PROBLEMS AFFECTING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ACHIEVEMENT OF

STUDENTS IN BARANGAY AND NATIONAL

HIGH SCHOOLS

Instructions:
1. Read all about in-text citation writing and reference writing APA 6th edition format
2. Update the in-text citations and reference list
3. Be sure that all of the RRL (review of related literature) as your in-text citations are
aligned with your reference list and relevant to the text/thoughts.
 INTRODUCTION

The involvement of the community in the educational process seems to have a positive

effect on the achievement of youngsters. From the exhibit of strong teachers, administration,

community partnership and school community agreement on the educational program, it reflects

on the best result achieved by the school. The quality education program has direct relationship

to the ability of the staff to work toward an educational partnership with the community.

When it comes to the comparison of the performance on academic achievement

tests of students from small, usually rural, and school with those from larger, often urban,

institution has not produced definitive results. Several studies have not found any significant

differences between the academic achievements of the areas. However, the rural and urban

differences do exist, and this study will find how and what differences appear in some rural and

urban school.

For many years, the discussion about whether rural schools provide an education of equal

quality to urban schools has been a topic that many people in the education field, as well as

parents and students, have been disputing. This study seeks to present comparison between rural

and urban school.

According to the research of Williams (2003), community involvement and community

opportunities, is the most prevalent difference between rural and urban middle school education.

Rural communities tend to be stronger in many ways. They are united by students, school pride

and community values. Research shows that it is important to have qualified teachers in both

rural and urban classrooms.

Research by Cox, Lawrence Howley and Bickel (2002) are all indicated a strong

relationship between school size and student achievement.

 In his study, Hicks (2002) hypothesized that there would be an advancement in academic

achievement of students enrolled in rural schools using distance school. The hypothesis was

found to be supported by literature and later accepted.

Method

Research Design

The researcher used the descriptive method of research in order to satisfy her objectives

in the problems affecting the English achievement of students in barangay and national high

schools.

Sources of Data

The researcher got the population of all the students enrolled in barangay and national

high school in Quezon, Quezon which are the Paaralang Sekundarya ng Lucban Guinhawa

Annex and Cometa National High School-Main Campus for barangay high schools while

Quezon Central Institute and Cometa National Highs School- Annex for national High schools.

From the population, samples were determined.

Instrumentation

The researcher made a questionnaire that served as the instrument in gathering data. The

first part of questionnaire is the profile of the students in terms of gender, barangay and national

and year level while the second part is the problems encountered in the course of studying

English in terms of accessibility on references, distance of school from home, peer influence, and

teacher. The questionnaire was composed of close and open-ended questions. Some students

from Perez National High School were used in validation of the questionnaire.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher made a letter of permission to conduct the study. This request that was

signed by her adviser and this permission to conduct her study approved by the principals of
barangay and national high schools in Quezon, Quezon. Upon approving, the questionnaire was

administered. The result was tabulated, analyzed and interpreted.

Statistical Treatment

All the data that were gathered were tallied and analyzed for statistical treatment. The

gathered data were used to compare the problems encountered by the students in barangay and

national high schools that affect in their academic achievement.

The following formulas were used in the analysis and interpretation of data.

To determine the profile of the respondents and the percentage of their preferred accent,

the researcher used a percentage formula.

f
P= × 100
N

Where: P-percentage

f –frequency

N- number of respondents

To determine the significant difference between four variables, (students in rural and

urban secondary schools, problems, gender, and year level) in this study, correlation was used.

This is the formula:

2
Σ( O−E)
X² =
E

Where: X²- Chi-square

E- Expected Frequency

O- Observe Frequency
Result and Discussion

Findings

After gathering data and applying the necessary method and statistical treatment, the

following were revealed:

Profile of the Respondents on the Location of School at Different Year Level

12
Percentage of Respondents Profile on

10
the Location of School

6
Rural
4 Urban

0
I II III IV
Year Level

Plate shows the percentage of respondents’ profile on the location of school at different

year level. In rural, fourth year has the highest population with 9.96%and second year as the

lowest with 8.84%. While in urban first year is the highest with 5.87% and the lowest is the

fourth year with 4.41%.

