FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION (MANUAL COMPUTATION)

This is a tabulation or grouping of data into appropriate categories showing the number of observationS in each gro
category. 1.      Data are not arranged:
a.      Arrange the scores from lowest to highest.
b.      Get the Range.
c.       Get the interval (i )
d.      Arrange the scores from lowest using the interval.
Exercise 1. The scores below were taken from the result of the test in Algebra among grade 7
13 15 27
18 8 12
20 17 13
23 18 20
21 9 22

Arrange the scores:

8 9 12
14 15 15
18 18 18
20 20 21
22 23 24

UL of the
first
boundary

C.I.
(Class Interval)
Tally f CL CB
  the Scores (frequency) (Class Limits) (Class Boundaries)
8 - 12   LL UL
    7.50 - 12.50
13 - 17 III
 
3 8 + 12
18 - 22 IIII II 13 + 17 12.50 - 17.50
 IIII IIII I 7 17.50 - 22.50
23 - 27 11 18 + 22
IIII 23 + 27 22.50 - 27.50
  4
n = 25
LL of the
second
boundary

To solve for CB (class boundary) use:

V (gap bet. Lower & upper limits) = LL of the second boundary - UL of the first boundary
2
Or 13 - 12 = 0.5
2
Note: LL = - V hence: In 8 - 12 LL = 8 - 0.50 = 7.50
UL = +V UL = 12 + 0.50 = 12.50
v  To solve for the CM (class mark) = Get the sum of CI (Class intervals) divide by 2.

LL + UL = CM
2

Or 8 + 12 = 10
2
ber of observationS in each group or

e test in Algebra among grade 7 students.

24 14
25 16
Use R = HS - LS
19 15 = 27 - 8
19 21 = 19
18 22 4
= 4.75
 

13 13
16 17
19 19 Note : Round off the interval into a
21 22 whole number , therefore, i = 5
25 27
1st Relative
Frequency....add the next
going down and so on.....

CM rf rf>
Boundaries) (Class Mark) (Relative Frequency) Cmf> Cmf<
3 ÷ n (25) = 0.12 x 100 (Cumulative Frequency cmf>÷ n =
L UL   3 ÷ 25 =0.12x100 (f = going up) 
 
25
 

- 12.50 10 12 3 12
0 - 17.50 15 28 10  40
22
0 - 22.50 20 44 21  84
15
0 - 27.50 25 16 25  100
4
 = 100  
 
 

last Relative Frequency....add

last the next going up and so
1st Frequency....ad on.....
Frequency....add d the next
the next and so going up and so
on..... on.....
he next
on.....

rf<
< cmf<÷ n =
ing up)  25 ÷ 25 = 1 x 100
100
88
60
16
 
 

last Relative Frequency....add

the next going up and so
on.....
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
Problem: There were 18 Students in Algebra who took the test and each got the
following scores.
Construct the FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION.
78 45 67 23 90 90
56 89 59 66 78 73
81 82 81 75 86 82

C. I. Tally f CL CB CM rf
Relative Frequency
Class Interval Values Count frequency Class Limit Class Boundary Class Mark f / n * 100
 Cmf˃ rf˃ Cmf˂ rf˂
Communlative Frequency Greater Relative Frequency Greater Communlative Frequency Lesser Relative Frequency Lesser
Add 1st freq-down so on Cmf ˃ / n * 100 Add freq (last freq) Up Cmf˂ / n * 100
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION (USING EXCEL) No. of Students Scores
Problem: There were 18 Students in Algebra who took the 1 78
test and each got the following scores. 2 56
Construct the FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION. 3 81
78 45 67 23 90 90 4 45
56 89 59 66 78 73 5 89
81 82 81 75 86 82 6 82
7 67
8 59
9 81
10 23
11 66
12 75
13 90
14 78
15 86
16 90
17 73
18 82
 CI Bin Bin Frequency
Min 23 21-30 30 30 1
Mx 90 31-40 40 40 0 ALGE
41-50 50 50 1
51-60 60 60 2 9
61-70 70 70 2 8
71-80 80 80 4 7
81-90 90 90 8 6
More 0

Frequency
5
4
3
2
1
0
30 40 50
 ALGEBRA SCORES
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 More
Bin
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION (USING EXCEL)
Problem: There were 25 Students in Geonmetry who took the aptitude test
and each got the following marks.
Construct the FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION.
Marks of Students
73
65
34
21
43
26
48
70
74
71
72
69
68
26
64
44
47
48
90
47
11
COMPUTING MEEAN-MEDIAN-MODE MANUALLY UNGROUPED DATA
CLASSES ENGLISH MATH SCIENCE
A 45 73 75
B 23 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 65 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 74 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒
C 33 34 71
D 41 18 69
E 19 43 54
F 23 26 43
G 28 𝑥 ̅=706/20 48 𝑥 ̅=1136/20 23 𝑥 ̅=1180/2
H 23 70 56
I 23 74 75
J 50 71 46
K 48 72 57
L 47 𝑥 ̅= 35.3 69 𝑥 ̅= 56.8 36
M 25 68 57
N 34 64 57
O 50 64 Md 64 73
P 23 44 Mod 47,48 &64 49
Q 36 47 72
R 42 48 66
S 46 91 68
T 47 47 59
706

