The Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative strategies in

Teaching Mathematics IV in UB-Loon Institute

Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr.

Karl S.Carcasona
Rabroyd C. Arcales
John Ashley Uy
Jasper R. Olaivar
Brael M. Rasonabe
Jerrimel M. Mirontos
Edcel R. Ceballos
Louie S. Lera
Lovely Geniston

October 2019
The Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative strategies in
Teaching Mathematics IV in UB-Loon Institute

_______________

A Thesis Proposal
Presented to the Faculty of
UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

_______________

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

_______________

Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr.

John Ashley Uy
Karl S.Carcasona
Rabroyd C. Arcales
Jasper R. Olaivar
Brael M. Rasonabe
Jerrimel M. Mirontos
Edcel R. Ceballos
Louie S. Lera
Lovely Geniston

October 2019
 APPROVAL SHEET

This is to certify that this thesis entitled: “The Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative
Strategies in Teaching Mathematics IV in UB-Loon Institute”, prepared and submitted
by Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr., John Ashley Uy, Karl S. Carcasona, Rabroyd C. Arcales
,Jasper R. Olaivar, Brael M. Rasonabe, Jerrimel M. Mirontos, Edcel R. Ceballos, Louie S.
Lera, Lovely Geniston in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Senior High School has
been examined and recommended for acceptance for oral defense.

THESIS COMMITTEE

DR. MA. VIDA MAY TIROL-DE JUAN

Chairman

JOCELIE JOY DUMAYAC, LPT JASMINE REJAS ASOY

Statistician English Critic

MA. THERRY MHEL M. FRAGA, LPT

Adviser

Approved by the Examining Panel during the Oral Examination conducted on

___________________with a rating of__________________.

EXAMINING PANEL

DR. MA. VIDA MAY TIROL-DE JUAN

Chairman

MARLON LAJERA, LPT JASMINE ASOY, LPT

Member Member

JOCELIE JOY DUMAYAC, LPT LOREAL GIANNE ESTOSE, LPT

Member Member
Accepted and approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for Senior High School.
_________________ DR. VIDA MAY TIROL-DE JUAN, LPT.PHD
Date of Oral Defense Principal

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researchers would like to extend their heartfelt gratitude and

warmest thanks to the following persons who contributed for the success of this

research:

Dr. Vida May Tirol-De Juan, the school principal for allowing the
researchers to conduct the study;
Ms. TherryMhel M. Fraga, for giving her generous advice and
comprehensive suggestions that guided the researchers in this undertaking;
Ms. Loreal Gianne Estose , Research 3 Adviser, for sharing her expertise
and for guiding the researchers to conduct the study;
Ms. Jocelie Joy Dumayac, the statistician, for sharing her knowledge in
checking the manuscript in order to come up with good statistical matter.
Ms. Jasmin Asoy, the English Critic, for her suggestion and for making
the necessary corrections in the manuscript;
Mr. William Villasor and Mr. Bryan Labastilla, for the guidance and
approval in conducting the research study on their advisory;

To the Grade 5 pupils, for participating on the trial run of the research
study;

To the Grade 4 pupils, the respondents, for sharing their time and effort
to realize this study;
To the parents of the researchers, for extending their support morally and
financially;
Above all to Almighty God, for enlightening and guiding the researchers’
heart and mind that lead to realization and success of the research.

- The Researchers
iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Title Cover…………………………………………………………………………….i

Title Page……………………………………………………………………………..ii

Approval Sheet………………………………………………………………………iii

Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………..iv

Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………v

List of Tables………………………………………………………………………...vi

List of Figures……………………………………………………………………….vii

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………..viii

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction…………………………………………………………………..

Theoretical Background………………………………………………….…

Theory……..……………………………………………………………

Legal Bases………….……………………………………………….

Review of Related Literature……………………………………..

Review of Related Studies………………………………………….

v
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem……………………………………………….…

Statement of the Null Hypothesis…………………………………………

Significance of the study……………………………………………….…

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Design…………………………………………………………………….…
Respondents………………………………………………………………..
Environment………………………………………………………………...
Instrument…………………………………………………………………...

Data Gathering Procedure

Phase 1 Approval of the conduct of the study…………………..
Phase 2 Procedure…................................................
Phase 3 Treatment of the data……………………………….

Statistical Treatment………………………………………………..
Definition of Terms…………………………………………..

CHAPTER II
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Student’s Performance with the use of Chalk-Board
and Manipulative strategies…………………………….
Test Hypothesis……………………………………………………..
CHAPTER III
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary………………………………………………………………
Findings………………………………………………………………
Conclusions…………………………………………………………
Recommendations……………………………………………………

CHAPTER IV
OUTPUT OF THE STUDY
Proposed Lesson Design for Chalk-Board Strategy……………….
Proposed Lesson Design for Manipulative Strategy……………..
REFERENCE LIST………………………………………………………….
APPENDICES
A. Transmittal Letters……………………………………………..
B. Questionnaire for Trial Run……………………………………
C. Item Analysis Result……………………………………………
D. Pre-test / Post-test Questionnaire……………………………..
E. Pre-test and Post-test Results………………………………...
F. Tabular Computations………………………………………….
G. Sample Computations………………………………………….
H. Time Table………………………………………………………
I. Daily Evaluation of the Respondents…………………………
J. Documentation………………………………………………….
RESEARCHERS’ BIODATA

Timoteo P. Mejorada……………………………………………………….

John Ashley Uy……………………………………………………….

Karl Carcasona..………………………,,……………………………………

Rabroyd C. Arcales……………………,……………………………………..

Jasper Olaivar………………………………….\…………………………….
Brael M. Rasonabe………………………….……………………………….
Jerrimel M. Mirontos……………….………………………………………...
Edcel R. Ceballos……………….…………,………………………………...
Louie S.Lera……………………………..……………………………………..
Lovely Geniston……………………………………………………………….
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Student’s Performance with the Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative

strategies in teaching Math IV ………………………………......
2 Summary of the results of the Posttest in Chalk Board and Manipulative
strategies in teaching Math IV ………………………………......
3 Student’s Performance Using Chalk-Board Strategy………………………
4 Student’s Performance Using Manipulative Strategy………………………
5 Pretest Results with the Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative Strategies

6 Post-test Results with the Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative

Strategies ………………………………......
7 The Use of Chalk-Board Strategy in Teaching Math IV…………………...
8 The Use of Manipulative Strategy in Teaching Math IV…………………...

9 Time Table during the conduction with the Use of Chalk-Board and
Manipulative Strategies ………………………………......
10 Daily Evaluation of the Repondents with the Use of Chalk-Board Strategy
11 Daily Evaluation of the Repondents with the Use of Manipulative Strategy

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Research Flow ………………………………...........

2. Map of Loon ……………………………….…......

3. Graphical Presentation of Daily Evaluation Results with

The Use of Chalk-Boad and Manipulative Strategies…….…..

vii
 The Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative strategies in
Teaching Mathematics IV in UB-Loon Institute

Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr., John Ashley, Carl Carcasona, Rabroyd

Arcales,
Jasper Olaivar, Bryle Rasonabe, Jerrimel Mirontos, Louie Lera,
Lovely Geniston

UB-LOON INSTITUTE
Loon, Bohol
2019

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine the use of Chalk-Board and

Manipulative strategies in teaching Math IV of UB-Loon Institute Grade School
Department school year 2018-2019. It is an action research study (pretest-
posttest design). There were 18 sample respondents. Each group composed of
9 pupils. The first group used the Chalk-Board strategy while the second group
uses Manipulative strategy in teaching Math IV. Results showed that there was
an increase in the students’ performance using the Chalk-Board strategy and
Manipulative strategy based on their pretest-posttest results. Furthermore, both
strategies enhanced students’ performance in teaching Mathematics with the
Grade IV pupils. This implied that the integration of Chalk-Board and
Manipulative strategies were effective in teaching Math IV. In testing the
significant difference between the two groups, t-test for independent samples
was used. It was found out that there was no significant difference between the
performance of the students using Chalk-Board and Manipulative as strategies
in teaching Math IV

viii
 1

Chapter 1

The Problem and Its Scope

Introduction

Mathematics is crucial for the innovation of the world. It has been

successfully applied to many other aspects of the human world: for business

and accounting, in the field of engineering and even in science and industry.

Indeed, learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming

a liberally educated person.

Unfortunately, Mathematics has faced struggles in teaching. It is a great

challenge to a teacher to unwrap the complexity of the subject. Mostly, teachers

all over the world has common global issues. Issues that are specific with

regards to the attitude of the students and in looking for the best strategy in

teaching.

In terms of the attitude or behavior of the students about the subject, it is

a great factor that can affect the process of learning. Students are more

sensitive about corrections or errors. Unlike a lot of other subjects, there is no

room for error when it comes to Math. The child either understands what he or

she is doing, or not. Because of this, Math can quickly become a frustrating and

stressful experience for students. In that case, many students hate Math.
 2

Math is an abstract subject. It struggles the learning process of the

students. They learn best when they relate math in real life situations. As math

becomes more advanced, that can be difficult to do especially for the teacher to

seek a better strategy. As a result, many students find themselves needing to

work harder and practice longer to understand more abstract math concepts.

Aside from the global issues, there are also local issues that arise in our

country with regards to the teaching and learning process in math. Philippines

is a multi-lingual nation, it is one of the factor that affect the process of learning

of the students in math. Teachers use mother tongue in teaching mathematics

because its part of the curriculum. In that case, teachers had the difficulty to

translate Math terms in mother tongue. And students may confuse about the

terms and may lead to misunderstanding.

Mathematics is very essential to one’s life. There is a need for it to be

embedded very well in education because it provides the necessary skills that

prepare the learners for the future. Apparently, Math is the most widely used

subject in the world. Every career uses some sort of Math. Certain qualities that

are nurtured by Mathematics are the power of reasoning, creativity, abstract or

spatial thinking, critical thinking, problem-solving, and even effective

communication skills. Without it, life would be so difficult.

