CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
3. Differences Between the Performance of Students and each of the Profile Variables
A t-test comparison was made to analyze the students’ performance in the three language modalities stratified according to the profile variables. This is to identify if any of the profile variables could be linked to the student’s performance and perhaps capitalize on these variables in the design of particular intervention strategy. Furthermore, it is also geared towards gathering insights how profile variables could influence the student’s linguistic performance and utilize such as basis for formulation recommendation to relevant educational authorities. The result of this analysis is shown in Table 9.
Based on the table, it can be observed that for gender, the p-values for listening and speaking are below 0.05 indicating that the performance of the male and the female students are significantly different.
This means that gender or being male or female is not a factor that affects the listening and speaking skills of the students. For reading however, a p-value greater than 0.05 was obtained which indicates that gender or being
students. It is interesting to note that while co-education at the tertiary level was adapted by the Thai Nguyen University, it appears that male and female students have different abilities in terms of learning the modalities of listening and speaking but not reading.
Table 9
Correlation of Students’ Performance in the Three Language Modality Test Groups with Profile Variables
Test Groups p-values in the different test groups Reading Listening Speaking
Gender:
Male vs. Female 0.634590 0.046081 0.041278
Parent's Education:
Secondary vs. Tertiary 0.629338 0.857220 0.400229 Secondary vs. Elementary 0.879172 0.189781 0.100477 Tertiary vs. Elementary 0.507290 0.097033 0.004500
Place of Origin:
Urban vs. Rural 0.000041 0.000000 0.000000
Type of High School:
Private vs. Public 0.000004 0.000015 0.000000 Note: p-value < to 0.05 is significantly different and shown in shaded boxes.
male and female students on listening and speaking and a non-gender specific module for reading. On the aspect of Parent’s Education, it can be noted that only in the Tertiary vs. Elementary was a significant difference noted for speaking. This means that the parents’ education affect the speaking skills of the students and this effect is specially observed among tertiary educated parents and those below secondary or educated otherwise.
For place of origin, it can be observed that in all three modalities, the p- values were below 0.05 and are significantly different for urban and rural origin. This means that this is an important factor in the learning performance of the students in all three modalities. Students originating from rural areas are performing less compared to those coming from urban areas. This means that environment in terms of socio-cultural factors and technology affect the way the students learn the English language.
In the case of the type of High School, it can be noted that all the p-values were below 0.05 indicating that performance of the students in the three modalities are significantly different for both the private and public schools.
The private schools were performing better than those in public schools. This means that education in the public schools particularly on the English language has to improve to be at par with those in private schools.
Speaking Skills
Fifty teacher respondents from Thai Nguyen University were administered with a survey questionnaire to explore how they assess the student’s performance in the learning modalities of reading, listening and speaking. A set of 13 items included in the survey questionnaire was presented for validation. The result of this survey is shown in Table 10.
It can be observed that only one out of 13 items obtained an agree score of >50 percent. This item pertains to phonetic analysis. All the rest of the 12 items got an agree score of less than 50 percent. This means that the teacher respondents do not consider the listed items as pertinent items to assess the performance skills of sophomore students. This result is very strange because the survey questions had been validated by three English language experts and no less than 30 English teachers that are not the target respondents and they all considered the survey questionnaires as appropriate.
This indicates that the teacher respondents either did not fully grasp the concept of the survey or they do not understand the questions in the context of their teaching English at the sophomore level and were answering the survey questions randomly. The apparent inconsistency of the teacher response can be seen for example in items 3 and 4 where extremely divergent ratings are
Table 10
Student Skills Employed in Teaching the Basic English Course
Student Skills Agree % Rank
I. The student is able to recognize that the Context Clues in the sentence: His lack of skill with his hands is offset by his (A.
wisdom B. knowledge C. ability) in mental work. Is letter: C
14 23.3 6
2. The student is able to answer questions on the application of
Context Clues. 20 33.3 3.5
3. The student is able to identify the word that rhymes with “lake”
in the following choices A.leak B. make C. lac, as letter B. 33 55.0 1 4. The student is able to make correct phonetic analysis. 5 8.3 9.5 5. The student is able to infer from the Latin meaning of the word
trepid which is alarmed, the meaning of the word intrepid from the choices: A. fearless B. courage C. strong; is A.
0 0.0 13
6. The student is able to perform structural analysis. 3 5.0 12 7. The student is able to recognize the most appropriate title for
the following given phrases: funny clowns, six white horses, dancing monkeys, a big gray elephant, jugglers and acrobats from the choices: A. A Religious Procession, B. At the Zoo, C. A Circus Parade; is letter C.
