2

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed if Licensure examination for Teachers Scores and academic

performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education are correlated.

Specifically, this study tried to answer the following questions:

1. What is the academic performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education?

2. What is the Licensure Examination for Teachers scores of Bachelor of Secondary

Education?

3. Is there a significant relationship between Licensure Examination for Teachers

scores and academic performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education?

Importance of the Study

This study entitled “Correlation Analysis between Academic Performance and

Licensure Examination for Teachers scores of Bachelor of Secondary Education in

Cavite State University- Naic” is important to the researchers because they know that

having a great performance in academic will not hinder you to pass your Licensure

Examination for Teachers.

This study is beneficial to the following sectors of individual:

Students: the result of this study will determine the significance of academic

performance and licensure examination for teachers.

 3

Teachers and School Administrators: the result of this study will reveal the

characteristics of existing educational program and verify if it is improving.

Parents: the result of this study will give information about the performance of

their children in the school.

Future Researchers: different findings and result of this study will serve as a

reference to the future researchers who are going to conduct related studies about the

Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) by the students’ academic performance.

Objectives of the Study

The study entitled “correlation analysis between academic performance and

licensure examination for teachers (let) of Bachelor of Secondary Education in Cavite

State University- Naic” aimed to:

1. determine the Licensure Examination for Teachers Scores of Bachelor of

secondary Education;

2. determine the academic performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education; and

3. determine the relationship of Licensure Examination for Teachers Scores and

academic performance.
 4

Time and Place of the Study

The study entitled “Correlation Analysis of Licensure Examination for Teachers

Scores and the Academic Performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education” was

conducted at Cavite State University- Naic Campus, Bucana, Naic, Cavite of June to

October 2012.

Scope and Limitation

The focus of this study is the Licensure Examination for Teachers scores and

academic performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education which includes their average

grade in General Education, Professional Education and Major or Field of Specialization.

The study was conducted among the Bachelor of Secondary Education of Cavite State

University- Naic Campus from 2006-2011. However, due to the time constraints no

matter how the researchers wish, the researchers disregard the number of takes, revision

of curriculum, transferees and those who are not seen the grade in the registrar office by

the researchers.

The study tried to find out the relationship of Academic Performance in relation

to their Licensure Examination for Teachers scores. Valid instruments were utilized to

obtain reliable results. Reliable people were asked to obtain accuracy in finding the true

results of the study.

 5

Operational Definition of the Terms

For clarification, the succeeding terms are operationally defined for the purpose of

this study. They are as follows:

Academic Performance – refers to general point average of the BSEd students of Cavite

State University- Naic Campus.

Licensure Examination for Teacher- examination given by Philippine Regulation

Commission to examine qualified teachers.

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (sometimes referred to as

the PPMCC or PCC, or Pearson's r, and is typically denoted by r) - is a measure of

the correlation (linear dependence) between two variables X and Y, giving a value

between +1 and −1 inclusive. It is widely used in the sciences as a measure of the

strength of linear dependence between two variables. It was developed by Karl

Pearson from a similar but slightly different idea introduced by Francis Galton in the

1880s.

Professional Education- education subject taken includes Teaching Profession,

Principles of Teaching, Curriculum Development, Child and Adolescent and etc.

General Education- subjects taken include Study and Thinking Skills, Literature, Basic

Mathematics, Physical Sciences and etc.

Major Education- subjects that are taken according to their field of specialization: for

Mathematics Major includes Trigonometry, Advance Algebra, Statistics, Modern

Geometry and etc. English Major includes Literary Criticism, English Literature, Afro-
 6

Asian Literature etc,. for Biological Science Major include Cell Biology, Human

Anatomy, Parasitology etc.

HYPOTHESIS

There is no significant correlation between academic performance and licensure

examination for teachers’ scores of Bachelor of Secondary Education from 2006-2011.

 7

CHAPTER II

Review of Related Literature

According to Bell (2004) success is measured by academic performance, or how

well a student meets standards set out by local government and the institution itself. As

career competition grows ever more fierce in the working world, the importance of

students doing well in school has caught the attention of parents, legislators and

government education departments alike.

Teacher education students in most states must pass teacher licensure

examinations before being considered “highly qualified” for employment. Teacher

education students who believe teacher licensure examinations are an important part of

their professional development and who value their pedagogical training probably will

have more incentive to complete their respective teacher education programs and attain

teacher licensure than will those education students who do not value pedagogical

training and state licensure requirements.