Rural and urban schools are much the same when it comes to resources and learning

environments" (EQR, 2003, p.45). Yet there are many variables that affect students' achievement
and those variables are directly related to whether a school is considered a rural or an urban

school.

Percentage of Accessibility on References

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
percentage

50% English books

40% Assignment on E-lib
30% Electronic Library
20% References
10%
0%
Rural Urban
School Location

This plate shows the accessibility of the respondents on references. It indicates all

respondents in the rural area have no access in electronic library and the references that they

have is the books especially English (100%). While respondents in the urban have access to

electronic library (100%) and as well as books in the library (100%)

This particularly attributes to the easy accessibility of new technologies in the urban areas

than in rural especially on internet access. The problem regarding unequal distribution of

resources between provinces, rural and urban areas are still intact (Motala & Pampalis, 2001:56).

Several schools in rural areas do not have laboratories and this situation means that students

learn science by rote learning. Facilities are important in order to make the teaching and learning

process more effective. Students that live in rural areas will less expose to the using of
technology because the facilities that were provided for them are not sufficient. This will make

their learning process will be less effective and they will have less knowledge about current

issues as well as how to use technology. Students in urban areas have many advantages in their

learning process and with the advent of technology it will make easier for their study. They will

more understanding with their learning with the facilities provided.

Percentage on the Distance of School from Home

100%
90%
80%
70%
60% Urban %
Percentage

50%
40% Rural %

30% Means of
20% Transportation
10%
0%
Walking Tricycle Bicycle Jeep
Means of Transportation

Plate above shows the different means of commutation made by the respondents in going

to school. Both rural and urban respondents prefer walking in going to school with percentage

value of 56.25% (rural) and 78.57% (urban). The least means of commutation made by the

respondents in rural is through jeep (4.78%) and in urban is through bicycle (3.67%)

In general, majority of respondents, regardless of their school was prefer to walk

(70.60%) in going to school and the least made by of commutation is bicycle ride (4.99%).

Raychaudhuri, Debnath, Sen and Majumder (2010) report a positive relationship that

exists between school location (closer distance to homesteads) and students ‘academic

performance as they attend school regularly. Emore (2005) shares that distance to school

together with school discipline; family background and school location caused truancy

(attendance irregularity) among school students. Distance in association with location of the
school seems to be one of the strong influencing origins for the academic performance among

students. This was evidenced as well by Obemeata (1995) and Obayan (2003) who confirmed

that school physical environment exerts dominant influence on students ‘academic performance.

Percentage of the Perception of the Respondents on Teacher Factor to Attend English

Class

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Percentage

50%
Punctuality
40% Fairness
30% Inspiration
20% Comfortability
10%
0%
Yes (%) No (%) Yes( %) No (%)
Rural Urban
School Location

In this template, it shows the different characteristics of English teacher. In rural and

urban respondents, they both believe that their teacher is fair enough in treating their students

and in giving grades with percentage distribution of 100% (rural) and 95.92% (urban).

Respondents in rural areas have the same regard to the comfortability of their teacher (98.52%)

and their teacher continue to inspire (98.52%) them in their studies. Respondents in rural areas

have different opinions, serving as inspiration has the greater percentage (93.26%) compared

with comfortability to their teacher (92.24%). Both respondents in rural and urban believe that

their teachers are punctual in coming to class with 57.35% and 64.90%, respectively.

Awoniyi (1981) remarked that there is a direct relationship between the quality of

teaching personnel and the quality of education process. Most of them did not master the

teaching technique yet because they are still new in teaching area. When we compared to
students in urban areas they usually have a teachers that have good communications skills in

English. Most of teachers compete for placement in urban schools. So, rural school will have

inadequate teacher and it will make their learning progress disturbed and not running properly.

