La Consolacion University Philippines

(formerly University of Regina Carmeli)

The Learning Style of Grade 7-10 of Dona Trinidad Mendoza Institute

"Learning Style on Scholastic Institution”

by

Ronaldo C. Vicente

A Research Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Master of Arts in Education Major in Educational Management

La Consolacion University Philippines

January 2017
 Chapter I

The Problem and its Background

Introduction:

Learning is a life-long process. Factors influencing it are too complex that

understanding how in particular each factor affects learning is a constant everyday struggles
among educators ( Kordi, 2011).
Researchers from the past to the present have been continually affirming the
significant impact of parents’ parenting styles on their children’s academic outcomes
(Robertson, 2009). However, concrete evidences have been missing, particularly in terms of
understanding how in particular each of the preferred parenting style of parents affects
their children’s academic outcomes ( Fakeye, 2008; Kordi, 2011).
According to Grusec et al.,(2000) parental responsibilities start as soon as the child
was born, and these responsibilities in form of socialization process which are bidirectional
in nature formed the very first learning experiences of the child.
This introduction sets out the basic ideas of what all the units in this course are trying to do.
It also sets out what is the focus of each separate course.
The course as a whole is trying to help you answer some really important questions.
These include:
 What is your life like?
 Are you happy with your life?
 Are there just too many things that need to be balanced?
 Do too many people ask you too many questions?
Asking too many questions is, of course, what we have been doing! But we were doing it
deliberately, which is not always the way that it seems.
Everyday, most of us get asked all sorts of little questions. If you are looking after other
people this might be 'What’s for dinner?' If you are sitting in from of the TV, you are likely to
be bombarded with questions about what to watch, what to buy and what to think or
believe.
You might also be asking questions about yourself.
It’s this questioning that this course really wants to help you develop.
 What do I want to do with my life?
 Is there anything I would like to study?
 How can I cope with the challenges that life keeps throwing my way?
 Is going to college or university an option?
 Could I cope with going to college or university?
If you would like to begin to think about questions like this, or have already started on
similar questions, Learning to learn is just what you are looking for.
Learning to learn takes your life as its starting point. This is an important point to
understand. For one thing it means that you are the expert. All this course does is to suggest
ways of building on and ‘fine-tuning’ your expertise. We hope that with the help of this
course you will become even more of an expert.
Learning to learn – the learning outcomes
Learning outcomes are something that you will become familiar with if you do any of the
units on this course. If you study anywhere else it is increasingly likely that you will come
across learning outcomes. But what are they? A learning outcome should make it clear to
you what you will gain as a result of the time and effort you put into working through a
course or a course. The advantage of having learning outcomes is that they should help you
work out how far you have travelled, as well as seeing if you have travelled in the direction
you anticipated when you started.
Learning outcomes also mean that anyone who writes course materials needs has to
be clear in their own mind about the relevance of what they ask you to do. Do the materials
really help you move from where you are at the start?
Pause for a minute. What did you think of these learning outcomes? Did you think they
were clear? Did you feel that they were useful in pointing clearly to what you might achieve
in the first week of the Learning to learn course? You could note any thoughts down in your
Learning Journal. If you do follow this suggestion then you will actually have completed a
reflective activity.
Significance of the Study
The major focus of this study was to assess the influence of parenting styles and
teachers’ efficacy on students’ academic achievement. The findings may provide
information that would be beneficial to the following individuals:
Students. The finding of the study would be useful to help them ponder about their
reasons for obeying or not their parents’ wishes and desires. Thus, lessen possible
misunderstanding between them and their parents.
Parents. the results would be helpful for them to be aware of their children are
going through. This study would also serve as an eye opener for them to choose the most
appropriate parenting styles that further guide and support their children to become better
learners.
Teachers. The finding of this study would help them to realize the importance of
extending their concern and understanding with regard to the individual differences of their
students as product of different parenting styles.
School Administrators. The results would bring light in developing new programs
that tap both the parents and teachers as partners in helping the students as they
journeyed in their life adventure towards becoming successful professionals in the future.
Society at Large. The findings of the study would serve as a starting point of
understanding the importance of harmonizing both the roles of the parents and teachers in
the total development of the students.
Future Researchers. The finding may be useful as a springboard to another study
similar to the variables in the study and better yet another topic of interest following the
results as baseline data.
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework
The present study was anchored on the premises of Jacobson (2007); Fakeye (2008)
& Kordi (2011); Sawyer (2004) and Gordon(2001) with their conception that parents and
teachers do bring certain beliefs and biases in their manner of guiding and assisting
children/students, thus affecting performance outcomes.
According to Henson (2001) Gordon(2001) Teachers’ beliefs and self-efficacy
orientations guide and influence what teachers do in the classroom. Teachers’ plans and
actions are generally filtered through their belief system, which can affect their practice,
especially with students from diverse cultures and backgrounds.
Likewise, as viewed by Jacobson (2007), Pakeye(2008) & Kordi (2011) parents who
equally received almost the same parenting styles from their own parents would most likely
adhere to the same beliefs that the type of parenting styles they received would be
affective for their children.
In relation with the study, it is the primary aim of the researcher to be able to
harmonize the unique choice of parents’ parenting styles in terms of raising their children,
as well as, the unique teacher’s sense of efficacy belief that in turn would produce
significant positive change in the academic achievement of the student as individual
learner.
Figure 1 present the conceptual model of the study. The respondents of the study
were Parents, Teachers and Students. This study sough to describe the types of parenting
styles, teacher’s level of efficacious beliefs and students’ academic achievement.
Specifically, this present study also aimed to relate the specific types of parenting
styles used by parents and how it affects their children academic outcomes. And how in
such a way teachers’ efficacious belief towards their students would either help their
students to become or poor learners in the classroom. Both the parenting styles and
teachers’ efficacy belief served as the independent variables of the study and the students’
academic achievement as the dependent variable of the study from which the effects of the
two variables would either lessen or increase students’ academic achievement.
 Parenting styles

- Authoritarian
- Authoritative
- Permissive

Students' Academic
Achievement (GPA)
- Mathematics
- Science
- English

Teacher's Efficacy
- Students' engagement
- Instructional practices
- Classroom management

