as

administrator

of

the

administrator-respondents was 5.50 years with a SD of 1.22 years and CV of 0.22. 11. The mean monthly

family

income

earned

by

the

administrator was Php38,666.67 with a SD of Php14,375.91 and CV of 0.37. 12. The mean number of family members of the administratorrespondents was six with a SD of two members and CV of 0.33.

13.

The

administrator-respondents

trainings

also

in

the

different

regional, division, and district.

attended levels

–

Most of their

several national, trainings 146

were in the regional and district levels. 14. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same adjectival classification of the classroom management styles of

the

teacher-respondents

along

authoritarian

classroom

management style. However, they slightly differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.78 while the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.70 with the same adjectival interpretation of “neutral.” 15. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same adjectival classification of the classroom management styles of

the

teacher-respondents

along

authoritative

classroom

management style. However, they differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted mean

of

grand

4.10

weighted

while mean

the of

administrator-respondents 3.67

with

the

same

gave

a

adjectival

interpretation of “agree.” 16. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same adjectival classification of the classroom management styles of

the

teacher-respondents

along

democratic

classroom

management style. However, they differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted

mean of 3.27 while

the

administrator-respondents gave a

grand weighted mean of 2.90 with the same adjectival 147 interpretation of “neutral.” 17. The two groups of respondents arrived at the same adjectival classification of the classroom management styles of

the

teacher-respondents

along

laissez-faire

classroom management style. However, they differed in the numerical assessment. The teacher-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.01 while the administrator-respondents gave a grand weighted mean of 2.07 with the same adjectival interpretation of “disagree.” 18. None of the personal variates of the teacherrespondents proved to have an influence to the classroom management

styles

they

practiced

in

school

along

authoritarian, authoritative, democratic, and laissez-faire. 19. The mean academic performance of the pupilrespondents based on their final grade during the School Year 2014 – 2015 was pegged at 81.15 with a SD of 2.33 and CV of 0.03. 20. In the association of the academic performance of the pupil-respondents and the classroom management styles practiced by the teacher-respondents, the following results were

arrived

at:

authoritarian,

not

significant;

authoritative,

significant;

democratic,

significant;

laissez-faire, not significant. 148 Conclusions Based

on

the

findings

of

the

study,

the

following

conclusions were drawn: 1. The

teacher-respondents

relatively

young

were

on

their

late

30’s

but

and at the prime of their age, which were

dominated by the female sex, an indication that in the past, if not up to the present, majority of those who took up the teacher education course belonged to this sex and only few of the males embraced the teaching profession. 2. Most of the teacher-respondents had conjugal

family

responsibilities which they raise and maintain by the income they derived from teaching. 3. The teacher-respondents were educationally qualified having obtained the minimum educational requirement required for the teaching position. Some, however, recognized the value of advanced education that they pursued the master’s level or even obtaining a master’s degree. 4. The teacher-respondents had a regular family income which they used to finance the basic and nutritional needs of the family members. 5. The teacher-respondents

considered

as their avenue for professional

in-service trainings

growth

that

them strove to attend in the different levels

a number of as 149

their chances warranted them to attend. 6. The teacher-respondents had been teaching for quite a number of years, however, a number of them were newly hired. 7. The administrator-respondents were on their late 40’s but at the prime of their age. Moreover, female dominance among

administrator-respondents

as

existed

the result of the

observation in the past that women mostly embraced teaching as

a

profession

so

that

in

the

event

of

promotion

to

administrator positions, most of them rose from the ranks. 8. Most of administrator-respondents had conjugal family responsibilities

which

they

raise

and

maintained

by

the

income they derived from their profession. 9. A number of administrator-respondents had earned educational qualification

higher

than

the

minimum

educational

level

required for the teaching profession. 10. The administrator-respondents had been in the service as school administrators for quite a number of years. 11. The administrator-respondent had a regular income they earned to finance the basic necessities of their respective family members. 12. The administrator-respondents had an ideal family 150 size

of

six

based

on

the

average

family

set

in

the

calculation of the poverty threshold that is composed of the couple and four children. 13.

The

administrator-respondents

considered

also

in-

service trainings as their avenue for professional growth that

a

number

of

them

had

attended

trainings

different levels which they were required to attend.

in

the

14.