 3

According to Dowker (2004), Mathematics is believed to be the toughest

and most challenging academic subject according to several studies that have

investigated the prevalence of learning difficulties in this subject. Unfortunately,

Math has a reputation as being hard to understand. This situation motivated the

researchers to find solutions to problems in Mathematics. They wanted to

explore and test the efficacy on what strategies or method they can use to make

lesson easier and how they can integrate for an effective teaching-and-learning

process.

The challenge in education today is to effectively teach students of

diverse ability and differing rates of learning in a way that enables them to learn

mathematical concepts with deep understanding and positive attitude. This

challenge encouraged the researchers to conduct a study on the efficacy of

Chalk-Board Method and Manipulative Method in teaching Math IV of UB-Loon

Institute Grade School Department.

 4

Theoretical Background

The researchers formulated a theory to clarify, predict, and provide a

systematic way of understanding the said study. Moreover, this theoretical

background presents and portrays the hypothesis that supports the study.

Math is anchored on the different learning theories that support the

learner’s development. One of the theories that support this study is the

Behaviorist Theory. It states that behaviorism theory is the integration of

knowledge of the biological foundations of emotions with behavioral principles

is made possible by defining emotions as central nervous system responses

that must be distinguished from the physiological indices (stats and eifert 1990)

Emotion is considered to provide a basic definition of reinforcement and

also of the incentive function of stimuli.

Another theory that support the study is the Experiential Learning

Theory. Experiential Learning theory provides a holistic model of the learning

process and a multi linear model of adult development. The focus of the theory

is experience, which serves, as the main driving force in learning, as knowledge

is constructed through the transformative reflection on one’s experience (barker

Jenson, Kolb, 2002).

 5

Review of Related Literature

In order to have a comprehensive and relevant content that supports the

study, the researcher provides a review of related literature to evaluate and

illuminate the foundation of knowledge towards the study.

Nisbet, J. and Shucksmith (1986) emphasized the learning strategies

that establish ideas that teaching needs to create and build unique techniques

for the students to cope up with the lessons easily and utilize every potential in

learning by using precise teaching strategies.

Piaget (1968) pointed out that every normal student is capable of good

mathematical reasoning if attention and care are directed to activities of his

interest, and if by this method, the emotional inhibitions that too often give him

a feeling of inferiority in lessons in Mathematics are removed.

Mathematics needs to be fun and engaging. According to Colgan (2014),

a large majority of students find mathematics boring, mostly irrelevant and

unrewarding. This need not be the case, however, as educators should strive to

use resources and strategies that capture student interest and spike motivation.

Stuart, (2000) asserts that students report anxiety or nervousness in

mathematics, in that case, educators must able to recognize that math anxiety

is real, and teachers must be aware of strategies to reduce mathematics anxiety

with our students. Mathematics anxiety can be characterized by math

 6

avoidance, obsessing over everything that is not understood, or viewing math

as a punishment.

According to Rittle-Johnson & Jordan, (2016) ,Manipulatives are very

popular tools in the mathematics classroom, with over 90% of Kindergarten

teachers using manipulatives. However, in July 2016 the Institute of Education

Science (IES) at the U.S. Department of Education released a synthesis of

mathematics education research from 2002-2013 explaining that multiple

studies have reported manipulatives having little or negative effects on learning.

Moreover, students in Grades 4-6 who used manipulatives when working on

problems about money and found that students made more mistakes when the

money looked realistic than when they were plain. As such, the IES

recommends that manipulatives used in the classroom should be simple with

minimal visual distractions.

Related Studies

According to the study of Mrs. Jherlenne Mae Asuncion-Atupan in her

research book about “Effective Approaches in Teaching Mathematics Using

Reusable Instructional Materials". It states that the learners learn best in

Mathematics through experiential, student-centered, and cognitive method of

teaching; and the reusable instructional material made is effective in teaching

 7

Mathematics because students were more engaged, more interactive, and

gained more conceptual understanding in Mathematics concepts.

Norma Presmeg (2002) Educational Studies in Mathematics presents

new ideas and developments of major importance to practitioners working in the

field of mathematical educational. It reflects both the variety of research

concerns within the field and the range of methods used to study them.

Fulk (2002) stated that students with sequencing difficulties need to

maximize their engagement and improve their retention of learning use humor,

unexpected introduction and various other attention grabbers to stimulate

student’s interest in the lesson.

According to Stein and Bovalino (2001), as cited in “Research on the

Benefits of Manipulatives”, “Manipulatives can be important tools in helping

students to think and reason in more meaningful ways. By giving students

concrete ways to compare and operate on quantities, such manipulatives as

pattern blocks, tiles, and cubes can contribute to the development of well-

grounded, interconnected understandings of mathematical ideas.” In addition,

research indicates that using manipulatives is especially useful for teaching low

achievers, students with learning disabilities, and English language learners.

In addition, Cubio, Espinosa, and Torrefranca (2015) in their study “The

Use of Dice and Dominoes of Grade 3 Mathematics” has found out that in

teaching Elementary Mathematics, specifically multiplication with the use of dice

 8

and dominoes, there was an increase on the students’ scores. They also

recommend the use of the said manipulatives in as much as it arouses more

interest from the learners. Thus, manipulatives motivates learners to participate,

learn, and master the subject - matter as they experience and repeat

manipulating the learning tool.

Legal Bases

Education is also rooted on some laws and acts provided by the

government that can help improve and maintain a good quality of education. In

connection with this, the researchers contribute some laws that support the

study.

Batas Pambansa Blg. 232 Section 9 Paragraph 1. It states that the

students have the right to receive, primarily through competent instruction,

relevant quality education in line with national goals and conducive to their full

development as person with human dignity. This focuses on giving every

individual the quality education that can produce globally competent graduates.

For this reason, the researchers looked for strategies that can help make

learning easier and better.

Learning bodies must also see to it that the knowledge students gain

from school is useful for everyone. Another law that supports this study is the

Section 2 of Republic Act 10533 known as the “Enhanced Basic Education Act of
 9

2013”. It states that the state shall establish, maintain and support a complete,

adequate and integrated system of education relevant to the needs of the

people, the country and the society-at-large. This means that learning

institutions should implement various strategies that can involve all students in

the teaching-and-learning process, not only in mathematic; but also in other

subject areas.
 10

THEORY LEGAL BASES

Behaviorist Theory  Section 2 of Republic Act
B F Skinner 10533

Experiential Learning Theory  Batas Pambansa Blg. 232

Section 9 Paragraph 1

INPUT
1. Pre-test and Posttest of Chalk and Talk
2. Pre-test and Posttest of Video Presentation
3. Significant difference of the Post-test Result of the two
Strategies

PROCEDURE

 Gathering of data
 Statistical Treatment using t-test
 Data Presentation
 Analysis and interpretation of data
 Summary
 Conclusion

OUTPUT
Proposed Lesson Design in teaching Math IV using Chalk-Board Strategy

Proposed Lesson Design in teaching Math IV using Manipulative Strategy

Figure 1. Research Flow

 11

The Problem

Statement of the Problem

The core purpose of this study was to find out the use of Chalk-Board

and Manipulative strategies in teaching Math IV in UB-Loon Institute Grade

School Department during the school year 2018-2019.

Specifically, the study aimed to determine the following questions:

1. What is the performance of the students with the use of Chalk-Board

and Manipulative strategies in terms of their pre-test and post-test

results?

2. Is there any significant difference on the student’s performance with the

use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative strategies in terms of their post-

test results?

3. What lesson design can be proposed?

Statement of the Null Hypothesis

This research aimed to test the null hypothesis that there is no

significant difference between the use of the Chalk-Board and Manipulative

strategies in teaching Mathematics in Grade IV class of UB-Loon Institute Grade

School Department during the school year 2018-2019.

 12

Significance of the Study

The result of the study will be beneficial to the following:

To the teachers, this study would apprise and encourage them

especially for the fresh graduates, on how to handle their students towards

Mathematics using these strategies so that students would learn more about it.

It will also make them consume less time in teaching the topic.

To the pupils, this study would help them increase their skills in the field

of mathematics with the help of Lecture-Discussion Method and Laboratory

Method, and this can provide them better understanding on the lessons. They

will eventually have a positive attitude towards mathematics.

To the school administration, this study could help them to solve

problems about the student’s difficulty answering problems with regards to

mathematics.

To the parents, it would encourage them to provide additional support,

efforts and time to send their children to school. The parents would also be

open-minded to understand their children’s demands and activities that are

related to their studies.

To the future researchers, this study will help them as a guide or basis

on their own study. It would also assist them to interpret, analyze and make

conclusions on their study based on this.

 13

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Design
This study employs an action research (pretest-posttest design). This is

a quantitative type of research used to quantity the problem by the way of

generating data that can be transformed into usable statistics. The effectiveness

of the approaches was determined based on the pretest and posttest results of

the respondents. Questionnaires will be the instrument to use in conducting the

said study.

Respondents

The respondents for this study was the grade 4 pupils of UB-Loon

Institute, which has 13 males and 10 females with a total of 23 pupils. The class

was divided into two groups through pairing of grades in Mathematics. Based

on the pairing done, there are 9 pupils in Chalk Board strategy and 9 pupils in

Manipulative strategy.

Environment

The locale of the study is at UB-Loon Institute, which is located at Mesina

St. Moto Norte, loon, Bohol. It is near at the back of Loon town square which

has an approximate distance of 500 meters and 28 kilometers or 17 miles away

from Tagbilaran City. This institution was consist of 23 teachers and had a total

of 1,081 enrollees.
 14

Figure 2. Map of Loon

 15

Instrument

In this study, the pretest and posttest questionnaire was the main data-

gathering tool to achieve its purpose. The questionnaire was made in line with

subtopics of Mathematics which undergone trial-run testing with the Grade V

pupils of UB-Loon Institute school year 2018-2019.