Figure 1 : Conceptual Framework of the Study

Statement of the Problem
The major concern of this study was to assess the influence of parenting styles and
teacher’s efficacy on students’ academic achievement.
Specifically, this study sought answer to the following questions:
1. What is the most commonly used parenting styles of the parents in terms of the
following?
1.1 Authoritarian;
1.2 Permissive; and
1.3 Authoritative?
2. What is the level of the teacher’s efficacy beliefs in terms of the following?
2.1 Efficacy in students engagement;
2.2 Efficacy in instructional practices;
 2.3 Efficacy in classroom management
3. How do academic performance of the students be described in terms of the
following subjects:
3.1 Mathematics ;
3.2 Science: and
3.3 English?
4. How do the parenting styles of the parents significantly influence the academic
achievement of the students?
5. Does the teacher’s efficacy significantly influence students’ academic achievement?
6. What parent-teacher program can be developed to further enhance the academic
performance of the students?
Hypothesis of the Study
The following hypotheses would be tested at 0.05 alpha level of significance:
1. The parenting styles of the parents have no significant influence on the academic
achievement of the students.
2. The teacher’s level of efficacy beliefs does not significantly influence students’
academic achievement.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined operationally for the purpose of this study.
Academic Achievement. It refers to the grade point average obtained by the
students in their different academic subjects.
Authoritarian Parenting Style. It refers to the characteristics of authoritarian
parents usually attach with strong value to the maintenance of their authority, and
suppress any efforts their children make to challenge it. In this parenting style children
are not allowed to discuss with the parents or make decision by themselves. ( Baumrind,
2003; Maccoby & Martin, 2001).
Authoritative Parenting Style. authoritative parents usually expect mature behavior
from children and give clear standard setting, encourage children to be independent, and
also have open communication in the family ( Baumrind, 2003; Maccoby & Martin, 2001).
Parenting. Brooks (2001) points out that parenting is the process or state of being a parent
and it includes nourishing, protecting, and guiding the child through the course of
development. In the process, parenting is a continuous series of interactions between
parent and child, and these interactions change both partners in the parent-child dyad.
Permissive Parenting Style. This refers to parents allowing their children to regulate own
behavior and make their own decisions. ( Baumrind, 2003; Maccoby & Martin, 2001).
Teacher’s Efficacy Belief. This refers to the belief of the teacher about his/her
students, that with his/her exerted efforts he/she can produce significant changes to
the academic performance of his/her students ( Woodfolk, 2001).
Scope and Delimitation
The present study focused on the influence of parenting styles and teacher’s efficacy
on students’ academic achievement. In this study it would include students from early
adolescent to late adolescent, the parents both mother and father of the same
participating students and their respective teachers and or advisers.
The study included all the students from Dona Trinidad Mendoza Institute and their
parents and teachers. Purposive sampling approach was used since only students with
both parents are present and married parents would be the automatic respondents of
the study who are also bona fide students of the target school.
Two set of standardized instruments were utilized in the study. These were tests
that measure both the most preferred parenting styles of the father and mother and the
level of teacher’s efficacious beliefs. The Study covered the current school year 2016-
2017.
 Chapter 2
Related literature and studies
This chapter includes all the reviewed literature and other studies related to the
current study. The intention of the researcher is to present valid and reliable insights with
regard to the different variables included in the study. The reviewed literature and studies
were described using thematic format for ease and accuracy of the presentation.
Four Parenting styles
In categorizing parents according to whether they are high or low on parental
demandingness and responsiveness creates a typology of four parenting styles: indulgent,
authoritarian, authoritative, and involved ( Maccoby & Martin, 2003). Each of these
parenting styles mirrors different naturally occurring patterns of parental values, practices,
and behaviors ( Baumrind, 2001) and a distinct balance of responsiveness and
demandingness.
Indulgent parents ( also referred to as “ permissive” or nondirective”) are more
responsive than they are demanding. They are nontraditional and lenient, do not require
mature behavior, allow considerable self-regulation, and avoid confrontation” (Baumrind,
2001, p62). Indulgent parents may be further divided into two types: democratic parents,
who, though lenient, are more conscientious, engaged, and committed to the child, and
nondirective parents.
Authoritarian parents are characterized as highly demanding and directive, but not
responsive. “ They are the obedience-and status-oriented, and expect their orders to be
obeyed without explanation” These parents provide well-ordered and organized
environments with clearly stated rules. Authoritarian parents can be divided into two types.
nonauthoritarian-directive, who are directive, who are directive, but not intrusive or
autocratic in their use of power, and authoritarian-directive, who are highly intrusive.
In authoritative parents they are both demanding and responsive. “ They monitor
and impart clear standards for their children’s conduct. They are assertive, but not intrusive
and restrictive. Their disciplinary methods are supportive, rather than punitive. These
parents want their children to be assertive, socially responsible, as well as, self-regulated
and cooperative.
While, for uninvolved parents they are low in both responsiveness and
demandingness. In extreme cases, these parents might encompass both rejecting-
neglecting and neglectful parenting, although most of them fall within the normal range.
In addition to differing on responsiveness and demandingness the parenting styles
also differ in the extent to which they are characterize by a third dimension: psychological
control. Psychological control” refers to control attempts that intrude into the psychological
and emotional development of the child” through use of parenting practices such as guilt
induction, withdrawal of love, or shaming. one outstanding difference between
authoritarian and authoritative parents place high demands on their children and expect
their children to behave appropriately and obey parental rules. Authoritarian parents, on
the other hand, also expect their children to accept their judgments, values and goals
without questioning. In contrast, authoritative parents are more open to give and take
relationship with their children and make greater use of explanations. Thus, although
authoritative and authoritarian parents are equally high in behavioral control, authoritative
parents lean to be low in psychological control, while authoritarian parents be predisposed
to be high.
The child-rearing practices and interactive behaviors mentioned above which have
been developed and implemented by parents are referred to as parenting style. Parent-
child relationships as observed are greatly affected by the parenting style the parent
incorporates into parent-child interactions.
Parental responsibilities start as soon as the child was born. These responsibilities
suggest that the socialization process of a child was bidirectional in nature. The implication
was that parents convey socialization messages to their children, while children vary in their
level of acceptance, receptivity and internalization of these messages. Socialization means
the acquisition of education, experience, attitudes and behaviors that are required for a
successful adaptation to the society and the family.
 A strong relationship between parental styles and children’s school achievements
has been greatly documented in the literature. Research has shown that the relationship
between parenting style and academic achievement found that psychosocial maturity (
expansion of social knowledge and well-being ) mediated this relationship. In other words,
authoritative parenting impacts psychosocial maturity was measured by self-reliance
(control over life), work orientation ( students work skills & work goals), and self-identity (
self-esteem & life goals) Each of these variables, both separately and collectively correlated
with higher grades.
However, in the results it indicated that parental styles affected the academic
achievement of minority students. Prior studies have noted the importance of parenting
styles and academic achievements in schools. In Leung, Lau and Lam ( 2008) study on the
relationship between parenting styles and academic achievement in Hong Kong, the United
States and Australia revealed that Australian parents were lower than both Chinese and
American parents were higher in general authoritarianism, but lower in academic and
general authoritativeness. All groups academic achievement was observed to be negatively
related to academic authoritarianism, but showed little to no relationship with academic
authoritativeness.
Parenting Styles and Students’ Academic Performance
Education has merged as a process developing or training an individual to cope with
the daily challenges of everyday life. It is also said that the quality of effective education is
seen in individual who can stand the test of time. According to Ojerinde (2000) he
emergence of American or western education has opened the so-called formal education
that is the started the planned classroom situation facilitated by trained teachers. School is
served to be the center of development for student to become efficient social beings .
School is product of a community of different students from variety of different
homes and families ( Kordi, 2010) . In essence, the impact of parents of their children
development are continually be observed among students who become part of the schools’
classroom. Parents participation through parenting comprised the so-called traditional and
foundation of learning among students ( Baumrind, 2003).
 The authoritarian style of parenting for instance as one of the key aspect of
parenting styles, has been widely observed to have a positive to negative impact in almost
all facets of children’s outcomes ( Robertson, 2011).
Aremu (2001) observed that on recent studies the relevance of positive parenting
can boast the academic performance. From positive parenting warm home climate and
child acceptance has produced huge impact on child’s development.
Recent finding in the field of education indicated that parents who explain that
expectations to their children support their children to become much of an achievers in
return.
Moreover, studies with different results about the effects of the four most leading
types of parenting styles include the study of adolescents by Dornbusch et al. (2007)
discovered that authoritarian and permissive parenting styles were negatively associated
with higher grades whereas the authoritative parenting style was positively associated with
him/her grades. Radziszewska, Richardson, Dent, and Flay (2006) found similar results in
their study of 15-years-olds.
In another study of adolescents, Leung , Lau , and Lam (2008) found that academic
achievement was negatively related to authoritarianism. In a study of adolescent minority
students ( Hispanic American, African American, and Asian American, Boveja (2008) found
that adolescent who perceived their parents to be authoritative engaged in more effective
learning and studying strategies. While, in order Asian and European Schools, the effect of
parenting style on the educational performance of Asian-American and European-American
high school students in the United State were studied by Chao in 2001. Roughly 500 first-
generation Chinese-Americans and 208 European Americans who were third-generation or
more were examined for the study. The family adaptability and Cohesin Environment Scales
II ( FACES II ) and a parenting scale devised by Steinberg in 1992, were administered to
students. Students’ academic performance was assessed through students’ self-reported
cumulative grade point averages and school effort scale, devised by Steinberg in 1992.
 Evidence suggested authoritative parenting has effects on European Americans’
academic pursuits, whereas authoritarian parenting has negative effects. Students from
authoritative households consistently earned higher grades and showed higher overall
ability at approaching challenges presented by academia than those from authoritarian
households.
Evidence showed the effects of authoritative parenting on Chinese-Americans’
academic pursuits yielded the same results as authoritarian parenting. First generation
students’ grades overall academic abilities did not differ based on parenting style used
parents. Second generation students showed slightly higher grades and academic abilities
when reared in an authoritative households; However, the findings was not significant
enough to suggest authoritative parenting is truly more effective than authoritarian
parenting ( Chao, 2001). The study showed findings that more secure relationships with
parents who implemented an authoritarian parenting style, which was positively correlated
with academic abilities.
This is further evident in the study conducted by Stenberg (2010) about the impact
of parenting practices on adolescent achievement. In the study the author examined the
impact of authoritative parenting style of adolescents’ school achievement in an ethnically