The

two

groups

of

respondents

classification of the classroom teacher-respondents.

Along

arrived

management

authoritarian

at

the

same

of

the

style both

groups

of

respondents perceived the teacher-respondents as practicing moderately; authoritative, highly; democratic, moderately; and laissez-faire, slightly. Thus, the corresponding null hypotheses to these effects were accepted. 15.

The

practice

of

the

teacher-respondents

with

the

different classroom management styles was not influenced by their personal characteristics. 16. More or less the pupil-respondents were homogeneously performing academically with a slight variation in their academic

performance

Furthermore,

the

as

compared

pupil-respondents

with

the

showed

a

average. favorable

academic performance during the school year being shown by the mean which turned higher

than

the

required mastery

level of 75.00 per cent (DepEd). 151 17.

Of

the

practiced democratic influence

by

four the

identified

teacher-respondents,

classroom to

the

classroom

management academic

management

styles

authoritative

styles

performance

posed of

and

significant the

pupil-

respondents based on the final general average during the School Year 2014 – 2015. The other two identified classroom management styles, namely: authoritarian and laissez-faire proved no significant influence to it.

Recommendations Based on the conclusions drawn from the findings of the study, the following are the recommendations: 1. As it is revealed in this study that pupils’ academic performance was significantly influenced by both the authoritative and democratic classroom management styles practiced by the teachers, it is recommended that teachers at

all

times

should

practice

authoritative-democratic

classroom management styles in the classroom all the time as a strategy to boost the academic performance of the pupils. The greater extent the teachers assume authority in the classroom

and

allow

the

pupils

to

explore

their

innate

abilities would compel the pupils to excel more in their academic performance. 2. Although the other identified

classroom

management

styles did not prove significantly influencing the academic 152 performance of the pupils, they can still be practiced by the teachers in moderation. As teachers, they should be contingent in the use of classroom management styles, that is, they should practice what is appropriate for a situation and

not

practicing

similar

styles

appropriate for a certain situation.

which

might

not

be

3. The teachers should be encouraged to explore other classroom management styles which may be effective in raising the academic performance of the pupils. 4. This study could be of practical value in the light of the implementation of the K to 12 Program of the government. 5. Another study may be conducted to validate the findings of this study. 6. A sequel study may be conducted exploring other classroom management

styles

which

performance of the pupils.

might

influence

the

academic

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

154 BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Aquino, Gaudencio V., Curriculum Innovation, City: National Bookstore, 2009.

Mandaluyong

Bilbao, Purita P., et al., The Teaching Profession, Quezon City: Lorimar Publishing, Inc., 2006. Calderon, Jose F., Foundations of Education, Quezon City: Rex Printing Company, Inc., 1999. Calmorin, Laurentina P., Educational Research Measurement and Evaluation, 2nd ed.,Manila: National Bookstore, 1994. Castillon-Boiser, Diosdada, Strategies for Teaching: Modular Approach, Manila: Rex Bookstore, 2000.

A

Duka, Cecilio D., Philosophy Bookstore, 2006.

of

Education,

Manila:

Rex

Ebel, R.L., Measuring Educational Achievement, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965. Freud, John E. and Gary A. Simon, Modern Elementary Statistics, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1992. Gellor, Jaime M., Readings on New Thrusts in Education, Unnamed Publisher, 1984. Lardizabal, Amparo S., Principles and Methods of Teaching, 3rd ed., Quezon City: Phoenix Publishing House, 1995. Morphet, William H., Administrative Action: The Techniques of Organization and Management, New York: Prentice-Hall, 1967. Palma, Jesus C., Curriculum Development System: A Handbook for School Practitioners in Basic Education, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 1992. Palma, Jesus C., Curriculum Development System, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 2005. Pila, Rowena A., et al., The Teaching Profession in the Philippines, Mandaluyong City: Anvil Publishing, Inc., 2003. 155 Salandanan, Gloria G. and Brenda Corpuz, Principles of Teaching, Quezon City: Lorimar Publishing, Inc., 2007. Singh, Rosario P., and Corazon P. Padilla, Innovative Teaching and Evaluation, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 1990. Sutaria, Minda C., et al., Philippine Education: Visions and Perspectives, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 1989. Tauber, Robert T., Classroom Management: Sound Theory and Effective Practice, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 1999. The New Lexicon Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language, Connecticut,USA: Lexicon Publications, Inc., 1997.