Percentage of the Perception of the Respondents on Peer Factor to Attend English Class

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Percentage

50%
Assistance in Ass.
40% Helpfulness
30% Pressure
20% Kindness
10%
0%
Yes (%) No (%) Yes (%) No(%)
Rural Urban
School Location

This plate shoes the influence of peer on respondent in coming to school. Both

respondents in rural and urban appreciate the help being extended by their classmates, 83.03%

and 87.14%, respectively. This followed by the felt kindness from their peer both rural (83.09%)

and urban (83.67%). Respondents from rural also felt the assistance made by their peer (50%) in

doing their assignment and least was felt from pressure (15.44%) at their peers. While

respondents in rural, felt the pressure (65.10%) given by their peers in their everyday schooling

and least was observed from the assistance given by their peer in doing the assignment (61.43%).

Coleman Report (Coleman et al. 1966) is one of the earliest studies on peer group effects

in education. Two studies in the 70s by Summers and Wolf (1977), and Henderson, Mieszkowski

and Sauvageau (1978), have shown that students achieve higher if they are placed with high
performing peers. However, the early studies take few steps toward addressing the endogeneity

problems.

Mean Academic Standard in English of Students in Urban

86
85
84
83
Average Grdes

82
81
80 M
F
79
78
77
76
I II III IV
Year Level

Plate 7 shows the mean academic standard in English of students in urban. In all year

level, female are always have higher grades than male. First year female has 82.11% while male

with 81.69%. in sophomore section, female with 82.80% and male with 80.80While in junior,

female has 83.03 % and male with 79.45%. Senior female students had 85.10% and male with

81.55%. In general, female students in urban has average grades of 83.26% while male with

80.87%.

Bronfenbrenner (2005) asserts that the general views are that boys and girls are suited

differently to particular academic subjects. Research findings revealed that boys perform better

than girls in science and Mathematics achievement tests, while girls scored higher average
performances on most of the verbal school achievement tests like language (Rashid, N. and

Javanmardi, F, 2012; reiterated Rose´n, 1998), and, consistently also on school grades than boys,

at least in Scandinavia Niemivirta, 1997

Mean Academic Standard in English of Students in Rural

82
81
80
79
Average Grades

78
M
77
F
76
75
74
I II III IV
Year Level

Plate shows the mean academic standard in English of students in rural. In all year level,

female are always have higher grades than male. First year female has 80.96% while male with

78.68%. In sophomore section, female with 80.95% and male with 79.40%. While in junior,

female has 81.23 % and male with 76.98%. Senior female students had 81.12% and male with

79.59%. In general, female students in urban has average grades of 81.07% while male with

78.66%.

Pillow, (2008) has examined the gender differences among student on their academic

performance has reveal that in individuals background characteristic affect his/her cognitive and
non-cognitive is one of the most significant and influential characteristics in academic

performance. Nori, (2002) studies the sex differences and the relationship between creativity and

self-concept on academic performance among high school students.

Correlation of Mean Academic Performance of Respondents at Different School Location

80.50
Mean Academic Performance of Re-

80.00
spondents at Urban Schools

79.50

79.00 Series2
Linear (Series2)

78.50

78.00
81.00 81.50 82.00 82.50 83.00 83.50
Mean Academic Performance of Respondents at Rural Schools

This plate indicates the correlation linear regression line between the academic

performance of the respondents at rural and urban schools. Calculation reveals are value of

r=0.79 that indicates a high positive relationship between variables. Further tests of the academic

means showed a computed t-value of 1.822. This is lower than the tabular values of at 0.05

(4.303) and at 0.01 (9.925) levels of significance. it indicates a non-significance results between

means. Therefore the academic of performance of male and female do not differ.