and socioeconomically heterogenous sample of approximately 6,400 American 14-18-years
–olds. The positive impact of authoritative parenting on adolescent achievement, however,
is mediated by the positive effect of authoritativeness on parental involvement in schooling.
The finding showed that parental involvement is much more likely to promote adolescent
school success when it occurs in the context of an authoritative home environment.
Finally, in the reviewed conducted by Kordi (2011) on empirical studies about
children’s school achievements. The contribution of parenting style is very much evident.
and it is reported with almost thousand of studies from 2005 to 2010 that parenting styles
have strong relationship between children’s school achievement. Moreover, findings from
the review revealed that authoritative parenting style were associated with higher levels of
children’s school achievement, though findings remain inconsistent across cultures and
societies. As recommended by the author future studies may dwell on some of the salient
issues underlying the inconsistencies reported in the study, particularly the contradictory
results between Asian and European American school children.
Teachers’ Teaching Efficacy
Understanding teachers’ perceptions and beliefs is important because teachers,
heavily involved in various teaching and learning processes, are practitioners of educational
principles and theories . Teachers have primary role in determining what is needed or what
would work best with their students. Findings from research on teachers’ perceptions and
belief indicate that these perceptions and beliefs not only have considerable influence on
their instructional practices and classroom behavior but also related to their students
achievements. Thus, knowing the perceptions and beliefs of teachers enables one to make
predictions about teaching and assessment practices in classrooms.
Teachers’ efficacy belief can potentially influence both the kind of environment that
they create, as well as, the various instructional practices introduced in the classroom
(Bandura, 2001) , Furthermore, teaches with a high sense of self-efficacy are confident that
even the most difficult students can be reached if they exert extra effort; teachers with
lower self-efficacy, on the other hand, feel a sense of helplessness when it comes to dealing
with difficult and motivated students ( Gibson & Dembo, 2002). The literature widely
documented the influence of self-efficacy beliefs and corroborates social cognitive
theorythat place these beliefs at the roots of human agency.
Personal teaching efficacy has been defined as a belief in one’s ability to teach
effectively and teaching outcome expectancy as the belief that effective teaching will have a
positive effect on student learning. Research on efficacy of teachers suggest that behaviors
such as persistence on a task, risk taking , and use of innovations are related to degrees of
efficacy . For instance , highly efficacious teachers have been found to be more likely to use
inquiry and student-centered teaching strategies, while teachers with a low sense of
efficacy are more likely to use teacher-directed strategies, such as lecture and reading from
the text ( Czerniak, 2007). In classrooms where teachers have high levels of teaching
efficacy, high levels of learning occur.
 It is great interest to explore the development of efficacy beliefs among teachers,
given that teacher efficacy is related to teacher effectiveness in classroom management
activities, instructional behavior, classroom organization, feedback patterns, and pupil
control ideology, and appears to influence students’ achievement, motivation, and their
own sense of efficacy. In addition, given the importance of a strong sense of efficacy for
optimal motivation in teaching, exploring factors that contribute to the initial development
of 33 pre-service teachers’ efficacy will help them develop strong efficacy beliefs early in
their career.
This is further evident on previous research studies of pre-service teachers’ self-
efficacy, the value and power of teachers sense of efficacy, the value and power of
teachers’ sense of efficacy has been well established in the literature, but the sources of
pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs have not been established. For example , Anderson
and Betz (2001) have argued that little research has focused on the sources of self-efficacy,
in contrast to the amount of research has focused on the sources of self-efficacy. Also, the
overwhelming majority of research in the area of teacher efficacy has been conducted on in
service teachers and relatively little is known about the knowledge base in this area among
pre-service teachers.
Finally as observed, many efficacious pre-service teachers were less interventionist
toward classroom management. Efficacious teachers perceive and experience less student
failure, which likely corresponds to a decrease need to guard against their negative teaching
outcomes. High teacher self-efficacy, on the other hand, has consistently been found to
relate to positive student and teacher behaviors, and to have a positive influence on
educational improvements, leading to the view that teacher self-efficacy is a crucial element
in improving teacher education, promoting education reform towards achieving increased
positive students’ academic achievements.
Teachers’ Efficacy Relate to Academic Performance
Many studies fund consensus that teacher efficacy has significant connections to
students’ academic outcomes. It is noted that teachers with high efficacy have students
who are high performing compared to students with teachers who are with low teaching
efficacy scores.
Goodwin (2011) supported this notion with his discoveries on his studies that
students’ academic achievement is directly connected to teachers’ efficacy beliefs. And this
is further agreed by Ferguso (2003); Gordon ( 2001) and Scharlach ( 2008) who believed that
literature indeed support the idea that efficacious teachers have more positive and effective
results in the classroom.
Several studies also revealed that teachers who have showed positive connections
and dispel negative opinions about their students are expected showed to have more
academically high performing students ( Jacobson , 2007).
Further, high efficacy teachers are more likely to sustain positive student attitudes in
the classroom. according to Roberts, et al. (2000), a teacher may sense very comfortable in
his or her ability to achieve student learning in one subject area and may not have the same
degree of confidence to do so in another. Teachers may feel efficacious in delivering certain
curriculum to certain students in specific settings, and they may feel more or less efficacious
doing so under different circumstances.
Efficacious teachers have strong beliefs that they can bring about a change in
students learning attitude. if a teacher believes that all students in that classroom are
capable of learning, then the teaching style will involve rich standards, quality, and
sensitivity to students’ learning styles, regardless of the population the teacher serves .
When a teacher believes that all students can learn, they will have high expectations for
every student. A teacher with these qualities and beliefs is highly efficacious and can be
successful in teaching any student regardless of race or ethnic background. Thus, the key to
students becoming successful in the classroom is the effectiveness of the teacher ad her or
his ability to teach all students effectively ( a high efficacy quality) regardless of the quality
or social background of the students that make up the classroom.
In a study done in Australia, Green ( cited in Cooper et al., 2004) addressed how
newly graduated, young. White pre-service teachers’ perceptions of mathematics learning
of aboriginal students differed from that of Non-Aboriginal students. Green examined the
influence of classroom teachers on the performance of Aboriginal students. Fifteen (15)
White teachers were asked to the list the major difference between Aboriginal and Non-
Aboriginal students. The sample of teachers was drawn from schools where the Aboriginal
population varied from 5-60 %. Of the 80 respondents, 48 of them felt that the students
themselves were deficient, lacking interest and language skills, and not having proper
behavioral skills, adequate nutrition and proper school socialization skills. Eleven (11) of the
respondents blamed the problem on family difficulties, including low parental expectations ,
little parent support, and a transient lifestyle. Six (6) respondents felt that it was a cultural
gap between the Aboriginals and Non-aboriginal. Green explained that none of the teachers
appeared to expect Aboriginal students to do well ( Cooper et al., 2004; Lowell & Devlin,
2007). These results are typical
of teachers with low self-efficacy characteristics, whose beliefs about children’s abilities are
shaped by their personal beliefs rather than by the student’s ability.
Even the critics of Rosenthal and Jacobson (2014) accept the notion that teacher
expectation does affect learning . Research shows that a teacher’s distribution of behavioral
interactions among individual students often is associated with student achievement level,
or the teacher’s expectations for the student’s future achievement level. Unbiased teachers
have the same expectations for African American students that they do for white, Hispanic,
or Asian students.
However, teachers’ opinions of a student may change based on the information they
receive about that student, or on beliefs they may have previously formed about the ethnic
group to which the student belongs. That information may come in the form of written
descriptions, photographs, or videotapes, which combine to confirm the teacher’s pre-
established beliefs. In addition, if the student’s behavior is consistent with prior established
stereotypes and beliefs established by that teacher about that student, ( or students of that
racial group) those beliefs can influence teacher expectations for those students.
Synthesis
The impact of parenting styles on their children academic performance is largely
evident in the reported reviewed of literature and related studies. Parenting styles
particularly that of the authoritarian parenting styles produced significant effects on the
academic performance of the students. And this is also observable, in terms of the
perceived teaching efficacy beliefs of teachers, that the more efficacious the teacher is the
more it would create positive impact on students’ academic performance. However, if the
teachers have very low efficacious beliefs, they would find it hard to handle difficult
students, this is then would also be observed with that of the poor classroom performance
of their students.
Moreover, studies from the past to the present also attested to the significant
impact of parenting styles on their children academic outcomes. However, limited studies
have been found to tackle on issues involving how in particular the effects of preferred
parenting styles of both parents directly influenced their children academic performance.
Likewise, the influence of teacher’s efficacy beliefs on their students’ success in classroom
learning has been well-studied, but still its relevance to student’s individuality as learners
has been neglected. Thus, the current study looked at the possibility of discovering more
the relevance and significant influences of parenting styles of both parents present and
teacher’s efficacy beliefs on students’ academic achievement.
 Chapter 3
Methodology of the Study
This chapter present the research methods and technique, the respondents of the
study, the research instruments, the data collection, and the data processing and statistical
treatment utilized in gathering information, as well as, the evaluation and interpretation
purposes of the study.
Methods and Techniques
The descriptive correlation method was employed in the study. It is simply the way
to describe the characteristics of individual variables as they exist in the natural setting
(Gravetter, et, al. 2009). It also includes the description, recording, analysis, and
interpretation of the composition of the data gathered. A correlational design was likewise
considered appropriate for this study because it would described the relationship between
variables under investigation.
Since the study was about examining if there is a limited weak or strong association
that exist between parenting styles and teacher’s efficacy on students’ academic
achievement. The descriptive correlation method of research was deemed the suitable
approach to use.
Essentially, standardized questionnaires were used as primary data gathering tools.
A this was also used by the researcher in obtaining and analyzing the appropriate statistics
to be used in gathering the needed data.
Respondent of the Study
The study made use of the purposive sampling approach also known as judgmental,
selective sampling selection of the respondents, since from the very start the researcher has
already assumed characteristics of the target population used as respondents of the study.
The inclusion criteria in the study would include the students whose parents are
both present ( mother and father) and who are legally married. Only bona fide students of
Dona Trinidad Mendoza Institute were considered the student-respondents of the study
and their respective classroom advisers.
 Following the inclusion criteria, the participants of the study were the 308 students
and their 616 parents, who are both present and legally married, and their 30
advisers/teachers with an assumed total of 954 respondents. Table 1 below shows the
respondents of the study:
Table 1
Respondents of the Study
Respondents Frequency Percentage
Students 308 33 %
Parents 616 65 %
Teachers 30 32 %
Total 954 100 %