Walpole, Ronald E., Introduction to Statistics,3rd ed., New York: McMillan Publishing, Inc., 1982. Weinstein, Carol S. and Andrew Mignano, Jr., Elementary Classroom Management: Lessons from Research and Practice, Mandaluyong City: National Bookstore, 2003. Zulueta, Francisco M., Principles and Methods of Teaching, Manila: Rex Bookstore, 1991. B. PUBLISHED MATERIALS Florin, Lauren D., “Kindergarten Teachers' Classroom Management Beliefs and Practices and Their ImplicationsOn the Social and Academic Outcomes,” Published Masters Thesis, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, USA, May 2011. Keohan, David J., “Middle School Classroom Student Behavior,” Published Master’s Nevada College, Nevada, USA, May 2013.

Management and Thesis, Sierra

Obwoya, Martin F., “Classroom Management and Learners’ Achievement in Secondary Schools in Kitgum”, Published Master’s Thesis, Gulu University, Gulu, Uganda, April 2013. 156 C. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS Enderio, Demetria R., “Performance of Grade III Pupils in Mathemetics: Basis for an Enhancement Program,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan, Samar, March 2004. Laboc, Josefina M., “Classroom Learning Environment and Attitude Towards Reading English Language of Grade VI Pupils, Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan City, Samar, 2008. Maghanoy, Rosalia S., “Learning Styles of Secondary Students as Correlates to Their Reading Capacity Level,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan City, Samar, 2008.

Padilla, Pedrito G., “Students’ Achievement in Technology in the Secondary Education Program (SEDP): The Eastern Visayas Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar State Catbalogan City, Samar, 2006.

Science and Development Experience,” University,

Perez, Edwin S., “Scholastic Performance of Grade Six Pupils in Science Among Private and Public Schools in Catbalogan, Samar: Inputs for Enrichment Program,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan, Samar, March 2005. Reballos-Gabon, Ronila, “Teaching Effectiveness of Secondary School Teachers of Wright National High School: Basis for an Intervention Scheme,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan City, 2013. Tan-Payos, Christene, “Filipino Management Styles of Secondary School Administrators and Teachers’ Performance: The Northern Samar Experience,” Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Samar College, Catbalogan, Samar, 2004. D.ELECTRONIC AND OTHER SOURCES http://www.globalpartnership.org/education, November 22, 2014. http://www.lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html, November 26, 2014. 157 http://www.unicef.org/education/files/QualityEducation.PDF November 15, 2014. http://teaching.about.com/od/classroommanagement/tp / Classroom-Management-Tips.htm, November 15, 2014. http://www.edutopia.org/classroom-managementrelationships-strategies-tips November 15, 2014. http://educ-reality.com/behaviour-management-theories/, November 20, 2014. http://study.com/academy/lesson/john-dewey-on-educationimpacttheory.html October 12, 2014. http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html, October

12, 2014. http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-97 80199756810/obo-9780199756810-0108.xml, November 20, 2014. http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df,November 10, 2014. http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df,November 10, 2014. https://blog.udemy.com/classroom-management-styles/, November 10, 2014). http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df,November 10, 2014. http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df,November 10, 2014. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/education,October 23,

2014. http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/103027/chapters/TheCritical-Role-of-Classroom-Management.aspx, November 20, 2014. https://blog.udemy.com/effective-classroom-management-2/, November 20, 2014. 158 https://blog.com/-classroom-management November 20,

2014.

http://edglossary.org/classroom-management/, November 25, 2014. http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyle.p df, November 15, 2014. http://www.education.indiana.edu/cas/tt/v1i2/what.html 3, November 15, 2014. http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/103027/chapters/TheCritical-Role-of-Classroom-Management.aspx, January 20, 2015.

Biri Municipality Tourism Office Hand-out, February 2015.

