47

Chapter 3

Research Design and Methodology

This chapter was categorized into three parts, namely:

(1) Purpose of the Study and Research Design, (2) Methods,

and (3) Statistical Data Analysis Procedures.

Part One, Purpose of the Study and Research Design,

restates the purpose of the study, describes the research

design, and enumerates the variables used in the study.

Part Two, Methods, describes the participants, the

data-gathering instruments, and the research procedures

employed in the study.

Part Three, Statistical Data Analysis Procedures,

discusses the procedures for scoring and statistical tools

used to test the hypotheses.

Purpose of the Study and Research Design

This study was conducted to determine the effect of

Agile Learning Approach and Conventional Teaching Strategies

in teaching Mathematics on the Mathematics performance of

Grade 10 students of Milibili National High School, Roxas

City, Capiz for school year 2018-2019.

This Quasi-Experimental used pretest-posttest non-

equivalent control group design. According to Thyer, (2012),

 48

Quasi-experimental research designs are the most widely used

research approach employed to evaluate the outcomes of

social work programs and policies. These quasi-experiments

were making use of a control or comparison group, and time-

series designs. According to Moore (2008), Quasi-

experimental studies also examine outcomes; however, they do

not involve randomly assigning participants to treatment and

control groups. A quasi-experimental study might compare

outcomes for individuals receiving program activities with

outcomes for a similar group of individuals not receiving

program activities. This type of study also might compare

outcomes for one group of individuals before and after the

group’s involvement in a program (known as “pre-test/post-

test design”). Quasi-experimental studies can inform

discussions of cause and effect, but, unlike true

experiments, they cannot definitively establish this link.

Time

Experimental Group O1-------x-------- O3

Control Group O2---------------- O4

Pretest Posttest

In the pretest-posttest control group design, the

intervention or treatment was introduced to the experimental

group, but withheld from the control group. Before the

 49

introduction of the intervention, a survey observation, and

testing was done in both the experimental group (O 1) and

control group (O2). After the intervention to the

experimental group, another observation of testing

(posttest) was administered to both groups (O3 andO4),

respectively. The pretest was determined whether the two

groups have truly “collective similarity” at the beginning

of the experiment. The two posttests (O 3 andO4), was

compared.

The Agile Learning Approach was utilized to the

experimental group and Conventional Teaching Strategy to the

control group with thirty one participants per group. The

independent variables were the Agile Learning Approach and

Conventional Teaching Strategy, while the Mathematics

performance of the Grade 10 students was the dependent

variable.

The descriptive statistics that was used in the study

are mean, and standard deviation. The inferential statistic

is t-test which was set at 5% level of significance.

Methods

Participants

The participants of this study were the two sections of

Grade 10 students from Milibili National High School, Roxas

 50

City, Capiz, and each group was composed of thirty-one (31)

students.

The participants were grouped into two based on the

average of their first and second quarter grades, where one

group was assigned as the control group and the other group

as experimental groups. The researcher used lottery sampling

in the selection of the group to be under the Agile Learning

Approach and Conventional Teaching Strategy. The first

section drawn was assigned as experimental group and the

second section drawn was under the control group. The

concern about “collective similarity” in the assignment of

students in the two groups prior to the intervention was

matched based on their first and second grading average

grades.

Data-Gathering Instruments

Mathematics Performance Test. A 100-item researcher-

made Mathematics Performance Test was made. A Table of

Specification was prepared before making the test items to

make sure that each topic will be covered and presented in

this study. Prior to the use of the instrument, the

instrument underwent content validation. All suggestions and

recommendations were incorporated in the assessment tool.

 51

After the validation, the 100-item multiple choice

researcher-made test was pilot tested to thirty (30) Grade

11 Senior High School students of Milibili National High

School, Roxas City, Capiz, which were not participants of

the study. The result of the test underwent item analysis

and reliability testing using the Statistical Package for

Social Science (SPSS) software. The analysis became the

basis on the item retained, revised and discarded. According

to Navaro (2012), items with 0.26-0.75 difficulty Index and

0.46-1.0 discrimination index were retained. After the item

analysis and reliability testing, 55- items multiple choice

researcher-made Mathematics Performance Test was left and

used as pretest and posttest instruments.