The researcher formulated a 50-item test questionnaire for the trial-run

testing which the topics covered were based. An item analysis was done in order

to come up with the valid and reliable questionnaire for the pretest and posttest.

Items were analyzed and the result consists of 35-items (7-item per lesson).

This was served as the questionnaire for the pretest and posttest of the two

groups.

Data Gathering Procedure

Phase 1. Approval of the conduct of the study

With the help of the research adviser, the researchers construct and

formulate a letter of approval in conducting the study to the adviser of Grade 4

pupils. For the study to be more adequate, researchers also lend a letter of

approval to the principal of UB-Loon Institute as well as to the English Critic and

Statistician to ask guidance and amendments.

 16

Phase 2. Procedure

Researchers notify the students of Grade 4 about the conduction of the

study. Respondents are instructed on the flow of the conduction. For ethical

purposes, researchers hand over a letter of approval to the desired respondents

of the study.

Phase 3. Treatment of Data

Before doing the conduction, the researchers are obliged to conduct a

dry-run trial for the testing of the quality of questions that will be used for the

pretest and posttest. The dry-run was conducted on Grade 5 students of the

UB-Loon Institute elementary department. After the dry-run, the results undergo

item analysis to classify the accepted questions.

Pretest was conducted a day before the discussions of the lessons.

There are 5 lessons intended to cover up the whole conduction process. At the

end of the lessons, there are quizzes and activities intended to evaluate the

learning of students. After discussing the 5 lessons, the researcher will conduct

the posttest examination. The data gathered from the pretest and posttest will

be used for the presentation and analyzation of results.

 17

Statistical Treatment

The obtained scores of the two groups in their post-test were shown in

the tables. This range in each group is computed using the formula:

R=HS-LS

Where:

HS- is the highest score

LS- is the lowest score

Means, Standard deviations and percentage of the groups were

computed in order to get the average scores of the involved students within the

group. The spread of variability of each group respectively determined. The

formula used in computing the mean is:

∑𝑥
𝑋= 𝑁

Where:

∑x =Summation of all scores obtained

N= number of respondents
 18

The formula for the standard deviation is:

∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ )²
𝑆𝐷 = √
𝑛−1

Where:

∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ )² = sum of the squares of the deviations around the mean

(N-1) = the degree of freedom

The formula of the percentage computation is:

𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
Percentage = x 100
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

In determining the significant difference between the use of Chalk-Board

Method and Manipulative Method in Teaching in Math IV in terms of their

posttest result, t-test for independent sample is being used. The formula is:

T=𝒙̅1 – 𝒙
̅2
sd 2 sd 2
1 2
+
N1 N2

Where:

̅1 = mean of the first group

𝒙

̅2 = mean of the second group

𝒙
 19

sd12 =variance of the first group

sd22= variance of the second group

N1= number of cases in the first group

N2= number of cases in the second group

The degree of freedom also used to determine the critical value of the t

distribution table at 0.05 levels. The formula is:

df = (n1+n2) – 2

Where:

df = the degree of the freedom

n = number of respondents
 20

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Chalk-Board Strategy– a traditional teaching strategy that involves writing on

the board and discussing it.

Dry-run/ Trial-run – a test of the operation of a new system or product.

Grade Pairing – a method used to group the pupils based on their grades in

first grading.

Manipulative Strategy- a modern teaching strategy that uses manipulative

tools like cards, blocks and illustrations in teaching.

Posttest – the questionnaires given to respondents to gauge the effectiveness

and achievement of study.

Pre-test – the questionnaires that will be provided to the respondents before

the lessons.
 21

CHAPTER II
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of

data with regards to the use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative strategies in

teaching Math IV conducted in UB-Loon Institute based on the pretest and

posttest results obtained by the students. Nine pairs of students served as

respondents. Appropriate statistical tools were used.

 22

Table 1. Student’s Performance with the Use of Chalk-Board and

Manipulative strategies in teaching Math IV
Chalk-Board Method Manipulative Method
N=9 N=9

Respondents Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test

1 14 15 15 29
2 13 24 16 22
3 10 14 13 17
4 8 17 9 14
5 10 14 6 18
6 11 16 14 16
7 10 21 5 12
8 11 11 5 12
9 7 12 7 13
HPS 35 35 35 35
HS 14 24 16 29
LS 7 11 5 12
Range 7 13 11 17
Passing Score 26 26

No. of 0 0 0 1
respondents (11%)
passed
No. of 9 9 9 8
respondents (89%)
Failed

̅
𝒙 10.44 16 10 17

SD 2.19 4.18 4.5 5.55

 23

Table 1 shows the student’s performance with the use of Chalk-Board

and Manipulative strategies in teaching Math IV in UB- Loon Institute. The

numbers of respondents with their scores were presented in the table.

Moreover, it also includes the highest and the lowest scores obtained by the

respondents during the pre-test and post-test, the range and the mean.

With the use of Chalk Board strategy in teaching Math IV, the highest

score obtained during the pretest was fourteen (14) and the lowest was seven

(7) while during the posttest, the highest score obtained by the respondents

was twenty-four (24) and the lowest was eleven (11) out of thirty-five (35) items.

It was further found out through a statistical analysis that the mean during the

pre-test was ten point forty-four (10.44) with the standard deviation of two point

nineteen (2.19). While the mean of the post-test was sixteen (16) with the

standard deviation of fourteen point eighteen (14.18). The range during the

pretest was seven (7) and the posttest was thirteen (13). This shows that there

was an improvement of the performance of Grade 4 respondents through the

use of the Chalk Board strategy in teaching Mathematics based on the pre-test

and post-test results. The result is connected to the Behaviorism Theory, since

Chalk-Board strategy is a teacher-centered approach, the educator could easily

manage and observe the behaviour of the students through their emotions.

On the other hand, in the other group using Manipulative strategy, the

highest score obtained during the pretest was sixteen (16) and the lowest was

five (5) while during the posttest, the highest score obtained by the respondents
 24

was twenty-nine (29) and the lowest was twelve (12) out of thirty-five (35) items.

Through a statistical analysis, the mean during the pre-test was ten (10) with

the standard deviation of four point five (4.5). While the mean of the post-test

was seventeen (17) with the standard deviation of five point eighty-two (5.82).

The range during the pretest was eleven (11) and the posttest was seventeen

(17). Therefore, with the use of the Manipulative strategy, there was an

improvement of the performance of Grade 4 respondents based on the pre-test

and post-test results. Since Manipulative strategy offers students with

opportunities to learn through direct experiences. Moreover, this strategy

attracts the behaviour of the students to become more attentive and focus with

the lessons.

Test of Hypothesis

The null hypothesis stated that there is no significant difference between

the use of Chalk Board and Manipulative strategies in the pupils performance

based on their posttest results.

 25

Table 2. Summary of the results of the Posttest in Chalk-Board and

Manipulative strategies in teaching Math IV
Respondents N x SD DF Tabular Computed Decision Interpretation
t-value t-value of
0.05

Traditional 35 16 4.18 There is no

Method of 16 1.75 0.42 significant
Teaching Accept H difference.

Modern
Method of 35 17 5.82
Teaching

Table 2 shows the summary of the findings and the test of null hypothesis

of the posttest scores of the grade IV pupils handled with the Chalk-Board and

Manipulative strategies in teaching Mathematics.

In order to get to the computed t-value of the posttest result of the two

said teaching strategies. The researchers used t-test on finding the significant

difference.

Since the computed t-value was less than the tabular t-value, there was

an enough evidence that the null hypothesis was accepted in this study. It

implies that there is a no significant difference between the use of Chalk-Board

and Manipulative strategies in teaching Mathematics. It can be connected to the

Behaviourism Theory in a way of defining the acquisition of

the learning through the emotions and behaviour of the students in both teaching

strategies towards the lesson.

 26

CHAPTER III

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter dealt with the summary of the study, findings, conclusions

drawn and the recommendations that the researchers had arrived at.

Summary

This study aimed to determine the use of Chalk Board and Manipulative

strategies in teaching Mathematics in Grade IV pupils of UB- Loon Institute.

Specifically, the study sought to answer the questions: What is the

performance of the students with the use of Chalk Board and Manipulative

strategies in terms of their pre-test and post-test results?; and Is there any

significant difference on the student’s performance with the use of Chalk Board

and Manipulative strategies in terms of their post-test results?

The data gathered from the respondents’ pre-test and post-test results

were tabulated for analysis, interpretation and statistical computation. The

findings served as the basis for the conclusions and recommendations.

 27

Findings

Basing on the data gathered, results showed that both groups had an

increase in their performances based on their pretest and posttest results. In

Chalk-Board strategy, the mean score in the pretest was 10.44 and 16 during

the posttest and there was an increase of 5.56(65.25%). On the other hand,

Manipulative strategy had mean scores of 10 in the pretest and 17 during

posttest. It had an increase of 7(58.82%). This implies that the students’

performance improved in terms of their pretest and posttest results.

However, there was no significant difference on the students’

performance in teaching Mathematics between the use of Chalk-Board and

Manipulative strategies based on their posttest result. This implied that both

teaching strategies are efficient in teaching Mathematics with regards to the

performance of the grade IV pupils in UB-Loon Institute.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of the study, the researchers concluded that the

performance of the class who used Chalk-Board strategy was close as the

performance of the group who used Manipulative strategy based on the findings

gathered. Thus, both teaching strategies help improved the performance of the

grade IV pupils in learning Mathematics.

 28

Furthermore, the researcher concluded that the performance of the class

who used Chalk-Board strategy has no significant difference with the

performance of the group who used Manipulative strategy based on the findings

gathered. Thus, both teaching strategies help improved the performance of the

students in teaching Math IV students of UB-Loon Institute.

