Profile of the Subjects

Table 1
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Pupils as to Age

Age Frequency Percentage (%)

6 years old 1 4.00

5 years old 23 92.00

4 years old 1 4.00

Total 25 100.00

Table 1 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of

the pupil respondents in terms of age. As seen from the table,

the age category 5 years old has the highest frequency of 23

which comprises 92 percentage of the distribution. On the hand,

both age categories 6 years old and 4 years old has the lowest

frequency of only 1 which each comprises 4 percent of the

distribution. The data tells that most of the pupil respondents

of the study are 5 years old.

 Table 2
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the
Pupils as to Gender

Gender Frequency Percentage (%)

Male 13 52.00

Female 12 48.00

Total 25 100.00

Table 2 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of

the pupil respondents in terms of gender. As seen from the table,

the gender category Male has the highest frequency of 13 which

comprises 52 percentage of the distribution. On the hand, the

gender category Female has the lowest frequency of only 12 which

comprises 48 percent of the distribution. The result implies that

respondents of the study is male dominated.

 Table 3

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Pupils as to

Highest Educational Attainment of Father

Highest Educational Frequency Percentage (%)

Attainment Father
College Graduate 2 8.00

High School Graduate 15 60.00

Elementary Graduate 7 28.00

Elementary Level 1 4.00

Total 25 100.00

Table 3 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of

the pupil respondents in terms Highest Educational Attainment of

their Father. As seen from the table, the category High School

Graduate has the highest frequency of 15 which comprises 60

percentage of the distribution. Meanwhile, the category

Elementary Level has the lowest frequency of only 1 which

comprises 4 percent of the distribution. The result implies that

the father of most of the student respondents received and

completed a formal education in the high school level.

 Table 4
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Pupils as to
Highest Educational Attainment of Mother

Highest Educational Frequency Percentage (%)

Attainment of Mother
College Graduate 5 20.00

High School Graduate 15 60.00

Elementary Graduate 4 16.00

Elementary Level 1 4.00

Total 25 100.00

Table 4 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of

the pupil respondents in terms of the Highest Educational

Attainment of their mother. As seen from the table, the category

High School Graduate has the highest frequency of 15 which

comprises 60 percentage of the distribution. Meanwhile, the

category Elementary Level has the lowest frequency of only 1

which comprises 4 percent of the distribution. The result implies

that the mother of most of the student respondents received and

completed a formal education in the high school level.

 Table 5
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Pupils
As to Occupation of Father

Occupation of Father Frequency Percentage (%)

Farmer 6 24.00

Laborer 10 40.00

Self Employed 7 28.00

OFW 2 8.00

Total 25 100.00

Table 5 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of

the pupil respondents in terms of the Occupation of their Father.

As seen from the table, the category Laborer has the highest

frequency of 10 which comprises 40 percentage of the

distribution. Meanwhile, the category OFW has the lowest

frequency of only 2 which comprises 8 percent of the

distribution. The result implies that the father of most of the

student respondents work as laborer.

 Table 6
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Pupils
As to Occupation of Mother

Occupation of Mother Frequency Percentage (%)

OFW 3 12.00

Barangay Health Worker 1 4.00

Housewife 14 56.00

Helper 4 16.00

Cashier 1 4.00

Deceased 2 8.00

Total 25 100.00

Table 6 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of

the pupil respondents in terms of the Occupation of their Mother.

As seen from the table, the category Housewife has the highest

frequency of 14 which comprises 56 percentage of the

distribution. Meanwhile, both categories Barangay Health Worker

and Cashier has the lowest frequency of only 1 which comprises 4

percent of the distribution. The result implies that the Mother

of most of the student respondents are not employed.

Level of Development of the pupils in the Different Developmental
Domains

Table 7
Mean Scaled Score and Descriptive Interpretation of the Level of
Development of the pupils in the Different Developmental Domains

Developmental Domains Mean Scaled Descriptive Scale

Score
Average
Gross Motor 11.08 Development
Average
Fine Motor 11.92 Development
Average
Self-Help 12.84 Development
Average
Receptive Language 11.04 Development
Average
Expressive Language 09.80 Development
Average
Cognitive 12.00 Development
Average
Socio-Emotional 10.52 Development

Table 7 shows the mean scaled score and descriptive

interpretation of the level of development of the pupils in the

different developmental domains. As revealed in the table, among

the developmental domains, Cognitive has the highest mean scale

score of 12.84 with a descriptive interpretation of “Average

Development”. On the other hand, the developmental domain

Expressive Language has the lowest mean scale score of 9.80 with

a descriptive interpretation of “Average Development”.