To interpret the Mathematics performance of the grade

10 students, the scale shown below were used.

Score Description

44.01 – 55.00 Outstanding

33.01 – 44.00 Very Satisfactory
22.01 – 33.00 Satisfactory
11.01 – 22.00 Fairly Satisfactory
0.00 - 11.00 Did not meet expectation
 52

Data Gathering Procedures

The researcher employed three phases in the conduct of

the study: the pre- experimental phase, the experimental

phase, and the post- experimental phase.

Pre-experimental Phase. Prior to the conduct of the

study, the researcher secured the following:

First, the researcher identified the topics to be

discussed during the experimental phase which was taught

applying the Agile Learning Approach in the instruction. The

topics were included in the Grade 10 Junior High School

Mathematics Curriculum guide in the School Year 2018- 2019.

Second, the researcher constructed a table of

specifications utilizing the topics to be included in the

experimental period. Based on the table of specifications

made, the performance test was then constructed. In order to

determine the validity of the instrument, the test was

submitted to Mathematics master teacher for content

validation. The researcher sent communication letters to

formally ask the permission of the school principal and

advisers utilizing Grade 11 for pilot testing. Then, the

test was pilot-tested for item analysis ensuring a moderate,

difficulty and discrimination index of the test.

Third, the researcher sent letter to formally ask the

permission from the school principal to conduct the study in

 53

school and to utilize the two sections of Grade 10 students

as participants of the study.

Finally, the 55-item Mathematics Performance Test was

administered to both control and experimental group. The

Mathematics Performance Test was divided into four weeks,

one (1) pretest, and one (1) posttest per week. A 15- item

Mathematics Performance pretest and posttest for week 1, 16-

items for week 2, 9 items for week 3, and 15-items for week

4. The pretest items were scrambled and the same test was

administered in the posttest. The result of the pretest and

posttest was checked, recorded, and tabulated for analysis

using the appropriate statistical tools.

Experimental Phase. During the experimentation phase,

lottery sampling was used where one section was assigned to

be the experimental group and was taught under Agile

Learning Approach, while the other group was assigned in the

control group and was taught under Conventional Teaching

Strategy under similar environmental conditions. Within four

weeks, the researcher handled both groups.

The experimental group was under the Agile Learning

Approach. The students underwent classes with the lessons

that promoted the use of collaboration, time-bounded tasks

and agility in learning or the ability of the students to

acquire and apply new knowledge to solve mathematical real-

 54

life problems unlike in the Conventional Teaching Strategy.

Meanwhile, the control group utilized the Conventional

Teaching Strategy where the students have undergone the same

strategy that the teacher employed in usual teaching.

Post-experimental Phase. After the experimental phase,

the following tasks were accomplished by the researcher:(1)

The data on the pretest and posttest was tallied and encoded

in the Microsoft Excel application; (2) Both the pretest and

posttest summary results were processed using the

Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) software;

(3) The difference between the pretest and posttest results

was determined by submitting the data to statistical tools

to answer the statement of the problem and the hypotheses

stated in this study; (4) Both tabular and textual

presentation was used in data presentation and analysis.

Statistical Data Analysis Procedures

The data gathered from the study were analyzed using

the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software.

Mean. This was employed to determine the level of

Mathematics performance of the Grade 10 students.

 55

Standard Deviation. This test was used to determine the

homogeneity as well as heterogeneity of the scores obtained

by the Grade 10 students.

t-test for independent samples. This test set at 5%

alpha level of significance was used to determine the

differences between the Mathematics performance of students

of the control and experimental group in both the pretest

and posttest.

t-test for dependent samples. This test set at 5% alpha

level of significance was used to determine the differences

between the Mathematics performance of Grade 10 students of

the control group in the pretest and posttest and the

Mathematics performance of the experimental group in the

pretest and posttest.