From table 1 above it reveals that majority of the respondents are parents with total
of 615 or 65 % of the total population of target respondents and follow by the 308 students
and their teachers/advisers with percentage rate raging from 33 % to 32 % respectively.
Instruments of the Study
The study made use of two standardized questionnaires one for the parenting styles
and the other one for measure of the level of teacher’s efficacy belief. The descriptions of
the instruments to be used in the study are as follow:
For the parenting styles questionnaire or originally called the parental authority
questionnaire is first developed by Buri in 2001 cited in Riberio (2009) is a questionnaire
consists of separate evaluations of mother and fathers’ parenting style, it’s consists of three
parenting style based on authority, disciplinary practices of warmth, demands, expectations
and control. The measure consists of 30 items, 10 for each of the different styles of
parenting in a five point Likert format ranging from strongly agree to disagree. The items
are written from the perspective of the child but respond to by adults in a self-report
manner, i.e., what would your mother or father have done when you were a child. There is
a separate form for mother and a form for father, but the questions are the same and in the
same order.
 The three parenting style questions are entrenched in the questionnaire in a random
order. Authoritative parents are flexible, use reason with their children, are rational,
maintain firm and clear boundaries, while being consistent in the expectations of their
children’s behavior ( items 4, 5, 8, 11, 15,20, 22 23, 27 and 30 .) , Authoritarian parents
attempt to maintain unquestioning obedience from their children and attempt to control
behavior often through the use of punishment as a form of discipline ( items 2,3,7, 9, 12, 16,
18, 25, 26, and 29), Permissive parents tend to be relatively warm as well as non-
demanding and controlling of the child ( items 1, 6, 10, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 24 and 28). And so
score, the individual items for each parenting subtype are summed. The score on each
subscale are from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 30.
The questionnaire has separate procedure for authoritarian, authoritative and
permissive scores. Each of the scores is derived from the child’s appraisal of parent’s
perceived style. It was tested and proven to be an effective tool in assessing maternal and
paternal authoritativeness, authoritarianism, and permissiveness. it is an appropriate
measure for older adolescent and young adult males and females.
Part of its interpretation includes, the higher mean scores indicate stronger
perception by the respondent of perceived parent’s parenting style as authoritative,
authoritarian, or permissive. Score are separated into 6 categories: (a) mother’s
authoritativeness, (b) mother’s authoritarianism, (c) mother’s permissiveness, and (d)
father’s authoritativeness, (e) father’s authoritarianism, (f) father’s permissiveness. Mean
scores range from 1 to 5, with a indicating little recognition by the respondent of the
parenting style of each parent and 5 indicating total recognition by the respondent of the
parenting style of each parent.
Test-retest for liability yielded coefficient alpha values of .78 for mother
authoritativeness,. .86 for mother authoritarianism,. 81 for mother permissiveness .92 for
father’s authoritativeness, .85 for father authoritarianism, and .77 for father
permissiveness. Internal consistency reliability yielded Cronbach coefficient alpha values as
follows: .82 for mother authoritarianism, .85 for mother authoritarianism, .75 for mother
permissiveness, . 85 for father’s authoritativeness, .87 for father authoritarianism, and .74
for father permissiveness).
Criterion-related validity was assessed through comparison of the PAQ and the
Parental Nurturance Scale. Bivariate correlations between the scales yielded the following
results: authoritative parents were the highest in parental nurturance for mother ( r = 56, p
< .05) and fathers ( r = .68 p < .05 ) ; authoritarian parenting was inversely related
tonurturance for both mothers ( r = -.36, <.05) and fathers (r = -.53, p <.05) ; and parental
permissiveness was unrelated to nurturance for both mother ( r = .04, p > .10 ) and fathers
( = .13 p > .10).
according to Rebeiro (2009) on her study about the construction and validation of
the Parental authority scale or parenting styles scale. She found out that the reliability of
the questionnaire was found to be .77 to .92 in a test re-test check over a two-week period
of time. Validity for the PAQ was found to be .74 to .87 for the subscales.
For the measure of the teacher’s efficacy scale. The Megan Tschannen-Moran, and
Mary Anita Woolfolk Hoy (2001) version of Teachers’ Sense of Teacher Efficacy Scale will be
used for this study. This scale will described the three types of teachers’ sense of efficacy
beliefs in classroom management. For this study the short form with 12-item will be used
with the revised 5-point Likert scale with responses ranges from 1=nothing, 2= Very little, 3=
Some influence, 4= Quite a bit, and 5=A Great Deal, which came from the reduced 9-point
continuum in the original version of TSES . In this form it includes the following items for
each subscale; for Efficacy in Student engagement with items 2,3,4,11, for Efficacy in
Instructional Strategies with items 5, 9,10,12 and for Efficacy in Classroom Management
with items 1,6,7,8. The reliability for the teacher efficacy subscale ranged from coefficient
0.90 to 0.91 respectively.
For academic achievement measure, the Grade Point Average (GPA) for each subject
like Mathematics, Science and English were used and this information was asked from the
registrar’s office of Dona Trinidad Mendoza Institute ( DTMI). The GPA would include only
the grade obtained by the students in their first grading period for the current school year
2016 – 2017.
Data Gathering Procedure
A request letter by the researcher duly noted the dean of the La Consolacion
University, Philippines (LCUP) , Graduate School was sent to the school President of Dona
Trinidad Mendoza Institute ( DTMI) for approval to conduct the study. Upon approval, the
researcher personally distributed the copies of questionnaire to the respondents retrieved
on the agreed date and time and the researcher checked if the questionnaire is
accomplished as desired.
Data Processing and Statistical Treatment
The data would be processed using the SPSS version 19 with the assistance of the
statistician from the RDO office of La Consolacion University Philippines ( LCUP). the
computed data would be then presented using appropriate tables and texts. The following
statistical tools were utilized in analyzing and interpreting the data.
1. The parenting styles of the parents were described in terms of weighted mean.
2. The level of teacher’s efficacy beliefs were described in terms of weighted mean.
3. The grade point averages of the student obtained in Mathematics, Science and
English were described using frequency counts and percentages.
4. The influence of parenting styles on students’ academic achievement was analyzed
in terms of using regression.
5. Likewise, the influence of teacher’s efficacy beliefs on students’ academic
achievement was analyzed using regression.
The measure of parenting styles were categorized and as transposed using scale
below:
Scale Range Verbal Interpretation (VI)
5 4.40 – 5.00 Strongly Agree (SA)
4 3.50 – 4.30 Agree (A)
3 2.40 – 3.40 Neither Agree nor Disagree (NAD)
2 1.50 – 2.30 Disagree ( D)
1 1.00 – 1.40 Strongly Disagree ( SD)
 Then, the results were then analyzed and interpreted as part of chapter IV immediately
following this section.

