MATHEMATICAL LITERACY AND REASONING SKILLS OF GRADE 10

LEARNERS IN SELECTED SECONDARY SCHOOLS OF CALAUAG EAST

AND WEST DISTRICTS, DIVISION OF QUEZON: INPUTS FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTEXTUALIZED
REMEDIATION LEARNING PACKAGE

PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION: A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL

Volume: 17
Issue 4
Pages: 407-416
Document ID: 2024PEMJ1573
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10691030
Manuscript Accepted: 01-31-2024
 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Mathematical Literacy and Reasoning Skills of Grade 10 Learners in Selected Secondary

Schools of Calauag East and West Districts, Division of Quezon: Inputs for the
Development of Contextualized Remediation Learning Package
Jermaine R. Noves,* Noel R. Palomares
For affiliations and correspondence, see the last page.
Abstract
This study was conducted to determined the level of mathematical literacy and reasoning skills of Grade 10 learners
in selected secondary schools in Calauag East and West Districts, Division of Quezon, in the school year 2023–2024.
This study employed a descriptive-evaluative research design. The researcher utilized validated researcher-made tests
to describe the level of learners' mathematical literacy level and reasoning skills, as well as the causes of errors when
solving mathematical literacy problems. This study further evaluates the relationship between mathematical literacy
and reasoning skills. The results of the study were analyzed and interpreted using descriptive and inferential statistics
such as frequency count, percentage, mean, standard deviation, and Pearson product moment correlation. Findings
revealed that the level of mathematical literacy and reasoning skills of Grade 10 learners was at a low proficiency
level and had very low reasoning abilities. It also disclosed that the least mastered competency was solving problems
involving polynomial functions. The study also showed that common causes of errors in solving mathematical
problems were errors in reading and understanding the questions that lead to error in writing the final answer correctly.
Based on the results of the study, it shows that there is a significant relationship between the level of mathematical
literacy and the level of reasoning skills of Grade 10 learners, with a positive moderate correlation. The study
suggested addressing and enhancing the identified least-mastered competency through a contextualized remediation
learning package.
Keywords: mathematical literacy, reasoning skills, mathematics

Introduction
Mathematics holds a prominent position in international large-scale assessment studies, such as SEA-PLM, TIMSS, and PISA, with
the Department of Education actively participating to evaluate the Enhanced Basic Education Program (Republic Act No. 10533, 2013).
Despite its inclusion in assessments, Filipino learners exhibit low mathematical literacy, evidenced by below-average scores in PISA
2018 (Golla & Reyes, 2020). Filipino students' performance, as showcased in PISA 2018, reveals a concerning gap compared to
international and regional averages, particularly in Region IV–A CALABARZON. Despite achieving higher-than-average scores,
CALABARZON students still fall at Proficiency Level 1, indicating underdeveloped thinking and reasoning skills (PISA, 2018).
Numerous studies highlight the difficulties students face in solving mathematical problems, ranging from word problems to Polya's
problem-solving stages (Mustapa et al., 2023; Darmiany, 2023). Factors influencing mathematical literacy include interest, self-
concept, and mathematical reasoning skills, the latter being crucial for problem-solving (Syawahid, 2019; Kharis et al., 2021).
The COVID-19 pandemic further exacerbated challenges in mastering Most Essential Learning Competencies (MELCs) in
mathematics, compromising basic concepts (DepEd, 2020; Gabriel et al., 2022). Teachers are tasked with addressing these gaps,
emphasizing the need to strengthen interconnected competencies, including reasoning skills.
As a mathematics teacher, the researcher experienced firsthand the impact of the pandemic on learners' mathematical performance
during modular distance learning. This shift limited opportunities for active participation and collaborative problem-solving, essential
for developing mathematical literacy and reasoning skills.
The study aims to explore the relationship between mathematical literacy and reasoning skills post-pandemic, considering the evolving
educational landscape. Recognizing the importance of context, the researcher intends to develop a contextualized remediation learning
package to enhance students' mathematical understanding and performance (Vida et al., 2021; Gabriel et al., 2022).
Research Questions
This study aimed to determine the mathematical literacy and reasoning skills of Grade 10 learners in selected secondary schools in
Calauag East and West Districts, Division of Quezon as inputs to the development of a contextualized remediation learning package.
The research specifically aimed to answer the following questions:
1.What is the level of mathematical literacy among Grade 10 learners in selected secondary schools in Calauag East and West
Districts in the following competencies:
1.1.solves problems involving sequences;

Noves & Palomares 407/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

1.2. solves problems involving polynomials and polynomial equations;

1.3. solves problems involving polynomial functions;
1.4. solves problems on circles;
1.5. solves problems involving permutations and combinations;
1.6. solves problems involving probability; and
1.7. solves problems involving measures of position?
2. Which of the following competencies under mathematical literacy are:
2.1.most mastered; and
2.2.least mastered by the grade 10 learners?
3. What is the level of reasoning skills among student respondents?
4. What are the causes of errors of Grade 10 learners in solving worded problems based on their reasoning skills?
5. Is there a significant relationship between the level of mathematical literacy and the level of reasoning skills among learners?
6. Based on the findings of the study, what contextualized remediation learning package can be proposed by the researcher to
improve the mathematical literacy and reasoning skills?