ENGLISH
50
50
48
47
47
46
45
42
41
36
34 Md = 35
33
28
25
23 Mod = 23
23
23
23
23
19
 FILIPINO AP
95 78
𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 43 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 80 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁
53 95
67 96
82 54
23 43
𝑥 ̅=1180/20 28 𝑥 ̅=1013/20 23 𝑥 ̅=1391/20
29 56
27 75
50 46
48 57
𝑥 ̅= 59 47 𝑥 ̅= 50.65 36
𝑥 ̅= 69.55
25 57
86 57
Md 58 50 Md 47 78 Md 76.5
Mod 57 44 Mod 50 79 Mod 57
36 91
42 93
91 98
47 99
 EPP MUSIC ARTS
47 78 50
∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 67 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 64 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 33 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒
65 33 39
61 48 41
53 87 32
37 96 23
391/20 56 𝑥 ̅=1349/20 68 𝑥 ̅=1103/20 29 𝑥 ̅=789/20
78 34 26
76 52 28
87 50 50
83 48 48

 ̅= 69.55 82
𝑥 ̅= 67.45 47 𝑥 ̅= 55.15 47
67 29 38
54 39 39
62 Md 67 50 Md 49 50
90 Mod 67 27 Mod 48 & 50 43
93 36 36
95 42 49
19 86 41
77 89 47
 PE
65
𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 43 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁
53
70
72
23
𝑥 ̅=789/20 45 𝑥 ̅=1060/20
56
37
50
48
𝑥 ̅= 39.45 47 𝑥 ̅= 53
67
70
Md 40 50 Md 50
Mod 50 70 Mod 70
36
42
69
47
CLASSES ENGLISH MATH SCIENCE FILIPINO AP
A 45 73 75 95 78
B 23 65 74 43 80
C 33 34 71 53 95
D 41 18 69 67 96
E 19 43 54 82 54
F 23 26 43 23 43
G 28 48 56 28 67
H 59 70 56 29 56
I 23 74 75 27 75
J 50 71 46 50 46
K 48 72 57 48 57
L 47 69 36 87 36
M 25 68 57 25 57
N 34 64 57 86 57
O 50 64 73 50 78
P 23 44 49 44 79
Q 36 47 72 36 91
R 42 48 66 42 93
S 46 91 68 91 98
T 47 47 59 47 99

Mean 51.52
Median
Mode
SD
ENGLISH

Mean 37.1
Standard Error 2.659540918041
Median 38.5
Mode 23
Standard Deviation 11.89382856337
Sample Variance 141.4631578947
Kurtosis -1.28734580974
Skewness -0.01252493397
Range 40
Minimum 19
Maximum 59
Sum 742
Count 20

(𝑥−𝑥)^2
ENGLISH CB f
𝑥−𝑥 ̅
45 11-20 1 9.7 94.0900000000001
23 21-30 7 -12.3 151.29
33 31-40 3 -2.3 5.28999999999999
41 41-50 9 5.7 32.49
19 51-60 0 -16.3 265.69
23 20 -12.3 151.29
28 M = 35.3 -7.3 53.29
59 Sum = 706 23.7 561.69
23 -12.3 151.29
50 14.7 216.09
48 12.7 161.29
47 11.7 136.89
25 -10.3 106.09
34 -1.3 1.68999999999999
50 14.7 216.09
23 -12.3 151.29
36 0.7 0.490000000000004
42 6.7 44.89
46 10.7 114.49
47 11.7 136.89
36 1296
EPP MUSIC ARTS PE
47 78 50 65
67 64 33 43
65 33 39 53
61 48 41 70
53 87 32 72
37
56
78
96
68
34
23
29
26
23
45
56
UNGROU
76 52 56 37
82 50 50 50
83 48 48 89
82 47 47 47
67 29 38 67
54 62 39 70 =AVERAGE(B2:B21)
62
90
50
27
50
43
50
70 =MEDIAN(B2:B21)
93
95
36
42
36
49
36
42
=MODE(B2;B21)
19 86 41 69 =STDEV(B2:B21)
77 89 47 47
∑128▒𝑥 ̅ =
36
 UNGROUPED DATA

ERAGE(B2:B21)
DIAN(B2:B21)
ODE(B2;B21)
DEV(B2:B21)
COMPUTING MEEAN-MEDIAN-MODE MANUALLY
(𝑥−𝑥)^2
CLASSES ENGLISH 𝑥−𝑥 ̅ MATH
A 45 73
B 23 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 65
C 33 34
D 41 18
E 19 43
F 23 26
G 28 48
H 23 70
I 23 74
J 50 71
K 48 72
L 47 69
M 25 68
N 34 64
O 50 𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 64
P 23 ^2 )/(𝑛−1) 44
Q 36 47
R 42 48
S 46 91
T 47 47

