THE EFFECTS OF HUMOR IN THE MEMORY AND RETENTION OF THE GRADE

11 STEM STUDENTS OF ST. MARY’S COLLEGE OF BALIUAG

A Research Paper Presented to the Faculty of Senior High School of

St. Mary’s College of Baliuag

Baliuag, Bulacan

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in

Inquiries, Investigations and Immersion

Submitted to:

Ms. Cherilyn C. Robles

By:

Alleda, Jamaica Allyson F.

Dimaapi, Denise Margarette T.

Nieto, John Louis Q.

STEM

April 2021

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research is made with blood, sweat and a collaborative effort of the researchers.

However, myriad people also lend their hands to them throughout the process and became the

key species that is why they finished this research with flying colors. This task takes a village to

be done, but through these people it became easier somehow.

First on their list is the one who gave them wisdom and hope whenever they feel like

there is no light in the tunnel they are in, God Almighty. Without Him, they would not be able to

finish this challenging task for He is their source of inspiration and the one who enlightened

them throughout the making of this research. All their hard work is all for His glory.

To the researchers’ parents and families, they are utmost grateful for their support in this

venture. They all saw the struggles and efforts of the researchers to make this matter possible and

due to their unending love and support, all the burden of the researchers was vanished. The

researchers highly appreciate them for uplifting their spirits whenever they feel like they cannot

do it anymore and about to give up. Moreover, thank you for joining the researchers in their

sleepless nights and even making their coffee.

To all the respondents for this research, the researchers are grateful for extending their

help to them through their cooperation. Moreover, the researchers thank the respondents for

helping them seek answers to their problems by honestly answering their questionnaires. Their

time and effort is vital for the completion of this research; thus, the researchers are thankful for

them.

2
 To their Practical Research II teacher, Ms. Cherilyn Robles, the researchers are really

blessed having her by their sides throughout our journey in completing this task and for being the

best research adviser she could ever be. Thank you for the late night consultations and being

always a huge aid to them to be able to fix all the matters that they’ve encountered. They may

have a lot of queries to ask her regarding this research, but despite her hectic schedule she always

finds a way to answer all of those and came up with the best solution. Lastly, thank you for her

unending patience, love and understanding to them. Thank you for being not just the best

adviser, but also their savior and best groupmate.

To the team, the researchers, who are imperfect and challenged, they already reached

their final destination. May have tons of sleepless nights, misunderstandings and problems, yet

those are worth it as they reach their final itinerary and made it through Quantitative Research.

They have done so well and went so far. They couldn’t have done this without the help of each

other. All their efforts finally paid off.

To the future readers, the researchers hope that through this full of hard work research,

they can impart new knowledge to all of them and may they use this for the betterment of their

environment. Always know that in every problem that one will experience there will always be a

light on it, a light that will ignite one’s spirit, enlighten one’s mind and strengthen one’s body to

still pursue and continue.

3
 DEDICATION

This research is dedicated to God Almighty for being the researchers’ steadfast fortress

in finishing this research, for guiding them always and giving them wisdom and courage to

pursue this task. Moreover, for blessing them adequate skills and abilities that became a

significant tool in finishing this research. This research is also dedicated to their respective

families, for showing their constant support, undying care and concern for them, even in the

researchers’ ups and downs. They have witnessed their sacrifices just to finish this school work.

To their competent research adviser, Ms. Cherilyn Robles, who vividly taught them every detail

and patiently answered their questions. This research is also for her, she is really a beautiful

teacher with a genuine heart to anyone. They want to also thank their friends for giving them a

helping hand in times of need, this research is dedicated to them too. Lastly, to all who are in the

medical field who can use this. As they discuss about a specific way to memorize and retain

more information, they hope this could help those who are in the medical practice in finding the

best way to memorize things that they need especially the numerous medicines and

terminologies.

4
 ABSTRACT

One of the biggest challenges that the world is facing nowadays is how to make quality

education accessible to everyone. This problem was especially highlighted once the COVID-19

pandemic broke out last January 2020 which deeply impacted the education system where in

fact, online learning was formulated. Because of this, the researchers conducted a study that

centers around finding out the impact of the application of appropriate instructional humor to the

memory and retention of Grade 11 STEM students. A careful review of related articles, journals,

and researches was conducted in order for the researchers to have a better grasp and background

regarding the subject matter. In order to gather enough data and information about the study, the

researchers conducted an experiment that was done purely online. The entire duration of the

classes where the experiments took place were carefully observed and properly guided to assure

proper treatment and accurate results. By the end of the study, the researchers gathered, both

quantitative data and qualitative ones, that although there was a difference between the scores of

the control and experimental group, it was not significant enough to indicate that Appropriate

Instructional Humor did have an impact on the memory and retention of the students.

5
TITLE PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

DEDICATION

ABSTRACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF TABLES

I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction…………………………………………………………..….12

Statement of the Problem……………………………………….……….16

Significance of the Study…………………………………….…………..17

Scope and Delimitation of the Study…………………….………………19

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Related Literature………………………………………………….….....21

Related Studies…………………………………………………….….....25

Theoretical Framework...………………………………………….….....26

Conceptual Framework……………………………………………...…..29

6
 Hypotheses of the Study..………………………………………….….....30

Definition of Terms………………………………………………….......31

III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design …………………………………..………………....…..33

Respondents of the Study…………………………..………………...…..33

Sampling Procedure………………………………..………………...…..33

Research Instrument………………………………..………………...…..34

Research Procedure.………………………………..………………...…..34

Data Analysis…. …………………………………..………………...…..35

Statistical Treatment ……...…………………………………………......36

IV. PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Summary of Results……………………………………………………..43

Hypotheses Testing ……………………………………………………..45

Interview Results………………………………………………………...49

Interview Responses...…………………………………………………...59

7
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary of Findings…………………………………………………...88

Conclusion………………………………………………………………90

Recommendations………………………………………………….........93

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

8
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Instructional Humor Processing Theory Model……………………………...28

Figure 2: Conceptual Framework…………………………………………………........29

Figure 3: Response of experimental group about the discussion proper during the

experiment……………………………………………………………………………....49

Figure 4: Response of experimental group about the clarity of the discussion during the

experiment...………………………………………………………………..………........49

Figure 5: Response of control group about the discussion proper during the

experiment…………………………………………………………………………….....50

Figure 6: Response of control group about the clarity of the discussion during the

experiment...………………………………………………………..………………........51

Figure 7: Response of experimental group about the teacher’s usage of appropriate

instructional humor during the experiment...………………………………………........52

Figure 8: Response of experimental group about the appropriate instructional humor

used by the teacher during the experiment...…………………………………….

………........52

Figure 9: Response of control group about the teacher’s usage of appropriate

instructional humor during the experiment...……………………………………….

……………........53

9
Figure 10: Response of experimental group about the appropriate instructional humor

used by the teacher during the experiment...…………………………………….

………........54

Figure 11: Response of experimental group about the alignment of the tests and

difficulty of the pretest used during the experiment...………………………..

………………........55

Figure 12: Response of experimental group about the cues present in the tests used

during the experiment...

……………………………………………………………………........55

Figure 13: Response of control group about the alignment of the tests and difficulty of

the pretest used during the experiment...

………………………………………………........57

Figure 14: Response of control group about the cues present in the tests used during the

experiment...………………………………………………………………..………........57

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Interpretation of mean………………………………………...………………35

10
Table 2: Individual scores of the students in the control group during pretest….......…38

Table 3: Individual scores of the students in the experimental group during pretest.…39

Table 4: Individual scores of the students in the control group during posttest….....…41

Table 5: Individual scores of the students in the experimental group during posttest....42

Table 6: Summary of the results of the control group in pretest and posttest…….....…43

Table 7: Summary of the results of the experimental group in pretest and posttest.......44

Table 8: Hypothesis testing for control group……………………………………...…..45

Table 9: Hypothesis testing for experimental group………………...……………...….46

Table 10: Hypothesis testing for control and experimental group’s posttest………......47

CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

11
 Communication is a process that is largely involved in our day to day lives. In the history

of the recent half-century, the crucial role of effective communication has been highlighted in

terms of bringing public and political attention to environmental issues (Hansen, 2019),

improving the survival and progress of businesses (Marcovic & Salamzadeh, 2018), and in

extending knowledge, education, and entertainment to the people (Babu, 2018).

According to Güleç and Leylek (2018), educational institutions are one of the most

prominent places where the communication process occurs. However, due to the rise of the

COVID-19 pandemic, higher education has been severely impacted particularly in the

Philippines wherein schools were forced to resort to online learning (Toquero, 2020). In terms of

keeping up with the demands of edification, online learning has been successful at improving

student engagement in quantitative reasoning (Dumford & Miller, 2018), securing students’,

faculties’, and personnel’s health amid the pandemic (Adnan & Anwar, 2020), and improving

students’ ability to become self-directed learners (Arooj, Javed, Mukhtar, & Sethi, 2020).

Nevertheless, with respect to clarifications, explanations, and interpretations, the e-learning

method may render itself less effective than traditional methods of learning. To a significant

extent, the learning process for students is much easier face-to-face with instructors or teachers

(Abaidoo & Arkorful, 2015). In addition to this, people are actually less likely to have as many

sources of information in online communication than they would in face-to-face interactions. To

simulate the usual form of human interaction, humor can be used in computer-based interactions

to make up for the lack of behavioral cues (Proekt, 2019).

In order for others to better understand the message that one is trying to convey, humans

resort to using different communicative tools and strategies. One of the most common

instruments in communication is humor. It is so common, in fact, that its effective use and its

12
acknowledgement has become indispensable for communication (Meyer, 2015). According to

Healy (2018), humor is something that creates the "positive emotion of amusement" or if

something produces laughter. It is intangible and has a substantial effect on the body (Zabidin,

2015). Humor can be described as the comic, absurd, or incongruous quality that causes

amusement. It has benefits mainly on the brain and how a person thinks. Although humor is not

therapeutic, some people utilize humor in improving brain activity. It is also considered as a

fundamental human behavior that helps with forming intimacy and alleviating one's stress

(Gibson, 2016). Therefore, humor is anything that makes you laugh and feel uplifted.

Humor has been demonstrated to entertain students, alleviate anxiety related to learning,

create a positive academic climate, and produce an enjoyable atmosphere for learning (Bolkan &

Goodboy, 2015). It must be taken into consideration, however, that it is appropriate instructional

humor that has a positive link with student learning and that not every mode of humor is suitable

in the classroom (Dotson & Wortley, 2016). Moreover, Karlin and Machlev (2016) conducted a

study about the relationship between different types of instructional humor and student learning

and the results show that relevant/appropriate humor correlated with perceived learning in a

positive manner. This stems from the study conducted back in 2009 by Frymier, Irwin, and

Wanzer in which they proposed the Instructional Humor Processing Theory (IHPT). In this

theory, they suggested that humor associated with instructional content had a positive correlation

with student learning and that inappropriate forms did not. Later on in the analysis of their

findings it was confirmed that related humor, a form of appropriate instructional humor, did have

a positive correlation with student learning while inappropriate forms of humor did not have a

correlation with student learning.

13
 In terms of online learning, the use of jokes, cartoons, memes, riddles, quotes, or any

other forms of humorous material that is appropriate and content-based can actually increase

attention and focus while simultaneously aiding to bridge the gap in distance learning (McCabe,

Sprute, & Underdown, 2017). Cornett et al. (2015) indicated the importance of using humor in

the process of capturing and maintaining student's attention especially in building a positive

atmosphere in the classroom. He also stated that once the teacher gets a hold of the class'

attention, information will be disseminated to the class effectively, leading to improvement of

memory and retention. Furthermore, Hou, Lee, and Wang (2016) asserted that sharing personal

memories online facilitates memory retention.

Memory is a process that is used to acquire, store, retain and retrieve information. In

order to form memories, an information must be encoded into usable form then will later be

stored for future use. Retention is the second stage of memory, and is the ability to store

information in the brain for as long as one wishes to. Memory is something that helps people in

their everyday lives because they can rely on it to recall certain information (Cherry, 2020).

Previous studies have shown that the positive emotions that are related to humor have an

extensive impact on the memory processes (Figueroa, n.d.). Included in the study “The Pattern

Recognition Theory of Humour”, which was started by Alastair Clarke, “humour is not about

comedy; it is about a fundamental cognitive function,” indicating that humor is a set of patterns

mediated by a language and is recognized, processed and understood by the brain resulting to

laughter. This theory supports humor as a tool for learning and possibly for improving memory

and retention (Briggs, 2015).