Rashid and Javanmardi (2012) investigated the Relationship between Iranian EFL

Students’ Achievement Goal Orientations and Their Gender with a sample of 182 B.A. students,
both males and females, majoring in English Literature at Shiraz University. They reported that

mastery goal was the dominant goal held by students followed by performance approach, work

avoidant, and performance avoidant goal orientations. The results also revealed no significant

effect of gender on students’ goal orientations in English Language. This is in line with the

report of other studies which found no gender differences in students’ goal orientations (Midgley

& Middleton, 1997)

Correlation of Mean Academic Performance of Respondents and Gender

83.50
Mean Academic Performance of Female

83.00

82.50
Respondents

82.00
Series2
81.50 Linear (Series2)

81.00

80.50
78.00 78.50 79.00 79.50 80.00 80.50 81.00
Mean Academic Performance of Male Respondents

The plate above shows the correlation of the mean academic performance of respondents

in terms of gender. Correlation results to a value of 0.21 which means that there is a weak

positive relation of male and female academic performance. It means that gender’s academic

performance is not related and regardless of gender, a respondent earned a rating due to him/her.

Leland (2005) stated that urban students are faced with many extraneous factors that

other; specifically the majority of suburban students do not need to worry about on a daily basis.

Also Leland added that urban students live in crime-infested neighborhoods with violence on the
streets. Leland stated also those problems outside the classroom which affected students learning

tends to have a great impact in the classroom in urban school.

According to Bylund & Reeves (2005) for those who believe an urban education is better,

recent research does not provide clear evidence that rural schools are inferior to urban schools,

and analysis reveals that rural schools achieve mean annual gains in performance that equal or

better their urban counterparts.

As cited in Slavin (2004), technology today is starting to become more users friendly and

less expensive, so educators tend to use the internet and other technological advancements to

educate students in novel and interesting ways.

Conclusions:

After gathering data, the following conclusions were drawn:

Female has greater number of respondents than male. National high schools have greater number

of respondents than in rural. First year respondents have the greatest number while fourth year

have the least. Barangay schools did not access electronic library but they have English books

while in urban schools, they all have electronic library and English books. Both barangay and

national high schools respondents preferred to walk and least in riding on jeep. Both barangay

and national schools believe that giving fair grades was the characteristic of their teacher that

made the respondents attend English class. Both respondents in barangay and national high

schools appreciate the help being extended by their classmates and least was observed from the

assistance given by their peer in doing the assignment. National high schools have higher grades

in English than in rural schools. There is no significant relationship between the mean academic

performance of barangay and national high schools respondent’s respondent. There is no

significant relationship between the mean academic performance of male and female. Based on

the results, the following recommendations were hereby presented: Both barangay and national

high schools must have e- library as references. Male students should exert more effort to study

in English. The teacher should continue the fairness he gave to the students as well as being

punctual.
APPENDIX
QUESTIONNAIRE
“Problems Affecting the English Achievement of Students in Barangay And National High
Schools.”

Part I: Profile of the respondents in terms of name, year level, gender and area of the school.

Name:___________________________ Gender:_____
Year & section:_______

Does your school found in:

___ barangay
___ national high school?

Part II: Problems encountered in the course of studying English.

Direction: Kindly check the provided space that is according with your answer.

A. Accessibility on References

1. Do you have Electronic Library in your school?

___yes ___no

2. Are you doing your assignment with the help of Electronic Library?
___yes ___no
3. Do English books available in your school library?

___yes ___no

B. Distance of school from home

1. How do you commute to and from your school?

___by walk ___by bicycle
___by tricycle ___others:
Please specify: _____________________________
C. Teacher

1. Are you comfortable with your English teacher?

___yes ___no

2. Does your English teacher inspire you in taking various activities?

___yes ___no

3. Does your English teacher gives fair reports and treats in every student equally?
___yes ___no

4. Does your English teacher come late in your class?

___yes ___no

D. Peer Influence

1. Do you feel the kindness of your classmate?

___yes

2. Is there any instance where you feel pressured, ashamed and being embarrassed / harassed by
your classmates?
___yes ___no