A P P E N D I C E S

160 APPENDIX A Republic of the Philippines Commission on Higher Education SAMAR COLLEGE GRADUATE STUDIES Catbalogan City October 3, 2014 THE DEAN Graduate Studies Samar College Catbalogan City M a d a m:

With the desire of the undersigned researcher to start writing her thesis proposal, she has the honor to submit for your evaluation, suggestion, recommendation and approval three proposed titles, preferably number 1, to wit: 1. Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Effect on the Academic Performance of Pupils in the Elementary Grade Schools in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar 2. K to 12 Year 3 Implementation: Issues and Concerns Felt by School Heads and Teachers in the District of Biri, Division of Northern Samar 3. Classroom Management and Academic Achievement of Pupils in Biri Central Elementary Schools I anticipate for your prompt and favorable consideration. Very Truly yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Graduate Student Recommended Title: ____#1_______ ____#1_______ ____#1_______

(SGD.) BANELLO P. GABON, Ph. D. Evaluator (SGD.) NATALIA B. UY, Ph. D. Evaluator (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Evaluator APPROVED TITLE No. _#1_ (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies 161

APPENDIX B Republic of the Philippines Commission on Higher Education SAMAR COLLEGE GRADUATE STUDIES Catbalogan City ASSIGNMENT OF ADVISER NAME

: IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO

COURSE

: Master of Arts in Education

SPECIALIZATION

: Educational Management

TITLE OF THESIS PROPOSAL : Classroom Management Styles: Their Effect on the Academic Performance Of the Pupils in the Elementary Grade Schools in the District of Biri, Division of Northern Samar NAME OF ADVISER

: Pedrito G. Padilla, Ph. D.

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Graduate Student CONFORME:

(SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser APPROVED:

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies 162 APPENDIX C Letter-Request for Permission to the Schools Division Superintendent to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar June 29, 2015 CRISTITO ACERO ECO,CESE Schools Division Superintendent Division Of Northern Samar Catarman, Northern Samar Sir:

Greetings! The undersigned would like to seek permission from your good office to conduct a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled “Classroom Management Styles of Teachers: Their Influence on the Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. The target respondents of the said study in which questionnaires will be fielded are the six elementary administrators and all of the teachers of the eleven elementary schools. The undersigned would also like to seek permission for the access of Form SF-5 (Report on Promotion), S.Y. 2014-2015 of all of the eleven schools as part of the documentary analysis of this study. Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.)IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD,)PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD,) CRISTITO A. ECO,CESE Schools Division Superintendent

163 APPENDIX D Letter-Request for Permission to the Public Schools District Supervisor to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar June 29, 2015 ETHELINDA PAREDES-ASIS Public Schools District Supervisor

Division Of Northern Samar Catarman, Northern Samar Madam: Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 of the entire District of Biri for documentary analysis. Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) ETHELINDA P. ASIS Public Schools District Supervisor

164 APPENDIX E Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Bagong Silang Elem. School and Langub-Langub Elem. School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar June 29, 2015

ROGELIO LABENIA CALVO Head Teacher Bagong Silang Elementary School and Langub-Langub Elementary School Sir: Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis. Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) ROGELIO L. CALVO Head Teacher I

165 APPENDIX F Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Basud Elem. School, Talisay Elem. School and Tampipi Elem. School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015

TERESITA ALBARIO-CANESO Head Teacher Basud Elementary School, Talisay Elementary School and Tampipi Elementary School Madam: Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis. Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) TERESITA A. CANESO Head Teacher-I

166 APPENDIX G Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Biri Central Elementary School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015 MARIVIC AMOR-ESTAVILLO Head Teacher

Biri Central Elementary School Madam: Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis. Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.)IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser

(SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) MARIVIC A. ESTAVILLO Principal-I

167 APPENDIX H Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Cawayan Elem. School, Macaret Elem. School and Salvacion Elem. School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar June 29, 2015 PELAGIO BALAWANG ESTAVILLO PRINCIPAL Cawayan Elementary School, Macaret Elementary School and Salvacion Elementary School

Sir: Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis. 82 Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) PELAGIO B. ESTAVILLO Principal-I

168 APPENDIX I Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of Palhugan Elementary School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar

June 29, 2015 GLENDA ENGO-EVANGELISTA Head Teacher Palhugan Elementary School

Madam: Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis. Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) GLENDA E. EVANGELISTA Head Teacher-I