That said, despite the benefits associated with written manipulation (e.g., eliminating

differences in the presentation of information), future research projects should determine the

14
impact of integrated humor on student learning as it relates to some of the other instructional

activities students encounter in their educational experiences. For example, it is likely that

students process humor differently in face-to-face learning scenarios compared with written

scenarios, and thus future researchers may consider how the medium in which humor is

communicated changes its impact on learning (Bolkan, Goodboy, & Griffin, 2018). With this in

mind, the researchers wanted to conduct a research that is timely and that would be beneficial not

only to the current setting in the Philippines, but also to other countries that are sharing a

common experience,

This research entitled “The Effects of Humor in the Memory and Retention of the Grade

11 STEM Students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag” will be conducted to the Grade 11 STEM

students of SMCB. This study will benefit the teachers, students, administrators, other

educational institutions, future researchers and readers, and researchers. The researchers came up

with this problem as they experienced an unprecedented pandemic resulting in having virtual

classes, which is inarguably substantially different from traditional modes of schooling. Due to

this, students are now more vulnerable to several temptations since students primarily interact

with their gadgets while learning, engendering reduced attention span and low memory retention.

The researchers want to identify the effects of humor in memory and retention of the students in

the hopes of easing one’s burden in learning not only in the virtual setting, but in the classroom

as well.

Statement of the Problem

15
 This study aims to determine the effects of humor in the memory and retention of the

Grade 11 STEM students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag.

Specifically, the researchers seek to answer the following questions:

1. What is the pre-test score of the control and experimental group?

2. What is the posttest score of the control and experimental group?

3. Is there a significant difference between the pretest and the posttest score of the control

group and between the pretest and the posttest score of the experimental group?

4. Is there a significant difference between the posttest scores of the control and

experimental group?

Significance of the Study

16
 The findings of this study will be able to deepen the understanding and provide

awareness not just to the Grade 11 STEM students, but also to the whole community about the

effects of humor in memory and retention. This will be beneficial to the following:

1. To the Teachers

The contents of this study may serve as their basis in applying a different approach in

teaching. The information in this research may help them become educators to their students.

2. To the Grade 11 STEM Students

This study is significant to the Grade 11 STEM students because they would have a better

understanding of how certain factors such as humor can have an impact in their ability to

remember information. This can motivate them to figure out elements that contribute to their

ability to recall data.

3. To the Administrators and Other Educational Institutions

This study is significant to administrators and other educational institutions because it can

give them an idea on how they would select their future educators that would uphold their

institution's educational standards. In addition to this, it can help them provide better seminars

and conferences for their teachers.

4. To the Future Researchers and Readers

This study will benefit the future researchers and readers because of the data that this

investigation has to offer. The information that was gathered to fulfill the needs of this study

may be a beneficial and valuable reference to forthcoming academic works. Likewise, additional

and substantial knowledge may be instilled to the future readers.

5. To the Researchers

17
 This study will benefit the researchers because the researchers’ skills in research making

will be developed by executing the necessary skills, giving them a further edge in a world where

reports, case studies, and the likes are of utmost importance and relevance. Moreover, the data

gathered may be useful as a future reference when wider studies are proposed. Lastly, this will

add new knowledge to the researchers for their improvement.

Scope and Delimitations

18
 The main focus of this research is to determine the effects of humor in the memory and

retention of Grade 11 STEM students. It aims to identify whether humor, specifically appropriate

instructional humor, has an impact on the students' ability to form, retain and recall information.

The researchers used a non-random sampling method, specifically convenience sampling, in

selecting their respondents. Two sections were chosen to be the control and experimental group

based on the initial assessment done by the researchers. A pre-test and posttest were conducted

for both the experimental and control groups. The scores that the participants garnered from the

tests determined how well they were able to store and retrieve the information they received

from their instructor. Both the tests and the experiment proper were conducted online by using

Autoproctor, a Google Forms add-on, used to track malpractice in online tests, and Google

Forms, an online assessment tool, for the test proper.

This study is delimited to Grade 11 STEM students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag

(SMCB) School Year 2020-2021. The respondents of the study were only two out of the six

sections of Grade 11 students, St. Arnold Jansenn and St. Dominic. Both have 33 students each

only. The experiment was done online through Online Distance Learning hence, absenteeism and

connection problems are considered since it is beyond the power of the researchers. The

independent variable -- humor -- was applied online and was not tested in other forms such as

face-to-face or in written forms. The researchers only used a specific type of humor which is

Appropriate Instructional Humor. The students' perception of this humor is beyond the scope of

this study. The researchers will not be discussing which type of memory (primary memory,

short-term memory, working memory, etc.) is affected by humor. Time interval between the

experiment itself and interview will be disregarded as well as its effects, for during the interview,

the exact visual aids was shown to them. An identification type of test was conducted to the

19
students. The pretest was given right before the students were educated by their teacher and the

posttest was given right after the students were taught the designated module. This study was

conducted in a span of two semesters. Lastly, as this study utilized self-report measures, students

may over or under report about the usage of their proctor of appropriate instructional humor and

may not coincide with instructors' self-reported behaviors.

CHAPTER 2

20
 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Related Literature

Nowadays, students are having a difficult time focusing on discussions and school works

because they get easily distracted by their devices (Maxwell, 2018). Attention is a cognitive

function that has been negatively affected by the use of digital technology in learning (Lodge &

Harrison, 2019). In fact, as an effect of our digitalized lifestyle, a goldfish has a longer average

attention span of nine seconds, than that of a modern human who tends to lose concentration just

after eight seconds (McSpadden, 2015). According to The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and

Learning (n.d), this lack of attention may actually cause short-term memory to be forgotten.

However, studies show that humor is actually a beneficial tool in teaching as it encourages social

bonding between teachers and students and increases one’s ability to recall and retain

information (Al-Duleimi & Aziz, 2016).

Humor

Humor is used in communication as a way of producing amusement and prompting

laughter. According to Morrison (2019) humor has been proven beneficial for healing,

psychological well-being, stress management, pain reduction, and memory. When we laugh, we

alter the activity of endorphins, dopamine, and serotonin in our brain (Yim, 2016). Dopamine is

a neurotransmitter released by the brain that plays a significant part in the memory, attention, and

learning of a person (Mandal, 2015). According to Henderson (2015), cognitive and

neuroscience studies indicate that dopamine is crucial in the storage of short-term memory and is

systematically activated by humor. Moreover, a positive emotion, such as the use of positive

words, is actually linked with the enhancement of memory (Kensinger, Madan, & Scott, 2019).

21
This shows that the positive mood and atmosphere that humor creates is likely to stimulate the

storage of memory.

Humor has also been shown to contribute to the decrease of levels of certain hormones,

such as cortisol and epinephrine (Dicarlo, Lujan, Savage, & Thipparti, 2017). Cortisol, which is a

hormone released during stressful events, is responsible for the production of numerous

neurobiological alterations in the hippocampus (Kim, Kim, & Pellman, 2015). A stressful

classroom environment may sometimes cause difficulties in learning and in remembering

information because of the release of cortisol, a neurotransmitter that is a major modulator in

human learning and memory processes (Vogel & Schwabe, 2016). In an experiment done by

Bains et al. (2014), results showed that humor boosts cognitive function because the

hippocampus, the part of the brain responsible for consolidating short-term memory, received

less cortisol because of alleviated levels of stress. Based on these evidences, the researchers

believe that the use of humor to mitigate the stressful environment while learning can have a

positive impact on the memory and retention of students.

According to a study conducted by Pillado, Futalan, and Comighud (2020), students

recognize that certain factors, including teaching strategies, have a very “high contribution” to

memory retention. Moreover, there was a moderate and significant relationship between teaching

strategies and how it can boost students’ academic performance signifying a better level of

learning. When it comes to teaching a class, humor can be utilized as an instructional tool which

helps students to take part in the teaching and learning process (Betaubun, Fenanlampir, &

Rokhmah, 2020). In an experiment carried out by Abdullajeed, Halleed, Kamal and Khalil

(2017), applying humor in teaching a new topic about English grammar showed that the

22
introduction of humorous activities in the classroom has a tendency to enhance the student’s

comprehension and aided in retention and recalling grammar rules.

Memory and Retention

Memory can refer both to the product of learning and to the process of retention and

retrieval (Crowder, 2015). There are three processes related to memory, namely, memory

formation, memory retention, and retrieval (Amin & Malik, 2017). Moreover, these three stages

have long been established in the study of psychology and may also be referred to as the

encoding, storage, and retrieval stages (McDermott & Roediger, 2020). Encoding is when one

perceives and learns information or the initial registration of material. Storage is when the brain

maintains information over time. Retrieval is one’s capability to recall stored information when

needed. Though not all stored information is accessed. An important experiment in the field of

psychology conducted by Pearstone and Tulving (1966) shows that available information are

those that are stored in human memory, but there is no guarantee of how much and what types

are stored. On the other hand, accessible information are those that can be retrieved and are said

to be only a tiny fraction of the available information in our brains. Though recently, Spear

(2015) claimed that a variety of measurement techniques can produce an index of retention, and

the most direct technique is to ask someone to reproduce or to “recall.” Recall tests are usually

those that use declarative memory, and usually involve objective type questions with short

answer tests (Welkowitz, 2013). With this, the researchers opted to use identification type of

questions, a type of objective test, in conducting their pretests and posttests in order to measure

the retention of the students.

23
 Memory and retention are strongly connected since any form of retained information is

stored in parts of the human memory stores, thus retention of information would not take place in

the absence of human memory processes (Weiten, 2013).

Appropriate Instructional Humor

The Oxford Dictionary defines appropriate as “suitable or proper in the circumstances”.

This means that whatever is considered appropriate for one situation may not be as fitting for

another. The subsequent paragraph aims to clarify what exactly is the appropriate humor that

must be used in the instructional setting.

According to DiCarlo et al. (2017), the content in teaching must not just be about

educating, but must also be entertaining. If an educator uses humor while teaching, it has the

ability to improve students’ engagement, interest, stimulation, and cognitive and affective

learning (Freitas, 2018). But not all forms of humor have shown a positive link with student

learning and retention. Henderson (2015) listed down research-supported recommendations for

utilizing humor in order to increase retention including the use of content related humor and the

avoidance of cruel or inappropriate humor, sarcasm, forced humor, off-topic humor, and even

too much humor. This is supported by Malamed (n.d) wherein she provided a criterion for how

humor can help in learning and recall, and in it she included that the humor used by the instructor

must be relevant to the lesson. The use of humor that is integrated with the content of teaching

can serve as a ‘hook’ for remembering important points (Chabeli n.d.).

24
Related Studies

In a study Preliminary Verification of Instructional Humor Processing Theory:

Mediators Between Instructor Humor and Student Learning by Tsukawaki (2019), the use of

instructional humor has a significant effect on the cognitive learning of students, assumed by

instructional humor processing theory.

However, based on Karlin (2016) in the study, Understanding the Relationship Between

Different Types of Instructional Humor and Student Learning, there was no relationship found

between the different types of humor used in a classroom and actual learning of the students.

There was also no difference in the interaction between different types of humor with gender.

On the other hand, a study started by Alistair Clarke and continued by Briggs (2015)

entitled The Pattern Recognition Theory of Humour supports humor as a potential tool for

learning especially in memory and retention. Similarly, Cornett et al. (2015) in the study

Implications of Using Humor in the Classroom reiterates the value of using humor in the process

of attracting and retaining the interest of pupils, in mitigating classroom tension and stress, and

in encouraging and fostering good retention.

25
Theoretical Framework

The study of Stav Atir (2010) Memory for Information Paired with Humorous, Relevant

Jokes serves as one of the theoretical frameworks of the study. This study states that there are

three possible effects humor could have on memory for accompanying information. If humor

aids memory independently of its relevance to the to-be remembered information (for example, if

humor increases arousal and thereby enhances retention of any information encountered

immediately after), there should be a positive main effect of humor. There might be an

interaction between humor's and relevance's effects on memory for accompanying factual

information, so that humor would enhance memory more when it is relevant than when it is

irrelevant to the factual information. If humor aids memory only through its relevance to the

accompanying information, then humor’s main effect would be qualified by this interaction.

Alternatively, if humor in fact distracts from the information it is paired with regardless of its

relevance, then there should be a negative main effect of humor.

Furthermore, Instructional Humor Processing Theory (IHPT), a theory that combines

aspects of incongruity-resolution theory, disposition theory, and the elaboration likelihood model

(ELM) of persuasion. IHPT is suggested and provided as an example of why certain types of

humor created by teachers result in improved learning for students and others do not. IHPT

hypothesized that instructional content-related humor will associate favorably with student

learning, while incorrect types would not. Related humor, an acceptable type of instructional

humor, was positively correlated with student learning in conjunction with IHPT, whereas other-

disparaging and insulting humor, unacceptable styles of humor, did not correlate with student

learning. It also contends that appropriate forms of instructional humor are positively associated

with student learning. Working from the propositions of IHPT, the proponents expect that the use

26
of related humor by teachers would be favorably correlated with learning because this type of

humor can improve both the motivation and capacity of students to process and keep knowledge

(Frymier, Irwin, & Wanzer, 2010).

