CENTRAL MINDANAO COLLEGES

OSMEÑA DRIVE, KIDAPAWAN CITY

UNITY IN DIVERSITY: AN EXPLORATIONAL STUDY ON THE CHALLENGES

AND LIVED EXPERIENCES OF CENTRAL MINDANAO COLLEGES STUDENTS
ON HETEROGENEOUS CLASS SECTIONING

A Research Paper Presented to the Senior High School Faculty of Central Mindanao
Colleges
In Partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Subject Practical Research 1

Manapat, Jastine Claire T.

Mangalay, Rose Ann L.

Ulog, Geneth Rose M.

Galido, Ruffa Mae J.

Berja, Sheilou Lei D.

Pace, Sheena C.

Aisa Montefalcon
Adviser

September 2019

Introduction
 Nowadays, there are a lot of problems the students' facing. One of the issues that

brought some of them into their complaints is mixing them into one place which is in the

classroom with diverse abilities, intelligence, age and races in an heterogeneous class.

Heterogeneous sectioning is a type of distribution of students among various classrooms of a

certain grade within a school (Bainbridge, 2019). This study aim to give importance for the

students who belonged to heterogeneous class sectioning to cope and better understand the

purpose of implementing the heterogeneous class in Central Mindanao Colleges and to give

knowledge to Senior High School department of CMC about the opinions and suggestions of

some students regarding to this implementation and for them to give fast solutions to this

problem. The researchers conducted this study to know the challenges and lived experiences

of the students who were not able to compete with their co-students in an heterogeneous

class.

A new study from The Research Alliance for New York City Schools (2016) shows

that learning environments play a significant role in student success. Its findings show that

students who learn in positive environments effectively receive a month and a half more

math instruction than those in poor learning environments.

Gamoran and Weinstein (1998) studied that only one of the schools had adopted

heterogeneous grouping for all subjects, and in this school, the instruction was rarely

characterized by higher-order thinking.

The purpose of this study is to explain the challenges and lived experience

in heterogeneous grouped where some students may be at academic risk, due to insufficient

knowledge, inability to connect with the subject, and poor performances. The researcher

engaged in action research, a branch of qualitative.

This study of heterogeneous sectioning in the response to challenges and lived

experiences of an educational system addresses this particular question of who benefits most

from such an institutional arrangement especially in Central Mindanao Colleges. This study

is very first time and no other previous studies were conducted in this school that leads the

researchers to do the study and is relevant for the interpretation of instrumental variable

estimates of earnings returns to schooling and has direct implications for the analysis of

learning abilities and social skills. Certainly, the issue of selection and how it interacts with

personal background and pupil ability is of great research interest.

Statement of the Problem

This study generally seeks to answer the following questions that will serve as the

basis for gathering information for the study. It specifically seeks to answer the following

questions:

1.) What are the lived experiences of the grade 12 students on the Heterogeneous Class

Sectioning ?

2.) What are the challenges the grade 12 students encountered in terms of:

2.1 enhancing social skills

2.2 Boosting confidence towards academic class

Theoretical Lens

The study, "An Explorational Study on the Challenges and Lived Experience of

Central Mindanao Colleges Students on Heterogeneous Sectioning", adopts the idea of

heterogeneous sectioning as presented by Beth Lewis(2019) in her article entitled

"Heterogeneous Definition in a Classroom". Heterogeneous sectioning as defined by her is a

type of distribution of students among various classrooms of a certain grade within a school.

The main point of the idea is for students of lesser ability, being included in a heterogeneous

group rather than pigeonholed into a homogeneous group reduces their risk of being

stigmatized. The students may also learn skills and techniques to their classmates who excel

well in different areas. The study explores the challenges and experiences of the students in

Central Mindanao Colleges who are under such type of sectioning and if the same principle

would apply like the presentation of Beth Lewis(2019).

Many educators are now focusing on the multiple intelligences, specific learning

styles, and socio-economic and cultural needs of individual students and developing new

means of assessing learning. As we approach a new century the idea of heterogeneous

grouping is resurfacing. In her article, Kathleen Cotton (2019) states, "In view of the

overwhelming research evidence in support of non-graded primary education, virtually every

writer whose work was consulted in preparation of this report advocates widespread

implementation of this practice."

Pros and Cons of Heterogeneous Grouping in Classrooms by Carol Bainbridge states

that Gifted students in heterogeneous classes may not fare as well as their peers. They may

feel pressure to be "second teachers," that is, help students who are not grasping the material
as readily. These gifted students may also grow impatient and bored at the pace of a

traditional classroom, which can lead to frustration. Since the majority of students in a

classroom are average students, classrooms tend to be geared toward their learning needs.