𝑠=√(𝑠^2
)
 (𝑥−𝑥)^2 SCIENCE (𝑥−𝑥)^2
𝑥−𝑥 ̅ 𝑥−𝑥 ̅
75
𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 74 𝑥 ̅=(∑128
71
69
54
43
23
56
75
46
57
36
57
57
𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 73 𝑆^2=(∑12
^2 )/(𝑛−1) 49 ^2 )/(𝑛−1
72
66
68
59

𝑠=√(𝑠^2 𝑠=√(𝑠^
) )
 FILIPINO 𝑥−𝑥 ̅ (𝑥−𝑥)^2
95
𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 43 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁
53
67
82
23
28
29
27
50
48
47
25
86
𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 50 𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ )
^2 )/(𝑛−1) 44 ^2 )/(𝑛−1)
36
42
91
47

𝑠=√(𝑠^2 𝑠=√(𝑠^2
) )
 AP 𝑥−𝑥 ̅ (𝑥−𝑥)^2 EPP 𝑥−𝑥 ̅
78 47
80 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 67
95 65
96 61
54 53
43 37
23 56
56 78
75 76
46 87
57 83
36 82
57 67
57 54
▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 78 𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 62
79 ^2 )/(𝑛−1) 90
91 93
93 95
98 19
99 77

𝑠=√(𝑠^2
)
(𝑥−𝑥)^2 MUSIC 𝑥−𝑥 ̅ (𝑥−𝑥)^2
78
𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 64 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁
33
48
87
96
68
34
52
50
48
47
29
39
𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 50 𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅
^2 )/(𝑛−1) 27 ^2 )/(𝑛−1)
36
42
86
89

𝑠=√(𝑠^2 𝑠=√(𝑠^2
) )
 ARTS (𝑥−𝑥)^2 PE
𝑥−𝑥 ̅
50 65
𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 33 𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁 43
39 53
41 70
32 72
23 23
29 45
26 56
28 37
50 50
48 48
47 47
38 67
39 70
𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 50 𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ ) 50
^2 )/(𝑛−1) 43 ^2 )/(𝑛−1) 70
36 36
49 42
41 69
47 47

𝑠=√(𝑠^2 𝑠=√(𝑠^2
) )
𝑥−𝑥 ̅ (𝑥−𝑥)^2

𝑥 ̅=(∑128▒𝑥)/𝑁

𝑆^2=(∑128▒(𝑥−𝑥 ̅ )
^2 )/(𝑛−1)

𝑠=√(𝑠^2
)
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN or WEIGHTED MEAN (WM)
SOP : Level of practice of teachers in school and at home as to
planning Likert Scale DV or VI
oranizing 5 Outstanding
synthezising 4 Very Satisfactory
assessing 3 Satisfactory
evaluating 2 Fair
1 Needs Improvemen
Teacher Repondents
Planning
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 136 680 34 136 24 72 2
2 145 725 19 76 22 66 8
3 142 710 33 132 17 51 5
4 148 740 19 76 16 48 14
5 136 680 19 76 23 69 18
6 142 710 16 64 16 48 14
7 139 695 20 80 40 120 0
8 139 695 22 88 13 39 23
9 167 835 18 72 13 39 1
10 156 780 14 56 23 69 6

Organizing
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 124 2 36 4
2 111 12 58 7
3 110 8 56 3
4 16 108 48 9
5 23 18 136 4
6 16 14 142 12
7 40 127 26 1
8 13 23 139 3
9 13 1 167 1
10 23 6 156 1

Synthezising
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 2 24 104 36
2 11 22 106 42
3 9 17 103 38
4 34 36 89 22
 5 32 29 97 23
6 65 16 84 19
7 54 70 44 12
8 42 13 110 13
9 56 13 101 22
10 42 12 97 35

Assessing
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 126 34 2 14
2 134 16 9 22
3 142 13 5 17
4 148 13 14 16
5 126 14 18 23
6 142 22 14 16
7 119 21 0 40
8 139 23 23 13
9 157 11 1 13
10 147 10 6 23

Evaluating
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 8 136 24 30
2 12 145 22 13
3 14 142 17 21
4 13 148 16 9
5 24 136 23 9
6 26 140 16 16
7 31 120 40 9
8 31 111 18 22
9 17 156 13 12
10 19 144 23 8
 Range
O 4.50 - 5.00 Highly Practiced HP Always A
VS 3.50 - 4.49 Practiced P Usual U
S 2.50 - 3.49 Sometimes Practic SP Sometimes S
F 1.50 - 2.49 Least Practiced LP Often O
NI 1.00 - 1.49 Not Practiced NP Never N

1 Total AWM DV or VI
4 4 896 4.48 P
16 6 889 4.45 P
10 3 906 4.53 HP
28 3 895 4.48 P
36 4 865 4.33 P
28 12 862 4.31 P
0 1 896 4.48 P
46 3 871 4.36 P
2 1 949 4.75 HP
12 1 918 4.59 HP
Overall Weighted Mean 4.47 P