Chapter 4
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
This chapter deals with the presentation of data, analysis and interpretation of the
results of the study. The data are presented using different tables to present the needed
information designed to answer the questions stated in chapter 1.
The discussion are composed of the different tables for the most commonly used
parenting styles of the parents in terms of being authoritarian permissive, and or
authoritative. It includes information about the level of the teachers’ efficacy beliefs in
terms of their efficacy in students’ engagement, in instructional practices, and in classroom
management. It also includes the description of the academic performance of the students
in terms of the description of the academic performance of the student in terms of their
obtained GPA on subjects like Mathematics, Science, and English. It gives inform
information about the academic performance. It provides information between the level of
the teacher’s efficacy beliefs and students’ academic achievement. And lastly it gives
suggestions on the proposed parent-teacher program derived from the findings of the study
to further enhance the academic performance of the students.
Parenting Style of the Respondents
It is composed of three tables for the most commonly used parenting styles of the
parent-respondents of the study. The three tables included the table 2 for parenting style in
term of authoritative style, table 3 for parenting style in terms of authoritarian style and for
table 4 parenting style I terms of permissive style. These were used to described the most
preferred parenting style of the parent-respondents. Below is the parenting style of the
respondents.
Parenting Style . In this current study it adopted the most popular construct of
parenting style created by Baumrind (2001) in her conceptualization of authoritarian,
permissive, and authoritative parenting. These three very popular parenting style are
characterized by authoritarian parenting style which encompasses parents’ expectations
that children should learn to be submissive with their parent’s demands , while parents’ are
expected to be the opposite of being strict, directive, and emotionally detached. For
permissive parenting style like the name implies connotes less parental restrictions or limits
on the child. The proposition of this is that children are expected to regulate their own
activities. And for authoritative parenting style similar to authoritarian parenting entailed
clear and firm direction to children.
From table 2 it is worthy to note that under authoritative style majority of the
respondents agreed that while they are growing up at home their mother preferred to have
clear standards , but always adjust those standards whenever needed with obtained highest
weighted mean value of 4.23 and showed neutral response with the lowest weighted mean
value of 3.23 for having to create a decision in the family that would hurt any of their
children, however, willing to discuss with them and able to admit mistakes if needed.
And majority of the respondents also agreed that their father preferred to
consistently give direction and guidance in rational and objective ways with highest
weighted mean value of 4.42 and the least weighted mean value of 3.80 obtained for giving
clear direction for children’s behaviors and activities, but also shows understanding when
they showed disagreed with their fathers’ decision.
Table 2. Parenting style in terms of authoritative style
Indicators Mother Father
WM INT. WM INT.
4. As I was growing up, once family policy had been 4.39 Agree 4.39 Agree
established, my mother/father discussed the reasoning
behind the policy with the children in the family.
5. My mother/father has always encouraged verbal give-and- 3.93 Agree 3.87 Agree
take whenever I have left that my family rules and
restrictions were unreasonable.
8.As I was growing up my mother/father directed the activities 4.14 Agree 4.14 Agree
and decisions of the children in the family through reasoning
and discipline.
11. As I was growing up I knew what my mother expected of me in 3.89 Agree 3.94 Agree
my family, but also felt free to discuss those expectations with my
mother/father when I felt that they were unreasonable.
15. As the children in my family were growing up, my 4.41 Agree 4.42 Agree
mother/father consistently gave us direction and guidance in
rational and objective ways.
20. As I growing up my mother/father took the children’s opinions 3.92 Agree 3.98 Agree
into consideration when making family decisions, but she would
not decide for something simply because the children wanted it.
22. My mother/father had clear standards of behavior for the 4.43 Agree 4.34 Agree
children in our home as I was growing up, but she was willing to
adjust those standards to the needs of each of the individual
children in the family.
23. My mother/father gave me direction for my behavior and 4.38 Agree 4.35 Agree
activities as I was growing up and she expected me to follow her
direction, but she was always willing o listen to my concerns and to
discuss that direction with me.
27. As I growing up my mother/father gave me clear direction for 4.01 Agree 3.80 Agree
my behaviors and activities, but she also understands when I
disagreed with her.
30. As I growing up, if my mother/father made a decision in the 3.23 Neutr 4.19 Agree
family that hurt me, she was willing to discuss that decision with al
me and to admit it if she had made a mistake.
Average 4.07 Agree 4.14 Agree