These two theories explain this study well where it focuses both in appropriate humor

towards achieving positive effects in memory, retention, and in learning as a whole. However,

Instructional Humor Processing Theory (IHPT) is the most relevant for this study since it has

vivid explanations and much structured meaning into appropriate humor which encompasses

instructional humor which is also where this study focuses on. Although both presented humor

having positive and negative impacts, IHPT has a detailed and lucid representation of how one

specific type of humor affects someone and up until its effects.

Instructional Humor Processing Theory Model

According to Frymier, Irwin, and Wanzer (2010), initially students must recognize the

incongruity in the instructor’s message in order to perceive humor. Once the incongruity has

been acknowledged, it must then be interpreted. If the incongruity is not determined or ruled, the

student will not understand humor and will possibly be distracted or puzzled by the teacher’s

message. If the student resolves the incongruity, he/she may perceive the message as humorous,

and will result in laughter. Whether or not humor promotes learning is determined by the nature

of the humorous message and how it is perceived. A message viewed as humorous is further

assessed as either positive or negative in effect, as shown in Figure 1. Drawing on Frymier et al.

(2008) and Wanzer et al. (2009), appropriate forms of humor (i.e., related and unrelated

appropriate humor) are expected to create positive affect, while inappropriate forms of humor

(e.g.,other-disparaging and offensive) are expected to create negative affect.

27
Figure 1: Instructional Humor Processing Theory Model

28
Conceptual Framework

Figure 2 shows humor and how it affects the memory and retention of the Grade 12

students. The researchers included the process that will be done throughout the research.

Figure 2: Memory and retention of grade 11 STEM students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag

when humor is applied and the processes to be done.

29
Hypotheses of the Study

Null Hypotheses:

a. There is no significant difference between the pre-test and posttest scores of the control

and between the pre-test and posttest scores of the experimental group.

b. There is no significant difference between the posttest scores of the control and

experimental group.

Alternative Hypotheses:

a. There is a significant difference between the pre-test and posttest scores of the control and

between the pre-test and posttest scores experimental group.

b. There is a significant difference between the posttest scores of the control and

experimental group.

30
Definition of Terms

In order to fully understand and appreciate this study, the following terms are defined

conceptually and operationally to indicate the context in which they were used in this study.

1. Humor

● The ability to find the things funny, the way in which people see that some things are

funny, or the quality of being funny (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d).

● The stimulus, for example a joke, which elicits a response (Brook , Frates, & Louie,

2016).

2. Instructional Humor

● It is also known as integrated humor and it occurs when humor is embedded to the

instructional message (Bolkan, Griffin, and Goodboy, 2018).

● It is a type of humor that teachers use during instruction that is intended to illustrate a

point (Informed Instructors. 2018).

3. Long Term Memory

● Memory that involves the storage and recall of information over a long period of time

(such as days, weeks, or years) (Merriam Webster Dictionary, n.d).

● The storage of information for a long time and it is the final stage in the processing of

memory. Long-term memory decays very little with time and it is easier to recall (The

Human Memory, 2020).

31
4. Memory

● The power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained

especially through associative mechanisms (Merriam Webster Dictionary, n.d).

● A neuro-chemical process, including conditioning and any form of stored experience. It is

also often thought of as a physical thing stored in the brain; experiences that we can recall

at our will (Vansintjan & Zlotnik, 2019).

5. Retention

● The act of retaining or the state of being retained (Merriam Webster Dictionary, n.d).

● The persistence of memory over passing time (Crowder, 2015).

6. Short Term Memory

● Memory that involves recall of information for a relatively short time (such as a few

seconds) (Merriam Webster Dictionary, n.d).

● Refers to systems which provide retention of limited amounts of material for a limited

time period (seconds) (Vallar, 2017).

32
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

For this particular study, the researchers used a mixed method with an embedded research

design, specifically sequential, in order to determine the effects of humor to the memory and

retention of Grade 11 STEM students.

According to Sozpsychol (2017), embedded design is a type of design that a strand of the

other kind is applied to a typical qualitative or quantitative design to improve the overall design.

In this design, the researchers use qualitative data, in the experimental research as a sample, for a

variety of reasons, including developing a treatment, examining the method of an operation or

the processes that connect variables, or following up on the effects of an experiment (Creswell,

2017).

Respondents of the Study

The researchers utilized non-random sampling, particularly convenience sampling, in

order to determine the respondents of the study. The respondents consist of select Grade 11

STEM students from St. Mary’s College of Baliuag, an RVM school. The data were gathered

from fifty-two (52) Grade 11 students from the sections St. Dominic and St. Arnold Jansen.

There were 26 respondents from both sections.

Sampling Procedure

33
 To be able to make this research possible, the researchers utilized non-probability

sampling specifically convenience sampling. Hence, two sections emerged, St. Arnold and St.

Dominic. It was a convenience sampling since the chosen teacher only handles the said two

classes. Both sections each have 33 students; however, due to internet connection problems and

absenteeism, only 26 students from each class were able to participate which summed up to a

total of 52 students.

Research Instrument

The data for this study were collected using a research-made 15-item pretest and posttest.

It was administered to Grade 11- St. Dominic and Grade 11- St. Arnold wherein St. Dominic was

the control group and St. Arnold was the experimental group. The tests were based on the lesson

discussed by the teacher to the respondents. The pretest and posttest had the same level of

difficulty since the researchers used the same set of questions. The topic of the assessment was

about the Earth’s Processes in the subject of Earth Science. To test the memory and retention of

the students, the questions came from the modules of the students and they were asked to provide

objective answers. The test was verified by the subject teacher and approved it to be a test.

Lastly, a validated, by the research adviser, researcher-made interview questionnaire was used.

Research Procedure

The researchers included fifty-two (52) Grade 11 students from the STEM strand of St.

Mary’s College of Baliuag. The researchers formally asked permission from the respondents’

Earth Science teacher to be an essential instrument for the research and for the data collection.

Before the test proper, a pilot testing was done in two Grade 12 sections in their Practical

Research subject -- one from the HUMSS strand and one from the ABM strand -- to test for

34
possible difficulties that might be encountered in the online forms and websites that would be

used to gather data for the study. By doing so, the researchers were able to spot possible

alternatives and assess how they could resolve the problems that may arise. The researchers

informed and enlightened the teacher about which form humor must be utilized during the class

discussions. The pre-tests were administered the same day that the students were to learn about

the topic of the assessments. Both groups were given 15 minutes to complete their pre-tests. The

researchers then conducted a non-participant observation in order to get the initial findings, and

observed the respondents while they were holding their classes. This was also done to ensure that

the students’ instructor was using the appropriate form of humor as defined in this research

paper. After the class discussion, the researchers conducted the post-test. Again, both groups

were given 15 minutes to complete and answer the test. After the data collection, the researchers

interpreted and analyzed the data using different statistical treatment and data analysis. Interview

was also conducted to further validate the results in the quantitative study. Lastly, it was

interpreted and utilized to formulate a more concrete conclusion.

Data Analysis

The scores and data will be analyzed through the following table. Each range of score has

a corresponding interpretation.

Score Interpretation

0–3 Poor

4–6 Below Average

7–9 Average

35
 10 – 12 Above Average

13 - 15 Superior

Table 1: Interpretation of mean

This interpretation was derived from Taura and Taura (2010) in their study entitled

Bilingual First Language Development of Two Japanese-English Bilingual Siblings: Literature

Review on Possible Dependent Variables. It was derived in their interpretation of their test

specifically in table 7 of the said study. As the researchers also utilized tests, this table was found

relatable and connected to the study.

Statistical Treatment

1. Percentage

The data were tallied, analyzed and interpreted using frequency and percentage.

Formula:
F
P= n

P – percentage

F – frequency

n – sample size

2. Weighted Average/Mean

It is used to evaluate population in research.

Formula:

∑X
36
n
 x̅ =

x̅ – mean
∑ X – summation of all data

n – sample size

3. T-test

It is used to test the hypothesis and effect of the variable.

Formula

x̅ 1 – mean of experimental group

x̅ 2 – mean of control group

µ1 – population mean of experimental group

µ2 – population mean of control group

s1 – standard deviation of experimental group

s2 – standard deviation of control group

n1 – sample size of experimental group

n2 – sample size of control group

CHAPTER 4

37
 PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents analysis and interprets the data and information gathered according

to relation to the general and specific problems of the study as indicated in the statement of the

problem. To elucidate the discussion, the data are categorized and presented into parts according

to the sequence of the questions presented in chapter 1.

For specific question 1 and 2 (Scores of control and experimental group)
Studen Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q1 Q13 Q1 Q15 Score Interpretation
t Code 2 4
C1 0 Poor
C2 0 Poor
C3 / 1 Poor
C4 0 Poor
C5 / 1 Poor
C6 / / / / / / 6 Below
Average
C7 / 1 Poor
C8 / / / 3 Poor
C9 0 Poor
C10 / 1 Poor
C11 / 1 Poor
C12 / 1 Poor
C13 / 1 Poor
C14 / 1 Poor
C15 / 1 Poor
C16 / 1 Poor
C17 / 1 Poor
C18 / 1 Poor
C19 0 Poor
C20 / 1 Poor
C21 / / / / / 5 Below
Average
C22 / / / 3 Poor
C23 0 Poor
C24 0 Poor
C25 / 0 Poor

38
 C26 0 Poor
Total: 31 Mean: 1.192 Poor
3

Studen Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q1 Q13 Q1 Q15 Score Interpretation

t Code 2 4
E1 0 Poor
E2 Table 2: Individual scores of the students in the control group during pretest 0 Poor
E3 / 1 Poor
E4 Note: C# signifies that the respondents are from control group and their identity which is presented
0 Poor
in codes.
E5 0 Poor
E6 0 Poor
E7 / 1 Poor
E8 0 Poor
E9 / 1 Poor
E10 / 1 Poor
E11 / 1 Poor
E12 / 1 Poor
E13 / / 2 Poor
E14 / / 5 Below
Average
E15 0 Poor
E16 0 Poor
E17 0 Poor
E18 / 1 Poor
E19 0 Poor
E20 / 1 Poor
E21 / 1 Poor
E22 / 1 Poor
E23 0 Poor
E24 0 Poor
E25 / / 2 Poor
E26 0 Poor
Total: 19 Mean: 0.730 Poor
8

39
 Table 3: Individual scores of the students in the experimental group during pretest

Note: E# signifies that the respondents are from experimental group and their identity which is

presented in codes.

Stude Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Scor Interpretati

nt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 e on
Code
C1 / / / / / / / / / / / / 12 Above
Average
C2 / / / / / / / / / / 9 Average
C3 / / 2 Poor
C4 / / / / / 5 Below
Average
C5 / / / / / / / / / 9 Average
C6 / / / / / / 6 Below
Average
C7 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
C8 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
C9 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
C10 / / / / / / 6 Below
Average
C11 / / / / / / 6 Below
Average
C12 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
C13 / / / / / / / / / / / 11 Above
Average
C14 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
C15 / / / / / / / 7 Average
C16 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
C17 / / / / / / / / / / / 11 Above
Average
C18 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
C19 / / / / / 5 Below
Average
C20 / / / / / / / 7 Average
C21 / / / / / / / / / / / / / 13 Superior
C22 / / / / / / / / / / / / / 13 Superior
C23 / / / / / / 6 Below
Average
C24 / / / / / / / / 8 Average

40
 C25 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
C26 / / / / 4 Below
Average
Total: 210 Mean: 8.07 Average
69

Table 4: Individual scores of the students in the control group during posttest

Studen Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Score Interpretatio

t Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 n
E1 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
E2 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
E3 / / / / / / 6 Below
Average
E4 / / / / / / / / / / / 11 Above
Average
E5 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
E6 / / / / / / / 7 Average
E7 / / / / / 5 Below
Average
E8 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
E9 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
E10 / / / / / / / / / / / 11 Above
Average
E11 / / / / / 5 Below
Average
E12 / / / / / / / / / / / 11 Above
Average
E13 / / 2 Poor
E14 / / 2 Poor
E15 / / / / / / / / 8 Average
E16 / / / / / / / 7 Average
E17 / / / / / / / 7 Average
E18 / / / / / / / / / 9 Average
E19 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above

41
 Average
E20 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
E21 / / / / / / / 7 Average
E22 / / / / / 5 Below
Average
E23 / / / / / / / / / / / / / 13 Superior
E24 / / / / 4 Below
Average
E25 / / / / / / / / / / 10 Above
Average
E26 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 14 Superior
Total: 212 Mean: 8.153 Average
8

Table 5: Individual scores of the students in the experimental group during posttest

Summary of results:

Scores Interpretation Pre-test Post-test

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
0–3 Poor 24 92.3% 1 3.8%
4–6 Below Average 2 7.7% 7 26.9%
7–9 Average 0 0 10 38.5%
10 – 12 Above Average 0 0 6 23.1%
13 - 15 Superior 0 0 2 7.7%
Total 26 100% 26 100%
Mean 1.192307692 8.076923077

Control Group (St. Dominic)

Table 6: Summary of the results of the control group in pretest and posttest

Table 6 shows the scores of the control group garnered from the experiment. In the pre-

test, 24 out of 26 of the respondents obtained a score between 0 - 3 which can be interpreted as

poor, and 2 out of 26 of the respondents had a score between 4 - 6 which can be interpreted as

below average. Meanwhile, for the post-test, 11 out of 26 respondents got a score between 7 - 9

which is average, 7 out of 26 respondents got a score between 4 - 6 which is below average, 5

42
out of 26 respondents got a score between 10-12 which is above average, 2 out of 26 respondents

got a score between 13 - 15 which is superior, and 1 out of 26 respondents got a score between 0

- 3 which is poor. None of the respondents from the control group was able to get or exceed the

average score in the pre-test. There was an improvement in the scores of the respondents

comparing the mean of the pre-test, which is 1.192307692, to the mean of the post-test, which is

8.076923077.