1 Total AWM DV or VI
34
12
23
19
19
16
6
22
18
14
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
34
19
33
19
 19
16
20
22
8
14
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
24
19
23
9
19
6
20
2
18
14
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
2
8
6
14
8
2
0
18
2
6
Overall Weighted Mean
Strongly Agree SA
Agree A
Often Agree OA
Disagree D
Strongly Disagree SD
School Head Respondents
Planning
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 6 34 4 2
2 5 19 12 8
3 14 18 9 5
4 8 19 6 14
5 9 10 10 18
6 10 14 11 14
7 4 20 21 4
8 7 22 13 5
9 16 18 11 2
10 6 14 23 6

Organizing
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 34 2 4 4
2 19 8 6 12
3 18 5 4 9
4 19 14 3 6
5 10 18 3 10
6 14 14 1 11
7 20 4 1 21
8 22 5 3 13
9 18 2 3 11
10 14 6 1 23

Synthezising
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 4 4 34 6
2 12 6 19 5
3 9 4 18 14
4 6 3 19 8
 5 10 3 10 9
6 11 1 14 10
7 21 1 20 4
8 13 3 22 7
9 11 3 18 16
10 23 1 14 6

Assessing
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 2 4 6 34
2 8 12 5 19
3 5 9 14 18
4 14 6 8 19
5 18 10 9 10
6 14 11 10 14
7 4 21 4 20
8 5 13 7 22
9 2 11 16 18
10 6 23 6 14

Evaluating
Practices 5 4 3 2
1 4 6 2 4
2 6 5 8 12
3 4 14 5 9
4 3 8 14 6
5 3 2 18 17
6 1 10 14 11
7 1 4 4 21
8 3 7 5 13
9 3 16 2 11
10 12 17 16 2
 1 Total AWM DV or VI
4
6
4
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
6
5
14
8
9
10
4
7
16
6
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
2
8
5
14
 18
14
4
5
2
6
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
4
6
4
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
Overall Weighted Mean

1 Total AWM DV or VI
34
19
18
19
10
14
20
22
18
3
Overall Weighted Mean
SUMMARY AS TO
Teacher Res School Head Res
Indicators AWM
WM DV WM DV

planning 4.47 3.44 3.96

oranizing 3.44 3.33 3.39

synthezising 3.14 3.06 3.10

assessing 4.22 3.06 3.64

evaluating 3.74 2.42 3.08

Grand Overall Weighted Mean 3.8 3.06 3.43
DV
COMPUTING THE FREQUENCY OF DATA ON RESPONDENTS' PROFILE Use Rank and Percent
Profile of Respondents as to"
A. AGE
f % Rank
25 years old below 35 3 Point
26-35 46 2 3
36-45 58 100% 1 2
46-55 31 4 1
56 years old and above 30 5 4
5
B. GENDER
Male 50 Point
Female 150 2
1
C. LENGTH OF SERVICE
Below 5 years 34
6-10 years 66
11-15 years 21
16-20 years 32
21-25 years 2
26 years & up 45

D. POSITION
Teacher I to III 21
Master Teacher I to II 20
Head Teacher I to VI 16
Principal I 27
Principal II 108
Principal III 5
Principal IV 3

E. HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Bachelor's Degree Holder 15
With MA Units 56
Master's Degree Holder 58
M.A. with Doctorate Units 23
Doctorate Degree Holder 43
NC 1 to III 5
Others please Specify

F. RELEVANT TRAININGS ATTENDANCE

International Level
5 seminars and below 56
 6 to 10 seminars 25
11 to 15 seminars 34
16 to 20 seminars 13
21 seminrs and above 72
National Level
5 seminars and below 32
6 to 10 seminars 45
11 to 15 seminars 22
16 to 20 seminars 56
21 seminrs and above 45
Division, District and School Level
5 seminars and below 21
6 to 10 seminars 46
11 to 15 seminars 56
16 to 20 seminars 45
21 seminrs and above 32
Use Rank and Percent

Column1 Rank Percent

58 1 100.00%
46 2 75.00%
35 3 50.00%
31 4 25.00%
30 5 0.00%

Column1 Rank Percent

150 1 100.00%
50 2 0.00%
COMPUTING FREQUENCY AND RANK OF DATA
To what extent are the Mathematics Apps Utilized ?
Teacher Respondents
Mathematics Apps
4 3 2
CABRI Express 136 544 87 261 38 76
CK12 123 492 58 174 87 174
Desmos Graphing calculator 155 620 88 264 45 90
Geogebra 121 484 61 183 84 168
GRAPES Graphing Software 143 572 88 264 59 118
IXL Math 128 512 43 129 77 154
MalMath 112 448 76 228 73 146
MyScript Calculator 143 572 98 294 33 66
Number Sense 123 492 99 297 45 90
Photomath 112 448 95 285 65 130
Statistics Calculator 145 580 87 261 31 62
Symbolab 133 532 76 228 89 178
Socratic 129 516 69 207 77 154
Others: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Likert Scale