Recommendations

Based on the aforementioned findings and conclusions of the study, the

researchers recommend the following:

1. To Mathematics Teachers, they may integrate the use of Chalk-Board

Method and Manipulative Method in teaching Math IV since both strategies

are effective in improving the performance of the students but to adapt in

the new generation with the use of Manipulative Method in teaching Math

is more advantage. To cure the boredom and to make the students more

attentive and attractive to the lessons as well. Therefore, Manipulative

Method is more recommended especially with the subject Math.

2. To the pupils, Time element may be considered in Manipulative Method

since students need enough time to manipulate the manipulative tools.

3. To the administrator, they are recommended to give support by providing

enough manipulative materials in teaching Math to be used by the teachers.

 29

4. To parents, they are recommended to assist and support their

sons/daughters to send their children to school and open-minded with the

demands of their children since Manipulative Method requires tools and

other materials.

5. To the future researchers, they are recommended to be more open-minded

in terms of selecting their desired subject which they are more

knowledgeable and comfortable in making a study similar to this one.

 30

Chapter IV
OUTPUT OF THE STUDY

PROPOSED LESSON DESIGN IN TEACHING MATH IV USING CHALK-

BOARD STRATEGY

I. Objectives

With and at the end of the discussion, the pupils will be able to:

1.Know how to compare, order, and rounding off decimals;

2.Solve problems related to decimals;

3.Share the lesson learned.

II. Subject Matter

A. TOPIC: Comparing, Ordering and Rounding Off Decimals

B. MATERIALS: Chalk, Board, Book, Paper and Pen

C. SKILLS/COMPETENCIES: Mental and Memory

improvements

D. STRATEGY: Chalk- Board

E. VALUES: Participativeness and Attentiveness

III. Learning Procedure

Teacher’s Activities

A. Routine Activities
 31

1. Opening Prayer

2. Checking of Attendance

3. Motivation

4. Recapitulation

5. Presentation of Activity

B. Presentation of Activity

Give the pupils a few minute to prepare themselves for

the discussion. They will get their book as a reference and

copy additional information on the board. Prepare a piece

of paper for the quiz.

C. Lesson Proper

IV Assessment

V.Assignment

Read and study in advance about Adding and Subtracting

Decimals.
 32

PROPOSED LESSON DESIGN IN TEACHING MATH IV USING

MANIPULATIVE STRATEGY

IV. Objectives

With and at the end of the discussion, the pupils will be able to:

1.Know how to compare, order, and rounding off decimals;

2.Solve problems related to decimals;

3.Share the lesson learned.

V. Subject Matter

A. TOPIC: Comparing, Ordering and Rounding Off Decimals

B. MATERIALS: Cards, Blocks, Money and Illustrations

C. SKILLS/COMPETENCIES: Mental and Memory

improvements

D. STRATEGY: Manipulative

E. VALUES: Attentiveness, Cooperation and Participativeness

VI. Learning Procedure

Teacher’s Activities

D. Routine Activities

1. Opening Prayer

2. Checking of Attendance

3. Motivation

4. Recapitulation
 33

5. Presentation of Activity

E. Presentation of Activity

Give the pupils a few minute to prepare themselves for

the discussion. They will get their book as a reference and

copy additional information on the illustrations. Prepare a

piece of paper for the quiz.

F. Lesson Proper

IV Assessment

V.Assignment

Read and study in advance about Adding and Subtracting

Decimals.
 34

REFERENCE LIST

Batas PambansaBilang 232 (1982, September 11 ). Retrieved from

B.P. 232-
https://lawphil.net/statutes/bataspam/bp1982/bp_232_1982.html

Accessed on : December 10, 2018

Chacon,C.T. ( 2005 ). Teachers' perceived efficacy among English as a

foreign

language teachers in middle schools in Venezuela. Teaching and

Teacher education, 21 (3),257-272

Accessed on : December 9, 2018

Executive Order NO.210 Retrieved from

https://www.chanrobles.com.executiveorders/2003/executiveorderno21
0- 2003.html#.XAzFWPcRUwg

Accessed on : December 10, 2018

Moffet, J. ( 1968 ).Pedagogical Theory of Discourse

Accessed on : December 9, 2018

Republic Act No.896 Retrieved from

https://www.thecorpusjuris.com/legislative/republic-acts/ra-no-896.php

Accessed on : December 10, 2018

 35

Republic Act No. 9155 ( 2001, August 11 ). Retrieved from

R.A 9155-
htpps://www.lawphil.net./statutes/repacts/ra2001/ra_9155_2001.html

Accessed on : December 10, 2018

Su, Y.C.( 2006 )- EFL Teachers' Perceptions of English Language policy at

the
elementary level in Taiwan. Educational Studies, 32( 3 ), 265-283.
Accessed on : December 9, 2018

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A.W. ( 2001 ). Teachers' efficacy: Capturing an

exclusive construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17 ( 7), 783-805.
Accessed on : December 9, 2018
 36

APPENDICES
 37

APPENDIX A
TRANSMITTAL LETTERS
UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

November 23, 2018

JASMIN REJAS ANDALAN ASOY

English Teacher
UB-Loon Institute

Dear Ma’am,

The Group 2 researchers of the Grade 11 STEM Department students of

UB-Loon Institute are presently conducting a research entitled “The Use
between Chalk-Board Method and Laboratory Method in Teaching Math IV of
UB-Loon Institute Grade School Department”.
In connection with this, researchers would like to ask a permission from
your good office to be their English Critic.
The researchers are hoping for your positive response to this matter.
Thank you and God Bless.
Respectfully yours,
Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr. (Sgd)
Group Leader

Recommending Approval:
Ma. Therry Mhel M. Fraga (Sgd)
Thesis Adviser

Approved:
Jasmin Asoy (Sgd)
English Teacher
 38

UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

November 23, 2018

JOCELIE JOY DUMAYAC

Math Teacher
UB-Loon Institute

Dear Ma’am,

The Group 2 researchers of the Grade 11 STEM Department students of

UB-Loon Institute are presently conducting a research entitled “The Use
between Chalk-Board Method and Laboratory Method in Teaching Math IV of
UB-Loon Institute Grade School Department”.
In connection with this, researchers would like to ask a permission from
your good office to be their English Critic.
The researchers are hoping for your positive response to this matter.
Thank you and God Bless.

Respectfully yours,

Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr. (Sgd)

Group Leader

Recommending Approval:

Ma. Therry Mhel M. Fraga (Sgd)

Thesis Adviser

Approved:
Jocelie Joy Dumayac (Sgd)
Math Teacher
 39

UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

January 18, 2019

VIDA MAY TIROL DE JUAN, LPT, PHD

Principal, UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

Ma’am:

The undersigned are the Grade 11-STEM students of UB-Loon Institute presently working on
their research study.
In connection to this, they would like to request your approval to have their pre-oral defense on
Friday, January 25, 2019 at 8:00 to 12:00 nn at the ABM classroom.

There will be five (5) groups of students’ research outputs.

1. The Use of Lecture Method and Picture Presentation in Teaching Araling Panlipunan 5
(Troy Jayme, Jason Guia, Romil Montaldo, Whegy Sobrado, John Vincent Manuta, Johannes
Baliguat, Reyfani Crieta, Bianca Mani, John Harold Simbulas)
2. The Efficacy of Chalk and Talk and Video Presentation in Teaching English 5
(Rodel Gordiones, Jessa Amolata, Maryfer Galban, Jay Julrhyan Policianos, Rhyne Mark
Cataluna, Mark Kevin Marquez, Jomar Alcover, Randy Pantinos, Jay Mark Turtosa, Jexter
Leornas)
3. The Efficiency of Chalk and Board Strategy and Powerpoint Presentation as Techniques in
Teaching Science 6
(Marissa Decipolo, Francis Roi Amolata, John Ronald Sanguenza, Sydney Bryan Donayre, Novy
Mae Seprado, Vincent Mejorada, Christopher Noronio, Romil Marimon, Anthony Gucela,
Romarck Cartagenas))
4. The Use of Textbook and Powerpoint Presentation in Teaching Filipino 4
(Jay Ann Caminos, Kent Bryan Diaz, Ann Lascona, Charles Mamacos, Mark Stephen Marenio,
Mark Loyd Ngoho, Misael Radaza, Ricky Ivan Salgado)
5. The Efficacy between Lecture Method and Laboratory Method in Teaching Mathematics 4
(Timoteo Mejorada, Lovely Geniston, Karl Carcasona, Jasper Olaivar, Rabroyd Arcales, Edsel
Jade Ceballos, Louie Lera, Jerrimel Mirontos, Brael Rasonabe, Ashley Uy)

Adviser: Ma. Therry Mhel M. Fraga

Other members of the panel of examiners are Jocelie Joy Dumayac, Jasmin Asoy, Marlon Lajera,
Elizabeth Poquita.
It is agreed with the groups that if they are unable to submit their research output to the panel
members this Monday, January 21, 2019, that group will be excluded on the target date.

Respectfully yours,

MA. THERRY MHEL M. FRAGA, LPT(sgd)

Teacher, Research2

Approved by:

VIDA MAY TIROL DE JUAN, LPT, PHD (sgd)

Principal

Conformed by the panel of evaluators:

JOCELIE JOY DUMAYAC(sgd) JASMIN ASOY(sgd) MARLON LAJERA(sgd)

ELIZABETH POQUITA(sgd)
 40

UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

February 11, 2019

VIDA MAY TIROL DE JUAN

Principal
UB-Loon Institute

Ma’am:
Good day.
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Research subject of the
Grade 11 STEM students, the researchers are asking permissions in
conducting a Research Study entitled: “The Use of Chalk-Board and
Manipulative in Teaching Math IV.”
In line with this, we would like to request your permission to allow us to
utilize the Grade 4 students enrolled in the school year 2018-2019 as
respondents in the study.
The researchers are looking forward for your approval. Thank you so
much and God bless!

