 |
Asia-Pacific Forum
on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 13, Issue 1, Article 14 (Jun., 2012) |
Analysis of Research Question 1
The data was obtained through the use of the questionnaire (PCCRS), PAT and raw scores of students in physics test obtained from the school heads (ministry-made test scores).
Table 1. Showing Contents Covered and Average School Achievement of Students in PAT
Schools
Coverage %
Average scores in TMPT
1
98.38
58.63
2
88.44
55.10
3
78.82
55.09
4
79.44
48.53
5
74.67
46.07
6
67.15
41.40
7
66.67
25.00
8
58.63
39.44
9
57.14
30.75
10
52.14
45.64
From the table, TMPT: Teacher-Made Physics Test. Table1 revealed that School 1 covered more content area (98.38 %) and their students recorded the best achievement (as average of 58.63%). School 10 had their content least covered (52.14 %) and an average achievement of 45.14 %. Schools1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 had their contents more covered and had a corresponding average achievement of 52.68%, while Schools 6,7,8,9 and 10 had their contents least covered with an average students achievement of 36.45%. The table showed that a decrease in students’ achievement is the result of a corresponding decrease in teachers’ coverage of the contents. From the above descriptive statistics, there is difference in students’ achievements in teacher-made test between schools that have content coverage and those with low content coverage in Physics.
Table 2. Showing Contents Covered and Average Achievement of Students in Ministry Made Physics Test
Schools
Coverage %
Average score in MMPT
1
98.38
41.65
2
88.44
41.68
3
78.82
38.22
4
79.44
36.84
5
74.67
25.85
6
67.15
27.94
7
66.67
23.69
8
58.63
27.46
9
57.14
25.84
10
52.14
23.60
From the above, Schools 1,2,3,4,and 5 had their contents more covered (98.38%, 88.44%, 78.82%, 77.44%, and 74.67%) and a corresponding achievement of 41.65%, 41.68%, 88.22%, 36.84%, and 25.85%. schools6,7,8,9, and 10 had their contents least covered (67.15%, 66.67%, 57.14%, 52.14%) with a corresponding students achievement of 27.94%, 23.69%, 27.46%, 25.84%, 23.60%. the schools with high content coverage had a mean score of 36.85% while those with low content coverage had a mean score of 25.71%. from the mean scores, the schools with high content performed better. From the above analysis, there is a difference between students’ achievement in Ministry-made test between schools with high content coverage and schools with low content coverage in Physics.
Table 3. t-test of difference between HCC in TMT
Group
N
Mean
SD
Df
t-crit
t-cal
Decision
HCC
5
52.68
4.65
8
2.306
3.68
Ho1 rejected
LCC
5
36.45
7.50
From Table 3 above, N: number of schools under consideration, SD= standard deviation, d= degree of freedom, HCC: schools with higher content coverage, and LCC: schools with lower content coverage. t-crit. (2.306) ˂t-cal (3.68), the null hypothesis (Ho1) is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant difference in students’ achievement in teacher-made test between schools that have high content coverage and those with low content coverage.
Table 4. t-test of Difference between HCC and LCC in MMT
Group
N
Mean
SD
df
t-crit
t-cal
Decision
HCC
5
36.85
5.88
8
2.306
3.6533
Ho2 Rejected
LCC
5
25.71
1.82
From the Table 4 above, HCC = schools with higher content coverage, and LCC= schools with lower content coverage. t-crit (2.306) ˂ t-cal. (3.6533). Based on t-cal. (36533), the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, there is a difference between students’ achievement in Ministry-made test between schools with high content coverage and schools with low content coverage.