4
3
2
1
pondents School Head Respondents
Total Average DV
1 Rank 4 3 2
39 3.07 U 38 152 136 408 39 78
32 2.91 87 348 123 369 32 64
12 3.29 1 45 180 155 465 12 24
34 2.90 84 336 121 363 34 68
10 3.21 59 236 143 429 10 20
52 2.82 77 308 128 384 52 104
39 2.87 73 292 112 336 39 78
26 3.19 33 132 143 429 26 52
33 3.04 45 180 123 369 33 66
28 2.97 65 260 112 336 28 56
37 3.13 31 124 145 435 37 74
2 3.13 89 356 133 399 2 4
25 3.01 77 308 129 387 25 50
0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0

Point Column1 Rank Percent

3 3.29 1 ###
Always Utilized 3.25 - 4.00 5 3.21 2 92.30%
Utilized 2.50 - 3.24 8 3.19 3 84.60%
Partially Utilized 1.75 - 2.49 11 3.13 4 69.20%
Never Utilized 1.00 - 1.74 12 3.13 4 69.20%
1 3.07 6 61.50%
9 3.04 7 53.80%
13 3.01 8 46.10%
10 2.97 9 38.40%
2 2.91 10 30.70%
4 2.90 11 23.00%
7 2.87 12 15.30%
6 2.82 13 7.60%
14 0.00 14 0.00%
espondents
Total Average DV AWM DV
1
87 938 2.42 2.74
58 1081 2.80 2.85
88 969 2.52 2.91
61 1067 2.76 2.83
88 985 2.58 2.90
43 1096 2.80 2.81
76 1006 2.61 2.74
98 913 2.37 2.78
99 915 2.38 2.71
95 952 2.49 2.73
87 933 2.40 2.77
76 1059 2.78 2.96
69 1045 2.71 2.86
0 0 0.00 0.00
COMPUTING FREQUENCY AND RANK OF DATA ON CHALLENGES/ISSUES/CONSTRAINTS

Challenges Encountered by Respondents Teacher Respondents

3 2 1
1. Due to covid 19, provision of materials that bridge learning is
difficult 211 633 55 34
2 209 627 62 29
3 232 696 58 10
4 266 798 14 20
5 266 798 22 12
6 255 765 31 14
7 255 765 26 19
8 233 699 30 37
9 248 744 21 31
10 123 369 99 78

Likert Scale
3 Always
2 Sometimes
1 Never
 School Head Respondents
Total Average DV Total
3 2 1
933 63 48 189 300
927 98 54 148 300
996 58 10 232 300
1098 14 20 266 300
1098 122 12 166 300
1065 31 14 255 300
1065 26 119 155 300
999 30 37 233 300
1044 21 31 248 300
669 99 178 23 300

2.34 - 3.00
1.67 - 2.33
1.00 - 1.66
 Use Rank and Percent

Average DV AWM DV Rank

TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF Teachers and school head r
t-Test PAIRED TWO SAMPLE MEANS
Note : Assuming the number of Respondents is LESS THAN 30
The test was given to studens at the beginning and at the end of the school year.
Is the average scores of the students significantly different that of the start of classes and at the end. Has there bee

Students A B Column1 Column2

1 Beginning End
2 76 89 Mean 71.7 Mean
3 52 81 Standard Error 3.60570536 Standard Error
4 78 89 Median 74 Median
5 80 92 Mode #N/A Mode
6 67 82 Standard Deviation 11.40 Standard Deviation
7 65 86 Sample Variance 130.01 Sample Variance
8 72 91 Kurtosis -0.6164178 Kurtosis
9 57 88 Skewness -0.4592384 Skewness
10 82 95 Range 36 Range
11 88 100 Minimum 52 Minimum
12 Maximum 88 Maximum
Sum 717 Sum
Count 10 Count

Variables Sample Mean df SD Computed r-value

Pretest A 10 71.7 9 11.4

0.84
Posttest B 10 89.3 9 5.7
df = 18 Level of Significance = 0.05
 and school head respondents

d at the end. Has there been an improved performance?

Column 1 Column 2
Column 1 1
89.3 Column 2 0.84139427835 1
1.80154254892
89 r = 0.84
89
5.70
32.46
0.20500174406
0.32738668932
19
81
100
893
10

Computed t- Tabular or Decision Interpretation

Value Critical Value

7.63 2.2622 Reject Hₒ Significant

nificance = 0.05
TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF Teachers and school head r
t-Test for TWO SAMPLES ASSUMING EQUAL VARIANCES
Note : Assuming the number of Respondents is LESS THAN 30
The test was given to studens at the beginning and at the end of the school year.
Is the average scores of the students significantly different that of the start of classes and at the end. Has there bee

Students A B
1 Beginning End
2 76 89
3 52 81
4 78 89 df = N1-1 N2-1
5 80 92
6 67 82
7 65 86
8 72 91
9 57 88
10 82 95
11 88 100
12

Computed r-
Variables Sample Mean S² df
value

Beginning 10 71.7 130.01

End 10 89.3 32.46 18 0.84

df =
chers and school head respondents
ANCES

sses and at the end. Has there been an improved performance?