3. Do your classmates encourage you to do your assignments and projects in English?

___yes ___no

4. Do your classmates assist you in doing assignments?

___yes ___no

_________________________
Signature of the respondent

APPENDIX
Respondent’s Profile

Year Level Male (%) Female (%) TOTAL

I 14.80 12.68 27.48
II 9.25 14 23.25
III 12.81 13.08 25.89
IV 10.70 12.68 23.38

APPENDIX
School Location at Different Year Level
Year level Rural Urban Percentage (%)
 Rural Urban
I 25.09 28.78 9.40 5.87
II 23.60 23.06 8.84 4.71
III 24.70 26.53 9.26 5.41
IV 26.59 21.63 9.96 4.41
TOTAL 100.00 100.00 37.45 20.41

Appendix
Percentage of Accessibility References

Rural Urban
References Yes % No % Yes % No %
Electronic 0 0 272 100 490 100 0 0
Library
Ass. On E-Lib 0 0 272 100 490 100 0 0
English books 272 100 0 0 490 100 0 0

Appendix
Percentage on the Distance of School from Home

Means of Rural Urban Total

Transportation F % F % F %
Walking 153 56.25 385 78.57 538 70.6
Tricycle 86 31.63 57 11.63 143 18.77
Bicycle 20 7.34 18 3.67 38 4.99
Jeep 13 4.78 30 6.12 43 5.64
TOTAL 272 100 490 100 762 100

Appendix
Percentage of the Perception of the Respondents on Teacher Factor to Attend English
Class

Teacher Rural Urban

factor Yes % No % Yes % No %
Comfortability 268 98.52 4 1.47 452 92.24 38 7.76
Inspiration 268 98.52 4 1.47 457 93.26 33 6.73
Fairness 272 100 0 0 470 95.92 20 4.08
Punctuality 156 57.35 116 42.64 318 64.9 172 35.1
APPENDIX

Percentage of the Perception of the Respondents on Peer Factor to Attend English Class

Peer Rural Urban

Factor Yes % No % Yes % No %
Kindness 226 83.09 46 16.91 410 83.67 80 16.33
 Pressure 42 15.44 230 84.56 319 65.1 171 34.9
Helpfulness 234 86.03 56 20.59 427 87.14 63 12.86
Assistance 136 50 136 50 301 61.43 189 38.57
in Ass.

Appendix
Mean Academic Standard in English of Students in Urban

Year M F Total Mean Average

Level Grade
I 81.69 82.11 163.8 81.9
II 80.8 82.8 163.6 81.8
III 79.45 83.03 162.48 81.24
IV 81.55 85.01 166.65 83.33
TOTAL 80.87 83.26 656.53 82.06

Appendix
Mean Academic Standard in English of Students in Rural

Year M F Total Mean Average

Level Grade
I 78.68 80.96 159.64 79.82
II 79.4 80.95 160.35 80.18
III 76.98 81.23 158.21 79.11
IV 79.59 81.12 160.71 80.36
TOTAL 78.66 81.07 638.91 79.87

APPENDIX
Correlation of Mean Academic Performance of
Respondents at Different
School Location and at Different Year Level

Yr Level Rural Urban RxU RxR UxU

I 81.90 79.82 6537.26 6707.61 6371.23
II 81.80 80.17 6557.91 6691.24 6427.23
III 81.24 79.10 6426.08 6599.94 6256.81
IV 83.32 80.35 6694.76 6942.22 6456.12
TOTAL 328.26 319.44 26216.01 26941.01 25511.39
 There is a strong positive association between
variables, which means that there was a significant between
the variables whereas the school location has relation with
its academic performance of the students.

APPENDIX
To further test the significance of the correlation the testing of correlation coefficient was
used

YR. Compute
Tabular Value
LEVEL Male Female r d
S t 0.05 0.01
I 81.90 79.82
II 81.80 80.17
0.79 1.822 4.303 9.925
III 81.24 79.10
IV 83.32 80.35

not significant, since the computed t (1.822) is lower than the tabular value of 4.303 and
9.925
both at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of significance.