Experimental Group (St. Arnold)

Scores Interpretation Pre-test Post-test

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
0–3 Poor 25 96.2% 2 7.7%
4–6 Below Average 1 3.8% 5 19.2%
7–9 Average 0 0 7 26.9%
10 – 12 Above Average 0 0 10 38.5%
13 - 15 Superior 0 0 2 7.7%
Total 26 100% 26 100%
Mean 0.730769231 8.153846154

Table 7: Summary of the results of the experimental group in pretest and posttest

Table 7 shows the scores of the experimental group obtained from the experiment. In the

pre-test, 25 out of 26 of the respondents obtained a score between 0 - 3 which can be interpreted

as poor, and 1 out of 26 of the respondents had a score between 4 - 6 which can be interpreted as

below average. Meanwhile, for the post-test, 10 out of 26 respondents got a score between 10 -

12 which is above average, 7 out of 26 respondents got a score between 7 - 9 which is average, 5

out of 26 respondents got a score between 10-12 which is below average, 2 out of 26 respondents

got a score between 13 - 15 which is superior, and 2 out of 26 respondents got a score between 0

- 3 which is poor. None of the respondents from the experimental group was able to get or

exceed the average score in the pre-test. There was an improvement in the scores of the

43
respondents comparing the mean of the pre-test, which is 0.730769231, to the mean of the post-

test, which is 8.153846154.

Hypotheses Testing

Control Group (St. Dominic)

Pretest Posttest

Mean 1.192307692 8.076923077

Variance 2.241538462 7.433846154

Observations 26 26

Pooled Variance 4.837692308

Hypothesized Mean 0
Difference

df 50

t Stat -11.2857971

t-value 2.31591E-12

Critical Value 2.060

Table 8: Hypothesis testing for control group

Table 8 shows whether there is a significant difference between the pretest and posttest of

the control group or not. In this case, hypothesis (a) must be used. The t-value must be greater

than the critical value, which is 2.060, to reject the null hypothesis (a). The t-value of this data

44
list is 2.31591E-12. E-12 means that the t-value has 12 more digits on its right side.

Consequently, 2.31591E-12 is much bigger than 2.060; thus, null hypothesis (a) is rejected and

the alternative hypothesis (a) is accepted. There is a significant difference in the pre-test and

post-test scores of the control group. The students exposed to normal class still exhibit higher test

scores. In line with that, Karlin (2016) shared that humor has no huge impact in students’

memory and learning; thus, implying that even a usual or traditional class can elicit learning.

Experimental Group (St. Arnold)

Pretest Posttest

Mean 0.730769231 8.153846154

Variance 1.164615385 9.575384615

Observations 26 26

Pooled Variance 5.37

Hypothesized Mean 0
Difference

df 50

t Stat -11.54964124

t-value 2.71733E-10

Critical Value 2.060

Table 9: Hypothesis testing for experimental group

Table 9 shows whether there is a significant difference of the pretest and posttest score of

the experimental group or not. In this case, hypothesis (a) must be used. The t-value must be

greater than the critical value, which is 2.060, to reject the null hypothesis (a). The t-value of this

data list is 2.71733E-10. E-10 means that the t-value has 10 more digits on its right side.

45
Consequently, 2.71733E-10 is much bigger than 2.060; thus, null hypothesis (a) is rejected and

the alternative hypothesis (a) is accepted. The null hypothesis (a) is rejected signifying a

difference between the pre-test and post-test score of the experimental group, which received the

treatment of Appropriate Instructional Humor. According to Matthews (2011), humor aids

memory similar to memory hooks in which students hang concepts on, or like pneumonic

devices that help trigger memories.

Control and Experimental Posttests

Posttest Posttest

Mean 8.076923077 8.153846154

Variance 7.433846154 9.575384615

Observations 26 26

Pooled Variance 8.504615385

Hypothesized Mean 0
Difference

df 50

t Stat -0.095104482

P(T<=t) one-tail 0.462305986

t Critical one-tail 1.675905025

P(T<=t) two-tail 0.924611972

t Critical two-tail 2.00855911

t-value 0.93471884

Critical Value 2.060

Table 10: Hypothesis testing for control and experimental group’s posttest

46
 Table 10 shows whether there is a significant difference between the posttest scores of

the control and experimental group or not. In this case, hypothesis (b) must be utilized. The t-

value must be greater than the critical value, which is 2.060, to reject the null hypothesis (b). The

t-value of this data list is 0.93471884. Consequently, 0.93471884 is smaller than 2.060; thus, null

hypothesis (b) is accepted and the alternative hypothesis (b) is rejected. There is no significant

difference between the variables. According to Westgate (2010), humor generates mixed results

on memory and interest, and may perhaps have delayed effects that appear only after a certain

period of time. Furthermore, the humor’s enhancement of the memory of the material, may be

heavily dependent on the duration of subjection or strength and frequency of humor. Given that

the classroom discussion lasted only for an hour, it may have run counter to the conditions

necessary for humor to produce an effect on memory and performance.

47
Interview Results

1. Was the class discussion more engaging than the previous sessions with the teacher?

Were you able to better understand and remember the lesson? (Normal or a different

class).

- Experimental Group

Figure 3: Was the class discussion more engaging than

the previous sessions with the teacher?
30

25

20

15

10

0
YES NO

Figure 3: Response of experimental group about the discussion proper during the

experiment.

48
 Figure 4: Were you able to better understand and
remember the lesson?
30

25

20

15

10

0
Understood and remembered Not

Figure 3 shows that all the participants from experimental group, 100%, revealed that the

class was more engaging that time due to many reasons. Moreover, 92.31% of them, based from

Figure 4, shared that they understood more and remembered their lessons well during that

discussion while 7.69% of them said that they were not able to understand and remember the

lesson they had well.

This implies that all the respondents perceived their class during that topic as an engaging

one and most of them remembered the lesson. Only few stated that they weren’t able to

remember and understood much.

According to participant no. 1 from the experimental group, “What I remember is she used

meme that make sit somehow unique and engaging. I better remember the lesson in that day.” It

is also aligned to what Freitas (2018), if an educator uses humor while teaching, it has the ability

to improve students’ engagement, interest, stimulation, and cognitive and affective learning.

- Control Group

49
 Figure 5: Was the class discussion more engaging than
the previous sessions with the teacher?
30

25

20

15

10

0
YES NO

Figure 5: Response of control group about the discussion proper during the experiment.

Figure 6: Were you able to better understand and

remember the lesson?
18

16

14

12

10

0
Understood and remembered Not

Figure 6: Response of control group about the clarity of the discussion during the
experiment.

Figure 5 shows that all the participants from control group, 100%, revealed that the class

was more engaging that discussion proper. In addition, 61.54% of them, based from Figure 6,

shared that they understood more and remembered their lessons well during that discussion while

50
38.46% of them said that they were not able to understand and remember the lesson they had

well.

This implies that all of them identified the discussion during that day engaging while

many of them remembered the lesson.

Based from participant no. 17 from the control group, “Yes, I was entertained during the

discussion because Ma’am Ericca use jokes and memes in discussing the lesson. It was also

because of those that made me remember the lesson.” It is in coordination with what Cornett et

al. (2015) shared in the study Implications of Using Humor in the Classroom which reiterates the

value of using humor in the process of attracting and retaining the interest of pupils, in mitigating

classroom tension and stress, and in encouraging and fostering good retention.

2. Was the instructor able to utilize appropriate instructional humor (Note: Appropriate

Instructional Humor includes the following: (a) related humor strategies or behaviors linked

to course material, (b) unrelated humor strategies or behaviors not associated with course

material, (c) self-disparaging humor directed at oneself, and (d) unintentional humor that

was considered spontaneous or unplanned).

- Experimental Group

Figure 7: Was the instructor able to utilize appropriate

instructional humor
30

25

20

15

10

0
YES NO

51
 Figure 7: Response of experimental group about the teacher’s usage of appropriate
instructional humor during the experiment.
Figure 8: Response of experimental group about the appropriate instructional humor used by
the teacher during the experiment.
Figure 7 shows that 100% of the participants from the experimental group, 26 out of 26,

shared that they have observed the teacher applying appropriate instructional humor in that

discussion. None said that they have not observed any appropriate instructional humor utilized.

Based from Figure 8, the appropriate instructional humor used according to the 53.85% of the

participants was related jokes. On the other hand, 34.62% revealed that related humorous

pictures or memes were used and 11.54% answered that unrelated jokes were evident.

Figure 8: Appropriate instructional humor used by the

teacher.
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Related jokes Pictures/memes Unrelated jokes

This implies that all experimental group participants discerned the proctor’s usage of

appropriate instructional humor and the most common used was related jokes.

According to participant no. 11 from the experimental group, “Whenever Ma’am Ericca

with make jokes in the class it was always related to the lesson and she doesn’t make jokes that

is targeted to one specific person,” and this is supported by Fitriah (2017) which revealed that

52
humor related to the topic being taught is perceived or counted as appropriate instructional

humor.

- Control Group

Figure 9: Was the instructor able to utilize appropriate

instructional humor
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
YES NO

Figure 9: Response of control group about the teacher’s usage of appropriate instructional

humor during the experiment.

Figure 10: Response of experimental group about the appropriate instructional humor used
by the teacher during the experiment.

53
 Figure 10: Appropriate intructional humor used by the
teacher.
16

14

12

10

0
Related jokes Unrelated jokes

Figure 9 shows that for the control group, 61.54% of the participants shared that they

remembered the teacher applying appropriate instructional humor in their class discussion.

However, 38.46% of the respondents revealed that they were not able to discern any appropriate

instructional humor used by the teacher. Figure 10 shows that those who answered yes, 93.75%

answered that related jokes including hugot jokes were employed. 6.25% of them revealed that

unrelated jokes were utilized.

This implies that many observed their teacher applying appropriate instructional humor

and related jokes was the most rampant example.

According to participant no. 9 from the control group, “Every class, she uses humor for

active participation, but in this I think she was not able to make jokes,” which is backed up by

the idea of the Instructional Humor Processing Theory by Frymier at al. (2010) that states that

varying perception in humor varies if the incongruity is discerned since that is the initial phase.

54
 3. Were all the items in the pretest and posttest present in your discussion and were they

aligned with the discussion and module? Was the pretest hard?

- Experimental Group

Figure 11: Were all the items in the pretest and posttest
present in your discussion and were they aligned with
the discussion and module? Was the pretest hard?
30

25

20

15

10

0
Aligned and hard NO

Figure 11: Response of experimental group about the alignment of the tests and difficulty of

Figure 12: Cues in the pretest and posttest

12

10

0
Ideas Pictures Keywords

the pretest used during the experiment.

55
 Figure 12: Response of experimental group about the cues present in the tests used during
the experiment.
Figure 11 shows that all of the participants (100%) in the experimental group said that the

questions presented in the pretest and posttest that they answered were aligned with the module

and discussion that they had. All of them also found the pretest hard. When asked what were the

cues that made them recognize the content of the module in the pretest and posttest, as shown in

Figure 12, most of the participants (42.30%) said that it was because of the ideas presented in

module that was also seen in the pretest and posttest. Some participants (26.92%) said it was

because of the pictures and the rest (30.77%) said it was because of the keywords.

This implies that pretest, a test to measure their prior knowledge about a new lesson, was

hard for all of them. Moreover, the tests done by them were aligned in the module and similar

ideas is the most rampant cue.

Based from the answer of participant no. 17 in the experimental group, “Yes, the content

of the module is present in the pretest and posttest. I observed that both pictures and keywords

were in the module and tests, also when I saw the pictures and keywords I was not immediately

reminded what we discussed but yes, I did remember what was discussed. before the test. I

remember some things, but it is hard,” and this is supported by Wierman (2021) which revealed

that many people are visual learners, meaning they absorb and remember knowledge better when

they can see it. Adding visual elements to lessons in a virtual environment that draws students'

attention back during a lecture or finding a short video of the science concepts you're talking

about.