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances Column 1 Column 2

Column 1 1
Variable 1 Variable 2 Column 2 0.841394 1
Mean 71.7 89.3
Variance 130.01111111111 32.4555556
Observations 10 10
Pooled Variance 81.233333333333
Hypothesized Mean Dif 0
df 18
t Stat -4.366470523639
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.0001860341697
t Critical one-tail 1.7340636066175
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.0003720683394
t Critical two-tail 2.100922040241

Tabular or Critical
Computed t-Value Decision Interpretation
Value

4.37 2.1009 Reject Hₒ SIGNIFICANT

Level of Significance = 0.05

TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF Teachers and school head r
t-Test for TWO SAMPLES ASSUMING UNEQUAL VARIANCES
Note : Assuming the number of Respondents is LESS THAN 30
Teacher School head
Respondents Respondents
346.55 56.73
250.66 52.34
65.48 51.26
50 44.44
48.91 37.25
43.48 36.79
42.46 34.18
39.97 30.29
33.5 29.4
32.9 28.65

Computed Computed
Variables Sample Mean SD df
r-value t-Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

ers and school head respondents
RIANCES

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Unequal Variances

Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean 95.391 40.133
Variance 12067.59 107.2998
Observations 10 10
Hypothesized Mean D 0
df 9
t Stat 1.583662
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.073865
t Critical one-tail 1.833113
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.147731
t Critical two-tail 2.262157
Tabular or
Decision Interpretation
Critical Value

Level of Significance = 0.05

Sample 1 (PAIRED TWO SAMPLE MEANS)
Test of significant difference in the assessment of the two groups of respondents
on the pre and post test results.
1 Pre-test Post-test
2 223 257
3 97 123
4 123 142
5 187 210
6 211 266
7 69 76
8 59 87
9 183 199
10 134 159
11 256 276
12 241 285
13 290 299
14 211 244
15 300 312

Computed Computed
Variables Sample Mean SD df
r-value t-Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

 Tabular or
Decision Interpretation
Critical Value

Level of Significance = 0.05

Sample 2 (TWO SAMPLES ASSUMING EQUAL VARIANCES)
Test of significant difference in the assessment of the two groups of respondents
on the examination results.
1 1st dry run 2nd dry run
2 89 98
3 38 67
4 41 59
5 26 34
6 56
7 73
8 76
9 89
10 91
12 92
13 87
14 66
15 59
16 51
17 49
18 45

Computed Computed
Variables Sample Mean SD df
r-value t-Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

 Tabular or
Decision Interpretation
Critical Value

Level of Significance = 0.05

Sample 3 (TWO SAMPLES ASSUMING UNEQUAL VARIANCES)
Test of significant difference in the assessment of the two groups of respondents
on the level of managerial skills of the school heads.
Teacher School head
Respondents Respondents
A 3.12 2.67
B 4.56 2.44
C 4.12 2.12
D 3.89 3.12
E 3.67 2.89
F 4.03 3.67
G 2.12 2.12
H 2.89 1.89
I 3.45 2.17

Variables Sample Mean SD df

df =
respondents

Computed Computed Tabular or

Decision Interpretation
r-value t-Value Critical Value

Level of Significance = 0.05

SUMMARY
School Head
Teacher Respondents
Respondents
Planning 4.47 3.44 Teacher Respondents
Organizing 3.44 3.33 Teacher Respondents
Syntheisizing 3.14 3.06 School Head Respondents
Assessesing 4.22 3.06
Evaluating 3.74 2.42

3.8 3.06

Teacher Respondents School Head Respondents

Mean 3.80 Mean 3.06

Standard Error 0.2443440198 Standard E 0.17704236781065
Median 3.74 Median 3.06
Mode #N/A Mode 3.06
Standard Deviation 0.55 Standard D 0.40
Sample Variance 0.30 Sample Var 0.16
Kurtosis -1.8437211544 Kurtosis 1.94729585718564
Skewness 0.0851165063 Skewness -1.28508340888818
Range 1.33 Range 1.02
Minimum 3.14 Minimum 2.42
Maximum 4.47 Maximum 3.44
Sum 19.01 Sum 15.31
Count 5 Count 5

Computed
Respondents Sample Mean SD
r-Value
Techers Res 200 3.8 0.55
0.23
School head Res 50 3.06 0.4
df =