Academic Performance of the Pupils in the three learning areas

Table 8
Mean and Standard Deviation of the Academic Performance of the
Pupils in the three learning area

Mean Academic
Performance (1st Standard Descriptive
Learning Area and 2nd Quarter) Deviation Scale
Mother Approaching
Tongue 1 83.84 5.38 Proficiency
Approaching
Mathematics 1 80.32 5.53 Proficiency
Araling Approaching
Panlipunan 1 83.66 4.53 Proficiency

Table 8 shows the Mean and Standard Deviation of the

Academic Performance of the Pupils in the three-learning area. As

revealed in the table, the learning area, Mother Tongue 1 has a

mean academic performance of 83.84 with a standard deviation of

5.38 which is descriptively interpreted as “Approaching

Proficiency”. On the other hand, the learning area Mathematics 1

has a mean academic performance of 80.32 with a standard

deviation of 5.53 which is descriptively interpreted as

“Approaching Proficiency”. Meanwhile, the learning area Araling

Panlipunan 1 has a mean academic performance of 83.66 with a

standard deviation of 4.53 which is descriptively interpreted as

“Approaching Proficiency”.
Relationship between the level of development of the Pupils and
their academic performance

Table 9
Relationship Between the Level of Development of the Pupils and
their Mean Academic Performance in Mother Tongue 1

Level of Development Pearson r Probability Decision at

Value Value 0.05 alpha
Gross Motor 0.21 0.294 Not Reject Ho
Fine Motor 0.15 0.448 Not Reject Ho
Self Help 0.23 0.267 Not Reject Ho
Receptive Language 0.13 0.521 Not Reject Ho
Expressive Language 0.45 0.021 Reject Ho
Cognitive 0.37 0.061 Not Reject Ho
Socio-Emotional 0.41 0.042 Reject Ho

Table 9 shows the relationship between the level of

development of the pupils and their mean academic performance in

mother tongue 1. As seen from the table the Pearson r values

0.21, 0.15, 0.23, 0.13 and 0.37 with associated probability

values 0.294, 0.448, 0.267, 0.521 and 0.061 which are all greater

than the 0.05 alpha, yielded no significant relationship. The

null hypothesis is not rejected. This means that the Gross Motor,

Fine Motor, Self Help, Receptive Language and Cognitive Level of

Development has no significant relationship to the Mean Academic

Performance of the pupils in Mother Tongue 1.

Meanwhile, it is interesting to find out that the Pearson r

values 0.45 and 0.41 with associated P values of 0.021 and 0.042

which are both less than the 0.05 alpha, yielded a significant
relationship. The null hypothesis is rejected. This means that

Expressive Language and Socio-Emotional level of development has

a significant relationship to the Mean Academic Performance of

the pupils in Mother Tongue 1.

Table 10
Relationship Between the Level of Development of the Pupils and
their Mean Academic Performance in Mathematics 1

Level of Development Pearson r Probability Decision at

Value Value 0.05 alpha
Gross Motor 0.22 0.274 Not Reject Ho
Fine Motor 0.15 0.461 Not Reject Ho
Self Help 0.22 0.282 Not Reject Ho
Receptive Language 0.13 0.528 Not Reject Ho
Expressive Language 0.39 0.048 Reject Ho
Cognitive 0.26 0.206 Not Reject Ho
Socio-Emotional 0.30 0.144 Not Reject Ho

Table 10 shows the relationship between the level of

development of the pupils and their mean academic performance in

Mathematics 1. As seen from the table the Pearson r values 0.22,

0.15, 0.22, 0.13, 0.26 and 0.30 with associated probability

values 0.274, 0.461, 0.282, 0.528, 0.206 and 0.144 which are all

greater than the 0.05 alpha, yielded no significant relationship.

The null hypothesis is not rejected. This means that the Gross

Motor, Fine Motor, Self Help, Receptive Language, Cognitive and

socio economical Level of Development has no significant

relationship to the Mean Academic Performance of the pupils in

Mathematics 1.
 Furthermore, it is interesting to find out that the Pearson

r value of0.39 with associated P value 0.048 of 0.021 and 0.042

which is less than the 0.05 alpha, yielded a significant

relationship. The null hypothesis is rejected. This means that

Expressive Language level of development has a significant

relationship to the Mean Academic Performance of the pupils in

Mathematics 1.