Respectfully yours,
TIMOTEO MEJORADA JR. (Sgd)
Group Leader

Noted:
MA. THERRY MHEL M. FRAGA (Sgd)
Thesis Adviser

Approved:

VIDA MAY TIROL DE JUAN (Sgd)

Principal
 41

UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

January 30, 2019

BRYAN LABASTILLA
Adviser, Grade 5
UB-Loon Institute

Sir:

Good day!

The STEM 11 students of UB- Loon Institute will conduct an action

research entitled “The Use of Chalk-Board Method and Manipulative Method in
Teaching Math IV in UB-Loon Institute”, in partial fulfillment for their senior high
school.
In relation to this, the researchers would like to ask an approval to allow
them to conduct their dry-run in your section.
Your approval is highly appreciated. Thank You!

Respectfully Yours,

TIMOTEO P. MEJORADA JR. (Sgd)

Group Leader

Endorsed:
MA. THERRY MHEL M. FRAGA (Sgd)
Thesis Adviser

Approved:
BRYAN LABASTILLA (Sgd)
 42

Adviser, Grade 5

UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

January 30, 2019

WILLIAM VILLASOR
Grade 4 Math Teacher
UB-Loon Institute

Sir:

Good day!

The STEM 11 students of UB- Loon Institute will conduct an action

research entitled “The Use of Chalk-Board Method and Manipulative Method in
Teaching Math IV in UB-Loon Institute”, in partial fulfilment for their senior high
school.

In relation to this, the researchers would like to ask an approval to allow

them to conduct their study in your classroom, they will substitute you as the
subject teacher of the grade 4 Math subject.
Your approval is highly appreciated. Thank You!
Respectfully yours,

TIMOTEO P. MEJORADA JR. (Sgd)

Group Leader

Endorsed:
MA. THERRY MHEL M. FRAGA (Sgd)
Thesis Adviser

Approved:
WILLIAM VILLASOR (Sgd)
Grade 4 Math Adviser
 43

UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

August 20, 2019

VIDA MAY TIROL DE JUAN, LPT, PHD

Principal, UB-Loon Institute
Loon, Bohol

Ma’am:
The undersigned are the Grade 12-STEM students of UB-Loon Institute presently working on their
research study.

In connection to this, they would like to request your approval to have their oral defense on Friday,
September 13, 2019 at 8:00 to 5pm at the underground room.

There will be five (5) groups of students’ research outputs.

1. The Efficacy between Chalk- Board Method and Manipulative Method in Teaching Mathematics
4
(Timoteo Mejorada, Lovely Geniston, Karl Carcasona, Jasper Olaivar, Rabroyd Arcales, Edsel
Jade Ceballos, Louie Lera, Jerrimel Mirontos, Brael Rasonabe, Ashley Uy)
2. The Use of Chalk and Talk and Video Presentation in Teaching Araling Panlipunan 5
(Troy Jayme, Jason Guia, Romil Montaldo, Whegy Sobrado, John Vincent Manuta, Johannes
Baliguat, Reyfani Crieta, Bianca Mani, John Harold Simbulas)
3. The Use of Book and Talk and Powerpoint Presentation in Teaching Filipino 4
(Jay Ann Caminos, Kent Bryan Diaz, Ann Lascona, Charles Mamacos, Mark Stephen Marenio,
Mark Loyd Ngoho, Misael Radaza, Ricky Ivan Salgado)
4. The Efficiency of Chalk and Board and PowerPoint Presentation as Techniques in Teaching
Science 6
(Marissa Decipolo, Francis Roi Amolata, John Ronald Sanguenza, Sydney Bryan Donayre, Novy
Mae Seprado, Vincent Mejorada, Christopher Noronio, Romil Marimon, Anthony Gucela,
Romarck Cartagenas))
5. The Efficacy of Chalk and Talk and Video Presentation in Teaching English 5
(Rodel Gordiones, Jessa Amolata, Maryfer Galban, Jay Julrhyan Policianos, Rhyne Mark
Cataluna, Mark Kevin Marquez, Jomar Alcover, Randy Pantinos, Jay Mark Turtosa, Jexter
Leornas)

Adviser: Ma. Therry Mhel M. Fraga

Other members of the panel of examiners are Marlon Lajera, Jocelie Joy Dumayac, and Jasmin Asoy.

It is agreed with the groups that if they are unable to submit their research output to the panel members
this Thursday, September 12, 2019, that group will be excluded on the target date.

Respectfully yours,

MA. THERRY MHEL M. FRAGA, LPT (Sgd)

Teacher, Research3

Approved by:

VIDA MAY TIROL DE JUAN, LPT, PHD (Sgd)

Principal

Conformed by the panel of evaluators:

MARLON LAJERA (Sgd) JOCELIE JOY DUMAYAC (Sgd) JASMIN ASOY (Sgd)
 44

APPENDIX B
DRY-RUN QUESTIONNAIRE

LESSON 2: Comparing, Ordering, and Rounding Off Decimals

1. Which symbol is appropriate for the two decimals? 0.56_0.056

A. > C. =
B. < D. ≤

2. Round off 0.489 to nearest tenth.

A. 0.05 C. 0.5
B. 0.3 D. 0.4

3. Which symbol is appropriate for the two decimals? 0.072_0.702.

A. > C.=
B. < D. ≤

4. Compare the decimals through symbol 0.25_0.025

A. < C.=
B. > D. ≤

5. Which set of number is arranged from least to greatest?

A. 0.03, 0.04, 0.02 C. 0.3, 0.4, 0.5
B. 0.3, 0.004, 0.05 D. 0.3, 0.04, 0.5

6. Order the following numbers from greatest to least.

29.29, 0.29, 92.92, 0.029

A. 92.92, 0.29, 29.92, 0.029 C. 0.29, 0.029, 92.92, 29.29

B. 92.92, 29.29, 0.29, 0.029 D. 0.029, 0.29, 29.29, 92.92
7. Which symbol is appropriate in the blank? (0.012+0.12)_(0.120+0.0120)
A. > C. =
B. < D. ≤
8. Which set of number round off to 40.37?
A. 40.368, 40.375, 40.381 C. 40.369, 40.361, 40.372, 40.375
B. 40.375, 40.371, 40.378 D. 40.368, 40.369, 40.371, 40.373
 45

9. Which of the numbers round off to 40.37?

A. 4.05 C.0.4
B.4.6 D.4.06
10. Round off 3.043 to the nearest thousandth.
A. 3.044 C. 3.043
B. 3.042 D. 3.041

LESSON 3: Adding and Subtracting Decimals

1. Find the sum of 0.31, 0.031, 3.10, and 3.133

A. 6.745 C. 6.547

B. 6.457 D. 6.574

2. What is the sum of 2341.302 + 1300.132?

A. 1, 041.17 C. 3, 417.4835
B. 3, 641.434 D. 3, 741.4358

3. How do we add a set of decimal of varying number of decimals?

A. Align all the digits starting at the right
B. Align all the digit starting at the left
C. Align all the decimal points
D. Insert zeros to replace missing digit

4. My money is ₱20.00 and I want to buy a bottle of water costs ₱13.68.

How much is my change?
A. ₱6.32 C. ₱33.68
B. ₱99.33 D. ₱36.38
5. What is the sum 9+9 tenths + 3thousands + 8 hundredths in decimal?
A. 9.933 C. 993.3
B. 99.33 D. 9.993

6. When we add 3.001 and 0.301, the answer is ______.

A. 2.700 C. 3.300
B. 2.71 D. 3.302
 46

7. What is the missing number from the given equation? 65.52 –

12.81=______
A. 78.33 C. 52.71
B. 73.38 D. 57.21

8. Jake’s daily allowance was ₱100.00 and he saved ₱25.25 on that day.
How much did he spend on that day?
A. ₱75.00 C. ₱75.47
B. ₱74.75 D. ₱125.20
9. Subtract 3, 412.827 from 5204.782.
A. 3,971.795 C. 7, 911.597
B. 2, 791.957 D. 1, 791.957
10. Add 1, 042.72 and 821.64
A. 1, 864.36 C. 1, 021.08
B. 1, 201.80 D. 1, 648.63

LESSON 4: Multiplying and Dividing Decimals

1. What is the quotient of 1.44+1 .2?

A. 1.4 C. 2.4
B. 1.2 D. 2.2
2. Determine the product of 0.07 and 0.8
A. 0.0056 C. 0.056
B. 5.6 D. 0.56
3. Evaluate the equation (1.5 x 3.8) ÷ 0.2=N
A. 28.5 C. 285.05
B. 25.8 D. 20.85

4. Maria wants to go to the movies with her friends. Each ticket is ₱9.50.
How much would 5 tickets cost?
A. ₱45.70 C. ₱40.70
B. ₱47.50 D. ₱45.60
5. Find the divided of: _÷0.3=3.
A. 0.009
B.
6. Find the missing decimal 3.2×____=3.84.
A. 1.2 C.12.288
B. 1.02 D. 10.2
 47

7. What is the product of 0.2 and 1.5?

A. 0.03 C. 0.003
B. 0.30 D. 0.50

8. What is the divisor of .10 to get the quotient .5?

A. 5.05 C. 0.050
B. 0.005 D. 0.5

9. Determine the product of 3.01 and 3.1

A. 9.331 C. 0.9331
B. 933.1 D. 93.31

10. What is the product of 1.32 and 4.2?

A. 554.4 C. 544
B. 5.544 D. 55.44

LESSON 5: Solving Problems Involving Decimals

1. Smith spent ₱5.25 for a meal and ₱1.75 for a drink. How much did
Smith spend?
A. ₱3.50 C. ₱7.00
B. ₱6.00 D. ₱6.50

2. Linda cut 12.65 cm from a stick that was 15.15 cm long. How long is the
stick now?
A. 2.85 cm C. 28.50 cm
B. 28.15 cm D. 21.80 cm

3. My father’s money is ₱1,200.150. The money will be shared equally by

10 children. How much will each child get?
A. ₱120.15 C. ₱120.50
B. ₱102.05 D. ₱120.05