Student’s perceptions on Ability Groupings

According to J Adams-Byers, SS Whitsell (2004), study investigated student

perceptions of differences in academic and social effects that occur when gifted and talented

youth are grouped homogeneously (i.e., in special classes for gifted students) as contrasted

with heterogeneously (i.e., in classes with many ability levels represented). Forty-four

students in grades 5-11 completed interviews or questionnaires while attending a summer

residential program for gifted and talented students. Questions were designed to clarify the

nature of academic and social outcomes under the two grouping conditions. On the whole,

the participants perceived homogenous grouping more positively with respect to academic

outcomes. 

Scope and limitations of the study

This study is limited to the challenges and lived experiences of the students. This

study focuses on the Senior High School Students of CMC where they will serve as the

respondents of this study. This study is limited only for the grade 12 students ages 16-21

years old.

Significance of the study

 This study gives a lot of significance that the readers should consider. It gives

importance to the following:

Society- so that they would be able to cope up with the different beliefs and levels of living

in a certain area.

School Administration- so that they would be able to understand and give some change/s to

the said issue if there’s some complaint/s.

Teachers- to make them understand what appropriate strategies will they use to make their

heterogeneous class understand them better and for them to be able to enhance their teaching

skills

Students - so that they would be able to cope up with their different levels of understanding

and so that to make them ready to face problems involving diversity in the future.

Future Researchers - to give them a lot of knowledge in doing this study. How important

conducting this study and to hive them hint/s on how to deal with diverse understanding in

order to cope up with different life situations.

Definition of Terms

Heterogeneous Grouping – refers to mixed ability of different individuals in a group.

Opposite of Homogeneous.

Homogeneous Classes- refers to a group of students organized so that students of similar

instructional levels are placed together. These groups are also known as ability groups.
 CHAPTER II

Review of Related Literature

This chapter contains the following related studies and literatures involving in the

study conducted by the researchers.

Diverse Schools in other countries

Each school develops a unique culture as a consequence of its importance in the

wider community.

According to Marsh (2000), the culture of the school has both an anthropological and

aesthetic basis, which contribute to its unique character. Indeed, diversity is the only constant

feature of L2 classroom, and so has been historically easier to recognize in that classroom,

the ideological problem resulting from the conflict between the individualist and

multiculturalist approaches remains (Maitzen, 1997).

According to (Gonzales et.al ,2011), our most salient encounter with diversity might

arise from different and consequential combinations of culture, economic class. This

diversity may present various challenges for example, it is well known that English as a

Second Language(ESL) learners with different L1s often have difficulty with different

aspects of the English language and students from the low/lower economic classes are often

less prepared academically than those from the middle/upper classes and hence, require

additional or special assistance (Gonzales et al 2011).

As one more example, the success of certain social learning activities (example, pair

work) may depend on the arrangement of culture and gender in the particular classroom
(Kinsella, 1996). When considered at the individual level, learners often transfer pragmatic

formulae-informing the performance of apologies, request, and refusals-from their first

language and culture (Kasper, 1992). At the group level, however, the success of class and

group activities can depend critically on the on the arrangement of the cultures in the class

(Park, 2001).

Another key aspect of diversity according to (Brown, 2007), is the way in which

different learners may have different preferred learning styles refer to a person’s typically

ways of learning and arise from cognitive and personality-based factors, while learning

strategies refer to the way in which learners consciously manage their learning experiences

and efforts. Interest in learning styles originate, in studies of successful learners

Later, however, according to Norenzayan & Nisbett, 2000), the more rigorous work

of the cultural psychologist Richard Nisbett and colleagues showed that children raised in

different cultures are reliably different in terms of field dependence and that these differences

have wide-ranging consequences for learning and reasoning. Personality-based learning style

variation includes the extroversion/introversion, thinking/feeling, and judging/perceiving

dichotomies (Murcia, 2001). Integrativeness, an openness to or identify with the culture of

the language being learned, is itself a complex notion (Dörnyei & Csizér,1998), as it covers

cases where real social and cultural integration is a realistic goal (e.g.,English-speaking

Canadians in Montreal) and where it is not (e.g., Japanese students who want to better

understand American popular music). Most recently Dörnyei (2014) has explored motivation

as a dynamical system of goals, attitudes, and beliefs about self-efficacy and the future.

Ability Grouping in Mathematics Class

 According to (Berends et al,2011), understanding the various forms of grouping

students for instruction is important for addressing issues of inequality that has been

observed by researchers. Although instruction did not mediate the effects of ability grouping

on achievement.

Cooperative Learning on Heterogeneous Grouping

According to Oddo, Jennifer Tracey, "The Effects of Homogeneous and

Heterogeneous Grouping Methods on Student Reading Attitudes" (1994), heterogeneous

grouping is the process of grouping students with varied abilities into learning groups so that

there are several mixed-ability groups within the classroom. The most common type of

heterogeneous grouping is cooperative learning. Cooperative learning refers to various

instructional methods in which students work in small, heterogeneous learning groups toward

some sort of group goal.