Methodology

Research Design
This study employed a descriptive–evaluative research design. Descriptive-evaluative research design aims to describe and evaluate a
particular phenomenon or situation. The study's main objective was to address a range of descriptive and evaluative questions
concerning the level of mathematical literacy and reasoning skills among Grade 10 learners in selected secondary schools in Calauag
East and West Districts. Research questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 focused on the descriptive element of the research, which aimed to outline
the present situation regarding learners' mathematical literacy level and reasoning skills, as well as the causes of errors when solving
worded problems. The study aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current status of mathematical literacy among
Grade 10 learners and identify areas that require improvement.
On the other hand, research question 5 focused on the evaluative part of the study, which aims to evaluate the relationship between
mathematical literacy and reasoning skills. This aspect of the research was geared towards analyzing the learning gap in mathematical
literacy and reasoning skills among Grade 10 learners, as well as recommending ways to address and enhance least mastered
competencies through the proposed contextualized learning package
Participants
The researcher used clustered-random sampling techniques to select three schools that will represent one school per school-size
category (large school, medium school, and small school). The respondents of the study were composed of 148 grade 10 learners from
selected secondary schools in Calauag East and West Districts, Calauag, Quezon during the school year 2022-2023 who are enrolled
in respective public secondary schools.
Table 1. Respondents of the Study
Name of Secondary School Respondents
1 Lamon Bay School of Fisheries – Annex 14
2 Bantulinao Integrated School 38
3 Sto. Domingo National High School 96
Total 148

Instruments
The researcher utilized constructed test items based on the Most Essential Learning Competencies and likewise to measure the learners’
reasoning skills. The researcher-made questionnaire was divided into two parts. Part I is a 20-item multiple choice type of test about
problem-solving involving sequence, polynomials and polynomial equations, polynomial functions, circles, permutations and
combinations, probability, and measures of positions. In this part, the researcher determined the level of proficiency of learners’
mathematical literacy and the most and least mastered mathematical competencies of grade 10. Part II consists of ten problem-solving
items where students answered with complete solutions. Looking at the student's solutions for the problems, the level of reasoning
skills was measured. The researcher-made questionnaire was tested for validity and reliability. It was subjected to review and content
validation before administration.
Procedure
The study utilized a researcher-made test as the research instrument, which underwent content validation, reliability testing, and

Noves & Palomares 408/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

approval by experts following suggestions from pre-oral defense evaluators. Prior to conduct of this study, approval and consent were
secured from the proper authorities. The research instrument was administered to Grade 10 learners, ensuring that ethical considerations
and informed consent procedures were followed. The researcher-made 20-item test measured the level of mathematical literacy of the
respondents and identified the least learned competencies using a scale adapted from CID form 10 of DepEd. While the other ten items
focused on the respondents’ detailed solution for the given problem, the level of reasoning skills was measured through a scoring rubric.
In addition to that, data for causes of errors were gathered.

Results and Discussion

This section covers the findings from the analysis and interpretation of the information gathered regarding the level of mathematical
literacy and reasoning skills of Grade 10 learners. The data tabulation results are presented according to the specific questions posed
in the problem statements.
Part I. The Level of Mathematical Literacy of Grade 10 Learners
Table 2. Mathematical Literacy Test in Seven (7) Learning Competencies in Mathematics 10
Percentage of Descriptive Descriptive
Learning Competencies
Correct Responses Interpretation* Interpretation**
Solves problems involving
48 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
sequences
Solves problems involving
polynomials and polynomial 44 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
equations
Solves problems involving
22 Not Proficient Least Mastered
polynomial functions
Solves problems on circles 35 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
Solves problems involving
27 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
permutations and combinations
Solves problems involving
31 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
probability
Solves problems involving
26 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
measures of position
Mean 33.3 Low Proficient Nearly Mastered
SD 8.94
Legend: *Based on CID Form 10 90-100% Highly Proficient (HP) 75-89% Proficient (P) 50-74% Nearly Proficient (NP) 25-49% Low Proficient (LP) 0-24% Not
Proficient (NOP) ** DepEd Curriculum and Learning Management Division – Learning Assurance for Monitoring and Progress (CLMD-LAMP) 75.0049-100 Highly
Mastered (M) 50.0049-75 Mastered (HM) 25.0049-50 Nearly Mastered (NM) 0-25 Least Mastered (LM)