At a time of teacher shortages in many rural and inner city schools, it is as

important to retain teacher education students as it is to maintain quality teacher

programs (Ingersoll, 2001). Understanding how teacher education students perceive state

mandated testing is an important consideration, especially in terms of whether or not

these examinations discourage prospective teachers from entering the teaching

profession.
 8

Teacher licensure in the Philippines primarily was controlled by teacher education

programs. Graduates of these programs were considered qualified to teach and were

granted teacher licensure by their respective state departments of education (Darling-

Hammond, 1999)

The quality of education in the country is low as stipulated in research findings.

This issue particularly on low quality education poses more implications as one strives to

deal with globalization, educational reform, technological change and survival issue

(Duque, 1999).The Philippines prohibits any individual from practicing or offering to

service the teaching profession without having previously obtained a certificate of

registration and a valid professional license from the Professional Regulation

Commission (PRC) to ensure that the student teachers become competent teachers

(www.pinoytest.com). This is the main reason why the commission conducts the

Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) to regulate the profession and to provide

license to deserving individuals who passed the LET

(http://www.pinoytest.com/teacherlicensureexam).

Moreover, Grade Point Average (GPA) as one of the main factors associated with

the LET performance of students, measures how well determinants of L.E.T.

Performance of the Teacher Education Graduates in a State University Multidisciplinary

Journal National Peer Reviewed Journal 92 one is doing in his academic studies. It is the

average obtained by dividing the total quality hours for courses for which one is

registered for any stated period of time. Under GPA, performance in a given set of

courses in the variable summarizes overall performance (tru.ca/policy/allpolicy.html).

 9

As a result of the “No Child Left Behind” legislation, many state departments of

education are advocating stricter standards of accountability to ensure only “highly

qualified” teachers are employed, and many states require teacher education students to

pass state licensure examinations to meet the “highly qualified” standard.

Although many policy makers are concerned about teacher shortages, our findings

seem to confirm that state licensure requirements do not discourage prospective teachers

from entering the teaching profession; instead, most teacher education students accept

licensure examinations as important requirements for any profession such as the law,

medicine, or teaching.

The goal suggests that practicing teachers are key to the transformation of schools

and that in order for teachers to lead the reform efforts; they need to be offered expanded

and enriched professional development experiences. Such experiences should be tied

directly to the emerging student performance standards and be continuous, site-based,

teacher-designed, and organizationally focused. Professional development programs with

these characteristics have to be viewed as essential or core activities that are less

vulnerable to budget cuts.

Teacher certification is the education system's process for assuring that public

school teachers possess minimum qualifications. Each state determines its own

certification standards. Increased mobility among teachers suggests that teacher

candidates should have information about general requirements for certification and

about where to locate particular state requirements. This digest provides information on

certification purpose and types, how to obtain information about requirements, and
 10

prospects for change in requirements. Certification is a process by which the state

evaluates the credentials of prospective teachers to ensure that they meet the professional

standards set by the state education agency. Certification ratifies the quality of teachers'

competence in subject area, educational methodology, teaching skills, and potential

classroom management ability (Roth and Mastain 1984).

The more prospective educators perceive their training as an important part of

their preparation for classroom teaching, the more inclined they will be to learn about

current research on best practices. Although it is debatable whether or not state mandated

teacher licensure examinations improve the quality of teachers entering the profession,

the majority of teacher education students in this study accepts and value state licensure

requirements.
 11

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter provides a history of the research design, sources of data, data

gathering procedure, data analysis, statistical treatment and statistical test used.

Research Design

This study made use of correlation analysis research to determine the academic

performance and licensure examination for teachers of Bachelor of Secondary Education

2006- 2011. The intention also of the researchers was to determine the academic

performance specifically in terms of general education, professional education and major

of BSEd 2006- 2011.

The descriptive research is designed to tell “what exist” or “what is” about a

certain educational phenomenon. Accurate observations and assessment arise from data

that ascertain the nature and incidence of prevailing conditions, practices or descriptions

of objects, process or persons who are object of descriptive research (Manuel, Medel,

1976).