Advantages of Heterogeneous Grouping

In a study administered by Wilkinson and Calculator (1982), it was found that in

mixed-ability groups, high-ability and low-ability students interacted with one another and

the high-ability children helped the low-ability children.

Wilkinson and Spinelli (1983) found that second and third grade students are

effective speakers in peer-directed instructional groups because they obtained appropriate

responses to their requests for action and information most of the time from their peers

instead of the teacher. In reading and language arts for example, students work in mixed

ability teams on a series of reading activities. These activities include reading aloud to each

other and completing activities relating to story structure, reading comprehension, decoding,
vocabulary, and spelling. In writing, students engage in peer response groups in a writing-

process model.

According to Slavin (1987), significant improvements in student performance in

reading and math were found when cooperative learning and within-class ability grouping

were combined.

According to the study of (Byrne, 1988; Filby & Barnett, 1982; Kulik & Kulik,

1982), researchers believe that if students are grouped with

other students at their own level, they will have positive self-concepts.

Study of (Eder, 1983; Gamoran, 1986; Mann, 1960; Weinstein, 1976), says that a

large advantage of heterogeneous grouping is that student labels are likely to diminish.

Research supports the belief that low-ability students tend to have low self-concepts and

negative attitudes.

Disadvantages of Heterogeneous Grouping

In their 1982 study, Filby and Barnett collected data from two second grades and two

fifth grades in order to learn about student perceptions of "better readers." It was found that

low-ability students were more easily noticed in heterogeneous classrooms because their oral

reading was less fluent. The researchers suggest that low-ability students have more positive

self-concepts in homogeneous groups than in heterogeneous groups because in

heterogeneous groups, everyone is aware of the hierarchy.

Filby and Barnett (1982), also suggest that heterogeneous groups promote friendships based

on ability, with low-ability students friendly with other low-ability students and high-ability
students friendly with other high-ability students. These findings are not consistent with other

research findings previously stated.

Sorensen and Hallinan (1986) suggested that one reason for a positive effect of

homogeneous grouping would be that, "the greater homogeneity of students and their greater

attentiveness allow the teacher to cover more material in the same period of time and thus

provide more opportunities for learning for students"

Self-Concepts of Students in Heterogeneous Groups

There is not much research in the area of self-concepts of students in heterogeneous

classrooms. According to Filby and Barnett (1982), they find that students in heterogeneous

groups had lower self-concepts than students placed in homogeneous groups. However,

much of the other research is not consistent with the findings of Filby and Barnett.

In addition, Peterson (1989), could not find evidence that students have a higher self-

concept when they are grouped homogeneously than, when they are placed in mixed,

heterogeneous classrooms.

However, according to(Borko & Eisenhart, 1986; Byrne, 1988; Eder, 1983; Mann,

1960; Peterson, 1989; and Winne, Woodlands, & Wong, 1982), as previously stated, there is

much evidence to suggest that students in homogeneous classrooms have lower self-concepts

than students who are heterogeneously grouped. Peterson concludes that, "Students are well

aware of which group they are placed in, and a student's placement can be as devastating to

his self-concept as any frustration he might feel in a mixed classroom”

Related Articles involved in Heterogeneous Class Sectioning

According to Zamani, Cogent Education (2016), one of the important aspects of

learning and teaching through cooperation is the group composition to ‘who with whom’. An

unresolved issue is that of the superiority of heterogeneity or homogeneity in the structure of

the groups. Having administered a standardized preliminary English test (PET) and a writing

test taken from PET sample tests as a pre-test, 66 high and low proficient learners were

assigned into three groups; heterogeneous, homogeneous high and homogenous low groups.

Following the end of the treatment that took 10 sessions each for 30 minutes, all groups

received a writing test as a post-test. The results demonstrated that learners improved their

performance through cooperation, whether working with stronger or weaker peers. However,

heterogeneous grouping showed superiority over homogenous grouping at the low level. Low

students in the heterogeneous class made more relative gains than high students in the same

class. It must be noted that low students did not improve at the expense of high students. The

results revealed that cooperative learning could be especially beneficial for low students.