Based on the DepEd CID – Measurement and Evaluation Form 10, table 2 reveals the level of mathematical literacy of Grade 10
learners with a mean of 33.3, classified as Low Proficient, and with standard deviation of 8.94. The mean indicates that students have
limited level of mastery of learning competencies in mathematics and they may require significant support to develop their proficiency
in mathematical literacy. The standard deviation of 8.94 underscores the variability in individual scores, highlighting diverse levels of
proficiency among learners. Some may be performing slightly better, while others may be facing more significant challenges,
reinforcing the need for tailored interventions.
In other competencies, students were classified as low proficient in solving problems under mathematical literacy. This finding was
similar to the results of PISA 2018 and PISA 2022 on the mathematical literacy test, wherein Filipino students fell at proficiency level
1. At this level, students can extract relevant information from a single source and make use of a single representational mode. Also,
students at this level can employ basic algorithms, formulae, procedures, or conventions to solve problems involving whole numbers,
and they can make literal interpretations of the results (PISA, 2018). This means that students are far from having high mathematical
literacy that falls at Proficiency Level 5 or 6.
As seen in table 2, there is an absence of students in the proficient and highly proficient categories in the study's results. This suggests
that a significant proportion of Grade 10 learners did not achieve a level of mastery or proficiency in any of the seven learning
competencies assessed. This raises concerns about the overall preparedness of students in handling mathematical problems that require
a higher degree of understanding and application. Students' proficiency in mathematical literacy can be greatly impacted by the K-12
mathematics curriculum's insufficient integration of real-world settings. As shown in the study of Golla and Reyes (2020), the K to 12
Mathematics Curriculum does not show clear evidence of how contexts are embedded in content knowledge and mathematical
processes. In line with the implications of the results of the study, students found it difficult to see the practical significance of what
they were learning if the curriculum did not effectively incorporate contextual learning experiences.

Noves & Palomares 409/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Based on the DepEd CLMD-LAMP, the seven competencies that were evaluated, the most mastered competency was “solving
problems involving sequence” with 48% of the students obtained it correctly. Although students have a relatively better understanding
of this mathematical concept compared to other competencies, it is still not mastered. On the other hand, students performed poorly in
the polynomial functions, with just 22% of the questions answered correctly, which is considered as least mastered competency. With
this least mastered competency, it indicates remediation as instructional assistance based on DepEd CLMD-LAMP. As an output of
this study, the developed contextualized remediation learning package will address this least mastered competency. As evident in the
study of Buan et al. (2021), students perceived contextualized lessons as relevant and comprehensive. This further provides evidence
that by using contextualized problem-solving increases motivation so as the student’s problem-solving ability. The researchers
recommend that mathematics teachers may contextualize learning to improve academic performance in math classrooms.
Part II. Reasoning Skills of Grade 10 Learners
Table 3. Level of Reasoning Skills of Grade 10 Learners
Level of Reasoning Skills F %
Very High 0 0
High 5 3.38
Medium 16 10.81
Low 32 21.62
Very Low 95 64.19
Total 148 100.00
Legend: 80-100 Very High 60-79 High 40-59 Medium 20-39 Low 0-19 Very Low