Further analysis of the result showed in table 2 revealed that the parents are
capable to provide appropriate standards and objectives that are well-understood by their
growing children at home. At the same time, they are always willing to make the necessary
adjustment needed once their showed disagreement with their decisions.
These results are further evident in the study conducted by Stenberg (2010) about
the impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement. In the study the author
examined the impact of authoritative parenting styles of adolescents’ school achievement
in an ethically and socioeconomically heterogenous sample of approximately 6,400
American 14-18-year-old. Findings from the study involved the positive impact of
authoritative parenting on adolescent achievement, however, is mediated by the positive
effect of authorittiveness on parental involvement in schooling. The finding showed that
parental involvement is much more likely to promote adolescent school successwhen it
occurs in the context of an authoritative home environment.
For table 3, it describes the parenting styles of the respondents in terms of
authoritarian style.
It is evident in table 3 that majority of the respondents agreed that their parents
parenting styles in terms of authoritarian style for their mother with highest weighted mean
value of 4.03 which include the description that even if her children didn’t agree with her,
my mother felt that it was for our own good if we were forced to conform to what she
thought was right. And with the least obtained weighted mean value of 3.0 with the
description that as they growing up his/her mother did not allow her/him to questions any
decision she had made.
Table 3. Parenting Style in terms of Authoritarian Style
Indicator Mother Father
wm int wm int

2.Even if his children didn’t agree with her, my mother/father felt 4.03 Agree 4.22 Agree

that it was for our own good if we were forced to conform to what
she thought was right.
3.Whenever my mother /father told me to do something as I was 3.16 Neutral 3.28 Neutral
growing up, she expected me to do it immediately without asking
any questions.
7.As I was growing up my mother/father did not allow me to 3.08 Neutral 3.15 Neutral
question any decision she made .
9. My mother/father has always felt that more force should be 3.26 Neutral 3.39 Neutral
used by parents in order to get their children to behave the way
they are supposed to.
12. My mother/father felt that wise parents should teach their 3.53 Neutral 3.71 Agree
children early just who is boss in the family.
16. As I was growing up my mother/father would get very upset if I 3.31 3.44 Neutral
tried to disagree with her.
18. As I was growing up my mother/father let me know what 3.21 Neutral 3.33 Neutral
behavior she expected of me, and if I didn’t meet those
expectations, she punished me.
25. My mother/father has always felt that most problems in 3.68 Neutral 3.78 Agree
society would be solved if we could get parents to strictly and
forcibly deal with their children when they don’t do what they
are supposed to as they are growing up.
26. As I growing up my mother/father often told me exactly 3.66 Agree 3.69 Agree
what she wanted me to do and how she expected me to do it.
29. As I was growing up I knew what my mother/father expected 3.47 Agree 3.45 Neutral
of me in the family and she insisted that I conform to those
expectations simply out of respect for her authority.
Average 3.44 Neutral 3.54 Agree

Analysis of the result found in table 3 revealed that both parents ( father and
mother) of the respondents preferred to use set of standards for what is right and wrong
and stick to what is right even their children sometimes disagreed with them, but make sure
that proper discussion of the impose standards would be done once disagreement surface.
The result above are the further supported by the recent findings in the field of
education which indicated that parents who explained they expectations to their children
support their children to become much of an achievers in return ( Schunk, 2000;
Zimmerman , 2001 , cited in Walters, 2008; Wilson , 2005; Ashtiani and Hassani, 2000)

For table 4 it summarizes the most preferred parenting styles of both mother and
father according to their children I terms of permissive style.
From table 4, it is worthy to note that the respondents agreed that both their father
and mother felt that in a well-run home the children should have their way in the family as
often as the parents do with highest weighted mean value of 4.20 and 4.11 respectively and
the respondents also agreed that while they are growing up at home their mother did not
direct the behaviors activities, and desires of the children in the family with the least
obtained weighted mean value of 2.83. And their fathers did not view them as responsible
for directing and guiding behavior as while growing the least obtained weighted mean value
of 2.88.
Table 4
Parenting Style in Terms of Permissive Style
Indicators Mother Father
wm int wm int
1.While I was growing up my mother/father felt that in a 4.11 Agree 4.20 Agree
well-run home the children should have their way in the
family as often as the parents do.
6.My mother/father has always felt that what children 3.29 Neutral 3.21 Neutral
need is to be free to make up their own minds and to do
what they want to do, even if this does not agree with
what their parents might want.
10. As I was growing up my mother/father did not feel 3.13 Neutral 3.11 Neutral
that I needed to obey rules and regulations of behavior
simply because someone in authority had established
them.
13. As I was growing up, my mother/father seldom gave 3.63 Agree 3.72 Agree
me expectations and guidelines for my behavior.
14. Most of the times as I was growing up my 3.89 Agree 3.94 Agree
mother/father did what the children in the family wanted
when making family decisions.
17. My mother/father feels that most problems in society 3.46 Neutral 3.35 Neutral
would be solved if parents would not restrict their
children’s activities, decisions, and desires as they are
growing up.
19. As I was growing up my mother/father allowed me to 3.20 Neutral 3.21 Neutral
decide most things for myself without a lot of direction
from her.
21. My mother/father did not view herself as responsible 2.86 Disagree 2.88 Neutral
for directing and guiding my behavior as I was growing
up.
24. As I was growing up my mother/father allowed me to 4.03 Agree 4.05
form my own point of view on family matters and she
generally allowed me to decide for myself what I was
going to do.
28. As I was growing up my mother/father did not direct 2.83 Disagree 2.94 Neutral
the behaviors, activities, and desires of the children in the
family.
Average 3.44 Neutral 3.46 Neutral

Analysis of the result obtained revealed that the parents of the respondents with
parenting styles in terms of permissive style believed that children while growing up at
home should be independent enough to do what they want and have desires and goals
separate from their parents expectations about them. According to Baumrind (2003) these
are the common beliefs among parents who, first and foremost desire is to give more
freedom for their children to grow independently.
Teachers’ Efficacy Beliefs
It includes the three tables for the efficacy beliefs of the teacher-respondents about
efficacy in students’ engagement, in classroom management and in instructional practices.
There were utilized to highlight the most and least efficacious beliefs of the teachers. Below
are the efficacious beliefs of the teacher-respondents.
Teachers’ Efficacy. Teachers beliefs about their own effectiveness, kwon as teacher
efficacy, according to Selami (2008) underlie many important instructional decisions, which
ultimately shape students’ educational experiences. Teacher efficacy is also believed to be
strong linked to teaching practices and student learning outcomes ( Goddarn, 2007)) And it
is highly observed that teachers with lower self-efficacy, feel a sense of helplessness when
it comes to handling difficult students.
It is clearly noted in table 5 that for teachers’ efficacy in terms of students’
engagement they believed that they can have more impact on their students in terms of
how much they can do to help their students to value learning with highest mean value of
7.00 with interpretative description of Quite a bit and least with how much they can do to
get through to the most difficult students with weighted mean value of 5.89.
Table 5
Teachers Efficacy in terms of Student Engagement
Indicators WM Interpretation
1.How much can you do to get through to the most difficult students? 5.89 Quite a Bit
2.How much can you do to help your students think critically? 6.32 Quite a Bit
4.How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in school 6.53 Quite a Bit
work?
6.How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in school 6.83 Quite a Bit
work?
9.How much can you do to help your students valuing learning? 7.00 Quite a Bit
12. How much can you do to foster student activity? 6.32 Quite a Bit
14.How much can you do to improve the understanding of a student who is 6.47 Quite a Bit
falling?
22.How much can you assists families in helping their children do well in school? 6.53 Quite a Bit
Average 6.49 Quite a Bit