Collaborative Learning in an Heterogeneous and Homogeneous Class section

According to Barros and Verdejo (1998), cooperative learning (CL) originally based

on the social constructivist view of learning and as a major of learning and teaching strategy

is an attempt to make instruction more relevant and students more responsible. Marr (1997),

defined CL as the instructional technique or grouping structure in which students are divided

into heterogeneous or homogenous groups to complete instructional activities . There is a

considerable body of research validating the effectiveness of CL. Gillies, Ashman, and

Terwel (2008), report that concepts such as cooperative, competitive and individualistic
learning have been investigated in social psychology and about 750 studies have been

conducted on the benefits of the CL since 1800. Baer (2003, holds the concept that the

concept of grouping is an important issue in any CL practice. In his words, a very important

feature of CL is an appropriate assignment to group since grouping “who with whom” in the

courses which employ CL as the major instructional model is very important. Baer (2003),

goes on to suggest two major ways to group students in CL which are called homogeneous

and heterogeneous groupings. In homogeneous groups, students are group according to their

abilities, genders, and/or races so that everyone in the group is the same regarding ability

level, gender, or ethnicity, etc. Heterogeneous grouping, groups students with a variety of

different ability levels, talents, and interests together to complete a single activity. Therefore,

the present study aims at the evaluating the effect of homogeneous and heterogeneous

groupings of low and high learners working cooperatively on the writing ability of Iranian

EFL intermediate learners. It will be highly benificial fo the instructors to know more about

the struture of groups in assigning learners to different groups. Actually,the importance of the

present study is to provide an opportunity for an informed and scientific decision for the

practitioners in the field os EFL. It can also improve our understanding of how much such

grouping strategies-either homogeneous or hetergeneous-will influence language learning in

a course that employs CL as a significant instructional technique. The rationale for the

selection of writing is writing as a process which matches well to be cooperative

(Storch,2005). Trough cooperative writing different members take on a role and through

different stages of pre-writing,rough drafting,rereading,revising and editing. They come to a

final draft.
 According to Pfeiffer (1966), some believed that ability grouping was a myth, others

said it produced especially clear effects (Kulik & Kulik, 1982). Many looked into ability

grouping with equality in focus (Davies, Hallam & Ireson, 2003; Jackson, 2008). Therefore,

ability grouping was not advised in order to avoid inequality among students. This is

especially the case when preschool and primary education is considered. At the high school

level evidence and feelings are varied (Keller, 2011). Some evidence showed benefit for the

low achievers and no gain for the high achievers. Meta-analytic reviews show the effects of

grouping programs depend on their features. Some grouping programs have little or no effect

on students; other programs have moderate effects; and still other programs have large

effects (Kulik, 1992). Even if there may be a need for a fresh look at the issue of grading in

K-12, the issue has been well-documented. The debate still goes on but it needs to be

evidenced at university level as well. Because of the different practices in student intake in

higher education around the world, almost no study focused on student grouping in higher be

based on imperfectly measured ability, informal grouping, vague interpretation of terms,

survey instruments that fail to discriminate ability and tracking, allocated resources, extent of

grouping and the curriculum (Betts & Shkolnik, 2000).This study aims to shed light on what

the student population thinks about heterogeneous grouping after living in an academically

homogenous classroom environment at university. Heterogeneous grouping Slavin’s review

of 29 pieces of research on ability grouping on achievement found zero effect (Slavin, 1990)

and his review of 27 researches on the effects of ability grouping on the achievement of

middle school students found almost no difference between students grouped according to

ability and heterogeneous grouping (Slavin, 1993). A study found that inequalities of civic

competences across classrooms are relatively large in systems characterized by early

selection on the basis of ability (Janmaat, 2011). Responding to growing concern over ability

grouping, schools have introduced some alternative methods of delivering instruction, such

as cooperative learning (which presumes heterogeneous learning groups) (Lee &Smith, 1993;

Macqueen, 2013). In two studies, students in Gifted &Talenteprograms experienced

systematic declines in three components of academic self-concept (Reading, Math, School)

over time and in relation to matched comparison students in regularmixed ability classrooms,

but not in four components of nonacademic self-concept (Physical, Appearance, Peer

Relations, Parent Relations). In both studies, these results were consistent over gender, age,

and initial ability level (Marsh, Chessor, Craven, & Roche, 1995). The achievements of

average and less able students proved to be significantly higher when compared to their peers

in the same ability classes, whereas highly able students performed about the same

(Linchevski & Kutscher, 1998). Students most affected by inequities (ability grouping) are

those achieving at the lowest levels (Macqueen, 2013). Heterogeneous grouping benefited

the low achieving group most (Duru-Bellat, Mingat, 1998). Ability grouping Results revealed

that the frequency with which teachers used ability groups was positively associated with

mean school gain in reading, suggesting that early literacy and readin improvement in

kindergarten may be facilitated by the use of ability groups in reading (McCoach, O'Connell,

& Levitt, 2006; Robinson, 2008). There are also a lot of studies that support ability grouping

especially for the high school period. On the one hand, findings by Slavin were criticized.