This study is correlation for its estimates the limit to which variables involved are

related to each other. Correlation analysis use to determine the extent to which changes in

the value of an attribute are associated with changes in another attribute. The data for a

correlation analysis consists of two input columns. Each column contains values for one

of the attributes of interest. It calculates various measures of association between the two

input columns.
 12

The data in the input columns also can be treated as a sample obtained from a

larger population, and it can be used to test whether the attributes are correlated in the

population. In this study, the null hypothesis asserts that the two attributes are not

correlated, and the alternative hypothesis asserts that the attributes are correlated.

Sources of Data

The researchers asked permission exclusively to the Office of Director for

Curriculum and Instruction of Cavite State University- Naic Campus to obtain the data

needed in the research. She has the results lists of Licensure Examination for Teachers, so

that, the researchers copied it to her office. Also the academic performance came from

the Office of the Registrar of the same school.

Data Gathering Procedure

When given permission by the adviser, the researchers asked permission from the

different authority so that research may be conducted in the locale of the study. Request

was made from the research adviser to grant the researchers to obtain data needed for the

study. The letter was given to Dr. Ligaya P. Antiojo to seek out the list of LET passers.

Also to Mrs. Cristeta Zapanta the Registrar gave permission the researcher to utilize their

computer to find the academic performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education from

2006- 2011.
 13

Data Analysis

The researcher used the following formula to obtain the correlation of the

variables:

 Formula for General Point Average.

GPA=
∑ (grade x unit)
∑ (units)
 Coefficient of Correlation by the Use of Rank Differential Method.

rho=6 ¿ ¿

Where:

D- Difference of the ranking of first and second variable.

N- Number of population.

The results computed were statistically measured and was interpreted using the following

scale:

Interpretation Correlation (+ and -)

Very High 0.91- 1.00

High 0.71- 0.90

Moderate 0.41- 0.70

Slight 0.21- 0.40

 14

Negligible 0 - 0.20

 Testing the significance of correlation coefficient

n−2
t=r
√ 1−r 2

Where:

r- Computed rho.

n- no. of population.

CHAPTER IV
 15

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To show the results of this study the researchers presented it through the use of

tables.

Table 1. Average of Academic Performance and Licensure Examination for Teachers.

General Education Professional Education Major

Year
ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD LET
2006 1.99 75.42 1.75 68.58 1.92 69.68
2007 1.97 69.21 1.82 65.71 2.03 62.19
2008 2.15 68.48 1.97 67.79 2.14 65.10
2009 1.83 77.5 1.64 77.5 1.82 76.00
2010 1.85 75.69 1.82 77.23 1.84 72.62
2011 1.97 76.71 1.86 77.86 1.91 71.23

Table 1 show that the average in batch 2009 has the highest percentage in terms

of general education, professional education and major. The lowest percentage in the

general education, professional education and major was the batch 2008.

Table 2. Correlation of Academic Performance and Licensure Examination for Teachers

with Corresponding Interpretations.

 16

General Education Professional Education Major

Year
rho Interpretation rho Interpretation rho Interpretation
2006 0.44 moderate 0.56 moderate 0.94 very high
2007 0.79 high 0.54 moderate 0.79 high
2008 0.71 high 0.39 slight 0.55 moderate
2009 1.00 very high 1.00 very high 1.00 very high
2010 0.71 high 0.88 high 0.84 high
2011 0.45 moderate 0.007 negligible 0.43 moderate

Table 2 presents the correlation of academic performance and licensure

examination for teachers in terms of general education, professional education and major.

In batch 2006, their correlation in ACAD and LET in three categories is from moderate-

high, it ranges from 0.40- 0.90. The same with the batch 2007. In 2008, their correlation

in general education is high, professional education is slight and in major category is

moderate. In batch 2009, the correlations of three categories were very high. High

correlation in batch 2010, but in 2011 it is moderate correlation except for professional

education.

Table 3. Testing the Significance of Correlation Coefficient for General Education

Year N- (no. of Df Critical t- Computed Conclusion

population) value t- value
 17

2006 19 17 1.740 0.65 Not

Significant
2007 28 26 1.706 1.68 Not
Significant
2008 29 27 1.703 1.32 Not
Significant
2009 2 0 0 1 Significant

2010 13 11 1.796 1.35 Not

Significant
2011 14 12 1.782 0.67 Not
Significant

Table 3 showed the testing the significant correlation for general education.