It can be gleaned from the table the the assessment of two groups of respondents on the level of practices a
organizing synthesizing, assessing and evaluation with 200 teachers and 50 school head repondents, the me
and 3.06, with standar deviation of 0.55 and 0.40 respectively. The computed r-value of 0.23 at 10 degrees o
shown that the computed Z-value was 2.44 which was greater than the tabulalar or critical value of 1.96, he
hypothesis was Rejected, therefore, assessment of the espondent was significant.
 Teacher Respondents
School Head Respondents
1
0.23 1

r = 023

z-Test: Two Sample for Means

Teacher Respondents
School Head Respondents
Mean 3.80 3.06
Known Variance 0.3 0.16
Observations 5 5
Hypothesized Mean Di 0
z 2.44
P(Z<=z) one-tail 0.007349574004
z Critical one-tail 1.644853626951
P(Z<=z) two-tail 0.014699148008
z Critical two-tail 1.96

purport seen
revealed shown
yielded reflected manifested

Computed Z- Tabular or Critical

Decision Interpretation
Value Value

2.44 1.96 Reject Hₒ SIGNIFICANT

Level of Significance = 0.05

dents on the level of practices as to planning,

chool head repondents, the mean yielded 3.80
d r-value of 0.23 at 10 degrees of freedom, had
lalar or critical value of 1.96, hence, the null
ficant.
TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF Teachers and school head r
Z - TEST FOR TWO SAMPLE MEANS WITH MORE THAN 30 RESPONDEN
Cocoa Users Old Cocoa New Cocoa
1 14 11
2 16 9
3 20 5
4 10 19
5 21 11
6 14 15
7 19 9
8 8 19
9 18 3
10 15 12
11 9 8
12 15 20
13 18 16
14 7 18
15 17 10
16 19 21
17 13 14
18 18 13
19 14 18
20 12 14
21 15 18
22 29 30
23 21 25
24 17 27
25 13 23
26 12 18
27 13 15
28 14 12
29 15 15
30 30 23
31 24 28
Vaiance

Tabular or
Computed Computed
Variables Sample Mean SD Critical
r-Value Z-Value
Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

s and school head respondents
N 30 RESPONDENTS

Decision Interpretation

ficance = 0.05
TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE ON THE PROFILE AS TO AGE OF THE TWO GROUPS OF RESPONDENTS
WHILE IN THE SERVICE DOING TASKS
Sample 1
Teacher School head
Respondents (50) Respondents (35)
AGEs/MTs 48 57
34 63
27 61
47 58
48 53
35 49
26 53
35 54
28 64
27 62
25 60
34 39
32 45
31 48

Computed Computed
Variables Sample Mean SD
r-value Z-Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

SPONDENTS

Tabular or
Decision Interpretation
Critical Value

evel of Significance = 0.05

TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE PERCEPTION OF THE TWO GROUPS OF RESPONDEN
ON THE EXTENT RESPONDENTS PERFORM THE FOLLOWING
Sample 2
Teacher School head
Respondents Respondents
Cleaning 4.23 2.67
Washing 4.12 2.78
Cooking 4.67 3.21
Preparing Lesson 3.67 3.02
Sleeping 3.23 2.78
Relaxing 3.98 2.89
Eating 4.4 2.67
Listening Radio 3.78 2.35
Watching TV 3.78 4.12
Arranging 4.56 3.89
Texting 3.56 3.67
Singing 3.89 2.56

Computed
Variables Sample Mean SD
r-value

df =
TWO GROUPS OF RESPONDENTS
THE FOLLOWING

Computed Tabular or Decision Interpretation

Z-Value Critical Value

Level of Significance = 0.05

TEST OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE PERCEPTION OF THE TWO GR
ON THE EXTENT MANAGERS PERFORM THEIR SUPER
Sample 3
Teacher School head
Respondents Respondents
Motivator 2.11 3.67
Inspirer 1.98 4
Collaborator 2.06 4
Supervisor 3.01 3.78
Evaluator 2.34 3.89
Monitor 1.78 3.99
Operator 1.56 3.59

Variables Sample Mean

df =
 THE PERCEPTION OF THE TWO GROUPS OF RESPONDENTS
MANAGERS PERFORM THEIR SUPERVISORY FUNCTIONS

Computed Computed Tabular or

SD Decision Interpretation
r-value Z-Value Critical Value

Level of Significance = 0.05

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE -ANOVA

Master Department
Teacher
Teachers Head
1 3.27 3.45 2.26
2 2.86 3.78 2.34
3 3.56 4.23 2.23
4 4.22 4.55 2.12
5 4.23 4.12 2.31
6 3.87 4.17 2.33
7 3.12 4.23 2.56
8 2.98 4.29 1.98
9 2.89 4.36 1.87

Computed Tabular or F - Critical

Source of Variation SS df MS
F-value Value
Between Groups 16.83 2 8.41
3.4
Within Groups 3.62 24 0.15 55.83
df = 26 Level of Significance = 0.05

Refleted on the table was the assessment of the three groups of respondents onteachers level of satisfaction,
which yielded sum of squares beteween and wthin groups of 16.83 and 3.62 respectively, with degrees of freedom
of 26 and at o.o5 level of significance, the computed F-value was 55.83 which showed that this was greater than
the f-critical value of 3.4, hence, the null hypothesis was Rejected. Therefore, the the three groups of respondents h
since it revealed Significance.
 Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average
Column 1 9 31 3.444444
Column 2 9 37.18 4.131111
Column 3 9 20 2.222222