Results of a study by Mulkey, Catsambis, Steelman & Crain (2005) reaffirm that tracking has

persistent instructional benefits for all students. Yet, high-achieving students who are tracked

in middle school may suffer considerable losses in self-concept that subsequently depress

their achievement. taught together. On the other hand, in the case of universities there is very
little research about ability grouping of college students (Bosco, 2009). Bosco (2009) studied

a group of college geology classes and concluded that students should be grouped

heterogeneously. In a study with gifted youth, on the whole, the participants perceived

homogeneous grouping more positively with respect to academic outcomes. They learned

more in the more challenging environment provided by homogeneous classes. However, they

had mixed feelings about which setting better met their social needs (Adams-Byers, Whitseel

& Moon, 2004). Economics is another factor to take into account when deciding on mixed

ability classes. Mixing treatment has a positive but statistically insignificant effect on average

adulthood earnings. While mixing has positive effects on low ability students’ adulthood

earnings, it has smaller or even negative effects on higher ability students (Kang, Park, &

Lee, 2007). Due to the concerns about class content, pace and teaching methods, most

teachers have a positive attitude toward ability grouping.

Local Studies Conducted

Gamoran and Weinstein (1998) studied eight middle grades schools that had

implemented some form of detracking as part of their school-wide reform and restructuring

efforts. Only one of the schools had adopted heterogeneous grouping for all subjects, and, in

this school, the instruction was rarely characterized by higher-order thinking. The other seven

schools offered at least one high-track class (often algebra), and several had "honors"

sections of other classes. In general, the researchers found isolated classrooms in which

teachers demonstrated high-quality instruction across all schools, substantiating that

detracking in and of itself is of limited value if the school does not also address the overall

quality of instruction. While the Gamoran and Weinstein (1998) study is extremely useful, it

is limited in application due to the lack of control group comparisons, a limitation frequently
found in the literature (Mulkey, Catsambis, Steelman, & Crain, 2005). In attempting to

overcome this limitation, Mulkey and associates examined data from the National Education

Longitudinal Survey (NELS:88) for differences in mathematics achievement and self-

concept between tracked and untracked eighth grade students. Few of the effects of tracking

were positive. Students placed in a higher mathematics track in the eighth grade experienced

diminished mathematics selfconcept in the tenth and twelfth grades, when compared with

those eighth graders in nontracked settings. This trend was particularly problematic for

males. Trends in self-concept were, in turn, linked to students' academic choices (e.g.,

whether to continue to college) and to tenth and twelfth grade mathematics grades. The

effects of tracking on lower-performing eighth graders were also problematic, as those eighth

graders placed in lower tracks continued to perform most poorly in mathematics in grades 10

and 12. In practically all cases, the data favored those students assigned to untracked settings

in eighth grade mathematics. may make the teacher's work easier, even if it is not the most

effective way to serve Ansalone and Biafora (2004), found that teachers continue to support

ability grouping (tracking) as a result of their managerial concerns about the complexities of

teaching students with diverse learning needs. Tracking students. This finding is interesting

considering that another study (Yonezawa & Jones, 2006) found that students regarded

tracking policies as unjust and inequitable. In response to the negative outcomes of tracking,

many schools have begun to implement "detracking" measures (i.e., concentrated efforts to

move from ability grouping or tracking to heterogeneous grouping while maintaining

appropriately high standards for all students involved). Oakes and Lipton (1992), reflecting

on a decade of schools' efforts to detrack, noted that schools must take the issue more

seriously than simply moving students from homogeneous to heterogeneous groups.

 Watanabe (2006) found that teachers must learn how to appropriately initiate

dialogue about tracking and detracking: "As any experienced teacher can tell you, 'tracking'

and 'detracking' are not the equivalent of 'forward' and 'reverse' on a car" (Rubin & Noguera,

2004, p. 94). Teachers implementing heterogeneous grouping as an alternative to tracking

must also be careful not to perpetuate inequalities within their detracked classrooms and,

thereby, "retrack" their students within the midst of the apparently heterogeneous group.

Because detracking is inherently difficult, some would argue that an alternative solution is to

maintain tracking but focus on the assurance of quality of instruction provided to students in

the lower tracks. Gamoran and Weinstein (1998) warned, however, that this nobly-intended

alternative is inherently flawed. Ability grouping, while addressing instructional

differentiation, is powerless to address the unequal distribution of status which led to the

choice of ability grouping in the first place.

Related Articles Conducted

According to the ‘Within- Class grouping; A Meta-analysis of Lou et,al; Review of

Educational Research 66 (4),423-458, (1996), the effects of within-class grouping on student

achievement and other outcomes were quantitatively integrated using two sets of study

findings. The first set include 145 effect sizes and explored the effects of grouping versus no

grouping on several outcomes. Overall, the average achievement effect size was +0.17,

favoring small –group learning. The second include 20 effect sizes which directly compared

the achievement effects of homogenous versus heterogeneous grouping; the average effect

size was +0.12. The variability in both sets of study findings was heterogeneous, and the

effect were explored further.