From 2006-2011 are not significant correlation between the academic performance and

licensure examination for teachers’ score except in bath 2009. Since the computed t-

value of it is greater than the critical t- value with the population of 2 and the degrees of

freedom is 0. The other batches were not significant since their computed t- value is less

than the critical t- value.

Table 4. Testing the Significance of Correlation Coefficient for Professional Education

 18

Year N- (no. of Df Critical t- Computed Conclusion

population) value t- value
2006 19 17 1.740 0.89 Not
Significant
2007 28 26 1.706 0.84 Not
Significant
2008 29 27 1.703 0.55 Not
Significant
2009 2 0 0 0 Significant

2010 13 11 1.796 2.48 Significant

2011 14 12 1.782 0.009 Not
Significant

Testing the significance of correlation coefficient for professional education is

shown in table 4. In year 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2011 the correlation significance between

their academic performance and licensure examination for teachers’ score are not

significant because the computed t- value is less than the critical t- value. However, the

years 2009 and 2010 are significant since their computed t- value is greater than the

critical t- value.

Table 5. Testing the Significance of Correlation Coefficient for Major

 19

Year N- (no. of Df Critical t- Computed Conclusion

population) value t- value
2006 19 17 1.740 3.63 Significant

2007 28 26 1.706 1.68 Not

Significant
2008 29 27 1.703 0.86 Not
Significant
2009 2 0 0 0 Significant

2010 13 11 1.796 2.07 Significant

2011 14 12 1.782 0.64 Not
Significant

The table revealed that in major, the correlation significance between their

academic performance and licensure examination for teachers’ score are significant in

year 2006, 2009 and 2010. Since the computed t- value is less than the critical t- value in

year 2007, 2008 and 2011, the significant correlations are not.

CHAPTER V
 20

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

This study was conducted at Cavite State University- Naic Campus, Bucana,

Naic, Cavite . The study was conducted to determine the correlation analysis of the

academic performance and Licensure Examination for Teachers scores of Bachelor of

Secondary Education from 2006-2011. It aimed to find out the following questions: What

is the academic performance of Bachelor of Secondary Education? What is the Licensure

Examination for Teachers scores of Bachelor of Secondary Education? Is there a

relationship of Licensure Examination for Teachers scores and academic performance of

Bachelor of Secondary Education?

Through the stated problem, the researchers came up with the null hypothesis that

there is no significant relationship between academic performance and licensure

examination for teachers’ scores.

After administering the data needed in the study, the researchers used Coefficient

of Correlation by the Use of Rank Differential Method and Pearson-r method, and T-test

method used to obtain the needed findings.

Conclusion
 21

Based on the data gathered, in General Education batch 2006-2011, the t-test

interpretation is not significant correlation except batch 2009 which the t-test

interpretation is significant correlation since the value of t is 1 it is greater than the value

of t tabular 0. In Professional Education, batch 2006-2008 and batch 2011, the t-test

interpretation is not significant correlation except batch 2009-2010 which t-test

interpretation is significant correlation. And in Major/Field of Specialization Education,

the t-test value in batch 2007-2008, and 2011, there is no significant correlation except

batch 2006, 2009-2010, which the t-test interpreted that there is significant correlation.

Recommendation

Since the findings revealed that there is no significance correlation between

academic performance and licensure examination for teachers. It is a teacher’s role to

teach lessons parallel based on their field of specialization in order to maintain the

transparencies of teaching learning process. The study is done to the Bachelor of

Secondary Education; the researchers are trying to study again in terms of Bachelor of

Elementary Education in Cavite State University- Naic.

For the TED Curriculum makers, the content of the Licensure Examination for

Teachers should update according to the revisions of the curriculum of Bachelor of

Secondary Education students.

 22

And for those who might be interested in enhancing this study, the researchers

highly recommend to continue this study to further determine the academic performance

of Bachelor Secondary Education.