The data shown in the table indicates that a considerable proportion of grade 10 students, 64.19%, display very low reasoning abilities.
This result points to an important hindrance in the learners’ development of their reasoning skills. The large number of students falling
into the very low category indicates that most of them are having serious difficulties with logical reasoning and critical thinking.
Furthermore, the data shows that 21.62% of the students have low reasoning abilities, highlighting a concerning pattern of inadequate
critical thinking. Additionally, 10.81% of students fall into the medium category, showing a tiny percentage of students with somewhat
improved reasoning abilities but still below the anticipated proficiency level. A small percentage (3.38%) of grade 10 learners have
"High" reasoning skills. This implies that there are some learners who demonstrate above-average reasoning abilities but not at an
exceptionally high level.
Most importantly, the absence of learners falling into the Very High category indicates that there is an insufficient number of students
with advanced reasoning abilities. The deficiency of advanced reasoning abilities among Grade 10 learners is concerning as it indicates
a substantial void in the instruction of critical thinking skills. But this might be due to the effect of the pandemic on the educational
system, in which there is no mastery of the lesson because of the limited access to resources, disruption of classes, and lack of interaction
between teachers and students. Thus, the pandemic harms the development of mathematical literacy among learners (Fitzgerald et al.,
2023).
Part III. Causes of Errors in Solving Worded Problems
Table 4. Causes of Errors in Solving Worded Problems
Question no.
Causes of Errors Scale Ave %
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 53 109 109 110 106 106 129 111 122 104 105.9 71.55
1 20 29 27 27 26 21 16 33 24 32 25.5 17.23
Reading question
2 17 8 12 10 12 21 3 3 2 10 9.8 6.62
3 58 2 0 4 4 0 0 1 0 2 7.1 4.80
0 55 110 111 110 108 109 130 114 127 120 109.4 73.92
1 19 34 37 33 32 38 17 31 20 23 28.4 19.19
Understanding the question
2 24 4 0 1 4 1 1 3 1 4 4.3 2.91
3 50 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 1 5.9 3.99
0 59 115 113 115 116 120 130 120 131 121 114 77.03
1 36 32 35 29 28 27 18 28 17 24 27.4 18.51
Transforming the work process
2 20 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 3 2.9 1.96
3 33 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3.7 2.50
0 61 115 113 120 116 125 130 124 132 121 115.7 78.18
1 40 33 35 28 30 23 18 24 16 27 27.4 18.51
Process
2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.61
3 38 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 2.70
Writing the final answer 0 66 119 118 125 121 132 135 131 138 128 121.3 81.96

Noves & Palomares 410/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

1 36 29 30 23 25 16 13 17 10 19 21.8 14.73
2 24 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 1.69
3 22 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2.4 1.62
Legend: Error in Reading question 0 - No answer. 1 - Wrong in determining information and mathematical symbols 2 - Identify information and precise mathematical
symbols 3 - Identify information and mathematical symbols completely Error in Understanding the question 0 - No answer. 1 - Wrong in determining what is known and
asked question 2 - Write down what is known and not by what is asked in the question 3 - Write down what is known and asked in the question Error in transforming
the work process 0 - No answer. 1 - Wrong in determining mathematical model/diagram 2 - Write down mathematical model/ diagram but not complete 3 - Write dow
the mathematical model/diagram correctly Error in Process 0 - No answer. 1 - Using a particular procedure is wrong and the answer is wrong. 2 - Using a particular
procedure is right but the answer is wrong. 3 - Using a particular procedure is right and the answer is right. Error in writing the final answer 0 - No answer. 1 – The
conclusion given is wrong. 2 - The conclusion given is less precise. 3 - The conclusion is rendered right.

As shown in the table, the majority of errors in reading the question (71.55% of 148 respondents or average 105.9) falls under the score
of zero means there is no answer. This indicates that a substantial proportion of learners did not attempt or provide any answer in
determining mathematical information and mathematical symbols given in the worded problems. Among the learners, 17.23% or 25.5
learners got a score of 1 in reading the question. This means that, while some learners provided answers, they often made mistakes in
determining information and mathematical symbols when reading the question. The average in obtaining a score of 2 is 9.8 or 6.62%,
indicating that a smaller proportion of respondents were able to identify information and precise mathematical symbols correctly when
reading the question. Learners who got a score of 3 in reading question is 4.8%. This suggests that very few learners were able to
completely identify information and mathematical symbols correctly when reading the question.
When it comes to errors in understanding the question, 73.92% of the learners obtained a score of 0. This means that they have no
answer. This indicates that they have struggled with comprehending the question or fail to attempt a response. While 19.19% of the
learners have misinterpreted what is known and misunderstood the question requirements. With 2.91% of the learners having identified
what is known, there might be discrepancies in aligning it with the question. A relatively low percentage (3.99%) of errors are in this
scale. Lastly in understanding the question, there is a relatively low percentage (3.99% of the respondents) who wrote down what is
known and asked in the question correctly.
In transforming the work process, 77.03% of respondents obtained a score of 0, wherein they have no answer. This indicates that
learners may struggle with initiating the problem-solving process or fail to complete it. For a score of 1, 18.51% of the learners struggled
in selecting the appropriate mathematical model or diagram for a given problem. Three or 1.96% got a score of 2, this indicates that
they attempted to construct a mathematical model or diagram, but it may be incomplete or not fully accurate. Only 2.50% of the learners
obtained a score of 3 which means that they constructed a model or diagram correctly to answer the problem.
In terms of the process, 78.18% of the learners fall in getting a score of 0. They may struggle to initiate or complete the problem-
solving process, leading to a lack of response. Among the learners, 18.51% obtained a score of 1, wherein they used incorrect
procedures, resulting in inaccurate solutions. Only 0.61% of the learners got a score of 2, wherein they used correct procedures, but
errors occur in the final calculation. Having 2.70% of the learners got a score of 3. This means that these students applied correct
procedures and got the correct answers.
In writing the final answer, 81.96% of the learners did not write conclusions. This may indicate that they may face challenges in
interpreting their final answer. A score of 1 was obtained by 14.71% of the students, indicating that their final answers contained
incorrect conclusions. A score of 2 was earned by 1.69% of the students, indicating that their findings were less exact. Only 1.62% of
students came to the right conclusions.
As cited by Rohmah and Sutiarso (2018), Abdullah (2015) stated that two reasons make the students unable to produce correct answers,
that is, problems in the fluency of languages and understanding concepts and problems, and process skill of mathematics. These factors
affect the reasoning skills of the learners. They cannot reason properly if they cannot understand the problem.
These findings reveal an established issue among students, emphasizing the necessity for comprehensive improvement initiatives. The
recurrence of errors in reading and understanding questions indicates a potential gap in language comprehension or problem statement
interpretation skills. Gomez et al. (2020) stated that since math includes much more than just manipulating numbers, it is time for the
educational system to recognize how important it is to incorporate reading skills into math classes to reduce the problems that develop
when students perform poorly in the subject. In addition to that, Fuchs et al. (2015) explained that problem-solving is distinct from
other types of mathematical competency since it calls for students to understand a text that describes a problem scenario and determine
the number sentence that best describes it. Furthermore, failures in the process and transformation processes highlight the importance
of focused teaching methods that emphasize both theoretical understanding and practical problem-solving skills.
Contextualized learning packages have shown significant benefits in solving math problems. These packages enhance students'
problem-solving abilities by providing a connection between mathematical concepts and real-world situations (Yibin et al., 2022).
According to Yerizon et al. (2019), teachers who implement contextualized problem-solving approaches in their classrooms have
reported positive changes in their teaching practices, including longer-term planning sequences and improved management of
uncertainty. With this, the researcher believed that contextualized learning packages will offer a valuable framework for teaching and

