Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

Science education is essential in nation building as it provides advances in

every aspect of each individual lives. According to Durban & Catalan (2012),
Filipinos regarded education as the most effective vehicle for social mobility. They
saw it as way to improve their social status as the country moves through
modernization.

As technology drives the development of every society, the impact of Science

is significantly evident and will continue influence for the coming years (Dacumos,
2016). In a world that is becoming increasingly complex, where success is driven
not only by what you know, but also by what you can do with the knowledge, it is
imperative for youths to be equipped with skills to solve tough problems, gather
and evaluate evidence, and make sense of information (Lawal, 2017).

However, according to Dacumos (2016), despite the importance and great

impact of Science, students perceive it as a difficult subject. It is a common
observation that learning Science creates more negative feedback to many
learners than seeing its economic value. As cited by Porter and Pavin (2008)
students at the age of 9 have positive feedbacks on Science but drastically
declined when they reached the age of 14 and got uninterested to Science by the
age of 16. It indicates that students during junior high school have difficulties in
Science.

The two international sources of information and analysis on science

education, i.e. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and
Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), aim to assess the extent of
student’s achievement in Science and other fields. TIMSS, specifically, is an
international study on student’s ability to solve scientific as well as mathematical
problems participated by many countries around the world. In this assessment, the
Philippines was among the bottom five of poor performers in Math and Science.
Dela Cruz (2012) reported that the Philippines placed 36th in science out of the 38
countries who participated in the said assessment. Similarly, results in the 2003
TIMSS showed that the country ranked 23rd of the 25 countries in grade four
science and 42nd out of the 45 participating countries in second year science
(Dacumos, 2016).

Aside from international agencies, Philippine itself assess its educational

attainment every year through National Achievement Test (NAT). It was given both
in elementary and secondary schools. Based from NAT results, Science is one of
the subject areas which got unsatisfactory rating most especially in junior high
school. As reported by Dios (2013), on NAT 2005, science got the lowest mean
percentage (MPS) of 39.9. It was also noted that science is the only learning area
who got a MPS of 41.45 which is 10 points lower from overall MPS of 51.41. It
indicates that the difficulty of Science as a subject among students are still seen in
the Philippines.

Even in the school level, La Filipina National High School drastically declined
in the NAT result in science on S.Y. 2013 - 2014 and S.Y. 2014 - 2015. From Mean
Percentage Score (MPS) of 63.93 in S.Y. 2013 -2014, it becomes 29.28 in the S.Y.
2014 - 2015. Despite from the various factors presented by the teachers and
administrators, it is very alarming to be acquainted in the trend of NAT results in
the past few years. Thus, there is a need that teachers must be creative and
innovative in the delivery of lessons and even in the intervention material.

As mentioned by Dy (2011), teacher must have initiative to make and use

instructional materials to lessen the gap of low performance in the academe. These
materials must facilitate the mastery and development of skills out from least
learned competencies. This is where the Strategic Intervention Material or SIM
come into play.
 Review of Related Literature

Aside from the large number of students, lack of facilities, and students’
behavior, one problem a teacher greatly faces is pointing out the appropriate and
effective strategy to apply in class to make the students’ learning more significant.
Teachers face many problems in teaching but these problems can be solved with
genuine desire to conquer these difficulties with appropriate teaching aids,
approaches and strategies (Albuoruto, 2017).

Another, studies across the country has shown that one of the effective
approaches and strategies that develop a learner’s potentials is through
scaffolding. According to Rosseau (2018), in education, scaffolding refers to
various instructional techniques that help you move your students forward to
stronger understanding of what they are learning, and to a greater independence
in their own learning processes and development.

On the other hand, Sawyer as cited by Villareal (2006) stated that

instructional scaffolding is a learning process designed to promote a deeper level
of learning. Thus, through guided assistance learners can successfully perform
tasks and can later on do it on their own. This is also supported by Al Aila (2015)
when he mentioned that guidance and collaboration with a more knowledgeable
person causes movement of learners from a lower level to a higher level.

In addition, materials herein this study such as advance organizers, cue

cards, concept and mind map, examples, explanations, handouts, hints, prompts,
question cards, question stems, and visual scaffolds suggest a variety of scaffolds
to accommodate students’ different levels of knowledge (Alibali, 2006).
 These materials that can cater different levels of knowledge can be utilized
by introducing a Strategic Intervention Material or more commonly known as SIM.
Togonon (2011) pointed out that Strategic Intervention Material (SIM) is a type of
instructional material that deepens students’ skills in manipulation, thinking,
understanding and observing.

A teacher will be more efficient, effective, and productive if learning

materials are readily available. In fact, a Science classroom has more life if the
necessary learning materials are present. This can also lead to a more meaningful
learning for the students. However, most materials in a science classroom is
expensive thus making it difficult to acquire. The science teacher therefore, is
responsible to devise and provide the necessary materials for use in science
classes (Dy, 2007). This makes the SIM a powerful tool in the teaching-learning
process.