 23

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Internet Sources

Anderson S.( August 2004) Licensure Examination for Teachers. Retrieved Date:

October 2012. http://www.ericdigests.org/1996-1/portfolio.htm

Edward J.P (July 2002) Academic Performance. Retrived Date: October 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_the_Philippines#Secondary_education

Cynthia L. Smith (January 2008). Correlation Analysis. Retrieved Date: October

2012.http://www.ericdigests.org/1996-1/reform.htm

Ogre, Michael Z. (September 2009). Licensure. Retrieved Date: October 2012.

http://www.prc.gov.ph/prb/default.aspx?id=38&content=224

(Date Modified: November 2005). Date Retrieved: October

2012http://www.allbusiness.com/glossaries/correlation-analysis/4964988-

1.html#ixzz29O6MJnAU
 24

APPENDICES
 25

Appendix A. General Point Average of Academics and LET

Table 1. Batch 2006

2006
Gen Education Prof Education Major
Name
LET ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD
06- 001 77 2.43 63 2.07 63 2.5
06- 002 79 2.04 70 2.08 65 2.1
06- 003 76 1.97 79 1.69 65 1.99
06- 004 78 1.73 77 1.59 78 1.6
06- 005 58 2.13 63 1.84 48 2.16
06- 006 77 1.8 77 1.72 72 1.82
06- 007 81 1.76 80 1.56 79 1.54
06- 008 61 2.47 63 2.03 47 2.6
06- 009 76 1.77 75 1.45 75 1.65
06- 010 68 1.97 52 1.76 73 1.98
06- 011 72 2.61 58 2.13 59 2.56
06- 012 72 2.1 61 1.84 64 2.15
06- 013 83 1.94 80 1.84 66 1.79
06- 014 83 1.31 85 1.35 89 1.39
06- 015 75 1.8 79 1.57 77 1.67
06- 016 81 2.16 78 1.74 69 1.96
06- 017 79 1.75 78 1.54 78 1.54
06- 018 77 2 77 1.78 78 1.84
06- 019 80 2.02 78 1.69 79 1.58
 26

Table 2. Batch 2007

2007
Gen Education Prof Education Major
Name
LET ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD
07-001 87 1.67 85 1.51 84 1.51
07-002 77 1.67 77 1.59 76 1.7
07-003 61 2.26 53 2.03 44 2.3
07-004 81 1.83 77 1.59 70 1.67
07-005 50 2.44 73 2.3 64 2.6
07-006 73 2.07 67 1.81 65 2.14
07-007 67 1.71 55 1.74 66 1.88
07-008 63 2.21 67 2.23 52 2.39
07-009 72 1.93 65 1.76 62 1.96
07-010 75 1.66 60 1.46 62 1.75
07-011 66 2.18 65 2.04 57 2.29
07-012 76 1.78 76 1.37 79 1.49
07-013 86 1.76 85 1.62 80 1.69
07-014 70 1.74 73 1.7 72 1.9
07-015 75 2.1 78 1.87 56 2.11
07-016 52 2.2 43 2.01 57 2.42
07-017 76 1.88 75 1.54 76 1.69
07-018 61 1.94 57 1.79 47 1.98
07-019 67 2.2 60 2.09 48 2.32
07-020 77 1.56 72 1.46 78 1.44
07-021 64 1.93 52 1.88 45 2.26
07-022 67 2.1 60 1.91 54 2.39
07-023 58 2.58 55 2.42 39 2.78
07-024 76 1.95 62 1.94 76 1.91
07-025 52 2.32 50 2.1 53 2.42
07-026 59 1.79 57 1.71 44 2.09
07-027 72 2.2 62 1.96 59 2.24
07-028 78 1.59 79 1.53 76 1.63
 27

Table 3. Batch 2008

2008
Gen Education Prof Education Major
Name
LET ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD
08-001 62 2.35 68 1.95 72 1.93
08-002 57 2.31 52 2 61 2.5
08-003 72 1.86 65 1.73 63 2.2
08-004 77 2.22 65 1.99 72 1.98
08-005 67 2.16 75 1.9 69 2.04
08-006 65 2.04 68 1.9 62 1.88
08-007 77 1.58 75 1.58 76 1.72
08-008 76 1.94 77 1.98 54 1.94
08-009 64 2.32 72 2 68 2.23
08-010 73 2.17 66 1.9 75 2.18
08-011 59 2.48 52 2.29 58 2.79
08-012 64 2.26 66 1.93 63 2.4
08-013 53 2.35 54 2.12 37 2.56
08-014 76 1.9 75 2.77 78 1.63
08-015 75 2.02 65 1.81 73 1.71
08-016 71 1.7 77 1.46 75 1.73
08-017 77 2.2 77 1.81 78 1.8
08-018 65 2.71 73 2.52 75 2.68
08-019 56 2.57 52 2.47 55 2.77
08-020 70 2.09 79 1.87 76 1.85
08-021 79 1.75 82 1.54 81 2.05
08-022 73 1.96 61 1.66 51 2.02
08-023 73 1.71 75 1.62 66 1.91
08-024 78 2.12 66 1.86 77 2.2
08-025 69 2.3 66 2.06 44 2.48
08-026 65 2.36 68 2.05 59 2.17
08-027 75 2.1 76 2.08 65 1.63
08-028 57 2.24 72 1.98 56 2.23
08-029 61 2.43 47 2.38 49 2.71