4. The exchange rate of a US dollar to Philippine peso at a certain time

was
₱ 49.75. What was the value of 500 US dollars in peso?
A. ₱28.745 C. ₱26, 847
B. ₱24, 875 D. ₱25, 478

5. The cost of 50 m rope was ₱102.10. If I want to buy 150 meters. What
would be the cost the rope?
 48

A. ₱306.30 C. ₱360.60
B. ₱303.60 D. ₱330.30
6. Lito gave 50 pieces of ₱0.75 for their sinking fund. How much did he
give for the fund?
A. ₱30.50 C. ₱37.50
B. ₱35.20 D. ₱35.70
7. The mass of 1 jar of sugar is 1.92 kg. What is the total mass of 4 jars of
sugar?
A. 78.6 kg C. 76.8 kg
B. 7.68 kg D. 7.86 kg
8. The length of a ribbon is 1.28 m. The length of a string is 2.74 m longer
than the ribbon. What is the length of the string?
A. 1.46 m C. 40.2 m

B. 14.6 m D. 4.02 m
9. A human hair grows at a rate of 1.25 cm per month. How long would a
strand of hair grows in one year?
A. 15 cm C. 8 cm
B. 7.5 cm D. 9 cm
10. A bottle holds 1.2 liters of water. A pail holds three times of the bottle.
What is the volume of water in a pail?
A. 2.4 liters C. 1.5 liters
B. 3.6 liters D. 2 liters

LESSON 1: Angles

1. It is the common end point of the two rays.

A. Angle C. Ray
B. Vertex D. Segment

2. Which angle is 90
A. Straight angle C. Obtuse angle
B. Acute angle D. Right angle
 49

3. What are the degrees in acute angle?

A. Below 90 degrees C. At 45 degrees only
B. Above 70 degrees D. Between 90 and 70
4. It is an angle that measures between 90 and 180.
A. Acute angle C. Right angle
B. Obtuse angle D. Straight angle

Refer ( 5, 6, 7)
D
A

C
B

5. <ABC is called _____.

A. Acute angle C. Obtuse angle
B. Right angle D. Straight angle

6. The degree of <DBC is ______.

A. 90 degrees C. 180 degrees
B. 30 degrees D. 60 degrees
7. What angle is <EBC?
A. Acute angle C. Right angle
B. Obtuse angle D. Straight angle
 50

8. Which among the figure is an obtuse angle?

A.

90

B.

60
60

45
C. 45

D.
95

9. Which of the following is not an acute angle?

A.

B.

C.

D.

10. What is an angle?

A. It is a point where two lines meet to form an angle.
B. It is a long narrow mark on a surface.
C. It is a part of a straight line between two points.
D. Is the figure form by two rays.
 51

Answer Key

Lesson 2 Lesson 3 Lesson 4

1. A 1. D 1. B
2. C 2. B 2. C
3. B 3. C 3. A
4. B 4. A 4. B
5. C 5. A 5. D
6. B 6. D 6. A
7. C 7. C 7. B
8. D 8. B 8.C
9. D 9. D 9.C
10. C 10. A 10.B

Lesson 5 Lesson 1
1. C 1. B
2. A 2. D
3. D 3. A
4. B 4. B
5. A 5. C
6. C 6. A
7. B 7. A
8. D 8. C
9. A 9. D
10. B 10. D
 52

APPENDIX C
ITEM ANALYSIS RESULT

Difficulty Discrimination
Items Remarks Remarks Decision
Index Index
Lesson 2: Comparing, Ordering, and Rounding Off Decimals
Moderately
1 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
0.46 0.15
Moderately
2. 0.5 0.5 Very Good Accept
Difficult
Reasonably
3 0.62 Easy 0.31 Accept
Good
Moderately Reasonably
4 0.5 0.4 Accept
Difficult Good
Moderately Marginal
5 0.58 0.23 Accept
Difficult Item
Very
6 0.19 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
7 0.2 Difficult 0.2 Poor Item Improve
Very
8 0.08 0 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Very
9 0.1 -0.1 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Reasonably
10 0.31 Difficult 0.31 Accept
Good
Lesson 3: Adding and Subtracting Decimals
Moderately Marginal
1 0.4 0.2 Accept
Difficult Item
Moderately
2 0.5 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
 53

Marginal
3 0.27 Difficult 0.23 Accept
Item
Moderately
4 0.5 0.2 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
5 0.27 Difficult 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Moderately Marginal
6 0.4 0.2 Accept
Difficult Item
Moderately
7 0.42 0.54 Very Good Accept
Difficult
8 0.23 Difficult 0.15 Poor Item Improve
Very
9 0.19 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Moderately
10 0.46 0.15 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Lesson 4: Multiplying and Dividing Decimals
Very
1 0.15 0 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
2 0.23 Difficult 0 Poor Item Improve
Very
3 0.08 0 Poor Item Improve
Diffcult
Marginal
4 0.35 Difficult 0.23 Accept
Item
5 0.27 Difficult 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Marginal
6 0.35 Difficult 0.23 Accept
Item
Reasonably
7 0.31 Difficult 0.31 Accept
Good
Very Reasonably
8 0.19 0.38 Improve
Difficult Good
 54

Very
9 0 0 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
10 0.62 Easy 0.15 Poor Item Improve
Lesson 5: Solving Problems Involving Decimals
1 0.27 Difficult -0.1 Poor Item Improve
2 0.23 Difficult 0.15 Poor Item Improve
Very
3 0.15 0.15 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Marginal
4 0.27 Difficult 0.23 Accept
Item
Very
5 0.154 0.154 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
6 0.31 Difficult 0.46 Very Good Accept
7 0.35 Difficult 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Very
8 0.15 0 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Very
9 0.15 0.15 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Very
10 0.154 0.154 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
Lesson 1: Angles
Reasonably
1 0.27 Difficult 0.38 Accept
Good
Very Reasonably
2 0.19 0.38 Improve
Difficult Good
3 0.23 Difficult 0.15 Poor Item Accept
Very
4 0.15 0.15 Poor Item Accept
Difficult
5 0.308 Difficult 0.462 Very Good Accept
 55

Moderately
6 0.46 0.46 Very Good Accept
Difficult
Moderately Reasonably
7 0.462 0.308 Accept
Difficult Good
Reasonably
8 0.23 Difficult 0.31 Accept
Good
Reasonably
9 0.23 Difficult 0.31 Accept
Good
Very
10 0.19 0.08 Poor Item Improve
Difficult
 56

APPENDIX D
PRE-TEST/ POST-TEST QUESTIONNAIRE
THE USE OF CHALK-BOARD AND MANIPULATIVE STRATEGIES IN TEACHING
MATH IV IN UB LOON INSTITUTE

UB-LOON INSTITUTE
LOON, BOHOL

Vision: A premier institution nurturing knowledge-empowered, socially-responsible, and service-

oriented learners for sustainable growth and development of the society.
Mission: To provide quality education through a child-friendly environment with relevant and
real-life learning experiences to prepare learners to be responsible civic and digital citizens

LESSON 2: Comparing, Ordering, and Rounding Off Decimals

1. Which symbol is appropriate for the two decimals? 0.56_0.056

A. > C. =
B. < D. ≤
2. Round off 0.489 to nearest tenth.
A. 0.05 C. 0.5
B. 0.3 D. 0.4
3. Which symbol is appropriate for the two decimals? 0.072 _ 0.702.
A. > C.=
B. < D. ≤
4. Compare the decimals through symbol 0.25_0.025
A. < C.=
B. > D. ≤
5. Which set of number is arranged from least to greatest?
A. 0.03, 0.04, 0.02 C. 0.3, 0.4, 0.5
B. 0.3, 0.004, 0.05 D. 0.3, 0.04, 0.5
6. Order the following numbers from greatest to least.
29.29, 0.29, 92.92, 0.029
A. 92.92, 0.29, 29.92, 0.029 C. 0.29, 0.029, 92.92, 29.29
B. 92.92, 29.29, 0.29, 0.029 D. 0.029, 0.29, 29.29, 92.92
7. Round off 3.043 to the nearest thousandth.
A. 3.044 C. 3.043
B. 3.042 D. 3.041
 57

THE USE OF CHALK-BOARD AND MANIPULATIVE STRATEGIES IN

TEACHING MATH IV IN UB LOON INSTITUTE

UB-LOON INSTITUTE
LOON, BOHOL

Vision: A premier institution nurturing knowledge-empowered, socially-responsible, and service-

oriented learners for sustainable growth and development of the society.
Mission: To provide quality education through a child-friendly environment with relevant and
real-life learning experiences to prepare learners to be responsible civic and digital citizens

LESSON 3: Adding and Subtracting Decimals

1. Find the sum of 0.31, 0.031, 3.10, and 3.133

A. 6.745 C. 6.547
B. 6.457 D. 6.574
2. What is the sum of 2341.302 + 1300.132?
A. 1, 041.17 C. 3, 417.4835
B. 3, 641.434 D. 3, 741.4358
3. How do we add a set of decimal of varying number of decimals?
A. Align all the digits starting at the right
B. Align all the digit starting at the left
C. Align all the decimal points
D. Insert zeros to replace missing digit
4. My money is ₱20.00 and I want to buy a bottle of water costs ₱13.68.
How much is my change?
A. ₱6.32 C. ₱7.32
B. ₱5.83 D. ₱6.38
5. When we add 3.001 and 0.301, the answer is ______.
A. 2.700 C. 3.300
B. 2.71 D. 3.302
6. What is the missing number from the given equation? 65.52 –
12.81=______
A. 78.33 C. 52.71
B. 73.38 D. 57.21

7. Jake’s daily allowance was ₱100.00 and he saved ₱25.25 on that day.
How much did he spend on that day?
A. ₱75.00 C. ₱75.47
B. ₱74.75 D. ₱125.20
 58