169 APPENDIX J Letter-Request for Permission to the Head Teacher of San Antonio Elementary School to Field Questionnaires and Have Access to Report on Promotions Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region VIII DIVISION OF NORTHERN SAMAR Catarman, Northern Samar June 29, 2015 ELENA ESTAVILLO-FLORES PRINCIPAL San Antonio Elementary School Madam:

Greetings! The undersigned is currently conducting a study on her Master’s Thesis entitled

“Classroom

Management

Styles

of

Teachers:

Their

Influence

on

the

Academic Performance of Pupils in the District of Biri, Division Of Northern Samar”. In view thereof, she would like to ask permission from your good office that she be allowed to field her questionnaires to all of your faculty and have access to the Report on Promotions, S.Y. 2014-2015 for documentary analysis. 86 Thank you in anticipation for a favorable consideration. More power and God bless. Respectfully yours, (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Teacher-Researcher Recommending Approval: (SGD.) PEDRITO G. PADILLA, Ph. D. Adviser (SGD.) NIMFA T. TORREMORO, Ph. D. Dean, Graduate Studies Samar College APPROVED: (SGD.) ELENA E. FLORES Principal-I

170 APPENDIX K Republic of the Philippines Commission on Higher Education SAMAR COLLEGE GRADUATE STUDIES Catbalogan City July 1, 2015 Dear Respondent: Good day! study

The undersigned researcher is currently conducting a entitled, “Classroom Management Styles: Their

Influence on the Academic Performance of the Pupils in the District of Biri, Division of Northern Samar”, as a requirement for the degree Master of Arts in Education with the College of Graduate Studies of Samar College, Catbalogan City. Along this line, she would like to request for your support and cooperation by answering the attached questionnaire. Rest assured that all the pieces of information you provide in her study will be treated with utmost confidentiality and that these will solely be used for research purposes and would be presented without any reference to a particular person. Thank you. Truly yours,

(SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Researcher

171 APPENDIX L QUESTIONNAIRE (For the Teacher-Respondents) PART I.

PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Direction:

Kindly provide the information asked for by writing in the space provided or by checking the appropriate box. You may or may not write your name (OPTIONAL ONLY).

Name:________________Age:_____ Sex:

Male

Female

Civil Status:

Single

Separated Married

Widowed

Annulled

Others, Specify:___

Educational Qualification:

Doctoral Degree Doctoral Level

Master’s Degree Master’s Level (Including CAR) Baccalaureate Degree Others, specify:__________________ Average Monthly Family Income:__________________________________ Number of Years in Teaching:____________________________________ 172 Number of Relevant In-service Trainings Attended: Level International National Regional Division District Others, specify:______________ PART II.

Number of Trainings

Direction:

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES Below are twelve statements on classroom management styles. Read each statement

carefully. Respond to each statement based upon your either actual or perceived/imagined classroom experience. Write your response to each statement and signify your agreement by checking the appropriate column using the following scale: 5 4 3 2 1

= = = = =

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral (Not Certain) Disagree Strongly Disagree

Classroom Management Statements

1. If a student is disruptive during class, I send him/her to principal’s office, without further discussion. 2. I don't want to impose any rules on my students. 3. The classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn. 4. I am concerned about both what my students learn and how they learn. Classroom Management Statements

5. If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not my problem. 6. I don't want to reprimand a student because it might hurt his/her feelings. 7. Class preparation isn't worth the effort. 8. I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions. 9. I will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy. 10. The emotional well-being

5 (SA )

4 (A )

3 (N )

2 (D )

1 (SD )

5 (SA )

4 (A )

3 (N )

2 (D )

1 (SD )

of my students is more important than classroom control. 11. My students understand that they can interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant question. 12. If a student requests a hall pass, I always honor the request. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Researcher

174 APPENDIX M QUESTIONNAIRE (For Administrator-Respondents)

PART I.

PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Direction:

Kindly provide the information asked for by writing in the space provided or by checking the appropriate box. You may or may not write your name (OPTIONAL ONLY).