- Control Group

56
 Figure 13: Were all the items in the pretest and posttest
present in your discussion and were they aligned with
the discussion and module? Was the pretest hard?
30

25

20

15

10

0
Aligned and hard NO

Figure 13: Response of control group about the alignment of the tests and difficulty of the

Figure 14: Cues in the pretest and posttest

16

14

12

10

0
Ideas Pictures Keywords

pretest used during the experiment.

Figure 14: Response of control group about the cues present in the tests used during the
experiment.

57
 Figure 13 shows that all of the participants (100%) in the control group said that the

questions presented in the pretest and posttest that they answered were aligned with the module

and discussion that they had. When asked what were the cues that made them recognize the

content of the module in the pretest and posttest, as shown in Figure 14, most of the participants

(57.69%) said that it was because of the ideas presented in module that was also seen in the

pretest and posttest. Some participants (19.23%) said it was because of the pictures and the rest

(23.07%) said it was because of the keywords.

This implies that all of the participants from the control group also had a hard time

answering the pretest. Moreover, the tests done by them were aligned in the module and similar

ideas is the most rampant cue.

Based from participant no. 4 from the control group, “Yes, because there are similar ideas

in the test and in the discussion,” which is entailed to what Gonzales (2021) shared, when a

person uses what a word sounds like or similar ideas to imagine something unforgettable that

will help them remember the concept later, they are using the keyword tool, which is a useful

technique for memorizing.

58
 Interview Responses

Experimental group

6. Was the class discussion more engaging than the previous sessions with the teacher? Were

you able to better understand and remember the lesson? (Normal or a different class)

Participant no. 1

- What I remember is she used meme that make sit somehow unique and engaging. I better

remember the lesson in that day.

Participant no. 2

- Normal class only since Ma’am Ericca is always interactive with us and entertaining with

some jokes. It helped us remember the lesson.

Participant no. 3

- It is just the usual class but the lesson is much easier to understand due to her jokes and

funny pictures that time.

Participant no. 4

- Just a usual class, a normal class with Ma’am Ericca.

Participant no. 5

- It was a normal class since ma’am is a naturally fun person. I remember the lessons.

59
Participant no. 6

- Normal class since she usually uses memes. I seem to not remember the lesson going into

the post-test.

Participant no. 7

- Usual class only. Easily understood and remembered.

Participant no. 8

- Normal class since ma’am is always jolly in her class that’s why it is always engaging

and easy to remember.

Participant no. 9

- Simple discussion, normal or usual class, understandable.

Participant no. 10

- I think that this particular session with Ma’am Ericca is just like the previous sessions

that we had with her, but I was able to better understand the lesson that we had that day.

Participant no. 11

- Yes, I was able to better understand the lesson because Ma'am Ericca provided some

examples for us to understand the lesson. The humor that she applied during the lesson also

helped me understand the lesson much better. Even with the previous sessions that we had with

her, she also applied humor to the discussion.

60
Participant no. 12

- The classes before was already somehow a routine in Ma'am Ericca's class. The

techniques and strategies she uses are understandable.

Participant no. 13

- I was able to understand and remember the lesson and the class was also engaging. She

also used humor and was always smiling when discussing and it made the discussion fun and the

time passed by really quickly so I wasn't able to feel lazy during the class.

Participant no. 14

- Yes, but as of today it is very hard to keep up with our studies because of the online

distance learning. The use of humor made me understand the lesson, because I feel like our

lessons can be overwhelming and humor can help cope with that. She also applied humor during

our previous discussions.

Participant no. 15

- Yes, I was able to engage and participate in lesson. Also, Ma'am Ericca always used

humor in our discussion.

Participant no. 16

- The discussion was more engaging and I understood the lesson much better. The memes

that ma'am Ericca helped us relate with the subject, and I remembered the lesson much better

when she used humor in class.

61
Participant no. 17

- In my opinion I think yes, its captivating than usual since the lesson is taught during

previous years, and since I had prior knowledge regarding the lesson, it's easy to understand. I

think that the factor that Ma'am Ericca has when it comes to teaching is she teaches us like

having a casual conversation, not in an informal way but more like she does it so we can grasp

understand the lesson. She also uses terms we can easily capture. She also uses humor in her

class that makes it more interesting in a sense. Sometimes she gives examples with humor in

attempt to makes us remember it better, and I think it works well, but she sometimes use it in her

class.

Participant no. 18

- Yes, I understood the lesson because the lesson was relatively easy. The jokes and memes

that she made during the discussion made me further understand the lesson. She sometimes

incorporates humor in our class but at the same time her delivery of the joke wasn't on time.

Participant no. 19

- Opo kase nagtatanong din po si maam kada lesson. Nagbibigay din sya ng follow up

questions samen para mas maging interactive at para mas madali naming matandaan. Opo (mas

natandaan ko po yung lesson). Wala naman po (difference sa pagtuturo ni Ma’am Ericca). Since

the first quarter naman energetic na sya magturo at interactive din.

Participant no. 20

- Yes because its more entertaining and the way she teach is not boring.

62
Participant no. 21

- Para saken, parang naulit na po kase sa past (yung lesson) nung junior high school. Okay

lang naman po. Para po saken, normal lang naman po (yung pagututro ni maam ericca).

Participant no. 22

- Parang usual lang naman po (yung pagututuro ni Maam Ericca). Parang same lang naman

po kagaya nung sa ibang lesson (when asked about if she remembered the lesson better).

Participant no. 23

- Actually, tama lang. Katulad lang din nung dati. Medyo kabado lang kase may ibang tao

(sa klase — referring to the observers/ researchers). I think yes, marami naman akong naalala

dun (sa discussion). Siguro, yes parang may konting pagbabago sa turo ni maam

Participant no. 24

- Actually natural Naman sya mag turo parang kung paano siya mag discuss ganon din at

may naintidihan din naman sa tinuro nya at medyo na hirapan sa post test kasi identification

usually samin may choices.

Participant no. 25

- I think no, kase hindi makapagfocus kase may different person na kasama sa class, kaya

di kame masyado comfortable na may nagoobserve. She got more serious (during the

discussion). To be honest hindi (gaano tumatak yung lesson). Im not used to maam ericca

63
teaching like that kase. Kase when she’s teaching the class, hindi sya yung type of serious

teacher. She uses humor para makapagbond samen and mas madali maituro yung lesson.

Participant no. 26

- Parang engaging naman po sya kase maayos naman po magturo si maam ericca. madali

lang din intindihin yung mga dinidiscuss nya tsaka yung powerpoint nya maayos naman tingnan.

mas natatandaan sya kase ang clear nung pag nagdidiscuss si maam, ineelaborate nya nang mas

maayos kaya mas naiintindihan namin nang mabuti at naaalala pag nagbibigay sya ng quiz.

pansin ko lang, same lang, pareho lang yung teaching style nya. Siguro mahirap lang yung lesson

kaya mahirap kabisaduhin pero naiintindihan naman.

2. Was the instructor able to utilize appropriate instructional humor (Note: Appropriate

Instructional Humor includes the following: (a) related humor strategies or behaviors

linked to course material, (b) unrelated humor strategies or behaviors not associated

with course material, (c) self-disparaging humor directed at oneself, and (d)

unintentional humor that was considered spontaneous or unplanned).

Participant no. 1

- Yes, she used some related jokes.

Participant no. 2

- Yes, she put some pictures that helped me remember.

Participant no. 3

64
- Yes, she utilized related and funny memes for us to easily remember and understand

specifically about faults.

Participant no. 4

- Yes, she utilized humorous pictures for analogy

Participant no. 5

- Yes, she put jokes in the powerpoint. Memes and pics with joke captions for us not to be

bored are also in the discussion.

Participant no. 6

- Yes, since she is always giving jokes related or unrelated to the lesson. In that day, she

told some jokes that some are related and some are unrelated.

Participant no. 7

- Yes, because there is a picture in the powerpoint and some jokes about crust.

Participant no. 8

- Yes, she always uses that, but in this lesson, she used pictures that are related in the

lesson and some relatable love jokes that can be incorporated in the lesson.

Participant no. 9

- Funny discussions with her are usual. In this lesson, she used memes and love jokes

related to the discussion.

65
Participant no. 10

- Yes, I was more attracted to the lesson that we had. I was able to listen attentively when

the appropriate instructional humor was applied during the discussion instead of just having a

plain discussion.

Participant no. 11

- Whenever Ma'am Ericca with make jokes in the class it was always related to the lesson

and she doesn't make jokes that is targeted to one specific person.

Participant no. 12

- Every aspect of it was completely utilized, the jokes, memes, and other techniques were

relevant in the discussion.

Participant no. 13

- I was able to observe appropriate instructional humor during the discussion and during

the previous sessions with her I also observed this.

Participant no. 14

- The memes and jokes that she presents in the class are aligned with the discussion and I

think that she does that for us to be able to understand the lesson. I also feel like students tend to

understand the lesson when there is a connection built among the students and teacher.

66
Participant no. 15

- The jokes that she used were aligned with the discussion and I seldom notice that her

jokes would go off-topic.

Participant no. 16

- Yes, I observed the appropriate instructional humor in class specifically the unintentional

and unplanned humor.

Participant no. 17

- Yes, I observed appropriate instructional humor in her class specifically the related

humor strategies or behaviors linked to course material.

Participant no. 18

- I was able to observe appropriate instructional humor during the class although I tend to

focus on the lesson rather than the jokes, it still caught my attention and brought my relationship

to Ma'am Ericca closer.

Participant no. 19

- Para saken po yung second or third po na sinabi nyo (referring to unrelated and self-

disparaging humor). Opo naglalagay po sya ng jokes. Nakakatulong naman po sya sa energy (po

siguro) ng klase.

67
Participant no. 20

- Yes, the proctor uses her sense of humor so that her students would not be bored

Participant no. 21

- Sa tingin ko po tama naman po (yung pag gamit nya ng humor). Naalala ko po sa fault

yung sa incline/anticline, yung parabola, yung smiley face. Hindi ko po maalala na nagpakita sya

ng funny na video, hindi ko na po kase masyado maalala (yung discussion)

Participant no. 22

- Yung una po (referring to Ms. Reyes’ use of humorous content/material related to the

lesson), pero di din naman po sya nakasakit ng damdamin ng estudyante nung nagjoke sya. Ang

alam ko po meron syang prinesent na something funny na related sa topic.

Participant no. 23

- Yes, parang mas natatandaan yung students yung topic dahil dun sa humor na ginamit

nya (that day). Pictures like memes (gumamit si ma’am)

Participant no. 24

- Hindi namn regular class lng Naman sya non and bihira lng Naman sya mag patawa and

nung araw nayon d Naman sya nag patawa kasi sabi nya after nito may quiz kami.

Participant no. 25

68
- I think, just a bit (when asked if maam ericca used Appropriate Humor). When she jokes,

everything is related naman sa topic and with connection. I think she used funny photos as

examples. May memes sya na prinesent.

Participant no. 26

- Connected naman (yung mga jokes). hindi ko na matandaan pero pag may dinidiscuss sya

nagsisingit sya ng mga nakakatawa. di ko na matandaan yung mga sinabi nya mismo.

3. Were all the items in the pretest and posttest present in your discussion and were they

aligned with the discussion and module? Was the pretest hard?

Participant no. 1

- The questions are all in the discussions and were discussed by ma’am greatly. Opo it’s

hard since I have no idea about it.

Participant no. 2

- All the questions were discussed by the teacher and in the powerpoint. Difficult po.

Participant no. 3

- All questions were discussed. There are similar pictures and key words present in the test

and powerpoint. Yes, it is hard.

69
Participant no. 4

- It was aligned due to similar pictures to easily understand the questions. It is tricky since

we haven’t discussed it yet.

Participant no. 5

- Yes, since the discussion was nice and inputted the ideas we need. Hard to answer

Participant no. 6

- It was discussed and present in the presentation. Somehow hard.

Participant no. 7

- All the questions have the same idea with the module. Yes because I still don’t know that.

Participant no. 8

- All questions are discussed well as well as the ideas. Having no idea about the lesson

made it hard.

Participant no. 9

- Ma’am discussed all the information and was aligned in the module. Hard to answer.

Participant no. 10

70
- The questions present in the pretest and posttest were both present in the discussion and

module. The pictures presented in the powerpoint and modules were both present in the tests and

the module and powerpoint presentation, also when I am taking notes, I try to remember the

keywords in the lesson and those were also present in the test that we had. I had a hard time

completing it.

Participant no. 11

- Yes, the content of the pretest and posttest were taught by Ma'am Ericca. When I was

answering the pretest and posttest, I just read the questions and then tried to remember what was

taught to us, because whenever our teachers discuss I try to listen attentively so that when I see

some keywords and I feel like my answers were correct I answer what I know. I just base on my

stock knowledge that’s why it is hard.

Participant no. 12

- The items in the pretest and posttest were all present in the discussion and I was able to

remember the information because of the keywords and visual aids Ma'am Ericca applied in the

discussions. Stock knowledge is what I used, but nothing is stocked.