THE USE OF CHALK-BOARD AND MANIPULATIVE STRATEGIES IN

TEACHING MATH IV IN UB LOON INSTITUTE

UB-LOON INSTITUTE
LOON, BOHOL

Vision: A premier institution nurturing knowledge-empowered, socially-responsible, and service-

oriented learners for sustainable growth and development of the society.
Mission: To provide quality education through a child-friendly environment with relevant and
real-life learning experiences to prepare learners to be responsible civic and digital citizens

LESSON 4: Multiplying and Dividing Decimals

1. What is the quotient of 10÷ 0.8?
A. 1.25 C. 0.125
B. 12.5 D. 0.0125
2.Maria wants to go to the movies with her friends. Each ticket is ₱9.50.
How much would 5 tickets cost?
A. ₱45.70 C. ₱40.70
B. ₱47.50 D. ₱45.60
3. Find the missing decimal 3.2 × ____=3.84.
A. 1.2 C.12.288
B. 1.02 D. 10.2
4. What is the product of 0.2 and 1.5?
A. 0.03 C. 0.003
B. 0.30 D. 0.50
5. What is the divisor of .10 to get the quotient .5?
A. 5.05 C. 0.050
B. 0.005 D. 0.5
6. Determine the product of 3.01 and 3.1
A. 9.331 C. 0.9331
B. 933.1 D. 93.31
7. What is the product of 1.32 and 4.2?
A. 554.4 C. 544
B. 5.544 D. 55.44
 59

THE USE OF CHALK-BOARD AND MANIPULATIVE STRATEGIES IN TEACHING

MATH IV IN UB LOON INSTITUTE

UB-LOON INSTITUTE
LOON, BOHOL

Vision: A premier institution nurturing knowledge-empowered, socially-responsible, and service-

oriented learners for sustainable growth and development of the society.
Mission: To provide quality education through a child-friendly environment with relevant and
real-life learning experiences to prepare learners to be responsible civic and digital citizens

LESSON 5: Solving Problems Involving Decimals

1. Smith spent ₱5.25 for a meal and ₱1.75 for a drink. How much did Smith
spend?
A. ₱3.50 C. ₱7.00
B. ₱6.00 D. ₱6.50
2. Linda cut 12.65 cm from a stick that was 15.50 cm long. How long is the
stick now?
A. 2.85 cm C. 28.50 cm
B. 28.15 cm D. 21.80 cm
3. My father’s money is ₱1,200.150. The money will be shared equally by
10 children. How much will each child get?
A. ₱120.015 C. ₱120.50
B. ₱102.05 D. ₱120.05
4. The exchange rate of a US dollar to Philippine peso at a certain time
was ₱ 49.75. What was the value of 500 US dollars in peso?
A. ₱28.745 C. ₱26, 847
B. ₱24, 875 D. ₱25, 478
5. The cost of 50 m rope was ₱102.10. If I want to buy 150 meters. What
would be the cost the rope?
A. ₱306.30 C. ₱360.60
B. ₱303.60 D. ₱330.30
6. Lito gave 50 pieces of ₱0.75 for their sinking fund. How much did he
give for the fund?
A. ₱30.50 C. ₱37.50
B. ₱35.20 D. ₱35.70
7. The mass of 1 jar of sugar is 1.92 kg. What is the total mass of 4 jars of
sugar?
A. 78.6 kg C. 76.8 kg
B. 7.68 kg D. 7.86 kg
 60

THE USE OF CHALK-BOARD AND MANIPULATIVE STRATEGIES IN

TEACHING MATH IV IN UB LOON INSTITUTE

UB-LOON INSTITUTE
LOON, BOHOL

Vision: A premier institution nurturing knowledge-empowered, socially-responsible, and service-

oriented learners for sustainable growth and development of the society.
Mission: To provide quality education through a child-friendly environment with relevant and
real-life learning experiences to prepare learners to be responsible civic and digital citizens

LESSON 1: Angles

3. It is the common end point of the two rays.

C. Angle C. Ray
D. Vertex D. Segment
4. It is an angle that measures between 90° and 180°.
C. Acute angle C. Right angle
D. Obtuse angle D. Straight angle

Refer ( 3, 4, 5)
D
A

C
B

3. <ABC is called _____.

C. Acute angle C. Obtuse angle
D. Right angle D. Straight angle

4. The degree of <DBC is ______.

C. 90 degrees C. 180 degrees
D. 30 degrees D. 60 degrees
5. What angle is <EBC?
C. Acute angle C. Right angle
D. Obtuse angle D. Straight angle
 61

6.Which among the figure is an obtuse angle?

E.

90

F.

60
60

45
G. 45

H.
95

7. Which of the following is not an acute angle?

E.

F.

G.

H.
 62

Answer Key

Lesson 2 Lesson 3 Lesson 4

1. A 1. D 1. B
2. C 2. B 2. B
3. B 3. C 3. A
4. B 4. A 4. B
5. C 5. D 5. C
6. B 6. C 6. A
7. C 7. B 7. B

Lesson 5 Lesson 1
1. C 1. B
2. A 2. B
3. A 3. C
4. B 4. A
5. A 5. A
6. C 6. D
7. B 7. C
 63

APPENDIX E
PRE-TEST AND POSTTEST RESULTS
Student’s Performance Using Chalk-Board Strategy

Chalk-Board Strategy
Respondents
Pre-test (X1) Posttest (X2)
14 15
1
13 24
2
10 14
3
8 17
4
10 14
5
11 16
6
10 21
7
11 11
8
7 12
9

Total ∑x1= 94 ∑x2= 144

Mean(x̅) x̅1= 10.44 x̅2= 16

HS 14 24

LS 7 11

Range 7 13

SD 2.19 4.18
 64

PRE-TEST AND POSTTEST RESULTS

Student’s Performance Using Manipulative Strategy

Manipulative Strategy
Respondents
Pre-test (X1) Posttest (X2)
15 29
1
16 22
2
13 17
3
9 14
4
6 18
5
14 16
6
5 12
7
5 12
8
7 13
9

Total ∑x1= 155 ∑x2= 236

Mean(x̅) x̅1= 15.5 x̅2= 23.6

HS 16 29

LS 5 12

Range 11 17

SD 4.5 5.55
 65

Pretest Results with the Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative Strategies

PRETEST SCORES
RESPONDENTS
2 2
X Y (X 1 – X1) (X1– X1) (Y1– Y1) (Y1– Y1)
1 1
1 14 15 3.56 12.6736 5 25

2 13 16 2.56 6.5536 6 36

3 10 13 -0.44 0.1936 3 9

4 8 9 -2.44 5.9536 -1 1

5 10 6 -0.44 0.1936 -4 16

6 11 14 0.56 0.3136 4 16

7 10 5 -0.44 0.1936 -5 25

8 11 5 0.56 0.3136 -5 25

9 7 7 -3.44 11.8336 -3 9

N=9
ΣX1= ΣY1= Σ(X –X ) = Σ(X 1 – Σ(Y1– Σ(Y1– Y
1 1 X1)² =
94 Y1) = 0 )² =
90 0.04 1
X= 38.2224 162
1 Y1=
10.44 10
 66

Post-test Results with the Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative

Strategies

POSTTEST SCORES
RESPONDENTS X Y
2 2 2 2
(X 2 – X2) (X2– X ) (Y2– Y ) (Y2– Y )
2 2 2
1 15 29 -1 1 12 144

2 24 22 8 64 5 25

3 14 17 -2 4 0 0

4 17 14 1 1 -3 9

5 14 18 -2 4 1 1

6 16 16 0 0 -1 1

7 21 12 5 25 -5 25

8 11 12 -5 25 -5 25

9 12 13 -4 16 -4 16

N=9
ΣX2= ΣY2= Σ(X –X ) = Σ(X 2– Σ(Y2– Σ(Y2– Y
2 2
144 X2)² = Y)= )²2=
153 2
X= 0 140 0 246
2 Y2=
16 17
 67

APPENDIX F
Tabular Computation
The Use of Chalk-Board Strategy in Teaching Math IV

Respondents Pre- Post-

2 2 2
Test (X1– X ) (X1– X ) Test (X 2– X ) (X1– X ) D D
1 1 2 1

1
14 3.56 12.6736 15 -1 1 -1 1
2
13 2.56 6.5536 24 8 64 -11 121
3
10 -0.44 0.1936 14 -2 4 -4 16
4
8 -2.44 5.9536 17 1 1 -9 81
5
10 -0.44 0.1936 14 -2 4 -4 16
6
11 0.56 0.3136 16 0 0 -5 25
7
10 -0.44 0.1936 21 5 25 -11 121
8
11 0.56 0.3136 11 -5 25 0 0
9
7 12
-3.44 11.8336 -4 16 -5 25
N=9
ΣX1= Σ(X –X ) Σ(X1 – ΣX = Σ(X2–X ) Σ(X 2–
1 1 2
94 = X1)² = 144 = X2)² = ΣD = ΣD2
X= 0.04 0 -50 =
1
38.2224 X2= 140
406
10.44 16
 68

The Use of Manipulative Strategy in Teaching Math IV

Respondents Pre- Post-

2 2 2
Test (Y1– Y ) (Y1– Y ) Test (Y2– Y ) (Y2– Y ) D D
1 1 2 2

1 15 5 25 29 12 144 -14 196

2
16 6 36 22 5 25 -6 36
3
13 3 9 17 0 0 -4 16
4
9 -1 1 14 -3 9 -5 25
5
6 -4 16 18 1 1 -12 144
6
14 4 16 16 -1 1 -2 4
7
5 -5 25 12 -5 25 -7 49
8
5 -5 25 12 -5 25 -7 49
9
7 -3 9 13 -4 16 -6 36
N=9 ΣY1=
90 Σ(Y1– Σ(Y1– Y ΣY2= Σ(Y2– Σ(Y2– Y
Y1) = 0 )² =
1
Y)=
2 )²2= ΣD ΣD2
Y1= 153
162 246 = =
10 Y2= 0
-63 555
17
 69