20 33.3 3.5
8. The student is able to answer questions on the application of
appropriate title selection. 15 25.0 5
9. The student is able to identify topic sentence in a paragraph. 5 8.3 9.5 10. The student is able to make summary statements. 4 6.7 11 11. The student is able to correctly answer questions on reading
comprehension. 24 40.0 2
12. The student is able to correctly answer questions on listening
comprehension. 10 16.7 7
13. The student is able to correctly answer questions on speaking
skills. 9 15.0 8
and item 6 got a score of 5 percent. While these two are consistent in getting low Agree scores, a zero score in item 5 is not an acceptable response from English teachers.
The teacher respondents were also made to rate the items according to their perception of the frequency of use by the students. The result is shown in Table 11.
It can be noted from the table that majority of the items got ratings below 2.5 and only one had a rating of 2.5. This item is item no. 7 which pertains to reading comprehension. This means that this is the only modality item that the teachers perceived as sometimes practiced and demonstrated by the sophomore students. Teachers sometimes apply answering questions on reading comprehension to assess students’ performance.
Seven items got mean frequency scores of more or less than 2.0 or rarely done and one item got a mean of 1.3 interpreted as not done at all. This item is no.9 which pertains to speaking skills. This indicates that majority of the skill items being evaluated are rarely practiced by the sophomore students.
Moreover, these students are perceived not to practice their speaking skills at all. This is very alarming as the indications suggest a deteriorating linguistic skill as indicated by an over- all mean of 1.96 and interpreted as rarely used.
Teachers’ Assessments of Student Skills and Their Frequency of Use Student Skills
Mean Frequency
Score
Rank Verbal Interpretation I. The student is able to answer
questions on the application of Context Clues.
2.2 3 R
2. The student is able to make
correct phonetic analysis. 2.1 4 R
3. The student is able to perform
structural analysis. 1.9 5 R
4. The student is able to answer questions on the application of appropriate title selection.
2.4 2 R
5. The student is able to identify
topic sentence in a paragraph. 1.9 6 R
6. The student is able to make
summary statements. 1.5 8 R
7. The student is able to correctly answer questions on reading comprehension.
2.5 1 S
8. The student is able to correctly answer questions on listening comprehension.
1.8 7 R
9. The student is able to correctly
answer questions on speaking skills. 1.3 9 N
OVER-ALL MEAN 1.96 R
Legend:S- Sometimes, R- Rarely and N- Never
While it is presumed that advancement in tertiary education, particularly from freshman to sophomore stage would imply progression in various skills including linguistic skills in order for students to cope with the increasing
perceived as retrogressing and in fact deteriorating in their speaking skills.
The same items were rated by the teacher respondents according to their degree of importance. The result is shown in Table 12.
It can be observed that only two items had mean scores above 4.0 or equivalent to moderately important, four items had scores of more or less 3.0 or slightly important and three had scores of 2.0 or lower which were interpreted as less important. This indicates that the teacher respondents consider only Reading Comprehension and Context clues as the more important students’ skills given emphasis in the sophomore stage.
This reflects on the biased way of teaching strategy that the teachers employ. These imply that the teachers are utilizing an imbalanced approach in teaching the modalities of reading, listening and speaking. They have focused their strategy on reading comprehension and context clues which is a reading skill on word recognition. This could imply that perhaps, the choice of prioritizing reading skills is part of the general English curriculum scheme of the University to focus on specific modalities as the students advance in their tertiary level. This strategy however proves inadequate and ineffective in addressing the needs of the sophomore student with potentially devastating outcome as shown by the over-all mean of 2.77 interpreted as only slightly important.
Table 12
Teachers’ Assessments of Student Skills and Their Degree of Importance Student Skills
Mean Rating
Score
Rank Verbal interpretation I. The student is able to answer questions
on the application of Context Clues. 4.1 2 MI 2. The student is able to make correct
phonetic analysis. 1.6 8 LI
3. The student is able to perform structural
analysis. 1.5 9 LI
4. The student is able to answer questions on the application of appropriate title
selection.
3.0 3 SI
5. The student is able to identify topic
sentence in a paragraph. 2.9 4 SI
6. The student is able to make summary
statements. 2.5 6 SI
7. The student is able to correctly answer
questions on reading comprehension. 4.4 1 MI
8. The student is able to correctly answer
questions on listening comprehension. 2.0 7 LI 9. The student is able to correctly answer
questions on speaking skills. 2.9 5 SI
OVER-ALL MEAN 2.77 SI
Legend: MI- Moderately important, SI- Slightly important and LI- Less important
5. Differences between Teachers’ Assessment and Students’