Noves & Palomares 411/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

learning math problem-solving, promoting deeper understanding and application of mathematical concepts in real-life contexts.
Part IV. Relationship between the Level of Mathematical Literacy and Level of Reasoning Skills
Table 5. Correlations between the Level of Mathematical Literacy and Level of Reasoning Skills
Correlation
Variables Mean SD Interpretation p-value Interpretation Decision
coefficient (r)
Mathematical
6.63 2.42 Positive
Literacy
.406** moderately .0001 Significant Reject Ho
Reasoning
18.66 15.86 high
Skills
Note: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 5 shows the correlations between the level of mathematical literacy and reasoning skills. The mean (M) and standard deviation
(SD) for mathematical literacy are 6.63 and 2.42, respectively. For reasoning skills, the mean is 18.66 and the standard deviation is
15.86. It was revealed that the relationship between mathematical literacy and reasoning skills is statistically significant (p=.0001). The
existence of significant relationship tells us that the two variables are associated.
The correlation coefficient between mathematical literacy and reasoning skills is 0.406, indicating a moderate positive correlation
between the two variables. Moreover, this correlation is statistically significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), suggesting a strong
likelihood that the relationship observed is not due to random chance.
In sophisticated terms, the data suggests that individuals with higher levels of mathematical literacy tend to have better reasoning skills,
and vice versa. The positive correlation coefficient of 0.406 indicates that as mathematical literacy increases, reasoning skills also tend
to increase. A study conducted by PISA in 2018 found that students who performed well on the mathematical assessment were more
likely to demonstrate high levels of mathematical reasoning (OECD, 2018). This indicates that to be mathematically literate, students
must also be able to communicate their mathematical ideas clearly and effectively through different mathematical symbols and models.
Thus, this requires strong reasoning skills, as well as the ability to organize and present mathematical information logically.
Part V. Contextualized Remediation Learning Package
The results presented in the previous parts serve as inputs to the contextualized remediation learning package. Learning package is also
known by many different names. It is sometimes called a Learning Activity Pack (LAP), a Modularized Instructional Packet (MIP), a
Self-Learning Activity Package (SLAP). This learning package is designed as a self-contained package made for students to attain
specific objectives (Krulik, 1974).
The developed contextualized remediation learning package as an output of this study is intended to develop the least-mastered
competencies specifically for solving problems involving polynomial functions. This learning package is aligned with the I-D-E-A
instructional process utilized by DepEd CALABARZON in its prime project known as PIVOT 4A BOW. The I-D-E-A instructional
process follows four phases, which include the following: introduction for the I phase, development for the D phase, engagement for
the E phase, and assimilation for the A phase.
The objectives of this contextualized remediation learning package are (1) to improve the mastery level of solving problems involving
polynomial functions, (2) to enhance the performance of grade 10 learners, and (3) to increase the mathematical literacy and reasoning
skills of grade 10 students.
Conclusion
The following conclusions are drawn based on the study's findings:
The level of mathematical literacy among learners across various competencies was identified as low proficiency. Among the
competencies assessed, solving problems involving sequences was identified as the most mastered competency. On the other hand,
solving problems involving polynomial functions emerged as the least mastered competency, indicating a critical area that requires
focused attention and improvement. In terms of level of reasoning skills, Grade 10 learners are very low. The identified causes of errors
in solving worded problems were multifaceted, encompassing challenges in reading and understanding questions, difficulties in
transforming the work process, errors in the computational process, and inaccuracies in writing the final answer.
This study concludes that there is a significant relationship between the level of mathematical literacy and reasoning skills among the
Grade 10 learners, as indicated by the positive moderately high correlation coefficient. With this, the research hypothesis is rejected.
This implies that improvements in mathematical literacy are associated with enhancements in reasoning skills among learners. Hence,
the developed contextualized remediation learning package is recommended on addressing the least mastered competency but also
offers a strategic pathway for targeted improvement in mathematical literacy and reasoning skills among Grade 10 learners.