APPENDIX G
Sample Computation for Chalk-Board Strategy of Teaching

Pre-test Post-test

Range= HS-LS Range = HS-LS

= 14 - 7 = 24-11

=7 = 13

X= ΣX1 X = ΣX₂
N N
= 94 = 144
9 9
= 10.44 = 16

Standard Deviation

∑(𝑋−𝑋 2 2
1) ∑(𝑋−𝑋
2 2)
SD=√ SD=√
1
𝑛−1 𝑛−1

𝟑𝟖. 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟒 𝟏𝟒𝟎

=√ =√
𝟖 𝟖

=√𝟒. 𝟕𝟕𝟕𝟖 =√𝟏𝟕. 𝟓

= 2.19 = 4.18
 70

Sample Computation for Manipulative Strategy of Teaching

Pre-test Post-test

Range= HS-LS Range = HS-LS

= 16-5 = 29-12

= 11 = 17

Y= ΣY1 Y = ΣY₂
N N
= 90 = 153
9 9
= 10 = 17

Standard Deviation

∑(𝑌−𝑌 2 2
1 1) ∑(𝑌−𝑌2)
SD=√ SD=√
2
𝑛−1 𝑛−1

𝟏𝟔𝟐 𝟐𝟒𝟔
=√ =√
𝟖 𝟖

=√𝟐𝟎. 𝟐𝟓 =√𝟑𝟎. 𝟕𝟓

= 4.5 = 5.55
 71

T-test Independent Computation for the Posttest of Chalk-Board and

Manipulative Strategies

(𝑋1 – 𝑋2 )
t=
2 2
√𝑆𝑑1 + 𝑆𝑑2
𝑛1 𝑛2

(16−17)
= 2 2
√4.18 + 5.55
9 9

−1
=
17.4724 30.8025
√ +
9 9

−1
=
√1.94+3.42
−1
=
√5.36
−1
=
2.32
= │-0.43│
= 0.43
 72

APPENDIX H
Time Table in the Conduct of Both Strategies
Day Topic / Activities Duration Evaluation

1 Pre-test 1 hour Quiz

2 Discussion about 1 hour Quiz

Comparing, Ordering, and
Rounding Off Decimals
(Chalk-Board Strategy)
3 Discussion about 1 hour Quiz
Comparing, Ordering, and
Rounding Off Decimals
(Manipulative Strategy)
4 Discussion about Adding 1 hour Quiz
and Subtracting Decimals
(Chalk-Board Strategy)
5 Discussion about Adding 1 hour Quiz
and Subtracting Decimals
(Manipulative Strategy)
6 Discussion about 1 hour Quiz
Multiplying and Dividing
Decimals (Chalk-Board
Strategy)
7 Discussion about 1 hour Quiz
Multiplying and Dividing
Decimals (Manipulative
Strategy)
8 Discussion about Solving 1 hour Quiz
Problems Involving
Decimals (Chalk-Board
Strategy)
9 Discussion about Solving 1 hour Quiz
Problems Involving
Decimals (Manipulative
Strategy)
10 Discussion about Angles 1 hour Quiz
(Chalk-Board Strategy)
11 Discussion about Angles 1 hour Quiz
(Manipulative Strategy)
12 Posttest 1 hour Quiz
 73

APPENDIX I
Daily Evaluation of the Respondents
Chalk-Board Strategy

Respondents Quiz Quiz Quiz Quiz Quiz

1 2 3 4 5
HPS 10 % 10 % 10 % 10 % 10 %

1 7 70 6 60 4 40 8 80 10 100

2 10 100 8 80 5 50 10 100 8 80

3 8 80 10 100 7 70 8 80 8 80

4 8 80 5 50 5 50 6 60 7 70

5 6 60 7 70 4 40 8 80 7 100

6 5 50 7 70 6 60 7 70 9 100

7 6 60 8 80 7 70 10 100 7 70

8 8 80 10 100 5 50 9 90 8 80

9 7 70 8 80 8 80 9 90 8 100

∑ 65 650 69 690 51 510 75 750 72 720

Mean 7.22 72.2 7.67 76. 5.67 56. 8.33 83. 8 80

2 67 67 33
 74

Manipulative Strategy

Respondents Quiz Quiz Quiz Quiz Quiz

1 2 3 4 5
HPS 10 % 10 % 10 % 10 % 10 %

1 8 80 5 50 7 70 10 100 9 90

2 10 100 10 100 5 50 5 100 10 100

3 8 80 8 80 8 80 7 70 7 70

4 5 50 6 60 6 60 9 90 10 100

5 7 70 5 50 5 50 7 70 10 100

6 10 100 9 90 4 40 8 80 10 100

7 7 70 10 100 8 80 8 80 6 60

8 8 80 10 100 5 50 9 90 8 80

9 9 90 8 80 8 80 10 100 9 90

∑ 72 720 71 710 56 560 73 730 79 790

Mean 8 80 7.89 78. 6.22 62. 8.11 81. 8.78 87.7

89 22 11 8
 75

SUMMARY GRAPH

90

80

70

60

50
Chalk-Board Strategy

40 Manipulative Strategy

30

20

10

0
Quiz 1 Quiz 2 Quiz 3 Quiz 4 Quiz 5

Figure 3. Graphical Presentation of Daily Evaluation Results with The

Use of Chalk-Board and Manipulative Strategies
 76

APPENDIX J
DOCUMENTATION
Chalk-Board Method of Teaching Grade 4 Pupils
 77

Manipulative Method of Teaching Grade 4 Pupils

 78

RESEARCHER’S BIODATA

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Timoteo P. Mejorada Jr.

Address: Cogon Sur, Loon Bohol
Birth Date: November 17, 2001
Birth Place: Cogon Norte, Loon, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Timoteo A. Mejorada Sr.
Mother: Lilia P. Mejorada

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute (2018-

Junior High School: Governor Jacinto Borja NHS

Elementary School: Bagacay Saong Elementary School

: Cogon Norte, Elementary School

HONORS/AWARDS RECEIVED

ELEMENTARY LEVEL
 79

Grade 1 – 4th honor

Grade 2 – 5th honor

Grade 3 – 4th honor

Grade 4 – With Honor

Grade 5 – 2nd honor

Grade 6 – Salutatorian

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL

Grade 7 –4th honor

Grade 8 – 5th honor

Grade 9 – 5th honor

Grade 10 – With Honor

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL

Grade 11 – With Honor

CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATIONS

President: Skarta Club (Visual Artist) (S.Y. 2019-2020)

Auditor: Supreme Student Government (S.Y. 2019-2020)

 80

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: John Ashley Uy

Address: Song-on, Loon, Bohol
Birth Date: September 21, 2001
Birth Place: Jagna, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Charles Uy
Mother:

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Sto. Niño De La Paz Elementary School

HONORS/AWARDS RECEIVED

ELEMENTARY LEVEL

Grade 1 – most obedience

Grade 2 – most behave

Grade 3 – most respectful

 81

Grade 4 – most loyal

Grade 5 – best in drawing

Grade 6 – religion awardee

CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATIONS

Member: Skarta Club ( Visual Artist)

 82

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Jasper Olaivar

Address: Tangnan, Loon, Bohol
Birth Date:March 30, 2002
Birth Place: Tangnan, Loon, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Pablo Olaivar
Mother: Clementina Olaivar

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Loon South central Elementary School

HONORS/AWARDS RECEIVED

ELEMENTARY LEVEL

Grade 1 – With honors

Grade 2 – With honors

Grade 3 – With honors

 83

Grade 4 – With honors

Grade 5 – With honors

Grade 6 – With honors

 84

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Lovely Geniston

Address: Pig ot, Loon, Bohol
Birth Date:March 22, 2002
Birth Place: Tagbilaran, Bohol
Sex: Female
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Mother: Maria Connifel Geniston

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Pig-ot Elementary School

 85

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Karl Carcasona

Address: Song-on, Loon, Bohol
Birth Date: June 16, 2002
Birth Place: Song-on, Loon, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Samuel Carcasona
Mother: Llerma Carcasona

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Sto. Niño De La Paz Elementary School

CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL AFFILIATIONS

Member: Sports Club

 86

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Brael M. Rasonabe

Address: Punsod, Maribojoc, Bohol
Birth Date:October 17, 2001
Birth Place: Punsod, Maribojoc, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Ireneo Rasonabe
Mother: Gaudencia Rasonabe

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Maribojoc central Elementary School

HONORS/AWARDS RECEIVED

ELEMENTARY LEVEL

Grade 1 – most loyal

Grade 2 – most behave

 87

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Jerrimel Mirontos

Address: Punsod, Maribojoc, Bohol
Birth Date: August 31, 2000
Birth Place: Punsod, Loon, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Romil Mirontos
Mother: Riza Mirontos

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Maribojoc central Elementary School

 88

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Rabroyd C. Arcales

Address: Moto Norte, Loon, Bohol
Birth Date: December 11, 2000
Birth Place: Maribojoc, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Ricardo S. Arcales
Mother: Cherryl C. Arcales

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Bohol Wisdom School

HONORS/AWARDS RECEIVED

ELEMENTARY LEVEL

Grade 3 – most punctual

Grade 4 – most punctual

 89

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

Name: Edcel R. Ceballos

Address: Canhangdon Oriental Loon, Bohol
Birth Date: July 30, 2001
Birth Place: Basac Loon, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single

Parents
Father: Pedro Edlin R. Ceballos
Mother: Hermelina R. Ceballos

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School:

PERSONAL BACKGROUND
 90

Name: Louie Lera –not yet

Address: Moto Norte, Loon, Bohol
Birth Date: December 11, 2000
Birth Place: Maribojoc, Bohol
Sex: Male
Nationality: Filipino
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Parents
Father: Ricardo S. Arcales
Mother: Cherryl C. Arcales

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Senior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Junior High School: UB-Loon Institute

Elementary School: Bohol Wisdom School