Table 11
Relationship Between the Level of Development of the Pupils and
their Mean Academic Performance in Araling Panlipunan 1

Level of Development Pearson P Decision at

r Value Value 0.05 alpha
Gross Motor 0.12 0.561 Not Reject Ho
Fine Motor -0.02 0.898 Not Reject Ho
Self Help 0.38 0.061 Not Reject Ho
Receptive Language 0.20 0.325 Not Reject Ho
Expressive Language 0.35 0.081 Not Reject Ho
Cognitive 0.28 0.169 Not Reject Ho
Socio-Emotional 0.19 0.355 Not Reject Ho

Table 11 shows the relationship between the level of

development of the pupils and their mean academic performance in

Araling Panlipunan 1. As shown from the table the Pearson r

values 0.12, 0.02, 0.38, 0.20, 0.35, 0.28, and 0.19 with

associated probability values 0.561, 0.898, 0.061, 0.325, 0.081,

0.169 and 0.355 which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha,

yielded no significant relationship. The null hypothesis is not

rejected. This means that the Gross Motor, Fine Motor, Self Help,
Receptive Language, Expressive Language, Cognitive and socio

economical Level of Development has no significant relationship

to the Mean Academic Performance of the pupils in Araling

Panlipunan 1.

Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and

Their Level of Development

Table 12
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Gross Motor Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
Age 12.00 0.69 0.002 Reject Ho
Gender 0.02 0.01 0.953 Not Reject Ho
Highest Educational 12.31 0.70 0.006 Reject Ho
Attainment of
mother
Highest Educational 12.13 0.07 0.036 Reject Ho
Attainment of
father
Occupation of 3.32 0.36 0.650 Not Reject Ho
Mother
Occupation of 2.03 0.28 0.566 Not Reject Ho
Father

Table 12 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their gross motor development. as shown from the

table, the chi square values 0.02, 3.32 and 2.03 with associated

P values of 0.953, 0.650 and 0.566 which are all greater than the

0.05 alpha yielded no significant relationship. The null

hypothesis is not rejected. This means that profile variables

gender, occupation of mother and occupation of mother has no

significant relationship to gross motor development.

Interestingly, the chis square values 12.00, 12.31 and 12.13

with associated P values of 0.002, 0.006 and 0.036 which are all

less than the 0.05 alpha yielded a significant relationship. This

means that, the profile variables age, Highest Educational

Attainment of mother and Highest Educational Attainment of Father

has a significant relationship to Gross Motor Development of the

pupils.

Table 13
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Fine Motor Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
0.01 0.06 0.996 Not Reject
Age Ho
2.00 0.28 0.367 Not Reject
Gender Ho
Highest Educational 1.44 0.17 0.963 Not Reject
Attainment of mother Ho
Highest Educational 5.59 0.33 0.471 Not Reject
Attainment of father Ho
4.78 0.30 0.572 Not Reject
Occupation of Father Ho
8.38 0.41 0.591 Not Reject
Occupation of Mother Ho

Table 13 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their fine motor development. As shown from the table,

the chi square values 0.01, 2.00, 1.44, 5.59, 4.78 and 8.38 with

associated P values of 0.996, 0.367, 0.963, 0.471,0.572 and 0.591

which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha yielded no significant

relationship. The null hypothesis is not rejected. This means

that profile variables age, gender, Highest Educational

Attainment of mother, Highest Educational Attainment of Father,

occupation of mother and occupation of father has no significant

relationship to gross motor development.

Table 14
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Self-Help Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
Age 0.29 0.07 0.999 Not Reject Ho
Gender 3.14 0.35 0.370 Not Reject Ho
Highest Educational 2.27 0.17 0.986 Not Reject Ho
Attainment of
mother
Highest Educational 3.96 0.23 0.914 Not Reject Ho
Attainment of
father
Occupation of 7.29 0.31 0.607 Not Reject Ho
Father
Occupation of 13.70 0.42 0.548 Not Reject Ho
Mother

Table 14 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their Self-Help Development. As shown from the table,

the chi square values 0.29, 3.14, 2.27, 3.96, 7.29 and 13.70 with

associated P values of 0.999, 0.370, 0.986, 0.914, 0.607 and

0.548 which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha yielded no
significant relationship. The null hypothesis is not rejected.

This means that profile variables age, gender, Highest

Educational Attainment of mother, Highest Educational Attainment

of Father, occupation of mother and occupation of father has no

significant relationship to Self-Help Development.

Table 15
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Receptive Language Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
Age 0.18 0.08 0.910 Not Reject Ho
Gender 2.00 0.28 0.157 Not Reject Ho
Highest Educational 1.44 0.24 0.694 Not Reject Ho
Attainment of mother
Highest Educational 6.56 0.51 0.087 Not Reject Ho
Attainment of father
Occupation of Father 5.97 0.48 0.113 Not Reject Ho
Occupation of Mother 5.57 0.48 0.331 Not Reject Ho

Table 15 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their Receptive Language Development. As shown from

the table, the chi square values 0.18, 2.00, 1.44, 5.56, 5.97 and

5.57 with associated P values of 0.910, 0.157, 0.694, 0.087,

0.113 and 0.331 which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha yielded

no significant relationship. The null hypothesis is not rejected.