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS
Between Groups 16.82758518519 2 8.413793
Within Groups 3.616866666667 24 0.150703

Decision Interpretation Total 20.44445185185 26

Reject Hₒ Significant

Teacher Master Teachers

Mean 3.44 Mean

ers level of satisfaction, Standard Error 0.18 Standard E
ely, with degrees of freedom Median 3.27 Median
that this was greater than Mode #N/A Mode
three groups of respondents have distinct assessment Standard Deviatio 0.55 Standard D
Sample Variance 0.30 Sample Var
Kurtosis -1.49 Kurtosis
Skewness 0.50 Skewness
Range 1.37 Range
Minimum 2.86 Minimum
Maximum 4.23 Maximum
Sum 31 Sum
Count 9 Count
 Variance
0.301678
0.107686
0.042744

F P-value F crit
55.83037 9.399E-10 3.402826

aster Teachers Department Head

4.13 Mean 2.22

0.11 Standard E 0.07
4.23 Median 2.26
4.23 Mode #N/A
0.33 Standard D 0.21
0.11 Sample Var 0.04
1.54 Kurtosis 0.17
-1.22 Skewness -0.31
1.1 Range 0.69
3.45 Minimum 1.87
4.55 Maximum 2.56
37.18 Sum 20
9 Count 9
With
3 rows
Med Nurses Med Attendant
Dooctors
1 37 67 54
2 35 34 67
3 28 38 45
4 67 56 34
5 57 34 45
6 68 34 29
7 45 29 78

Source of SS df MS Computed Tabular or F - Decision

Variation F-value Critical Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

 Anova: Two-Factor With Replication

SUMMARY 67 54 Total
35
Count 3 3 6
Sum 128 146 274
Average 42.66667 48.66667 45.66667
Variance 137.3333 282.3333 178.6667

57
Count 3 3 6
Sum 97 152 249
Average 32.33333 50.66667 41.5
Interpretation
Variance 8.333333 624.3333 353.9

Total
Count 6 6
Sum 225 298
Average 37.5 49.66667
Variance 90.3 363.8667

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F
Sample 52.08333 1 52.08333 0.197973
Columns 444.0833 1 444.0833 1.687995
Interaction 114.0833 1 114.0833 0.43364
Within 2104.667 8 263.0833

Total 2714.917 11

It can be gleaned from the table the the sample had sum of squares of 52.08, which w
computed f-value of 0.20 which was lesser than 5.32, hences this ws accepted, there
444.08 for the sum and mean squares and 1 degree of freedom. It yielded a comput
simply mean that assessment of the colums had no significant. Moreover, that of inte
2104.67 and 263.08 respectively. The computed f-value was 0.43 lesser than the f-cr
there was no significance among allthe sources of variations.
 P-value F crit
0.668155 5.317655
0.230056 5.317655
0.528701 5.317655

m of squares of 52.08, which was also the mens squares, with one degree of freedom. It arrived at
ences this ws accepted, therefore there was no significance for the sample. Further, Columns revealed
reedom. It yielded a computed f-value of 1.69 which was lesser than the f-critcal value of 5.31 also. This
ificant. Moreover, that of interaction showed sum and mean squares of 114.08 while that of within were
was 0.43 lesser than the f-critical vaue of 5.31 which reflected acceptance of the null hypothesis, and that
tions.
out

Med Nurses Med Attendant

Dooctors
1 3.56 3.56 3.56
2 4.56 2.45 4.56
3 3.56 3.12 4.12
4 4.23 3.78 4.23
5 3.56 3.56 3.89
6 3.67 3.98 3.76
7 3.34 4.12 3.45

Source of Computed Tabular or F -

SS df MS Decision
Variation F-value Critical Value

df = Level of Significance = 0.05

Interpretation
 Master Is the assessment of the respondents on the level of convergence signifi
Parents Teachers
Teacher
1 2.67 1.67 2.67
2 3.67 3.78 3.25
3 3.45 1.56 2.45
4 2.23 3.55 5.68
5 3.25 2.59 2.56
6 3.87 2.67 2.33
he level of convergence significantly different? With Med Med
Nurses Dooctors
1 37 54
2 11 67
3 56 45
4 23 34
5 14 45
6 45 34
7 80 29
8 34 67
9 12 34
10 45 38
11 67 56
12 67 34
13 57 32
 Is the assessment of the respondents on the pulse rate of patients significantly different?
Attendant

45
80
34
12
45
29
78
34
23
26
45
34
71
ntly different?
Farmers
Fishermen
1 3.56 3.56
2 4.56 2.45
3 3.56 3.12
4 4.23 3.78
5 3.56 3.56
6 3.67 3.98
7 3.34 4.12
 Is the assessment of the respondents on the sale of products significantly different?
Carpenters

3.56
4.56
4.12
4.23
3.89
3.76
3.45
 X²
Items Observed Frequency Expected Frequency (O-E)^2/E
1. Vacation Leave 6
2. Salary 58
3.Professional Growth 14
4. Health and Retirements 14
5. Incentives and Recognition 8
Total 100