DETAILED ACTION RESEARCH PROPOSAL

A. BASIC INFORMATION
1. Title of the Project: DEVELOPING THE NUMERACY SKILLS IN GRADE -5
PUPILS THROUGH DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION IN
BETINAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

2. Proponents:
Program Leader:
Alangilan, Christine May F.
Program Coordinator:
Camanian, Angelie T.
Nabasca, Cherry Ann M.
Denila, Ruvyjane C.

2.1. Institution: J.H. Cerilles State College

2.2. Address: Mati, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur
2.3. Telephone Number: 09515759679
2.4. Email Address:
3. Project Duration: 4 months

4. Project Location: Betinan, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur

5. Total Budget Requested: 5,000 pesos

6. Research and Development Agenda to be Addressed:

STE Agenda 5: Teaching and Learning Evaluation

STE Agenda 8: Language and Mathematical Literacy

7. Expected Technology/Information:
Information on the numeracy skills of Grade – 5 pupils in
Betinan Elementary School.
8. Description of Technology/Information
The information that the study provides is the result of
assessment through differentiated instructions as impacted by
 teacher’s teaching capability. Additionally, this information
includes evaluation of teachers’ teaching performance.

9. Potential Impact of the technology/Information

Enhancement of the numeracy skills of grade 5 pupils in Betinan
Elementary School using differentiated instructions.
10. Target Beneficiaries/Users
Grade- 5 Pupils, Faculty, and Administration
11. Type of Research:
Educational Research

B. Technical Description
1. Rationale
Young people nowadays are characterized as dynamic and unique individuals
that they possess individual differences in terms of cultural background, cognitive
skills, and physical abilities. Students of the same age differ in the extent to which
they need instruction and support during learning. It is important that teachers know
their specific needs and take these needs into account in their teaching. On the
other hand, many teachers express frustration over high-quality standards. They
acknowledge pressure to acquire 100% passing grade from the learning areas
being taught. Diversity of learners in this generation, of what we called millennials,
are really evident because of rapid changes and a lot of innovations in technologies
and social lifestyle. Young people like our students learn in different ways and they
must be provided an instruction that may address their different skills and
capabilities. The quarterly result in Mathematics was an authentic evident that
students must be taught not only in a single way of teaching strategy but because
of students' diversity, they must engage in different ways of learning and teaching
as well. This action research is a great help to improve the numeracy skills of Grade
five pupils as well as improving the teaching and learning strategies of Mathematics
teachers.

2. Objectives

The primary focus of the study is to DEVELOP THE NUMERACY SKILLS OF

GRADE – 5 PUPILS THOUGH DIFFRENTIATED INSTRUCTION IN BETINAN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLAY 2023-2024:
 Specifically, the study intends to achieve the following:

1. To enable the pupils to understand the use of numbers and quantities

related to their daily life.
2. To create a suitable type of discipline in the mind of the pupils.
3. To give different instructions to assess the numeracy skills of the pupils.
4. To enable the child to understand the use of numbers and quantities related
to their daily life.
5. To make pupils comfortable with the idea of understanding the way on how
to solve the mathematical problems.

Review of Literature

Learning Mathematics through Differentiated Instructions

Mathematics is a challenging subject to master by students, from primary

school to university (Shafie, Shahdanb & Liew, 2010). Many elementary school pupils have

trouble in understanding mathematics taught by the teacher. Numeracy is known as a hard

subject to comprehend, without function and usefulness. Students usually experience

indifference, confusion and burnout whenever they are given numeracy lessons. Authorities

in Mathematics concur that attaining mathematics conceptual understanding and procedural

skills encompasses various cognitive processes (Watson & Gable, 2012). This includes

constructing representations, making arguments, reasoning about mathematical objects,

explaining their thinking, constructing proofs, among others (Schoenfeld, 2002, cited by

Esmonde, 2009). These learning processes are conceived as causal pathways to successful

outcomes that are later linked to achievement outcomes (Geary et al., 2008, cited by Lobato,

2008). According to Grigg, Kelly, Gamoran, and Borman (2013, cited in Carlisle, Kelcey,

Berebitsky, & Phelps, 2011), teaching practice influences students’ achievement. Ghazalia,

Othmanb, Aliasc, and Salehd (2010) added that teaching practice create correct connections

on content by using learning materials, and it connects appropriately procedural

understanding to conceptual understanding. The stance stated above makes a construct that

more effective instruction by the teacher practice, the greater the connections to students’

understanding, and the more engaged are the students in learning mathematics.
 Hunsaker, Nielsen and Bartlett (2010) posit that teachers’ differentiation practices

affect students’ outcomes. In a differentiated classroom, strategies are adapted to students'

different learning interests and needs so that all students’ experiences are challenging,

successful, and satisfactory (George, 2005). Reis and Boeve (2009) claim that when students

are given an opportunity to select their own content-based reading materials on their area of

interest, they are able to read more appropriately; and when the teacher provides flexibility in

solving practical problems in the number sense activities, they encourage students’ critical

thinking (Yang & Ru Wu, 2010). If instructional materials are varied and students are in

different instructional groups, they learn more (Tomlinson, et al., 2003). Also, when students

were given a variety of learning activities based on their Multiple Intelligences, the retention is

higher (Ghamrawi, 2014). Likewise, students in tiered/layered activities are on the same

essential understanding or skills, but different levels of complexity, abstractness and open-

endedness are challenged, consequently, students are enabled to apply literacy strategies

independently (Tobin & McInnes, 2008). Likewise, according to Geller, Chard, and Fien