Noves & Palomares 412/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations are hereby presented: (1) Considering that the
study revealed that Grade 10 learners in selected secondary schools in Calauag East and West Districts exhibit a low proficiency, it is
recommended that the learners actively engage in targeted practice for competencies with low proficiency levels, with a particular
emphasis on mastering the skill of solving problems involving polynomial functions. (2) The study also identifies a significant gap in
reasoning skills among Grade 10 students, assessed as very low. Additionally, errors in reading and understanding questions,
transforming the work process, and computational processes contribute substantially to inaccuracies in mathematical literacy problem-
solving. Teachers are encouraged to implement teaching strategies that specifically address the least mastered competency that is
solving problems involving polynomial functions. Workshops or professional development sessions should be organized to aid
educators in refining their instructional methods, with a focus on practical applications to enhance students' comprehension and
problem-solving skills. (3) The correlation analysis reveals a moderate positive relationship between the level of mathematical literacy
and reasoning skills, indicating their interdependence. This emphasizes the importance of simultaneously addressing both skill sets for
comprehensive academic development. School administrators are recommended to allocate resources for materials and tools that
facilitate interactive and engaging learning experiences. Furthermore, organizing workshops or professional development sessions for
teachers to enhance their instructional methods, ensuring alignment with the specific needs identified in this study, is crucial for
fostering an environment conducive to improved mathematical literacy and reasoning.(4)The study proposes a contextualized
remediation learning package targeting the least mastered competency in mathematics. Aligned with the I-D-E-A instructional process,
future researchers are recommended to explore the adaptability of the package across diverse educational settings and to test its
effectiveness in improving the mathematical literacy and reasoning skills.
References

Alcantara, K. M. & Ecleo, M. P. (2019). Mastery level of grade 10 mathematics learning competencies in public schools. Asian Journal
of Science and Technology, 10(4), 9483-9487.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of
educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,
14(2), 243-248. doi: 10.3758/BF03194059
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education,
59(5), 389–407. doi: 10.1177/0022487108324554
Bieda, K. N., Ji, X., & Drwencke, J. (2014). Examining relationships among mathematical reasoning, strategic competence, and
algebraic knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(4), 422-452.
Bjuland, R. (2007). Mathematical reasoning in school mathematics: What is it and why is it important? Acta Didactica Norge, 1(1), 1-
16.
Bjuland, R. (2007). The assessment of mathematical reasoning: A framework for the development of tasks. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 66(2), 157-177. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9056-9
Buan, A. T., Ali, A. Z. & Gomez, R. (2021) J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1835 012100. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012100
Carla, Júnia, Rodrigues, da, Silva. (2023). School mathematics curriculum reforms: Insights and reflections. New ICMI studies series,
523-535. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-13548-4_34
Cayabo, M. C., Tandoc, L. L., & Garcia, E. J. (2020). Developing mathematical reasoning skills of grade 10 students in the Philippines
through a mathematical reasoning program. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 8(1), 74-82.
Chua, C. P. (2015). Teaching mathematics in the Philippines: trends, issues, and challenges. In Proceedings of the 3rd International
Conference on Quantitative Sciences and Its Applications (ICOQSIA 2015), Langkawi, Malaysia, 10-12 August 2015 (pp. 396-402).
Available at https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4937559
Cramer, K. M., & Post, T. R. (2016). Mathematical literacy and analytical reasoning: Relationships with secondary and postsecondary
outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000062
Department of Education. (2013). 2013 National Achievement Test (NAT) Results. Retrieved from https://netrc.emb.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2016/01/NAT-2013-Results.pdf
Department of Education. (2020). National Achievement Test (NAT). Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/programs-and-
projects/assessment-and-examination/national-achievement-test-nat/
Department of Education. (2020). PEPT Online. Retrieved from https://pept.bea.gov.ph/pept-online/