Participant no. 13

- The content of the module was also present during the discussion. The pictures that was

present in the module were also seen in the tests. Pretest is hard.

Participant no. 14

71
- Yes. The questions in the pretest and posttest were aligned with the discussion and

module. Also, thanks to Ma'am Ericca's teaching strategies I was able to answer the pretest and

posttest. I was able to recognize the photos that was included in the module when we are taking

the quiz, because I am more of a visual learner and that helped me understand the lesson even

further. It was hard.

Participant no. 15

- Yes, the items that was in the module were present in the pretest and posttest that we

took. Some keywords that we in the module were present during the discussion and that made

answering of the posttest much easier for me unlike in pretest which is hard to answer.

Participant no. 16

- Yes, I was able to remember the lesson because of the jokes that Ma'am Ericca made. The

pictures and keywords that were present in the discussion and module was also present in the

pretest and posttest. The pretest was hard.

Participant no. 17

- Yes, the content of the module is present in the pretest and posttest. I observed that both

pictures and keywords were in the module and tests, also when I saw the pictures and keywords I

was not immediately reminded what we discussed but yes, I did remember what was discussed.

before the test. I remember some things, but it is hard.

Participant no. 18

72
- The content of the discussion and module were present in the pretest and posttest. The

pictures in the module were also present during the pretest and posttest. Actually, I wasn’t able to

answer it well.

Participant no. 19

- Opo halos lahat naman po nandun. Iba lang po siguro yung sentence construction. Opo

(naidiscuss naman yung mga words na andun sa quiz). Tama lang naman yung mga tinanong na

question. Opo, wala po ako gaano nasagot.

Participant no. 20

- Yes, its alligned with the discussion. I couldn’t answer the pretest but when the lesson is

discussed i easily answer that posttest. Yes, mahirap.

Participant no. 21

- Hindi ko lang po masyado nagets yung lesson kaya di ko po masyado nasagot yung quiz.

Pero nakaalign naman po sa lesson yung pretest and posttest. I think nandun naman po sa quiz

(yung keywords na naidiscuss). Mahirap po.

Participant no. 22

- Opo (naituro naman ni Ma’am Ericca lahat nung nandun sa questionnaire). Connected

naman po lahat (nung questions). Parang wala naman po (referring to possible items that might

73
not have been taught by the instructor). Mahirap lang po sya pero kasama naman po lahat sa

discussion. Medyo kasi di ko alam iyon.

Participant no. 23

- Yes, naituro naman ni maam lahat nung tinanong ni maam sa quiz, kaso di ko lang

natandaan. Yes, sang-ayon naman yung mga tanong sa module. Oo, mahirap siya kasi wala pa

akong alam dun.

Participant no. 24

- Tugma Naman ung binigay nyong quiz saamin and same pictures din ang nandoon sa ppt

nya at naituro naman nya ng maayos. Mahirap yung pretest.

Participant no. 25

- The questions were aligned naman and malapit sya sa topic. As far as I remember, parang

may 1 item lang na hindi kami familiar. oo naitanong sa quiz yung mga things you need to

remember (like keywords from the ppt). Mahirap po kasi di pa po naituro.

Participant no. 26

- Andun naman lahat (sa discussion) (yung mga questions sa assessment), siguro

nakakalito lang kase nung pinag assessment kami walang choices kaya nahirapan kami sagutan.

yes, aligned naman yung questions, iba lang talaga pag may choices. iba pag walang choices

medyo nakakalito. andun naman (yung mga points to remember) sa powerpoint ni maam. Medyo

mahirap po sya.

74
Control group

1. Was the class discussion more engaging than the previous sessions with the teacher?

Were you able to better understand and remember the lesson? (Normal or a different

class)

Participant no. 1

- Normal class only but with helpful visual aids.

Participant no. 2

- Usual and remembered a little.

Participant no. 3

- Normal class and I remember just some keywords

Participant no. 4

75
- For me, it is just a normal class. Nothing special. I remembered some lessons going into

the posttest.

Participant no. 5

- Normal class and I somehow, but unsure about some things that time and now, I forget

those lessons.

Participant no. 6

- It was still engaging though it is a usual class and I personally remember some things

about it but forgot that now.

Participant no. 7

- I remembered some, but now I don’t remember some of those things already. Normal

class with Ma’am Ericca is with joke so for me it’s her normal teaching way that day.

Participant no. 8

- Normal class but it is usual to Ma’am Ericca to throw jokes so that we can understand it

more. I remembered some, but not so many that’s why I am low at the test. Now, I can’t

remember that anymore.

Participant no. 9

- I think normal class since I did not feel any special technique she used during that day. I

don’t remember much.

Participant no. 10

76
- Yes, I was able to understand lesson but due to internet connection problems, I wasn't

able to see the powerpoint presentation during the discussion, when it come to class

participation, I tend to feel shy so instead of participating, I just jot down notes. Also taking

down notes enables me to remember the lesson much better.

Participant no. 11

- Yes. although I am a transferee and everything was new for me, the class was more

engaging because I became close to my teacher and was attracted to the lesson. I understand the

lesson much better because of Ma'am Ericca's teaching strategies wherein she provides

definitions for the difficult words encountered or she sometimes translates it to Tagalog.

Participant no. 12

- Yes, I understood the lesson much better because of the teaching strategies of Ma'am

Ericca wherein she showed some examples and uses jokes in class. It also because of the pretest

and posttest that I remembered the discussion.

Participant no. 13

- Yes, because she uses humor in class that made the class more engaging and made us feel

that we are connected with her. However, I do not think that humor has an effect on our

cognitive skills, it just made us more focused on the lesson but has no effect on how we will

understand the lesson.

Participant no. 14

77
- The class discussion was engaging because she integrated many different ways to discuss

the lesson and I was also able to understand the lesson. She used examples and real-life

experiences, and that made me understand the lesson much better.

Participant no. 15

- Yes, I understood the lesson during that time.

Participant no. 16

- The class was more engaging, and it is also because of the observer that we felt that we

are obliged to listen and participate, but still I understood the lesson.

Participant no. 17

- Yes, I was entertained during the discussion because Ma'am Ericca use jokes and memes

in discussing the lesson. It was also because of those that made me remember the lesson.

Participant no. 18

- Wala naman po (naiba sa pagtuturo ni maam ericca). ganun po talaga (magturo si maam

ericca). hindi po masyado (when asked if she was able to better understand the lesson).

Participant no. 19

- Opo mas okay po yun (yung discussion that day). mas okay po yung wala pong, yung

pangalawa pong session kesa po yung una. yung tinatanong nyo po ba yung may autoproctor?

mas okay po yung pangalawang session kase po hindi po ganun, mas maayos po yung

78
pangalawang session kesa po sa uanang pagtuturo kase mas diniscuss po ni maam nang mas

maayos tsaka komportable po kaming magtanong ng mga hindi namin naintindihan. Kinda

(when asked if she able to remember the lesson better). Naintindihan ko po yung pangalawa pero

di ko po naintindihan agad kase slow learner lang po ako.

Participant no. 20

- Yes, i able to undefstand and remember the lesson because after the discussion we take

the quiz right after the teacher discuss it

Participant no. 21

- Hindi naman po masyado, parang parehas lang. wala naman, parang normal class lang

(when asked if maam ericca taught the usual way). yes (he was able to better remember the

lesson) kase po same lang din po yung flow ng teaching ni maam po non. komportable lang po

ang parang alam ko na po yung gagawin ko.

Participant no. 22

- Medyo lang kase medyo mahaba yung discussion nun eh. Kaya siguro yung iba

nahihibang na kase ang daming informations. wala, ever since naman ganun sya mag discuss

samen. oo kase, medyo interesado ako sa mga topic na yun. (when asked if she was able to

remember the topic better).

Participant no. 23

- The class discussion were always engaging. Yes I was able to understand and remember

the lesson better.

79
Participant no. 24

- Understood the lesson and it is engaging, just a normal class.

Participant no. 25

- Not particularly, because it’s the same as the other previous discussions. yea sure (when

asked if he was able to better remember the lesson). (participant is not sure if he was able to

remember the lesson better because it was taught the usual way)

Participant no. 26

- Yes po (more engaging). normal teaching lang po. ineexplain nya po every topic and

nagbibigay po sya ng examples. yes po (i was able to remember better), kase usual lang

pagtuturo ni maam.

2. Was the instructor able to utilize appropriate instructional humor (Note: Appropriate

Instructional Humor includes the following: (a) related humor strategies or behaviors

linked to course material, (b) unrelated humor strategies or behaviors not associated

with course material, (c) self-disparaging humor directed at oneself, and (d)

unintentional humor that was considered spontaneous or unplanned).

80
Participant no. 1

- Yes, she told one joke.

Participant no. 2

- I think she did not joke or if there is just a light one.

Participant no. 3

- She told some jokes like hugot.

Participant no. 4

- She usually tells jokes that are related and during that day she told some jokes for us to be

awake since she is our first subject that day.

Participant no. 5

- I think she used a joke that is related.

Participant no. 6

- She is always entertaining in terms of teaching like jokes and love jokes

Participant no. 7

- She still jokes to be engaging and to have some analogy in the lesson.

Participant no. 8

- Did some jokes that are connected and some that aren’t connected.

81
Participant no. 9

- Every class, she uses humor for active participation, but in this I think she was not able to

make jokes.

Participant no. 10

- The use of humor during discussion bring excitement for me and I prefer for the class to

incorporate humor. Ma'am Ericca used jokes during the discussion but there were other times

that she doesn't.

Participant no. 11

- For me the humor that Ma'am Ericca uses is appropriate for the class. Since we have a

morning session, she uses humor to wake up the class.

Participant no. 12

- Yes, humor is present during the class discussion, and I think that it is appropriate and it

also enables me to understand the lesson.

Participant no. 13

- Yes, the jokes and memes that she used was connected to our topic.

Participant no. 14

- Yes, she was able to utilize the appropriate instructional humor in the class.

Participant no. 15

82
- Yes, Ma'am Ericca utilized appropriate instructional humor in the class.

Participant no. 16

- I think that every time that Ma'am Errica teaches the lesson, the humor that she used were

appropriate in the class.

Participant no. 17

- Yes, I observed appropriate instructional humor in the class.

Participant no. 18

- Wala naman po (when asked if maam ericca used humorous material)

Participant no. 19

- Hindi po, kase po parang di rin po komportable si maam nun kase may iba po sa meet

namin

Participant no. 20

- Yes, I think the instructor able to intruct it well.

Participant no. 21

- Wala naman po

Participant no. 22

83
- Hindi (sya gano nagpatawa)

Participant no. 23

- Yes the instructor was able to utilize appropriate instructional humor because it is related

to our subject.

Participant no. 24

- I don’t see any or remember any joke she said.

Participant no. 25

- I dont remember clearly. I dont think so. I do remember laughing at some point.

Participant no. 26

- Hindi po

3. Were all the items in the pretest and posttest present in your discussion and were they

aligned with the discussion and module? Was the pretest hard?

Participant no. 1

- All the information are in the presentation.

Participant no. 2

84
- Almost all are in the presentation, but some are tricky questions.

Participant no. 3

- It was discussed there are some keywords and pictures.

Participant no. 4

- Yes, because there are similar ideas in the test and in the discussion.

Participant no. 5

- Yes, it is aligned and were discussed.

Participant no. 6

- All were discussed in the test and we didn’t miss anything at all.

Participant no. 7

- Almost all are in the module and was discussed.

Participant no. 8

- It was aligned since the questions are in the presentation and what ma’am said.

Participant no. 9

- It was discussed by ma’am completely. I saw same pictures and definitions.

Participant no. 10

85
- Yes, the content of the pretest and posttest were present and aligned with the module. The

photos and keywords enabled me to remember the discussion while answering the question.

Participant no. 11

- Yes, the content of the pretest and posttest is present in the module. For me I focus more

on the unfamiliar words on the discussion rather than the words I am familiar with and upon

seeing these words I was remembered of what was discussed in the class and also the photos.

Participant no. 12

- Yes, the content of the lesson was aligned with the pretest and posttest. It was because of

the pictures and keywords that made me answer the pretest and posttest much easier.

Participant no. 13

- Some details weren't present because I think that some of the questions were not present,

but for the questions that are aligned I was able to identify those because of the concept.

Participant no. 14

- Yes, the questions that I answered during the pretest and posttest were present in the -

discussion and module. It was because of the keywords and photos that I was able to remember

the discussion while answering the tests.

Participant no. 15

86
- Yes, the content of the pretest and posttest were aligned with the discussion and module.

It was the photos that made me remember the discussion while taking the tests.

Participant no. 16

- Yes, the questions in the pretest and posttest were present in the module. It was because

of keywords that made me remember the lesson while answering the test and it also made the test

much easier to answer.

Participant no. 17

- Yes, the questions in the pretest and posttest were aligned with the discussion and module

and it was because of the keywords and photos that made answering the test much easier.