Table 4. Batch 2009

 28

2009
Gen Education Prof Education Major
Name
LET ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD
09-001 77 2.12 75 1.9 74 2.07
09-002 78 1.53 80 1.38 78 1.57

Table 5. Batch 2010

2010
Gen Education Prof Education Major
Name
LET ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD
10-001 72 2.21 76 2.3 61 2.09
10-002 78 1.96 75 2.02 50 2.05
10-003 70 2.08 72 2.13 75 2.2
10-004 69 2.15 78 2.01 75 2.04
10-005 76 1.87 78 1.89 76 1.74
10-006 80 1.75 79 1.65 80 1.6
10-007 65 2.16 67 2.15 64 2.3
10-008 77 1.64 83 1.68 66 1.82
10-009 81 1.95 77 1.82 80 1.66
10-010 77 1.66 79 1.63 79 1.65
10-011 82 1.37 81 1.3 84 1.38
10-012 78 1.8 78 1.71 77 1.94
10-013 79 1.42 81 1.35 77 1.45

Table 6. Batch 2011

 29

2011
Gen Education Prof Education Major
Name
LET ACAD LET ACAD LET ACAD
11-001 81 1.96 80 1.73 67 1.76
11-002 81 1.67 80 1.71 76 1.88
11-003 77 1.62 79 1.67 75 1.58
11-004 77 2.09 78 1.98 71 2.09
11-005 77 2.11 80 1.97 69 1.92
11-006 73 2.03 69 2.04 62 2.21
11-007 73 2.55 76 1.84 75 1.85
11-008 70 2.03 82 1.9 73 1.92
11-009 79 2.1 81 2.15 77 2.25
11-010 75 1.97 66 1.96 58 1.98
11-011 75 1.97 80 1.96 60 2.15
11-012 84 1.81 80 1.78 83 1.68
11-013 75 1.89 78 1.71 76 1.77
11-014 77 1.78 81 1.69 76 1.69

Appendix B
Sample computation of GPA
gen ed  
grad un
code Subject     e it  
ENGL Study and Thinking Skills in English     1.75 3 5.25
 30

1
FILI 6 Komunikasyon sa Akademikong Filipino     1.5 3 4.5
MAT
H1 Basic Mathematics     1.25 3 3.75
PHSC Physical Sciences including Earth
1 Sciences     1.75 3 5.25
HUM
N1 Music, Arts Education and Appreciation     1.5 3 4.5
SOCS
C2 General Psychology     1.0 3 3
PHED
1 Physical Fitness and Aerobics     1.5 2 3
NSTP
1 CWTS/ LTS/ ROTC     1.0 3 3
ENGL
2 Writing in the Discipline     1.5 3 4.5
FILI 7 Pagbasa at Pagsulat     1.5 3 4.5
LITT
1 Philippine Literature     1.25 3 3.75
MAT
H 12 Contemporary Mathematics     1.0 3 3
NASC
1 Natural Sciences     1.5 3 4.5
ITCH Information & Communication
1 Technology     1.0 3 3
PHED
2 Rhythmic Activities     1.75 2 3.5
NSTP
2 ROTC/CWTS/LTS     1.25 3 3.75
ENGL
7 Scientific Reporting ang Thesis Writing     1.75 3 5.25
FILI 8 Masining na Pagpapahayag     1.25 3 3.75
LITT
2 Masterpieces of World Literature     1.25 3 3.75
SOSC Philippine History, Geography and
4 Institution     1.25 3 3.75
PHED
3 Individual and Dual Sports     2.0 2 4
PHED
4 Team Sports     1.5 2 3
SOSC
1 Society and Culture w/ Family Planning     1.25 3 3.75
SOSC Philippine Government, Politics &
5 Constitution     1.5 3 4.5
SOSC Basic Economics w/ Taxation & Agrarian
9 Reform     1.5 3 4.5
HUM
N9 Logic     1.0 3 3
SOSC
6 Life and Works of Rizal     1.25 3 3.75
SCEL Any Science Elective Course     1.25 3 3.75
          80 109.5
av 1.3687
    e       5
 31