Noves & Palomares 413/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Department of Education. (2020a). DepEd Order No. 12, s. 2020: Adoption of the basic education learning continuity plan for school
year 2020-2021 in light of the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Department of Education. (2020b). DepEd Order No. 13, s. 2020: Additional implementation guidelines on the use of the MELCs in
the K to 12 curriculum for SY 2020-2021.
DepEd Philippines. (2017). K to 12 curriculum guide: Mathematics. Retrieved from https:// www.deped.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2017/10/Mathematics-CG.pdf
DepEd. (2013). K to 12 curriculum guide: Mathematics (Grade 1 to Grade 10). Department of Education.
DepEd. (2019). Guidelines on the conduct of the 2019 DepEd National Achievement Test (NAT) [DepEd Memorandum No. 34, s.
2019]. Department of Education.
DepEd. (2020). K to 12 basic education program learner’s materials for Grade 10 mathematics. Manila: Department of Education.
Department of Education. (2021). 2019-2020 National Achievement Test (NAT) Results. Retrieved from
https://www.deped.gov.ph/wpcontent/uploads/2021/03/DM_s2021_008.pdf
Elpedes, C. R. D., & Oruga, D. L. C. (2019). Promoting mathematical reasoning of Grade 10 students using problem-based learning
approach. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 3(1), 26-36.
Erdem, E., & Soylu, Y. (2017). The relationship between mathematical reasoning and achievement in mathematics: A meta-analysis
study. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 3(4), 297-312.
Fitzgerald, S. L., Fitzgerald, C., & Mandru, C. (2023). Effects of the pandemic on mathematics and reading achievement. In E. Soare,
& C. Langa (Eds.), Education Facing Contemporary World Issues - EDU WORLD 2022, vol 5. European Proceedings of Educational
Sciences (pp. 922-932). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epes.23045.92
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Powell, S. R., Seethaler, P. M., Capizzi, A. M., & Schatschneider, C. (2008). The cognitive
correlates of third-grade skill in arithmetic, algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100(1), 115–128. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.115
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2017). Mathematical problem-solving profiles of students with mathematics difficulties with and without
comorbid reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(3), 305-319.
Gabriel, Belen C.; Nepomuceno, Julios D.; Kadusale, Mary Hope; Taneo, Jingoy D. & Cabello, Cyril A. (2022). The compromised
most essential learning competencies: A qualitative inquiry. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal 5 (1):1-10.
Golla, E. F., & Reyes, A. G. (2020). PISA Mathematics Literacy Framework vis-à-vis the Philippine Kto12 Mathematics Curriculum.
Challenges of PISA: The PNU report, 57.
Gorgonio, N. J. (2014). Mathematics learning competencies: Their nature, scope, and assessment. Journal of Education and Practice,
5(6), 159-165.
Kelly, R., & Ramful, A. (2019). Development and validation of an assessment tool for mathematical reasoning. International Journal
of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(5), 638-656. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2018.1546191
Kersey, A. J., Mautone, J. A., Frazier, S. L., & Power, T. J. (2017). Relations among mathematics and literacy performance and
executive functioning in middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(4), 500-512.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000156
Kharis, S. A. A., Salsabila, E., & Haeruman, L. D. (2021, February). Effect of mathematical concept understanding and mathematical
reasoning on mathematical literacy Abilities. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1747, No. 1, p. 012042). IOP Publishing.
Kosko, K. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2019). Mathematical literacy, reasoning, and achievement in high school students: Examining the
relationship. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(1), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9851-2
Kustijono, R., & Murni, A. (2016). Assessing mathematics learning competencies in Indonesia: A proposed framework. International
Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 5(4), 293-298.
Lavadia, M. (2007). Mathematics Education in the Philippines: Historical Overview, Current Status, and Prospects. Mathematics
Education Research Journal, 19(2), 5-20.
Liporada, L. N., & Quimbo, M. A. (2017). Factors affecting mathematical reasoning ability of Filipino college students. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 892(1), 012059. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/892/1/012059

