Classroom Based Action Research Paired Formative Assessment

Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF MANDAUE CITY
PAIRED-FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT AND

ACHIEVEMENT IN MATHEMATICS
A CLASSROOM-BASED ACTION RESEARCH

PRESENTED TO DEPED MANDAUE CITY
JAIME M. CABUCOS
MT I, MCCNHS
JAIME P. RUELAN
EPSvr-Math
April 2020
Address: Plaridel Street, Centro, Mandaue City

Telephone Nos.: (032) 345-0545 | (032) 505-6337 | (032) 346-0800 | (032) 239-2934
Email Address: mandaue.city001@deped.gov.ph | Website: http://www.depedmandaue.net
2
Some learners continuously perform low in Mathematics. It has been

noticed that during instructional delivery, these learners find difficulty to
perform task on their own. They need to be closely monitored and they need
someone who can help them carry out the task. It is also observed that during
assessment, if unnoticed, these learners would really find ways to copy the
work of their classmates.
Step 2. Search the literature or interview your colleagues for some previous
strategies/interventions used to solve this problem
The problem was attempted to be solved by introducing paired-formative

assessment and tried to investigate how learners exposed to paired-formative
assessment perform in the summative assessment and quarterly exam
compared to those who were not exposed to paired-formative assessment. The
design used in this action research is quasi-experimental.
The intervention was implemented in Grade 7 Camia and Adelfa of the

Mandaue City Comprehensive National High School, Barangay Centro,
Mandaue City. Each class, with 32 learners, was divided into 2 groups. During
formative assessment, one group (controlled) answered in pairs while the other
group (experimental) answered individually. The pairing was done in such a
way that selected learners who are not so good in Math were partnered with
learners who are good in Math. This was observed during the second quarter of
SY 2019-2020. The learners then answered individually the summative
assessment and the second quarter exam. Scores in the summative
assessment and quarterly exam were recorded accordingly and analyzed.
Table 1 presents the analysis of the scores in the summative tests of the
two groups.
Table 1
Analysis of Scores in the Summative Tests
p-
Mean SD Critical t Computed t Decision Interpretation
value
Controlled 34.91 5.46 Failed to Not
1.6716 1.0330 0.15
Experimental 36.53 7.03 reject Ho significant
@ .05 level of significance
The table shows that the mean of the controlled group is 34.91 while that
of the experimental group is 36.53. There is a margin of 1.62. Moreover, the
3
standard deviation of the controlled group is 5.46 while the experimental group
has 7.03. This implies that the distribution of the scores of the controlled
group is more clustered than the experimental group.
Furthermore, the computed t of 1.0330 is less than the critical t of

1.6716. This leads to the failure to reject the null hypothesis. Hence, the
difference in the means in the summative assessment is not significant. This
implies that the performances of the two groups in the summative assessment
are relatively the same.
The analysis of the scores in the Second Quarter Exam is presented in

table 2.
Table 2
Analysis of Scores in the Second Quarter Exams
p-
Mean SD Critical t Computed t Decision Interpretation
value
Controlled 37.94 4.85 Failed to Not
1.6698 0.8285 0.21
Experimental 38.97 5.10 reject Ho significant
@ .05 level of significance
As shown in table 2, the mean of the controlled group is 37.94 while the
mean of the experimental group is 38.97. There is a difference of 1.03. On the
other hand, the standard deviation of the controlled group is 4.85 and 5.10 of
the experimental group. This implies that the spread of the distribution of the
scores in the second quarter exam of the two groups is relatively the same.
Moreover, the computed t of 0.8285 is less than the critical t of 1.6698.

This yields to the failure to reject the null hypothesis. Therefore, the difference
in the means in the second quarter exam is not significant. So, the
performances of the two groups in the second quarter exam are relatively the
same.
The findings show that we have somehow initially solved the problem
because the performances of the two groups are relatively the same, both in the
summative assessment and in the quarter exam. If the experimental group has
performed significantly better than the controlled group, then the intervention
failed. But the results show otherwise.
4
With these findings and conclusion, it is recommended that the teacher

will continue to implement the use of this strategy and will be replicated in
other classes to further evaluate its impact in improving learners’ achievement.
Moreover, it is also suggested, that a similar action research will be conducted
by other Math teachers and other schools to validate its efficacy.
Researchers:
JAIME M. CABUCOS JAIME P. RUELAN, EdD

MT I, MCCNHS EPSvr-Math
Approval Recommended:
ESTELA B. SUSVILLA, PhD, CESO VI

Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
Approved:
NIMFA D. BONGO, EdD, CESO V

School Division Superintendent

Classroom Based Action Research Paired Formative Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Classroom Based Action Research Paired Formative Assessment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Classroom Based Action Research Paired Formative Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

PAIRED-FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT AND

A CLASSROOM-BASED ACTION RESEARCH

Address: Plaridel Street, Centro, Mandaue City

Some learners continuously perform low in Mathematics. It has been

The problem was attempted to be solved by introducing paired-formative

The intervention was implemented in Grade 7 Camia and Adelfa of the

Furthermore, the computed t of 1.0330 is less than the critical t of

The analysis of the scores in the Second Quarter Exam is presented in

Moreover, the computed t of 0.8285 is less than the critical t of 1.6698.

With these findings and conclusion, it is recommended that the teacher

JAIME M. CABUCOS JAIME P. RUELAN, EdD

ESTELA B. SUSVILLA, PhD, CESO VI

NIMFA D. BONGO, EdD, CESO V

You might also like