Analysis of the results would show that the teachers’ efficacy beliefs in terms of
students’ engagement are more on how they can help student to learn to value more their
education. And to touch the lives of those students who happened to have difficult
situations in their academic lives.
From table 6 it depicts the teachers’ efficacy beliefs in terms of classroom
engagement, wherein majority of the teacher-respondent showed efficacious beliefs on
how much they can do to get their students to follow classroom rules and how much they
can do to calm students who is disruptive or noisy with highest weighted mean value of
7.05 with interpretative description of Quite a Bit. And with lowest weighted mean value of
6.16. These results would that teachers believed that they are effective in teaching their
students to follow rules and calming those students who was disruptive or noisy and less
effective in terms of responding to defiant students.
Table 6
Teachers’ Efficacy in terms of Classroom Engagement
Indicator WM Interpretation
3. .How much can you do to control descriptive behavior in the classroom? 6.79 Quite a Bit
5.To what extent can you make your expectations clear about student behavior? 6.32 Quite a Bit
8.How tell can you establish routines to keep activities running smoothly? 6.53 Quite a Bit
13.How much can you do to get children to follow classroom rule? 7.05 Quite a Bit
15. How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy? 7.05 Quite a Bit
16. How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group 7.00 Quite a Bit
of students?
19.How well can you keep a few problem students form ruining an entire lesson? 6.79 Quite a Bit
21. How well can you respond to defiant students? 6.16 Quite a Bit
Average 6.71 Quite a Bit

Further analysis of the results in table 6 above would reveal that the teachers’
efficacy beliefs about their own effectiveness in terms of classroom management range
from 6.16 to 7.05 respectively under interpretative description of Quite a Bit that would
further show that they believed they are quite capable in terms of classroom management.
For table 7 it described the teachers’ efficacy beliefs in terms of instructional practices.
From the table it is quite evident that majority of the teacher-respondents believed that
they are quite a bit effective I terms of how well they can implement alternative strategies
in the classroom with highest weighted mean value of 7.26 and also quite a bit effective
terms of how much they can gauge student comprehension of what they have taught with
the least obtained weighted mean value of 6.42. These results would also mean that the
teachers were Quite a Bit effective in terms of instructional practices with an overall all
weighted mean value 6.77.
Table 7
Teachers’ Efficacy in terms of Instructional Practices
Indicator WM Interpretation
7.How well can you respond to difficult questions from your students? 6.58 Quite a Bit
10. How much can you gauge student comprehension of what you have taught? 6.42 Quite a Bit
11.To what extent can you craft good question for your student? 6.58 Quite a Bit
17. How much can you do to adjust your lesson to the proper level for individual 6.84 Quite a Bit
students?
18. How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies? 6.84 Quite a Bit
20. To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when 6.74 Quite a Bit
students are confused?
23. How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom? 7.26 Quite a Bit
24. How well can you provide appropriate challenges for very capable students? 6.89 Quite a Bit
Average 6.77 Quite a Bit

Analysis of the results found in table 7 would also mean in terms of instructional
practices the teachers’ efficacy belief ranged from 6.42 to 7.26 respectively with an overall
mean of 6.77 and interpretative description of Quite a Bit. These results further that the
teachers’ efficacious beliefs are all quite a bit terms of instructional practices such in how
they can implement alternative strategies in the classroom to how much they can gauge
students comprehension of what they have taught.
Academic Performance of the Respondents
It is consists of the table 8 which clearly described the obtained academic
performance of the student-respondents in terms of their General Point Average( GPA)
obtained in academic subjects like Mathematics, Science and English. There were
considered to described the highest and lowest academic performance of the respondents.
Below is the academic performance of the student-respondents.
Academic Performance. Education has emerged as a process of developing or
training an individual to cope with the daily challenges of everyday life. It is also said that
the quality of effective education is seen in individual who can stand the test of time ( Kordi,
2010). According to Ojerinde (2000) the emergence of American or Western education has
opened the so-called formal education which signals the emergence of the planned
classroom situation facilitated by trained teachers. School is served to be the centre of
development for the student to become efficient social beings ( Sidhu, 2002). In relation
with the study, it is the main focused of the study to highlight the academic performance of
student as basis for determining how effective school practices are implemented and
challenged.
School is a product of a community of different students from variety of different
homes and families ( Kordi ,2010). In essence, the impact of parents on their children
development are continually be observed among students who become part of the schools’
classroom. Parents participation through parenting comprised the so-called traditional and
foundation of learning among students ( Baumrind, 2003).
For table 8 it shows the students’ academic performance in English, Mathematics
and Science.
Table 8 . Students’ Academic Performance
Subjects Performance Rating Interpretation
English 91.40 High, Excellent
Mathematics 82.22 Above Average, Good
Science 84.31 Above Average, Good
AVERAGE 85.98 High, Excellent
From the table 8 above it is clearly observed that out of the three subjects the
student-respondents obtained high or excellent performance with percentage rating of
91.40 for English, and equally the same interpretative value for subjects in science in
Science and Mathematics with performance rating of 84.31 and 82.22 respectively with
interpretative value of above average or good.
Proposed Parent – Teacher Program
Majority of the researcher from 2001 to 2013 have been continually affirming the
significant impact of parents’ parenting style on children’s academic outcomes ( Robertson,
2009) . In the present study, it added additional understanding into how parenting styles
influence academic outcomes. With regard to the findings of the study parenting styles
particularly that of permissive parenting styles appeared to be the most influential
parenting style in terms of an increased academic performance of the students in
Mathematics, but not so much on subjects like English and Science.
Moreover, teachers efficacy which is about Teachers beliefs about their own effectiveness
that they could bring about positive changes in students’ academic performance according
Selami (2008) underlies many important instructional decisions which ultimately shape
students educational experiences.
In relation with the findings of the study , the researchers proposed parent-teacher
program that would further enhance the academic performance of the students. Below is
the outline for the proposed program for parent-teachers’ seminar-workshop on good
parenting and positive teachers’ attitudinal relationship with students:
Program Title: Parent-Teachers’ Seminar Workshop on Good Parenting and Positive
teachers’ Attitudinal Relationship with their Students
Objectives:
The proposed program would give teachers and parents additional knowledge and
understanding of the following:
For Parents:
1. Effective choice of parenting Style that would fit the unique developmental needs of
their children.
2. Parenting skills that would help them become more attune with the present
generation gap that produces misunderstanding between them and their children.
3. Consider permissive parenting as good choice of parenting style to help their
children to become better learners on subject like Mathematics.
For Teacher:
4. Awareness that their positive understanding about their students’ capability to learn
would help them to make their students better learners.
5. Positive beliefs that their students are learners with a unique potential that needed
to be uncover and maximize to make them achievers in the classroom.
Period Covered: The proposed program would cover the next school year upon the approval
of the School President.
Chapter 5
Summary of findings , Conclusions and Recommendations
Summary
The main concern of this study is to determine the influence of parenting styles in
terms of authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive style and teachers’ efficacy beliefs in
students’ engagement , in classroom management, and instructional practices on students’
academic performance in English, Mathematics and Science.
This study utilized the descriptive-correlational research method to describe the
parenting styles practices of parents both the mother and father as observed by their
children, as well as, the level of teachers’ efficacy beliefs in students’ engagement,
classroom management, and instructional practices. And as part of the statistical analysis
employed in the study the significant influence of parenting styles and teachers efficacy
beliefs on students’ academic performance would be determined.
The respondents of the study were the 308 bona fide students from Dona Trinidad
Mendoza Institute and their 616 parents who are both present and legally married and their
30 adviser/teachers. There were 958 total numbers of respondents for the study who met
the inclusion criteria earlier stated in chapter 3.
Summary Findings
The salient finding in this study to the specific questions are as follows:
Problem 1. What is the most commonly used parenting styles of the parents in terms of the
following.
1.1 authoritarian;
1.2 permissive
1.3 authoritative
The data showed that most of the respondents parenting styles under authoritative
style showed that while they are growing up at home their mother preferred to have
clear standards, but always adjust those standards whenever needed with obtained
 highest weighted mean value of 4.23 and showed neutral response with the lowest
weighted mean value of 3.23 for having to create a decision in the family that would
hurt any of their children, however, willing to discuss that decision with them and able
to admit mistakes if needed. and majority of the respondents also agreed that their
father preferred to consistently give direction for children’s behaviors and activities, but
also shows understanding when they showed disagreed with their fathers’ decision.
Problem 2. What is the level of the teacher’s efficacy beliefs in terms of the following?
2.1 efficacy in students’ engagement;
2.2 efficacy in instructional practices:
2.3 efficacy in classroom management?
Based from the summary of results gathered and computed, majority of the responses
on teachers’ efficacy beliefs in terms of students’ engagement fall under quite a bit
interpretative description with highest mean value of 7.00, these include beliefs that they
can have impact on students in terms of how much they can do to help them to value
learning and to get through to the most difficult students with weighted mean value of 5.89.
The same results were applied to teachers efficacious beliefs on classroom management
with highest weighted mean value of 7.05 with interpretative description of a Quite a Bit on
their on how much they can do to calm students who is disruptive or noisy with highest
weighted mean value and with less efficacious belief in terms of how will they can respond
to defiant students with lowest weighted mean value of 6.16. And for responses on
teachers’ efficacy beliefs in terms of instructional practices which fall under the descriptive
value of a quite a bit effective in terms of how much they can gauge student comprehension
of what they have taught with the least obtained weighted mean value of 6.42. These
results would also mean that the teachers were Quite a Bit effective in terms of
instructional practices with an overall weighted mean value of 6.77.
Problem 3. How the academic performance of the students be described I terms of the
following subjects:
3.1 Mathematics;
3.2 Science; and
3.3 English?
The academics profile of the student-respondent revealed above average to highest
excellent performance of students’ in their academic performance Mathematics, Science,
and English respectively.
Problem 4: How do the parenting styles of the parents significantly influence the academic
achievement of the students?
Only permissive parenting style appeared to significantly influential to students’
academic performance on Mathematics but not on English and Science with obtained p-
value of 0.053 which was still within the acceptable region set at alpha 0.05 level of
significance.
Problem 5. Does the teacher’s efficacy significantly influence students academic
achievement?
Utilizing regression analyses the teachers’ efficacy beliefs of the teacher-respondent
which were all fall under descriptive equivalent value of Quite a Bit were all not
significantly influential enough to produce change in the academic performance of the
students in subjects like English, Science and Mathematics. Since the obtained p-value all
fall outside the acceptable region set at alpha 0.05 level of significance, thus, the null
hypothesis of no significant influence is true for teachers’ efficacy belief and students’
academic performance.
Problem 5. What parent-teacher program can be developed to further enhance the
academic performance of the students?
From the findings of the study, it is to be noted that the level of teachers’ efficacy
beliefs of quite a bit is not sufficient enough to produce positive influence on the academic
performance of the student, as well as, the parenting style of both parents wherein
onlypermissive parenting style significantly influence an increase students’ academic
performance in Mathematics subject, but not in subjects like English and Science.
Thus, development of programs which include seminar and training for teachers
should be focused more on how teachers could have better understanding on the
importance of having high efficacious beliefs that they could bring about positive changes in
the academic performance of their students. While, for parents training on parenting style
should include ways on how they can be more adept on using permissive parenting style to
further help their children to have better academic performance not only in Mathematics,
but more so on other subjects like English and science.
Conclusions
Based on the aforementioned findings of the study, the following conclusions were
derived:
1. From the majority of the responses it can be concluded that both parents ( mother
and father) of the student-respondents made use of all the three parenting styles,
simultaneously or depending upon the need of the situation. These include
authoritative styles as observed by their children that included; while they are
growing up at home their mother preferred to have clear standards, but always
adjust those standards whenever needed. For authoritarian style, where mothers as
observed by their children at home that even if they didn’t agree with their mother
felt that it was for our own good if we were forced to conform to what their mother
thought was right. While for authoritarian father, children believed that their fathers
felt that it was for their own good if they will be forced to conform to what the
father thoughtwas right. And for permissive parents majority of their children
agreed that booth of their parents became permissive when they allow them to
have their own way in the family as often as their parents do.