 Effects According to the article of Silvia Mendolia, Alfredo R. Paloyo, Ian Walker

(2018) entitled; Heterogeneous on high school peers on Educational outcomes; the

researchers investigated peer ability effects on high-stakes test scores at ages 16 and 18, and

on the probability of university attendance . The existence of heterogeneity in peer effects

across the ability distribution provides a rationale for the efficient mixing of pupils in a

school or in a classroom. The evidence is mixed for the existence of heterogeneous peer

effects ( Sacerdote, 2011).

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the process and instruments used in order for the study to be

more relevant and reliable for the readers. It includes, research design, selection of

respondents, research locale, and other important process used.

Research design

This research is a qualitative-narratology research that aimed to gather understanding

and knowledge about the challenges and lived experiences of the respondents. This design is

the most suitable to be used inorder to know the responses of the Senior High school students

of CMC regarding to the questions prepared by the researchers.

The Informants

The chosen informants will be the 10 (ten) grade 12 students of CMC in the locale of

Kidapawan City who experienced heterogeneous class sectioning.

Locale of the study

This study will be conducted at the Central Mindanao Colleges in the City of Kidapawan

year 2020.

The Role of the Researchers

The researchers will be the question master, video/audio recorder master of the

responses of the respondents, will analyze the data gathered and will be the founder of the

meaningful theme from the responses of the informants.

Research sampling

Purposive-sampling procedure will be used by the researchers in gathering the sample

that will be used in this study.

According to Ashley Crossman (2019) the Purposive-sampling technique is a

procedure in collecting data from the group of people who have the capabilities in responding

to the standards needed by this study.

Purposive sample was chosen by the researchers to be the procedure used in the

study. The Respondents tried to have the sample which would represent the population fit in

the study. Inorder to make sure that the sample will give appropriate answer and fill the

following standards needed by the study, the researchers made qualifications and these are

the following:

1.) The respondent should be a student of Central Mindanao Colleges- Senior High School

during the school year 2019-2012

2.) The respondent should be a grade 12 student

3.) The Respondent ages 17-21 years old

Research Instruments

The researcher designed an interview schedule as one of the data collection

instrument for this study. The respondents was the material used where every responses of

the respondents to the following questions were enrolled. Researchers will use the Key

Interview Guide where the prepared questions that would be questioned to the respondents

were written. This was only the guide and does not mean that this is the only questions that

would be used. The researchers will have the courage to ask some questions in order for the

discourse to be more meaningful.

Data gathering procedure

In order for the data gathering to be more precise and acceptable to the society's law,

the researchers will do the process in a more relevant and organized way.

1.) The researchers will write a formal letter to the rightful person or department responsible

for the study to be conducted by the researchers.

2.) After that everything were in organized manner, that's the time that the researchers will

find the 10(ten) persons that would serve as the respondents.

3.) The researchers will never force the students to be the respondents for this study and ask

for their permissions to be recorded while interviewing.

4.) The researchers will assure that the respondent's profile would be important to be kept.

Data Analysis
The data gathered from the interview will be studied using the way that is acceptable to the

society. The result from the interview will be written by the researchers. They will also use

thematic procedure inorder for the data to be studied. Each response to the questions will be

present using meaningful theme.

Trustworthiness of the study

Trustworthiness or rigor of a study refers to the degree of confidence in data,

interpretation, and methods used to ensure the quality of a study (Pilot & Beck, 2014). In

each study, researchers should establish the protocols and procedures necessary for a study to

be considered worthy of consideration by readers (Amankwaa, 2016). Although most experts

agree trustworthiness is necessary, debates have been waged in the literature as to what

constitutes trustworthiness (Leung, 2015). Criteria outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985) are

accepted by many qualitative researchers and will be the focus of this column. These criteria

include credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability; they later added

authenticity (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). Each of these criteria and the typically used procedures

will be outlined. Not all procedures are used in each study. Credibility of the study, or the

confidence in the truth of the study and therefore the findings, is the most important criterion

(Polit & Beck, 2014); Dependability refers to the stability of the data overtime and over the

conditions of the study (Polit & Beck, 2014); Confirmability is the neutrality or the degree

findings are consistent and could be repeated. This is analogous to objectivity in quantitative

research (Polit &Beck, 2014); The nature of transferability, the extent to which findings are
useful to persons in other settings, is different from other aspects of research in that readers

actually determine how applicable the findings are to their situations (Polit & Beck, 2014).

Ethical Consideration

According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, an ethical procedure involves questions

of right and wrong behavior and was based on the standards set by the society. It specifies

principle of morality, law and other rules that guides to whoever person or professions. The

researchers understand that following rules are obligations of all as a person. And as a person

that gives importance to morality, it is important to follow the rules and regulations of the

society to be more acceptable and trustworthy person. In a study, it is an accountability of the

researchers to insure that the respondents will not be harmed, maintained their profile to be

properly kept, and was asked about their consents.