Noves & Palomares 414/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Lubienski, S. T., & Bowen, N. K. (2006). Why do so many students think they hate math? Constructivist pedagogy and the social
context of learning mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 29-38.
Morris, A. K. (2002). What does mathematical reasoning mean? Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 2(2), 183-
194.
Mustapa, Al, Qadar., M., Lutfi, Firdaus. (2023). Analysis of the difficulties of class VIII students of private middle school PAB 1
Klumpang in solving story problems arithmetic sequences and series. Journal of research, doi: 10.56495/ejr.v2i1.288
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). National assessment of educational progress (NAEP). Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. reston, VA:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel.
U.S. Department of Education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-report.pdf
National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The
National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13398
National Research Council. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. The National Academies Press.
Nisperos, J. F., & Bernardo, A. B. I. (2018). Developing reasoning skills: Factors associated with performance of Filipino college
students in mathematical problem solving. Asia Pacific Education Review, 19(4), 583-593. doi: 10.1007/s12564-018-9559-9
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematics, financial literacy and collaborative
problem solving. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education. OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-ehn
OECD (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where all students can succeed. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume III): What school life means for students’ lives. PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris.
https://doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): what students know and
can do. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2018-results-volume-i_2bfc1d47-en
Pacete, L. A., Lapuz, R. B., & Nisperos, L. A. (2016). Mathematical reasoning skills of Grade 7 students in the Philippines. Asia Pacific
Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(4), 72-80.
Penaflorida, R. A., & Tapang, G. A. (2019). Factors affecting mathematical reasoning ability of Filipino high school students. Journal
of Physics: Conference Series, 1344(1), 012050. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1344/1/012050
PISA. (2015). Excellence through equity: Giving every student the chance to succeed (Volume II). OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264249574-en
PISA. (2018). PISA 2018 Assessment and analytical framework: mathematics, reading, science, and financial literacy. OECD
Publishing https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
Rohmah, M., & Sutiarso, S. (2018). Analysis problem solving in mathematical using theory Newman. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,
Science and Technology Education, 14(2), 671-681.
Stacey, K., & MacGregor, M. (1997). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in
mathematics. In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics
Education, vol. 4, 81-88.
Stacey, K., & Turner, R. (2015). The evolution and key concepts of the PISA mathematics frameworks. In K. Stacey & R. Turner
(Eds.), Assessing mathematical literacy (pp. 5-33). Springer international Publishing.
Stylianides, G. J., & Stylianides, A. J. (2013). Teachers' learning and development of mathematical knowledge for teaching reasoning:
Results from a professional development program. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16(3), 235-255. doi: 10.1007/s10857-
012-9237-x
Suciati, Munadi, S., Sugiman, & Febriyanti, R. W. D. (2020). Design and validation of mathematical literacy instruments for assessment

Noves & Palomares 415/416

 Psych Educ, 2024, 17(4): 407-416, Document ID:2024PEMJ1573, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10691030, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

for learning in Indonesia. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 865 - 875. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.865
Suryadi, D., & Ramlan, M. (2019). Mathematics learning competencies for 21st-century learners. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 1318(1), 012010.
Syawahid, M. (2019). Mathematical literacy in algebra reasoning. International Journal of Insight for Mathematics Teaching, 2(1), 33-
46.
Tan, R. (2016). Mathematical reasoning skills of Grade 10 students in the Philippines. Journal of Educational and Social Research,
6(2), 37-44.
U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. https://www.ed.gov/stem
Vida, Manfreda, Kolar., Tatjana, Hodnik. (2021). Mathematical literacy from the perspective of solving contextual problems. European
journal of educational research, 10(1):467-483. doi: 10.12973/EU-JER.10.1.467
Vukovic, R. K., Kieffer, M. J., Bailey, S. P., & Harari, R. R. (2013). Mathematics anxiety in young children: Concurrent and
Longitudinal associations with mathematical performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(1), 1-10.
https://doi.org/10..1016/j.cedpsych.2012.09.001
Yerizon, Yerizon., Yuni, Ahda., Dina, Amsari. (2019). The influence of contextual approach to students’ problem solving Ability of
class ix of smp negeri 1 bayang. doi: 10.37134/EJSMT.VOL6.2.1.2019
Yibin, Shen., Qianying, Liu., Zhuoyuan, Mao., Kevin, Cheng., Sadao, Kurohashi. (2022). Textual Enhanced Contrastive Learning for
Solving Math Word Problems. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2211.16022
Affiliations and Corresponding Information
Jermaine R. Noves
Bantulinao Integrated School
Department of Education – Philippines
Noel R. Palomares
Marinduque State College – Philippines

Noves & Palomares 416/416