(2008), students were encouraged to think aloud while they work or share their thinking with

peers; and when the behaviors of students are attended, they respond contingently to the

scaffolding (Mathes et al., 2005, cited by Tobin & McInnes, 2008). Students in Differentiated

Instruction, when given individual learning contracts, are found greatly motivated (Greenwood

et al., 2003, cited by Tobin & McInnes, 2008). Moreover, when students are differentiated

based on students’ needs and targeted learning outcomes, significant increases in student

achievement occur (Cobb, 2010). Besides, when teachers differentiate through identifying

students’ starting point of their learning experience, students gain explicit definitions of the

knowledge, understanding, and skills (Brimijoin, 2005). In addition, when students are in

flexible small groups, a focus on students’ interest has shown very positive results (Vaughn et

al., 2003 cited by Tobin & McInnes, 2008). Lastly, Trafton et al. (2001, cited by Stylianides &

Stylianides, 2007) note that well-designed real-life tasks stimulate students’ interest and

engagement. However, there are studies which reveal that despite the preparation of teachers

in providing real-life situations in teaching Mathematics using “Mathematics Trails”, students

do not have a clear grasp of the lesson in the given learning materials (Tsao, 2005). Same

happened in the study of Yang and Ru Wu (2010), after carefully reviewing the performance

of their students under the designed teaching method, they found out that it does not work for

all students; some still have difficulty in understanding the questions.

Alburan (2021) stated that students who were taught using differentiated instruction in

math performed better than those taught using a conventional instructional approach. Villa

and Nevin (2015) confirmed that when teachers differentiate instruction, they are purposefully

and conscientiously making the material, methods, and results of instruction more accessible

to all students, regardless of the student’s race, gender, ethnicity, language, or differing

abilities. As a result, it can be said that with the help of DI, teachers can have a more inclusive

teaching philosophy which may in turn result in being a more effective teacher (Thousand

et.al, 2015). According to Ullman (2021), differentiated instruction in mathematics refers to a

set of approaches, strategies, and adaptations that a teacher might employ to reach a diverse

population of students and make mathematics accessible to all. According to Maggio and

Sayler (2013), in mathematics, teachers should meet students' needs by matching their

readiness to the level of content delivered. Alburan (2021) stated that students who were

taught using differentiated instruction in math performed better than those taught using a

conventional instructional approach. Similarly, Bal (2016) discussed differentiated instruction,

noting that it is significant in the context of mathematics since it contains multiple levels of

sensitivity that enriches learning environments. As a result, rather of utilizing a one-size-fits-

all technique, this connection can help students accelerate their achievement mathematics

(IRIS Center, 2022).

Differentiated instruction is an approach to teaching and learning that recognizes the

diverse learning needs and styles of students, and adjusts instruction to meet those needs.

This approach involves providing multiple pathways for students to engage with content, using

a variety of instructional strategies, and providing individualized support as needed. Numeracy

skills refer to the ability to understand and work with numbers, including basic arithmetic
operations, fractions, decimals, and measurement. Developing strong numeracy skills is

important for success in many academic and career fields. Research has shown that

differentiated instruction can be effective in improving student learning outcomes, particularly

in math and numeracy. For example, a study by Tomlinson and Imbeau (2013) found that

differentiated instruction improved math achievement for struggling learners in middle school.

In terms of specific strategies for differentiated instruction in numeracy, some

examples include: Using manipulatives and visuals to help students understand math

concepts, providing multiple ways for students to solve problems and show their work, offering

choice in assignments or activities that allow students to demonstrate their understanding in

different ways, using small group instruction or one-on-one support to provide individualized

assistance to students who need it.

Overall, differentiated instruction can be a powerful tool for improving numeracy skills

and promoting student success in math. However, effective implementation requires careful

planning, ongoing assessment, and a willingness to adapt instruction as needed to meet the

needs of all learners.