This means that profile variables age, gender, Highest

Educational Attainment of mother, Highest Educational Attainment

of Father, occupation of mother and occupation of father has no

significant relationship to Receptive Language Development.

Table 16
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Expressive Language Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
0.54 0.14 0.762 Not Reject
Age Ho
0.36 0.12 0.548 Not Reject
Gender Ho
Highest Educational 4.16 0.40 0.244 Not Reject
Attainment of mother Ho
Highest Educational 1.31 0.22 0.727 Not Reject
Attainment of father Ho
3.45 0.37 0.327 Not Reject
Occupation of Father Ho
2.97 0.34 0.704 Not Reject
Occupation of Mother Ho

Table 16 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their Expressive Language Development. As shown from

the table, the chi square values 0.54, 0.36, 4.16, 1.31, 3.45,

and 2.97 with associated P values of 0.762, 0.548, 0.244, 0.727,

0.327 and 0.704 which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha yielded

no significant relationship. The null hypothesis is not rejected.

This means that profile variables age, gender, Highest

Educational Attainment of mother, Highest Educational Attainment

of Father, occupation of mother and occupation of father has no

significant relationship to Expressive Language Development.

Table 17
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Cognitive Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
2.00 0.20 0.999 Not Reject
Age Ho
4.37 0.41 0.628 Not Reject
Gender Ho
Highest Educational 12.22 0.40 0.836 Not Reject
Attainment of mother Ho
Highest Educational 17.72 0.48 0.474 Not Reject
Attainment of father Ho
24.50 0.57 0.139 Not Reject
Occupation of Father Ho
32.09 0.50 0.363 Not Reject
Occupation of Mother Ho

Table 17 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their Cognitive Development. As shown from the table,

the chi square values 2.00, 4.37, 12.22, 17.72, 24.50, and 32.09

with associated P values of 0.999, 0.628, 0.836, 0.474, 0.139,

and 0.363 which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha yielded no

significant relationship. The null hypothesis is not rejected.

This means that profile variables age, gender, Highest

Educational Attainment of mother, Highest Educational Attainment

of Father, occupation of mother and occupation of father has no

significant relationship to Cognitive Development.

Table 18
Relationship Between the Profile Variables of the Pupils and
Their Socio Emotional Development

Profile Variables Chi Cramer’s V P Decision at

Square Correlation Value 0.05 alpha
Value Coefficient
Value
5.43 0.33 0.942 Not Reject
Age Ho
7.63 0.55 0.266 Not Reject
Gender Ho
Highest Educational 10.90 0.38 0.898 Not Reject
Attainment of mother Ho
Highest Educational 23.11 0.55 0.186 Not Reject
Attainment of father Ho
Occupation of Father 24.56 0.57 0.037 Reject Ho
34.83 0.52 0.249 Not Reject
Occupation of Mother Ho

Table 18 relationship between the profile variables of the

pupils and their Socio Emotional Development. As shown from the

table, the chi square values 5.43, 7.63, 10.90, 23.1 and 24.83

with associated P values of 0.942, 0.266, 0.898, 0.186 and 0.249

which are all greater than the 0.05 alpha yielded no significant

relationship. The null hypothesis is not rejected. This means

that profile variables age, gender, Highest Educational

Attainment of mother, Highest Educational Attainment of Father

and occupation of mother has no significant relationship to

Cognitive Development.

Interestingly, the chis square value 24.56 with associated P

value of 0.037 which is less than the 0.05 alpha yielded a

significant relationship. This means that, the profile variables

Occupation of Father has a significant relationship to Socio

Emotional Development of the pupils.

 Proposed Enhancement Activities for Mathematics

Activities/Programs Objective Time Frame Persons

Involved
A. ICT Integration To develop Teacher
in teaching the interest
Mathematics of pupils by
a. Use of video attracting
clips their
b. Colorful and attention to
animated videos,
Powerpoint animations
presentations and colorful
presentations
B. Mathematics To enhance Teacher
Olympiad in the skills of Club Officers
classroom pupils Pupils
through
friendly
competitions
C. Game-based To add Teacher
activities excitements
and interest
of pupils to
different
mathematics
activities
using games
D. Math-inspired To introduce School Head
classrooms and mathematics Teachers
school in all Parents
environment corners of Stakeholders
a. Stairs the school
b. Doors and building
c. Walls familiarity
d. floors and math-
e. Windows friendly
f. CRs environment
g. Corridors
h. Parks
E. Partnership with To tap Teacher
stakeholders parents and Pupils
a. Home modules the community Parents
b. Parent-child to a
math projects mathematics
partnership
to develop
their
children
using home
modules and
projects