The researchers will also insure that the identity of the respondents will always be kept in a

secret and respect with carefulness. The information gathered about the identity of the

respondents will be kept with full of care especially from someone without connection and

engagement regarding in this study.

KEY INTERVIEW GUIDE

Unity in Diversity: An Explorational Study on the Challenges and Lived Experiences of

Central Mindanao Colleges Students on Heterogeneous Sectioning

1. What strand are you in?

2. Can you share with us about your experiences regarding being in a heterogeneous
class?
3. What are your thoughts on heterogeneous section? Is it effective? Or not?
 4. Are there any messages/suggestions you want to tell to the department who are
responsible for the sectioning system?
5. What are your best realizations and lessons you've learned being in a heterogeneous
class?
6. What are your message/s to your co- students in dealing with heterogeneous class
sectioning?

References

Adams-Byers, J.,Whitsell, S.S (2004). Systems of Goals, Attitudes, and Self-related Beliefs
in Second-Language-Learning Motivation. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240729729_Gifted_Students'_Perceptions_of_the_
Academic_and_SocialEmotional_Effects_of_Homogeneous_and_Heterogeneous_Grouping.
pdf

Adams-Byers, J., Moon, S. & Whitseel, S.S (2004). Gifted Students’ Perceptions of the
Academic and Social/Emotional Effects of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Grouping.
Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
240729729_Gifted_Students'_Perceptions_of_the_Academic_and_SocialEmotional_Effects_
of_Homogeneous_and_Heterogeneous_Grouping

Baer, J. (2003). Cooperative learning: Homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping of Iranian

EFL learners in a writing context. Retrieved from https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/295395170_Cooperative_learning_Homogeneous_and_he
terogeneous_grouping_of_Iranian_EFL_learners_in_a_writing_context
Bahar, M. (2015). Student Attitudes Towards Change From Ability Grouping To
Heterogeneous Grouping At A University Class. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274890739_Student_Attitudes_Towards_Change_
From_Ability_Grouping_To_Heterogeneous_Grouping_At_A_University_Class

Barros, B. and Verdejo, F. (1998). Cooperative learning: Homogeneous and heterogeneous

grouping of Iranian EFL learners in a writing context. Retrieved from

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1149959

Berends et al.,(2011). Ability Grouping Classroom Instruction and Students Mathematics

Gains in Charter and Traditional Public Schools. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519290.pdf

Bosco, K. R. (2009). THE IMPACT OF ABILITY GROUPING ON COLLEGE

STUDENT’S PERFORMANCE IN INTRODUCTORY GEOLOGY LABS AT A
MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITY. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/
viewdoc/download? doi=10.1.1.487.7506&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Brown, (2007). The use of learning styles in adaptive hypermedia. PhD thesis, University of
Nottingham. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60f6/5cc78e3b18bf5982d1bbdf3073a10bd4dd69.pdf

Calculator, S., Wilkinson, L. C., (1982). Requests and Responses in Peer-directed Reading
Groups. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/00028312019001107

Catsambis, S. et al. (2005). The long-term effects of ability grouping in mathematics: A

national investigation. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 8, 137-177.
Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227104637_The_long-
term_effects_of_ability_grouping_in_mathematics_A_national_investigation_Social_Psycho
logy_of_Education_An_International_Journal_8_137-177
Celce-Murcia, (2001). PERSONALITY TYPES AND LEARNING STYLES: AN
INVESTIGATION OF THEIR INFLUENCE ON PERFORMANCE IN A DISTANCE
EDUCATION ENVIRONMENT

http://etd.fcla.edu/WF/WFE0000020/Rimmerman_Stacey_Lynn_200512_EdD.pdf

Cotton, K. (2019). Non-graded Primary Education. Retrieved from

https://educationnorthwest.org/sites/default/files/NongradedPrimaryEducation

(Csizér & Dörnyei, 1998). The Internal Structure of Language Learning Motivation and Its
Relationship with Language Choice and Learning Effort. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227727113_The_Internal_Structure_of_Language_
Learning_Motivation_and_Its_Relationship_with_Language_Choice_and_Learning_Effort

Davies, Hallam & Ireson, (2003); Jackson, (2000). Ability groupings in the primary school:
Issues arising from practice. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
240530672_Ability_groupings_in_the_primary_school_Issues_arising_from_practice

Dörnyei, (2014). Systems of Goals, Attitudes, and Self-related Beliefs in Second-Language-

Learning Motivation. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274178976_Systems_of_Goals_Attitudes_and_Self
-related_Beliefs_in_Second-Language-Learning_Motivation

Gamoran, A. (1998). American Schooling and Educational Inequality: A Forecast for the
21st Century. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2673258