References

Beecher, M. & Sweeny, S. (2008). Closing the achievement gap with curriculum enrichment and
differentiation: One School’s Story. Journal of Advanced Academics Behavioral Sciences, 8,
294–298.
Bernardo, A. (2002). Language and Mathematical Problem Solving Among Bilinguals. The Journal of
Psychology, 136(3), 283-297.
Bernardo, A. & Calleja, M. (2005). The Effects of Stating Problems in Bilingual Students’ First and
Second Languages on Solving Mathematical Word Problems. The Journal of Genetic
Psychology, 166(1), 117–128.
Boden, Z., Gibson, S., Owen, G. 7 Benson, O. (2015). Feelings and Intersubjectivity in Qualitative
Suicide Research. Qualitative Health Research, 1-13
Chamberlin, M. & Powers, R. (2010). The promise of differentiated instruction for enhancing the
mathematical understandings of college students. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications
1-27, d o i :1 0 1 0 9 3/ t e a m a t / h r q 0 0 6.
Cho, S. Yang, J. & Mandracchia, M. (2015). Effects of M3 Curriculum on Mathematics and English
Proficiency Achievement of Mathematically Promising English Language Learners. Journal of
Advanced Academics, 26(2), 112–142 DOI: 10.1177/1932202X15577205.
Cobb, A. (2010). To Differentiate or Not to Differentiate Using Internet-Based Instruction, Kappa Delta
Pi Record, 51(1), 13-17, DOI: 10.1080/00228958.2015.988559.
Esmonde, I. (2009). Ideas and Identities: Supporting Equity in Cooperative Mathematics Learning.
Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 1008–1043 DOI: 10.3102/0034654309332562.
Felipe, A. (2006) Unexpected learning competencies of Grades 5 and 6 pupils in public elementary
schools: A Philippine report. International Education Journal, 7(7), 957-966.
Firmender, J. Reis, S. & Sweeny, S. (2013) Reading Comprehension and Fluency Levels Ranges
Across Diverse Classrooms: The Need for Differentiated Reading Instruction and Content.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 57(1), 3–14, DOI: 10.1177/0016986212460084.
Gavin, K. Casa, T., Adelson, J. Carroll, Sheffield, L. (2009). The Impact of Advanced Curriculum on the
Achievement of Mathematically Promising Elementary Students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53 (3),
188-202.
Geisler, J. Gardner, III, T. & Lovelace, T. (2009) Differentiated Writing Interventions for High-Ach
Sangcap P. (2010). Mathematics-related Beliefs of Filipino College Students: Factors Affecting
Mathematics and Problem-Solving Performance. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8,
465–475.
Shafie, N., Norainu Tengku n Tengku Shahdanb & Shahir Liew (2010). Mastery Learning Assessment
Model (MLAM) in Teaching and Learning Mathematics. Procedia Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 8, 294–298.
Sherma, H & Catapano, S. (2011). After-School Elementary School Mathematics Club: Enhancing
Achievement and Encouraging Future Teachers. Educational Research Quarterly, 35(1), 3-16.
Sjostrom, B. & Dalhgren, L. (2002) Applying Phenomenography in nursing research. Nursing Thoery
and Concept Development or Analysis. 40(3), 339-344.
Tatsuoka, K. Corter, J. & Tatsuoka, C. (2004). Patterns of Diagnosed Mathematical Content and
Process Skills in TIMSS-R across a Sample of 20 Countries. American Educational Research
Journal, 41(4), 901-926.
Tobin, R. & McInnes, A. (2008). Accommodating differences: variations in differentiated literacy
instruction in Grade 2/3 classrooms. Literacy, 42(1).3-7 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9345.2008.
00470.x
Tomlinson, C. (2005). Grading and Differentiation: Paradox or Good Practice? Theory into Practice,
44(3),262-269.
Tomlinson, C., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C., Moon, T., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. & Reynolds,
T. (2003). Differentiating Instruction in Response to Student Readiness, Interest, and Learning
Profile in Academically Diverse Classrooms: A Review of Literature. Journal for the Education
of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119–145.
Alburan, J. (2021). Differentiated Instruction in Plane Trigonometry Class. Asian Research Journal of
Mathematics. ARJOM, 16 (12): 65-73, 2020; Article no. ARJOM.64796.
Arem, C. A. (2010). Conquering math anxiety: a self-help workbook. 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole
Cengage Learning.
Baker, K. & Harter, M. (2015). A living metaphor of differentiation: A metaethnography of cognitively
guided instruction in the elementary classroom. Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers
College, 6(2), 27-35.

3. Methodology

The study will use quasi-experimental design in comparing two variables, the
control and the experimental group using pre-test and post-test. This is to
determine the effectiveness of differentiated instructions in terms of developing
the numeracy skills mathematics performance of the pupils in the experimental
group.
4. Gathering of Data

A letter of request was secured for from the School Principal with the
endorsement of the Master Teacher. Upon its approval, proper coordination with the
class advisers and parents of the pupil respondents was done by the researcher.

The researcher personally administered the questionnaire to ensure that all

items will be answered and 100% percent retrieval will be attained. The interview,
observation and field notes was also personally done by the researcher.

5. Workplan Schedule

Research Activities Sept Oct Nov Dec

Orientation on the project, Crafting of
research instrument

Validation of research instrument

Entry protocol, acquisition of prior

informed consent
Data gathering
Tallying of data and
Data validation

Analysis of data

Writing of the research paper

7. Budgetary Summary

ITEMS OF EXPENSES TOTAL

Transportation 1,000.00
Printing 800.00
Snacks for Respondents 500.00
Total P2,300.00
Prepared by:
Program Leader:
Alangilan, Christine May F.
Program Coordinator:
Camanian, Angelie T.
Nabasca, Cherry Ann M.
Denila, Ruvyjane C.

Approved by:

DR. JOEAN B. PALAHANG

STE DEAN