Name:___________________ Age:____Sex:

Civil Status:

Male

Female

Single

Separated

Married

Annulled

Widowed

Others, specify:____

Educational Qualification:

Doctoral Degree Doctoral Level Master’s Degree Master’s Level (Including CAR) Baccalaureate Degree

Others,Specify:___________________ Number of Years as Administrator:_______________________________ Average Monthly Family Income:__________________________________ 175 Number of Family Members:_______________________________________ Number of Relevant In-service Trainings Attended: Level

Number of Trainings

International National Regional Division District Others, specify:______________ PART II. Direction:

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES Below are twelve statements on classroom Management styles. Read each statement carefully. Respond to each statement based upon your either actual observation or perceived/imagined classroom management style of your teachers. Write your response to each statement and signify your agreement by checking the appropriate column using the following scale: 5 4 3 2 1

= = = = =

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral (Not Certain) Disagree Strongly Disagree

Classroom Management Statements

1. If a student is disruptive during class, he/she assigns him/her to detention, without further discussion. 2. He/She doesn’t want to impose any rules on his/her students. Classroom Management Statements

3. The classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn. 4. He/She is concerned about both what his/her students learn and how they learn. 5. If a student turns in a late homework assignment, it is not his/her problem.

5 (SA )

4 (A )

3 (N )

2 (D )

1 (SD )

5 (SA )

4 (A )

3 (N )

2 (D )

1 (SD )

6. He/She doesn’t want to reprimand a student because it might hurt his/her feelings. 7. Class preparation isn't worth the effort. 8. He/She always tries to explain the reasons behind his/her rules and decisions. 9. He/She will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy. 10. The emotional well-being of his/her students is more important than classroom control. 11. His/Her students understand that they can interrupt his/her lecture if they have a relevant question. 12. If a student requests a hall pass, he/she always honor the request. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! (SGD.) IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO Researcher

177 APPENDIX N Classroom Management Profile/Sytle Statements 1. If a student is disruptive during class, I send him/her to the principal’s office, without further discussion. 2. I don’t want to impose any rules on m students. 3. The classroom must be quiet in order for students to learn. 4. I am concerned about both what my students learn and how they learn. 5. If a student turns in a late homework/assignment, it is not my problem. 6. I don’t want to reprimand a student because it might hurt his/her feelings. 7. Class preparation is not worth the effort. 8. I always try to explain the reasons behind my rules and decisions. 9. I will not accept excuses from a student who is tardy. 10. The emotional well-being of my students is more important than classroom control. 11. My students understand that they can interrupt my lecture if they have a relevant question. 12.

178 If a student requests a hall pass, i always honor

the request. Note: Numbers 1, 3 and 9 are authoritarian statements.

Numbers 4, 8 and 11 are authoritative statements. Numbers 6, 10 and 12 are democratic statements. Numbers 2, 5 and 7 are laissez-faire statements. (http://www.pent.ca.gov/pos/cl/es/classroommanagementstyl e pdf,November 10, 2014).

C U R R I C U L U M

V I T A E

180 CURRICULUM VITAE NAME

: IVY ABLAY ESTAVILLO

HOME ADDRESS

: Pabanog, Paranas, Samar

DATE OF BIRTH

: April 13, 1987

PLACE OF BIRTH

: Las Navas, Northern Samar

CIVIL STATUS

: Single

PRESENT POSITION

: Teacher I

STATION

: Basud Elementary School

DEGREE PURSUED

: Master of Arts in Education

SPECIALIZATION

: Educational Management

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND ELEMENTARY

: Pabanog Elementary School Pabanog, Paranas, Samar......1994-2000

SECONDARY

: Samar State Polytechnic College Catbalogan City, Samar ......2000-2004

TERTIARY

: Bachelor of Elementary Education University of Eastern Philippines Catarman, Northern Samar ....2004-2009

GRADUATE STUDIES

: Master of Arts in Education Major in Educational Management Samar College Catbalogan City, Samar.....2010-present

ELIGIBILITY Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) : :

79.60% Legazpi City, Oct. 1, 2009 181

WORK EXPERIENCE Public Elementary School Teacher I, Basud Elementary School Biri, Northern Samar .............. 2010 - present Municipal Paid School Teacher, Pabanog Elementary School Pabanog, Paranas, Samar ........... Jan. 2010-Mar. 2010 TRAININGS/SEMINARS/WORKSHOPS ATTENDED

National Conference Workshop on Culture and Arts Three-day Division-based Training on Instructional Strategies in Multigrade Classes Teachers Induction Program Basic Computer Literacy Program