APPENDIX
Mean Academic Performance of Respondents at Rural and Urban School

YEA RURAL URBAN

R Cometa- QCI ME PSL Cometa- ME
Annex AN Main AN
LEV male fema male fema male fema male fema
EL le le le le
I 81.6 84.1 81.7 80.1 81.90 76.6 77.6 80.7 84.2 79.82
5 1 2 0 6 7 0 5
II 82.7 83.4 78.8 82.1 81.80 78.0 80.2 80.7 81.6 80.17
2 4 7 5 3 7 6 3
III 77.8 82.6 81.0 83.4 81.24 76.4 80.4 77.4 81.9 79.10
1 3 9 2 6 9 9 6
IV 79.1 83.2 83.9 87.0 83.32 78.3 84.0 80.8 78.2 80.35
1 0 8 0 7 1 1 2
TOT 321. 333. 325. 332. 328.2 309. 322. 319. 326. 319.4
AL 29 38 66 67 5 52 44 76 06 5
MEA 80.3 83.3 81.4 83.1 82.06 77.3 80.6 79.9 81.5 79.86
N 2 5 2 7 8 1 4 2
81.83 82.29 79.00 80.73
82.0625 79.86125

APPENDIX SCorrelation on the Mean Academic Performance of Respondent's Gender

YEAR
Femal
Male MxF MxM FxF
e
LEVE
L
I 80.18 81.53 6537.48 6429.23 6647.55
II 80.10 81.87 6557.58 6415.21 6703.11
III 78.21 82.13 6423.20 6117.20 6744.52
IV 80.57 83.11 6695.76 6491.12 6906.86
TOTA 319.0 328.6 26214.0 25452.7 27002.0
L 6 4 2 6 3
MEAN 79.76 82.16      
There is a weak positive association between variables, which means that there was no
significant relation between the variables. They are depending with each other.

Reference Cited

A. Unpublished research

Dones, Kristel V. (2009) Frequently Misused Homonyms and Homographs, Southern

Luzon State University.

Lai, Fang (2007) Are Boys Left Behind? The Evolution of Gender Gap in Beijing Middle
Schools, New York University

Liu, Keke (2010) Peer Group Effects on StudentS’ Outcomes

Vanderbilt University

Mhiliwa, Joseph Anthon (2015) Effects of School Location on Learners’ Academic

Performance: A Case of Community Secondary Schools in Makambako Town Council
Njomb, University of Tanzania

Musa, Alice K. (2016) Gender differences in Achievement Goals and Performances in

English Language and Mathematics of Senior Secondary Schools students in Borno
State, Nigeria, University of Maiduguri

B. Electronics references:
Reeves., 2007. Limited Availability of Education [Online] (Updated 10 July 2011)
Available at: http://www.ideaconnection.com/solution/3789-Limited-availability of-
education-in-rural-areas.html

Domenich., 2006.ericdigest[Online] (Updated 13 July 2011)

Available at: http://www.ericdigest.org/pre-927/rural.htm

Berliner., 2005. Articles’ Content [Online] (Updated 13 July 2011)

Available at: indarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0254/is_3_58/ai_55884737/pg_3/?
tag=mantle_skin;content

Bylund R., 2005. Rural School District Consolidation [Online] (Updated 14 July
2011) Available at: http://www.academicleadership.org/article/Rural School District
Consolidation

Rosman.,2006 Student Achievement [Online] (Updated 14 July 2011) Available at:

http://sitemarker.umich.edu/rosman.356/student_achievement

Butler., 2007 Student Achievement [Online] (Updated 14 July 2011) Available at:
http://sitemarker.umich.edu/butler.356/student_achievement

Leland., 2005 Impact in the Classroom [Online] (Updated 14 July 2011) Available at:
http://www.cehs.ohio.edu/resources/documents/Lawless_Final.pdf

Rashid and Javanmardi (2012) [Online] Availabale at:

http://repository.out.ac.tz/1296/1/Dissertation_-_Joseph_A._Mhiliwa.pdf

Pillow, (2008) [Online] Available at:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0187078

Bronfenbrenner (2005) [Online] Availabale at:

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1115862.pdf