According to Diaz and Dio (2017), even the Department of Science and
Technology (DOST) recommends the use of SIM not only for remediation but in
teaching large classes as well. Also, the Department of Education (DepEd)
suggests the utilization of SIM in enhancing the academic achievement of students
who are performing low in Science and Technology.

As defined by Togonon (2011) Strategic Instructional Material is a user-

friendly instructional material that can be used inside the four corners of the
classroom or it can be given as a take home activity of students. Likewise, Diaz
and Dio (2017) assert that SIM can be answered solely by a student or by a group
of students through cooperative learning. Therefore, it can be use to focus on both
the learner’s independence and cooperation in learning.
 Furthermore, Dy (2012) affirms that the Strategic Intervention Materials
(SIM) aim to provide the students with a learning experience which could give them
the opportunities to harness their scientific skills and values through a simpler way
of understanding the contents of the subject.

According to Soberano (2009), SIM are intervention materials which

designed to help teachers provide the students a needed support to make
progress. He also furthered that they were instructional materials meant to re-teach
the concept(s) and skill(s) to help the learners master a competency-based skill
which they were not able to develop during classroom teaching.

In this study, the intervention material has five parts namely: the guide card,
activity card, assessment card, enrichment card, and answer card. Simply, the
intervention materials are designed by aligning the activities to the intended task
or objectives.

Moreover, Diaz and Dio (2017) confirms that the effectiveness of Strategic
Intervention Material has already been proven by a number of studies. Dy (2011)
recommended that her developed SIM may be adopted as instructional material to
facilitate learning and to improve the academic achievement of students in
Science. Soberano (2009) affirms that the strategic intervention materials were
effective in teaching competency-based skills. There was significant difference
between the mean scores in the posttests of the experimental and control groups.

Consequently, Dy (2017) stated that it is expected that the discussion of any

of the topics using the Strategic Intervention Materials (SIM) or in any science
lessons, the greater emphasis is on developing the science process skills, the
acquisition of values and habits of the mind that make the student a better problem
solver and an efficient decision maker.
Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on Scaffolding by Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976)

which consists of the activities provided by the educator, or more competent peer,
to support the student as he or she is led through the zone of proximal
development. Scaffolding became synonymous to Zone of Proximal Development
by Lev Vygotsky (1978) which is defined as the distance between what a student
can do with and without help.

However, this study focuses only on the intervention material for Biology
provided by the teacher as one means of scaffolding. In fact, according to Jacobs,
as cited by Vernenikina (2008) scaffolding appears to become an umbrella term
for any kind of teacher support.

Furthermore, in the study of Hill and Hannifin as cited by Stålbrandt and

Hössjer (2007) they mentioned four types of scaffold. Two of them are conceptual
scaffolds and procedural scaffolds.

Conceptual scaffolds could be maps, outlines and clarifying examples which

support the student to make choices about the selection or to prioritize what is
important information. On the other hand, Procedural scaffolds could be textual
charts, graphic representations, site navigation maps or instructions about the
working procedure which help the student to value resources and at the same time
reduce the cognitive load in the procedure of navigation. These two are the most
common scaffold that a Strategic Intervention Material or SIM can provide.
Conceptual Framework

This study seeks to examine the effectiveness of Strategic Intervention

Material or SIM as remediation for low-performing students in La Filipina National
High School in mastering the least learned competencies in Biology topics in the
third quarter of Grade 10
.
The study’s Independent Variable consists the Strategic Intervention
Material which according to Dy (2011) refers to a teaching aid introduced into the
teaching methods to stimulate the activity of the students and thereby increased
their level of understanding, while the Dependent Variable is the Student’s score
in the post test in Grade 10 Biology.

Still, according to Dy (2011) SIM is strategically prepared and designed for

teaching remediation for low achievers in the subject. It is given after the regular
classroom instruction to students who were not able to grasp the concepts of the
subject matter.

Moreover, according to Salviejo et.al. (2014) studies have revealed that the
use of an instructional material plays a very significant role in enhancing the
memory level of the students and makes the teaching – learning process
interesting. Also, different studies have shown that the use of SIM successfully
decreased the least mastered skills in science subjects; thus, poor achievement
was enhanced.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Strategic Intervention
Material (SIM) Students’ Academic
Least Learned Performance (Post-
Competency Test Score) in Grade
10 Biology
(Biodiversity and
Evolution)
Statement of the Problem

The objective of this study is to identify the effectiveness of strategic

intervention material as remediation of Grade 10 low performing students on least
learned competencies in Biology in La Filipina National High School. The study
sought to answer the following questions.

1. Is there a significant difference between pretest and pot-test of the

controlled group?

2. Is there a significant difference between pretest and post-test of the

experimental group?

3. Is there a significant difference of post-test between experimental and

controlled group?

Null Hypothesis

The following hypothesis are tested at 0.05 level of significance:

Ho1 Use of traditional method in biology as remediation has no effect to the low
performing students on least learned competency in Biology.

Ho2 Use of Strategic Intervention Material in biology as remediation has no effect

to the low performing students on least learned competency in Biology

Ho3 Students’ performance who used Strategic Intervention Material (SIM) has
no significant differences to the students’ performance who used traditional
method in remediation.