             

   
             
prof ed  
grad uni
code Subject     e t  
TEAC 2 Principles of Teaching II     1.0 3 3
ASSE
21 Assessment of Student Learning I     1.25 3 3.75
EDFS
23 Participation 1     1.0 3 3
EDUC
99b Seminar 2     1.25 1 1.25
CURR
41 Curriculum Development     1.5 3 4.5
ASSE
22 Assessment of Student Learning 2     1.25 3 3.75
EDFS
24 Participation 2 (Field Study 5)     1.25 2 2.5
EDUC
99c Seminar 3     1.0 1 1
EDUC
39 The Teaching Profession     1.5 3 4.5
EDFS
25 Participation 2 (Field Study 6)     1.0 1 1
EDFS
25 Practice Teaching     1.25 6 7.5
EDUC
40 Social Dimensions of Education     1.25 3 3.75
EDUC
35 Seminar in Education     1.75 3 5.25
EDUC
37 Child and Adolescent Development     1.25 3 3.75
Introduction to Educational
EDTC 1 Technology     1.25 3 3.75
EDFS
21 Observation I     1.25 1 1.25
EDUC
38 Facilitating Learning     1.25 3 3.75
EDTC 2 Instructional Media Resources     1.25 3 3.75
ENGL
3a Developmental Reading 1     1.75 3 5.25
TEAC 1 Principles of Teaching I     1.25 3 3.75
EDFS
22 Observation 2     1.5 1 1.5
EDUC
99a Seminar 1     1.25 1 1.25
          56 72.75
av 1.29910
    e       7
 32

major  
code Subject     grade unit  
MATH
50 Foundations of Mathematics     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
55 Plane Geometry     1.75 3 5.25
MATH
60 Solid Geometry     1.25 3 3.75
MATH
65 Advanced Algebra     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
70 Elementary Statistics     1.0 3 3
MATH
75 Trigonometry     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
80 Abstract Algebra     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
85 Linear Algebra     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
90 Analytic Geometry     1.25 3 3.75
MATH
95 Business Math     1.25 3 3.75
MATH
100 Advanced Statistics     1.25 3 3.75
MATH Seminar in Problem Solving in
105 Mathematics     1.25 3 3.75
MATH
110 Mathematical Investigations     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
115 Calculus I     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
120 Strategies in Teaching Mathematics     1.25 3 3.75
MATH
125 Research in Mathematics     1.25 3 3.75
MATH
130 Seminar in Technology in Mathematics     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
135 Calculus II     1.5 3 4.5
MATH
145 Modern Geometry     1.5 3 4.5
 33

MATH
105 Number Theory     1.0 3 3
          60 82.5
    ave       1.375

Appendix C. Sample Computation of RHO in 2006

General Education Professional Education

rho=1−6 ¿ ¿ rho=1−6 ¿ ¿

6(637.75) 6(499.75)
¿ 1− ¿ 1−
19(192−1) 19(192−1)

3,826.5 2,998.5
¿ 1− ¿ 1−
6,840 6,840

¿ 1−0.56 ¿ 1−0.44

¿ 0.44 moderate ¿ 0.56 moderate

Major

rho=1−6 ¿ ¿

6(70)
¿ 1−
19(192−1)

420
¿ 1−
6,840

¿ 1−0.06

¿ 0.94 very high

 34

Appendix D: Sample Computation of t- Test

General Education Professional Education

n−2 n−2
t=r
√ 1−r 2
t=r
√ 1−r 2

19−2 19−2
¿ 0.44
√ 1−0.44 2
¿ 0.56
√ 1−0.562

17 17
¿ 0.44
√ 0.8064
¿ 0.56
√ 0.6864

1.740 1.740
¿ 0.44
√ 0.8064
¿ 0.56
√ 0.6864

¿ 0.44 (1.47) ¿ 0.56(1.59)

¿ 0.65 not significant ¿ 0.89 not significant

Major

n−2
t=r
√ 1−r 2

19−2
¿ 0.94
√ 1−0.94 2
 35

17
¿ 0.94
√ 0.1164

1.740
¿ 0.94
√ 0.1164

¿ 0.94 (3.87)

¿ 3.63 significant