Gillies, R. et al. (2008). The Teacher's Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the
Classroom. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Series. Vol. 8, 2008, New York:
Springer. Hardcover ISBN: 978-0-387-70891-1 2007. E.book ISBN 978-0-387-70892-8.
Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/16406201/
Gillies_R._Ashman_A._and_Terwel_J._Eds._2008_._The_Teachers_Role_in_Implementing
_Cooperative_Learning_in_t

e_Classroom._Computer_Supported_Collaborative_Learning_Series._Vol._8_2008_New_Y
ork_Springer._Hardcover_ISBN_978-0-387-70891-1_2007._E.book_ISBN_978-0-387-
70892-8

Gonzales, (2011). Diversity in the Classroom. Retrieved from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0224

Hallinan, M., Sorensen, A. B., (1986). Effects of Ability Grouping on Growth in Academic
Achievement. Retrieved from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/00028312023004519

Jones, M., Yonezawa, S. (2006). Students Perspectives on Tracking and Detracking.

Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255586643_Students_Perspectives_on_Tracking_a
nd_Detracking

Kang, C., Lee, M.J. & Park, C. (2007). Effects of ability mixing in high school on
adulthood earnings: Quasi-experimental evidence from South Korea. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
24059351_Effects_of_ability_mixing_in_high_school_on_adulthood_earnings_Quasiexperi
mental_evidence_from_South_Korea

Kasper, G. (1992). Pragmatic transfer. Retrieved from

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/026765839200800303
Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A. (1982). Effects of Ability Grouping on Secondary School
Students: A Meta-analysis of Evaluation Findings. Retrieved from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/00028312019003415

Keller, T.T (2011). Student Attitudes Towards Change From Ability Grouping To
Heterogeneous Grouping At A University Class. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
274890739_Student_Attitudes_Towards_Change_From_Ability_Grouping_To_Heterogeneo
us_Grouping_At_A_University_Class

Lewis, B. (2019). Heterogeneous Definition in a Classroom. Retrieved from

https://www.thoughtco.com/heterogeneous-groups-in-educational-settings-2081645

Maitzen, S. (1997). Diversity in the Classroom. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226812673_Diversity_in_the_Classroom

McCoach, O'Connell, & Levitt, (2006); Robinson, (2008). Ability Grouping Across
Kindergarten Using an Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254345400_Ability_Grouping_Across_Kindergarte
n_Using_an_Early_Childhood_Longitudinal_Study

Marr, (1997). Cooperative learning: Homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping of Iranian

EFL learners in a writing context. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
295395170_Cooperative_learning_Homogeneous_and_heterogeneous_grouping_of_Iranian_
EFL_learners_in_a_writing_context

Marsh (2000). Learning Diversity in the Chinese Classroom: Contexts and Practice for
Students with Special Needs. Retrieved from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1xwb4p
Marsh, H. et al. (1995). The Effects of Gifted and Talented Programs on Academic Self-
Concept: The Big Fish Strikes Again. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
269884602_The_Effects_of_Gifted_and_Talented_Programs_on_Academic_Self-
Concept_The_Big_Fish_Strikes_Again

Lewis, B. (2019). Heterogeneous Definition in a Classroom. Retrieved from

https://www.thoughtco.com/heterogeneous-groups-in-educational-settings-2081645

Lipton, M. and Oakes, J. (1992), Watanabe, M. (2006). HETEROGENEOUS

GROUPING. Retrieved from
https://challengebychoice.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/heterogeneous_grouping.pdf

Nisbett & Norenzayan, (2000). Diversity in the Classroom (Oddo, Jennifer Tracey)The
Effects of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Grouping Methods on Student Reading
Attitudes. Retrieved from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0224

Park,(2001). Diversity in the Classroom. Retrieved from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0224

Peterson, J.M. (1989). The Effects of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Grouping Methods
on Student Reading Attitudes. Retrieved from

https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1257&context=ehd_theses

Pfeiffer, I. (1966) and Kulik & Kulik, (1982). Student Attitudes Towards Change From
Ability Grouping To Heterogeneous Grouping At A University Class. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
274890739_Student_Attitudes_Towards_Change_From_Ability_Grouping_To_Heterogeneo
us_Grouping_At_A_University_Class
Slavin, R. (1987). Grouping for Instruction in the elementary School. Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15326985ep2202_2

Storch, N. (2005). The Impact of Collaboration on the Process-Based Writing in EFL

Classrooms in Saudi Arabia. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
327179041_The_Impact_of_Collaboration_on_the_Process-
Based_Writing_in_EFL_Classrooms_in_Saudi_Arabia

Zamani, M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping of

Iranian EFL learners in a writing context. Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1149959

Zamani, M. (2016). Cooperative Learning: Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Grouping of

Iranian EFL Learners in a Writing Context. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1138201