THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SPIRAL PROGRESSION APPROACH IN TEACHING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS IN ZAMBALES, PHILIPPINES
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In the School Year 2012-2013, K to 12 curriculum was implemented in the Philippines with the Spiral Progression Approach as the new approach in teaching. This feature of K to 12 exposes the learners to a wide variety of concepts that are allotted the same amount of time whether they are easy or difficult to master which proved to be a real challenge for many educators, especially the Science and Mathematics teachers. Various studies on the effect of Spiral curriculum in Science were conducted but only few studies were done to check whether it is effective in Mathematics curriculum. Hence, this study examined its Effectiveness in Teaching Junior High School Mathematics in Zambales, Philippines where a descriptive research method with the survey questionnaire as the research instrument was used. 570 student-respondents were selected through the quota sampling technique. The academic performance of students was correlated to the Effectiveness of Spiral Progression Approach. Findings revealed that student–respondents’ academic performance was rated satisfactory. The spiral progression approach was perceived by the students as effective. A highly significant relationship and moderately significant relationship exist between the effectiveness of spiral progression approach and academic performance in mathematics among 7th and 10th grade students and among 8th and 9th grade students respectively. Recommendations are made for the curriculum developers to look on the ways in improving the academic performance of the students through the Spiral Progression Approach since it has been proven in the study that a relationship between the two exists.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The owner of the article does not copy or violate any of its copyright. If any copyright infringement occurs or prosecution, in any case, the Editorial Board is not involved in all the rights to the owner of the article to be performed.
References
Abedi, J. (2008). Measuring students’ level of English proficiency: Educational significance and assessment requirements. Educational Assessment, 13(2–3), 193–214.
Agodini, R., Harris, B., Atkins-Burnett, S., Heaviside, S., & Novak, T. (2010). Achievement effects of four early elementary school math curricula: Findings for first and second graders (NCEE 2011-4001). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
Alegre, F., Moliner, L., Maroto, A., & Lorenzo-Valentin, G. (2020). Academic achievement and peer tutoring in mathematics: A comparison between primary and secondary education. SAGE Open, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020929295
Ankomah, Y. A. (2002). The success story of private basic schools in Ghana: the case of three schools in Cape Coast. Journal of Educational Management, 4, 1-14.
Batidor, P. G., & Casinillo, L. F. (2021). Evaluating spiral progression approach (SPA) in teaching science and mathematics for junior high curriculum. Philippine Social Science Journal, 4(3), 39-47. https://doi.org/10.52006/main.v4i3.362
Bhatt, R., & Koedel, C. (2012). Large-scale evaluations of curricular effectiveness: The case of elementary mathematics in Indiana. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 391–412. https://doi.org/10.3102/016237371244004
Cabansag, M. (2014). Impact statements on the K-12 science program in the enhanced basic education curriculum in provincial schools. Researchers World - International Refereed Social Sciences Journal, 5(2), 29–40.
Chingos, M. M., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2012). Choosing blindly: Instructional materials, teacher effectiveness and the common core. Washington, DC: Policy report, Brown Center on Education Policy.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2015). The aftermath of accelerating algebra: Evidence from district policy initiatives. Journal of Human Resources, 50(1), 159-188.
Cortes, K., Goodman, J., & Nomi, T. (2015). Intensive math instruction and educational attainment: Long-run impacts of double-dose algebra. Journal of Human Resources, 50(1), 108–158.
DepEd. (2012). DO 31, S 2012. Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of Grades 1 to 10 of the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC).
DepEd News (2020). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study 2019.
Domina, T., McEachin, A., Penner, A., Penner, E. (2015). Aiming high and falling short: California’s eighth-grade algebra-for-all effort. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(3), 275–295.
Dougherty, S. M., Goodman, J. S., Hill, D. V., Litke, E. G., & Page, L. C. (2015). Middle school math acceleration and equitable access to eighth-grade algebra: evidence from the wake county public school system. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(1_suppl), 80S-101S. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373715576076
Gatdula, I. (2016). Embracing the spiral progression approach of the K to 12 Program. Retrieved from https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/sunstar-pampanga/20161127/281642484777090
Hannula, M. S. (2002). Attitude towards mathematics: Emotions, expectations, and values. Educ Stud Math, 49(1), 25–46. doi:10.1023/a:1016048823497
Kronthal, L. J. (2012). A Background in chemistry helps students learn and understand biology. Washington DC: Georgetown University.
K to 12 Mathematics Curriculum Guide. (2016). K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum. Retrieved from http://lrmds.deped.gov.ph
Lucas, C. (2011). Spiral progression approach to teaching and learning. Philippines: University of the Philippines.
Luciano, J. (2014). The influence of curriculum quality on student achievement on the New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge (NJ ASK) language arts and mathematics for fifth-grade students in the lowest socioeconomic schools districts.
Mohd Yusof, A., Daniel, E. G. S., Low, W. Y., & Ab. Aziz, K. (2014). Teachers' perception of mobile edutainment for special needs learners: The Malaysian case. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(12), 1237-1246.
National Academies Press. (2001). How People Learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded Edition.
Quijano, Y. S., & Technical Working Group on Curriculum. (2012). Orientation for K to 12 Division Coordinators. Deped Complex.
Reddy, P., Sharma, B., & Chandra, S. (2020). Student readiness and perception of tablet leaning in HE in the Pacific: A cased study of Fiji and Tuvalu. J Cases Inf Technol, 52–69.
Resurreccion J., & Adanza J. (2015). Spiral Progression Approach in Teaching Science in Selected Private and Public Schools in Cavite. Presented at the DLSU Research Congress 2015. Philippines: De La Salle University.
Snider, V. E. (2004). A comparison of spiral versus strand curriculum. Journal of Direct Instruction, 4(1), 29-39.
Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. (2007). Curriculum development: Theory into practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Tudy, R. (2014). Attitude, self-efficacy and students’ academic performance in mathematics. IAMURE International Journal of Social Sciences, 12(1). DOI:10.7718/ijss.v12i1.920