Participant no. 18

- Naituro naman po (yung questions sa assessment). Yes po (aligned yung questions).

Participant no. 19

- Yes po. opo (they were aligned po). naituro po ni maam lahat

Participant no. 20

- Yes, it was aligned in the module and in the discussion.

Participant no. 21

- Yes naman, nandun naman (sa module). the questions were aligned with the module.

Participant no. 22

87
- Oo naituro lahat. yung keywords na prinesent ni maam ericca nandun lahat.

Participant no. 23

- Yes, it was all about faults.

Participant no. 24

- Yes, as far as I remember, it was discussed, but there are just some hard questions.

Keywords are there.

Participant no. 25

- Not all of them, but most of them. i feel like all the questions were discussed quiet well.

Participant no. 26

- Opo, nakalagay naman po sa module. yes po (the questions were aligned). i forgot na po

yung questionnaire (when asked to give specific examples).

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents a summary of the findings of the study, the conclusions were drawn

from the obtained results and the recommendations derived from the salient findings of the

study.

Summary of Findings

88
 The general problem of the study is to determine the Effects of Humor to the Memory

and Retention of Grade 11 STEM Students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag.

Specific Problems:

1. What is the pretest score of the control and experimental group?

For the pretest scores of the control group, the scores obtained by the respondents did not

reach the average score. 24 respondents (92.3%) got poor scores while 2 respondents (7.7%) got

below average scores. For the pretest scores of the experimental group, the scores obtained by

the respondents did not meet the average score, 25 respondents (96.2%) got poor scores while 1

respondent (3.8%) got below average score which is lower than what the control group scored.

2. What is the posttest score of the control and experimental group?

For the posttest scores of control group, more than half of the respondents reached the

average score. 1 respondent (3.8%) got poor score, 7 respondents (26.9%) got below average

scores, 10 respondents (38.5%) got average scores, 6 respondents (23.1%) got above average

scores and 2 respondents (7.7%) got superior scores. On the other hand, the posttest scores of the

experimental group showed that most of the respondents are in above average. 2 respondents

(7.7%) got poor scores, 5 respondents (19.2%) got below average scores, 10 respondents (38.5%)

got above average scores and 2 respondents (7.7%) got superior scores.

3. Is there a significant difference between the pretest and the posttest score of the

control group and between the pretest and the posttest score of the experimental

group?

89
 Yes, there is a significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the control

group. In fact, Ho (a) is rejected and Ha (a) is accepted. The t-value of the data, 2.31591E-12, is

much bigger than the critical value, 2.060, implying to reject Ho (a). Moreover, there is also a

significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the experimental group; thus, Ho

(a) is rejected and Ha (a) is accepted. Based on the t-value of 2.71733E-10, it is much bigger

than 2.060 which is the critical value; hence, Ho (a) must be rejected.

4. Is there a significant difference between the posttest scores of the control and

experimental group?

There is no significant difference between the posttest scores of the control group and

experimental group; thus, Ho (b) is accepted. With the tabulated t-value of 0.93471884, Ho (b)

must be accepted for the t-value is smaller than 2.060, the critical value.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

90
 Majority of the students in the control group received a lower score in their pretest. 100%

of the students received a score ranging from poor to below average in the pretest. None of them

exceeded the average score or even got that score. Similarly, the experimental group got lower

scores and also had lower scores than the control group. 100% also of the respondents from the

experimental got a score ranging from poor to below average in the pretest.

As a support, many of the interviewers shared that they had no idea about the lesson and

some just relied with their stock knowledge. With that, it implies the reason why the respondents

got a low score, poor to below average level. Moreover, the pressure that some of them has

nothing to recall, yet the type of test is an identification one attributed as one of the reasons of

their low scores.

On the other hand, there was a varying degree of the scores in the control group’s posttest

with only 30.7% of the students receiving scores from poor to below average, and 69.3% of them

had scores ranging from average to superior. The students in the experimental group also

displayed a similar performance wherein the students obtained a higher score in their posttest

compared to their pretest. 26.9% of the respondents from the experimental group got poor up to

below average while the remaining test scores, 73.1% of the respondents, ranges from average to

superior.

Based on the interview, the respondents from control and experimental groups’ scores

achieved mostly average and even some reached superior since most of them revealed that they

understood the lesson discussed and remembered it going into the posttest. In fact, 40 out of the

52 respondents from both groups answered that.

91
 On that note, the control group displayed a significant difference in terms of their scores

between the pretest and the posttest. The control group’s pretest and posttest prove that students

exposed to normal class still score higher in tests. In addition, the experimental group also

portrayed a significant difference in terms of their scores between the pretest and the posttest.

This result implies that usage of appropriate instructional humor in class can exhibit high scores

and learning capacity.

According to the survey, every class with their Earth Science teacher is engaging for their

teacher, according to them, is naturally humorous. Thus, making every class more engaging due

to jokes and humorous visual aids, and making lessons easily be remembered and understood.

That factor affected how thy scored higher in their posttest compared to their pretest hence

having a significant difference.

However, when posttests from the control and experimental groups are compared to see

whether humor truly has more positive effects and more beneficial than just a normal class, the

findings showed that there is no significant difference between the posttest scores of the control

and experimental group. Therefore, humor in teaching does not affect the memory and retention

of the Grade 11 STEM students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag. Hence, there is no significant

difference between the variables.

As support from the interview done, since their teacher used in this experiment is a

naturally humorous teacher, throwing jokes and using humor in class tends to be spontaneous for

her. With that factor, the teacher wasn’t able to apply the treatment only to experimental group,

but also in the control group, for majority in the control group shared that the teacher still utilized

appropriate instructional humor in their class.

92
Recommendations

93
 Based on the findings and conclusions from this study, the following recommendations

are formulated by the researchers.

To the Teachers

For the teachers of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag, to consider incorporating

different teaching strategies and techniques that would reinforce student learning and

memory retention. May they integrate humor in their discussions to help build a closer

relationship with their students and promote a positive learning environment.

To the Grade 11 STEM Students

For the students to discover new memorization and learning techniques that

would be most suitable for them. Moreover, utilize the knowledge from this research not

only in studies, but also in making a research in their future subjects or endeavors.

To the Administrators and Other Educational Institutions

For the administration to be meticulous in selecting future educators that will

contribute to the productiveness and development of the students. They can also

implement more seminars and training that will hone the teachers in becoming effective

instructors which will contribute to the growth of the students.

To the Future Researchers and Readers

For the future researchers who will support this study, the researchers recommend

having a larger sample size to make the study more reliable. Moreover, explore the

effects of humor in the memory and retention of younger respondents. Lastly, this

94
experiment was conducted during online distance learning; thus, the full participation of

the students during the experiment is not observed. The researchers recommend

conducting the study during face-to-face classes in order to compare the results of the

study or even blended with online distance learning. For the readers, to analyze and

ponder the information gathered in this study so that they can apply what has been

learned in their daily lives.

To the Researchers

Continue to discover and explore more. Every inch of hardwork in research

counts and will be beneficial to the whole world. Who knows, a research being conducted

by a group might be a catalyst of change in this world. Further expand the knowledge one

has and utilize it to produce meaningful research for the mutual benefit of everyone.

95
References

CHAPTER 1

Abaidoo, Nelly and Arkorful Valentina. (2015). The Role of E-learning, Advantages and

Disadvantages of its Adoption in Higher Education. International Journal of Instructional

Technology and Distance Learning.

https://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_15/Jan15.pdf#page=33. Accessed December 1, 2020.

Adnan, Muhammad and Anwar, Kainat. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic:

Students' perspectives. (2020). Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED606496.pdf. Accessed November 31, 2020.

Arooj, Mahwish, Javed, Kainat, Mukhtar, Khadijah & Sethi, Ahsan. (2020). Advantages,

Limitations and Recommendations for Online Learning During COVID-19 Pandemic

Era. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341461249_Advantages_Limitations_and_Rec

ommendations_for_online_learning_during_COVID-19_pandemic_era. Accessed

November 30, 2020.

Babu, Ravi. (2018). Importance of Communication in Present Society: Role and structure.

International Journal of Academic Research and Development.

http://www.academicjournal.in/download/1484/3-1-277-752.pdf. Accessed November

30, 2020.

Bolkan, San, Goodboy, Alan K. and Griffin Darrin J. (2018). Humor in the Classroom: The

Effects of Integrated Humor on Student Learning. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322253963_Humor_in_the_classroom_the_effe

cts_of_integrated_humor_on_student_learning. Accessed November 11, 2020.

96
Bolkan, San and Goodboy, Alan K. (2015). Exploratory Theoretical Tests of the Instructor

Humor–Student Learning Link. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273961291_Exploratory_Theoretical_Tests_of_

the_Instructor_Humor-Student_Learning_Link. Accessed November 11, 2020.

Briggs, Saga. (2015). “Intelligence & Humour: Are Smart People Funnier?” Open Colleges,

https://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/intelligence-humour-are-smart-

people-funnier/. Accessed November 27, 2020.

Cherry, Kendra. (2020). What is Memory?. Verywellmind.com.

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-memory-2795006. Retrieved November 11,

2020.

Cornett, Claudia E. et. al. (2015). Implications of Using Humor in the Classroom.

Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277934871_Implications_of_Using_Humor_in

_the_Classroom. Retrieved November 10, 2020.

Dotson, Elizabeth and Wortley, Amy. (2016). Stand Up Comics: Instructional Humor and

Student Engagement. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307526206_Stand_Up_Comics_Instructional_

Humor_and_Student_Engagement. Accessed November 16, 2020.

Dumbford, Amber D. and Miller, Angie L. (2018). Online Learning in Higher Education:

Exploring Advantages and Disadvantages for Engagement Link.Springer.com.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12528-018-9179-z. Accessed November 11,

2020.

97
Frymier, Ann B. et. al,. (2009). An Explanation of the Relationship between Instructor Humor

and Student Learning: Instructional Humor Processing Theory. Nca.tandfonline.com.

https://nca.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03634520903367238#.YBatxegzbIU.

Accessed November 11, 2020.

Gibson, Janet. (2016). “Getting serious about funny: Psychologists see humor as a character

strength”. https://theconversation.com/getting-serious-about-funny-psychologists-see-

humor-as-a-character-strength-61552. Accessed November 11, 2020.

Güleç, Selma and Leylek, Burcu Şentürk. (2018). Communication Skills of Classroom Teachers

According to Various Variables. Universal Journal of Educational Research.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1177819.pdf. Accessed November 27, 2020.

Hansen, Anders. (2019). Environment, Media and Communication. New York. Routledge.

Accessed November 27, 2020.

Healy, Ben. (2018). What Makes Something Funny.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/03/funny-how/550910/. Retrieved

November 11, 2020.

Hou, Yobou et. al,. (2016). Externalising the Autobiographical Self: Sharing Personal Memories

Online Facilitated Memory Retention. Researchgate.com.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306272247_Externalising_the_autobiographical

_self_sharing_personal_memories_online_facilitated_memory_retention. Accessed

November 10, 2020.

Karlin, Nancy J. and Machelv, Moshe. (2016). Understanding the Relationship Between

Different Types of Instructional Humor and Student Learning. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308794201_Understanding_the_Relationship_

98
 Between_Different_Types_of_Instructional_Humor_and_Student_Learning. Accessed

November 21, 2020.

Marcovic, Mirjana R. and Salamzadeh, Aidin. (2018). The Importance of Business Management.

Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328630849_The_Importance_of_Communicati

on_in_Business_Management. Accessed November 21, 2020.

McCabe, Crystal et. al. (2017). Laughter to Learning: How Humor can Build Relationships and

Increase Learning in the Online Classroom. Journal of Instructional Research.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1152964.pdf. Accessed November 21, 2020.

Meyer, John C. (2015). Understanding Humor through Communication: Why Be Funny,

Anyway?. Lanham, Maryland. Lexington Books. Accessed November 31, 2020.

Proekt, Julia. (2020). Humor as a Communication Strategy in Social Networking Services.

Academia.edu.

https://www.academia.edu/40390018/Humor_as_a_Communication_Strategy_in_Social_

Networking_Services. Accessed November 31, 2020.

Toquero, Cathy Mae. (2020). Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education amid the

COVID19 Pandemic: The Philippine Context.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1263557.pdf. Accessed November 31, 2020.

99
Zabidin, Nursyafiqah Binti. (2015). The Use of Humorous Texts in Improving ESL Learners’

Vocabulary Comprehension and Retention. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282514381_The_Use_of_Humourous_Texts_in_I

mproving_ESL_Learners'_Vocabulary_Comprehension_and_Retention. Accessed

November 2, 2020.

CHAPTER 2

Abdullajeed, Halleed, Kamal and Khalil. (2017). Using a Linguistic Theory of Humour in

Teaching English Grammar. Eric.ed.gov. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1126743. Accessed

November 31, 2020.

Al-Duleimi and Aziz, Rana Naji (2016). Humour as EFL Learning-Teaching Strategy. Journal of

Education and Practice. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1099483. Accessed November 21,

2020.

Amin, Hafeez Ullah and Malik, Aamir. (2017). Memory Retention and Recall Process.

Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299456892_Memory_Retention_and_Recall_Pr

ocess. Accessed November 21, 2020.

Atir, Stav. (2010). Memory for Information Paired with Humorous, Relevant Jokes. Yale.

University.

https://psychology.yale.edu/sites/default/files/stavatir_spring2010_seniorthesis.pdf.

Accessed November 21, 2020.

Betaubun, Martha, Fenanlampir, Casimirus Andy and Rokhmah, Desy Eva Laila .(2020). Am I

Allowed to Laugh? Students’ Perception Towards the Use of Humor in English Class.

100
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344851121_Am_I_Allowed_to_Laugh_Student

s'_Perception_Towards_the_Use_of_Humor_in_English_Class. Accessed November 21,

2020.

Bolkan, San, Goodboy, Alan K. and Griffin Darrin J. (2018). Humor in the Classroom: The

Effects of Integrated Humor on Student Learning. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322253963_Humor_in_the_classroom_the_effe

cts_of_integrated_humor_on_student_learning. Accessed November 11, 2020.

Brook , Frates, & Louie, (2016). The Laughter Prescription: A Tool for Lifestyle Medicine.

Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6125057/. Accessed

November 27, 2020.

Chabeli, M. (n.d.). Humor: a pedagogical tool to promote learning - PubMed (nih.gov). Accessed

November 28, 2020.

Crowder, James A. (2015). Big Data Concerns in Autonomous AI Systems. Sciencedirect.com.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128019672000148. Accessed

November 21, 2020.

Dicarlo, Stephen E. et. al. (2017). Humor, Laughter, Learning, and Health! A Brief Review.

Journals.Physiology.org. Accessed November 20, 2020.

Freitas, Tiffany Marie. (2018). Student Perceptions of Instructor Humor as a Predictor of Student

Intellectual Stimulation, Academic Interest and Engagement. University of the Pacific.

https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?

article=4116&context=uop_etds. Accessed November 20, 2020.

Frymier, Ann B. et. al,. (2010). An Explanation of the Relationship between Instructor Humor

and Student Learning: Instructional Humor Processing Theory. Researchgate.net.

101
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248940257_An_Explanation_of_the_Relations

hip_between_Instructor_Humor_and_Student_Learning_Instructional_Humor_Processin

g_Theory. Accessed November 11, 2020.

Harrison, William J. and Lodge, Jason M. (2019). The Role of Attention in Learning in the

Digital Age. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6430174/. Accessed November 21,

2020.

Henderson, Sarah (2015). “Laughter and Learning: Humor Boosts Retention” Edutopia.org.

https://www.edutopia.org/blog/laughter-learning-humor-boosts-retention-sarah-

henderson. Accessed November 19, 2020.

Informed Instructors (2018). Using Humorous Examples During Instruction Hampers Student

Learning. Informedinstructors.com https://informedinstructors.com/harm-of-humorous-

examples-during-instruction/. Accessed November 27, 2020.

Karlin, Nancy J. (2016). Understanding the Relationship Between Different Types of

Instructional Humor and Student Learning. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308794201_Understanding_the_Relationship_

Between_Different_Types_of_Instructional_Humor_and_Student_Learning. Accessed

November 31, 2020.

Kensinger, Elizabeth A., Madan, Christopher R., and Scott, Sarah M. (2019). Positive Emotion

Enhances Association-Memory. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6612425/. Accessed November 31,

2020.

102
Kim, Eun Joo et. al. (2015). Stress Effects on the Hippocampus: A Critical Review.

Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4561403/. Accessed

November 31, 2020.

Malamed, Connie. (2018). “Does Humor Enhance Learning?”. Theelearningcoach.com.

https://theelearningcoach.com/elearning_design/isd/humor-and-learning/. Accessed

November 31, 2020.

Mandal, Ananya. (2015). Dopamine Functions. News-meedical.net. https://www.news-

medical.net/health/Dopamine-Functions.aspx. Accessed November 31, 2020.

Maxwell, Bert. (2018). “Can Technology be a Distraction in Education?”.

Thewanderingeducators.com. https://www.wanderingeducators.com/best/stories/can-

technology-be-distraction-education. Accessed November 31, 2020.

McDermott, Kathleen B. and Roediger, Henry L. (2020). Memory (Encoding, Storage,

Retrieval). Nobaproject.com. https://nobaproject.com/modules/memory-encoding-

storage-retrieval. Accessed November 31, 2020.

McSpadden, Kevin. (2015). “You Now Have a Shorter Attention Span Than a Goldfish”.

Time.com https://time.com/3858309/attention-spans-goldfish/. Accessed November 31,

2020.

Morrison, Mary Kay. (2019). Hot Topic: Using Humor to Maximize Learning. Academia.edu.

https://www.academia.edu/8634321/Hot_Topic_Using_Humor_to_Maximize_Learning.

Accessed November 31, 2020.

Pearstone and Tulving .(1966). Retrieval. Courses.lumenlearning.com.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wmopen-psychology/chapter/reading-retrieval/.

Accessed November 31, 2020.

103
Pillado, Irene A., Futalan, Maria Chona Z. and Comighud Sheena Mae T. (2020). Factors on

Memory Retention: Effect to Students’ Academic Performance.

https://gnpublication.org/index.php/ms/article/view/1277. Accessed November 31, 2020.

Spear, Norman E. (2015). The Processing of Memories (PLE: Memory): Forgetting and

Retention. New York. Psychology Press. Accessed November 31, 2020.

The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning. (n.d). Technology and Student Distraction.

bok center.harvard.edu. https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/technology-and-student-distraction.

Accessed November 27, 2020.

The Human Memory .(2020). Long-Term Memory. Human-memory.net. https://human-

memory.net/long-term-memory/. Accessed November 27, 2020.

Tsukawaki, Ryota. (2019). Preliminary Verification of Instructional Humor Processing Theory:

Mediators Between Instructor Humor and Student Learning. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334998448_Preliminary_Verification_of_Instru

ctional_Humor_Processing_Theory_Mediators_Between_Instructor_Humor_and_Studen

t_Learning. Accessed November 31, 2020.

Vallar, G. (2017). Short-term Memory. Sciencedirect.com.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128093245031709#!. Accessed

November 27, 2020.

Vogel, Susanne and Schwabe Lars. (2016). Learning and Memory Under Stress: Implications

for the Classroom. Nature.com. https://www.nature.com/articles/npjscilearn201611.

Accessed November 27, 2020.

104
Weiten, Wayne. (2013). Psychology: Themes and Variations. Cengage Learning. Boston,

Massachusetts. https://books.google.com.ph/books?

id=ALkaCgAAQBAJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s. Accessed November 28, 2020.

Welkowitz, David S. (2013) "Privatizing Human Rights? Creating Intellectual Property Rights

From Human Rights Principles," Akron Law Review: Vol. 46 : Iss. 3 , Article 3.

Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol46/iss3/3. Accessed

December 1, 2020.

Yim, Jongeun. (2016). Therapeutic Benefits of Laughter in Mental Health: A Theoretical

Review. Researchgate.net.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305364789_Therapeutic_Benefits_of_Laughter

_in_Mental_Health_A_Theoretical_Review. Accessed November 21, 2020.

CHAPTER 3

Creswell J. (2017). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.

https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/research-design/book255675. Accessed April 15,

2021.

Sozpsychol K. (2017). How to Construct a Mixed Methods Research Design.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5602001/. Accessed April 15, 2021.

CHAPTER 4

105
Fitriah (2017). Appropriate and Inappropriate Uses of Humor by Teachers and the Effect of it in

Learning. https://scholar.google.com/citations?

user=5mFZQ5sAAAAJ&hl=en#d=gs_md_cita-d&u=%2Fcitations%3Fview_op

%3Dview_citation%26hl%3Den%26user%3D5mFZQ5sAAAAJ%26citation_for_view

%3D5mFZQ5sAAAAJ%3Au5HHmVD_uO8C%26tzom%3D-480. Accessed April 17,

2021.

Gonzales F. (2021). Keyword Method: Definition & Examples.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/keyword-method-definition-examples.html. Accessed

April 16, 2021.

Matthews, M. L. M. (2011). A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Hippocampus: The

Effects of Humor on Student Achievement and Memory Retention. Repository.

https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/56681/content/McCartney_asu_0010E_10676.pdf.

Accessed January 17, 2021.

Westgate, E. (2018). A Rocky Issue: The Effects of Humor on Learning and Interest in an

Educational Context. https://www.researchgate.net/deref/http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org

%2F10.31237%2Fosf.io%2Fc9rez. Accessed January 17, 2021.

Wierman M. (2021). 5 Brain-Based Learning Strategies to Boost Learning, Retention, and

Focus. https://blog.edmentum.com/5-brain-based-learning-strategies-boost-learning-

retention-and-focus. Accessed April 16, 2021.

106
 St. Mary’s College of Baliuag
Baliuag, Bulacan

ISO 9001:2015 Certified PAASCU Level III

Certificate No. 01 100 1534708
Accredited

APPENDIX A

November 10, 2020

To: Mrs. Ma. Clara R. Sepacio
IBEd Principal
Thru: Mr. Perfecto Austria
Senior High School Academic Coordinator

Dear Mrs. Sepacio:

Praised be Jesus and Mary!
In partial fulfillment of our requirements for our subject Practical Research 2, we, the Grade 12
students of St. Anne under Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) strand
would like to ask for permission to conduct a quantitative research study entitled “The Effects of
Humor in the Memory and Retention of the Grade 11 STEM Students of St. Mary’s
College of Baliuag.” Rest assured that the data we will gather from our respondents will remain
confidential. We intend to do the experiment on December 7, 2020.
Hoping for your favorable response regarding this matter.
Sincerely yours.
Jamaica Allyson F. Alleda
Denise Margarette T. Dimaapi
John Louis Nieto

Noted by:
Ms. Cherilyn Robles Mr. Perfecto Austria

107
 Research Adviser SHS Academic Coordinator
Approved by:
Mrs. Ma. Clara R. Sepacio
IBEd PrincipaL

St. Mary’s College of Baliuag

Baliuag, Bulacan

ISO 9001:2015 Certified PAASCU Level III

Certificate No. 01 100 1534708
Accredited

QUIZ QUESTIONS

We, the Grade 12 Students under STEM Strand from St. Mary’s College of Baliuag,

would like to conduct a research study entitled “The Effects of Humor in the Memory and

Retention of the Grade 11 STEM Students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag” as part of the

requirements in the Practical Research 2. In this regard, we would like to seek your participation

in answering this quiz.

We will be glad for your participation while remaining the confidentiality of the data that

will be gathered. Thank you and God bless!

1. What are cracks formed in the Earth’s crust because of tension or stress that overcomes

the strength capacity of rock?

2. Fault that is caused by tensional stress.

3. It is the change in shape, size and volume of rock subjected to stress.

4. Bent/deformed rock layer due to compressional stress.

5. “Arch – like” fold found in a rock formation.

6. It is where a continental plate meets an oceanic plate.

108
7. Process occurring beneath the earth’s surface.

8. It is also known as transform plate boundary.

9. What is the estimated inner core temperature?

10. What fault is seen in this picture?

11. What fault is seen in this picture?

12. What fault is seen in this picture?

13. What kind of stress does the picture represent?

109
14. What kind of stress does the picture represent?

15. What kind of stress does the picture represent?

110
 St. Mary’s College of Baliuag
Baliuag, Bulacan

ISO 9001:2015 Certified PAASCU Level III

Certificate No. 01 100 1534708
Accredited

Research Interview Questionnaire

We, the Grade 12 Students under STEM Strand from St. Mary’s College of Baliuag,

would like to conduct a research study entitled “The Effects of Humor in the Memory and

Retention of the Grade 11 STEM Students of St. Mary’s College of Baliuag” as part of the

requirements in the Practical Research 2, Research Capstone, and Inquiries, Investigations and

Immersion. In this regard, we would like to seek your participation in answering this quiz.

We will be glad for your participation while remaining the confidentiality of the data that

will be gathered. Thank you and God bless!

Name:

Gr. / Section:

1. Was the class discussion more engaging than the previous sessions with the teacher?

Were you able to better understand and remember the lesson? (Normal or just a usual

class).

111
2. Was the instructor able to utilize appropriate instructional humor (Note: Appropriate

Instructional Humor includes the following: (a) related humor strategies or behaviors

linked to course material, (b) unrelated humor strategies or behaviors not associated with

course material, (c) self-disparaging humor directed at oneself, and (d) unintentional

humor that was considered spontaneous or unplanned)

3. Were all the items in the pretest and posttest present in your discussion and were they

aligned with the discussion and module? Was the pretest hard?

112