2. It was also observed that of the three parenting styles only permissive parenting
styles appeared to have significant influence on the academic performance of the
student, but this was only for the Mathematics subject. However, since the students
respondents’ academic performance ranged from above Average to High/Excellence
performance it can be concluded that the student-respondents were adjusted at
home with their parents made use of their most preferred parenting styles. And for
 this reason, in general their academic performance was not so much dependent
with that of their parents ( father and mother) choice of parenting styles.
3. It was shown that majority of the teacher-respondents’ level of efficacy beliefs were
quite a bit which was also tantamount to just an average beliefs that they were
capable on how they could bring about positive changes in their students’ academic
performance, which include beliefs in terms of students’ engagement that they can
have impact on student in terms of how much they can do to help them value
learning, for beliefs in terms of classroom management on how they can do to calm
student who is disruptive. And for efficacy beliefs on instructions practices in terms
of how well they can implement alternative strategies in the classroom.
Recommendations
After a thorough assessment of the findings of this study, the following
recommendations are presented:
1. For the parents they should be able to learn to make use of parenting styles that
would be suited to the developmental needs of their children. From the findings of
the study it could be recommended that permissive parenting style can be effective
in promoting students’ academic performance in Mathematics. Thus, parents are
encouraged to make use of this parenting style as often as possible,
2. For the teachers they should learn to become instrumental in developing the
academic performance of the students by having to create high efficacy beliefs that
they can bring positive changes in their students’ academic performance.
3. For the school administrators that they devise a program or better yet considered
the suggestions of the researcher to create programs which include seminar and
workshop/training that focus on enhancing the parenting styles of both parents and
help teachers increased their efficacy beliefs about their important in helping their
students to become academic achievers in the classrooms.
4. For future researchers, that they cover other variables not contained in this study to
better understand the influence both of parenting styles and teachers’ efficacy
beliefs on the other students’ academic outcomes.
References
Aremu, S. (2001). Effect of Gender and Parenting Style on Academic Performance of
Undergraduate Students of a Nigerian University. African of Journal of Educational Research
((AJER). Vol 5 (1), 169 – 174
Bandura , A ( 2002) The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M.A. Hitt (eds.)
Great Minds in management ( pp. 9-35)) Oxford: Oxford Univesity Press.
Bauman-Knight, A (2006). Teacher credibility: A Tool for diagnosing problems in Teacher/
student relationships. University of Oklahoma.
Baumrind, D. (2003) Effective parenting during the early adolescent transition. In P. A.
Gowan & E. M Hetherington ( Eds.) , Advances in Family research ( Vol. 2, pp. III – 163 ).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fakeye, D. ( 2008) Parenting Styles and Primary Pupils Reading Achievement In South
Western Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences 5 (2): 209-214, 2008 SSN: 1683-8831.
Medwell Journals.
Gibson, S. & Dembo, M (2003). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76, 569-582.
Gordon, L. M. (2001) High Teacher efficacy as a marker of teacher effectiveness in the
domain of classroom management. San Diego, CA. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the
California Council on teacher Education , (Fall 2001)
Goodwin, B. (2010/2011) Research says: Good Teachers may not fit the mold, Educational
Leadership, 68(4), 79-80.
Kordi, A. (2010). Parenting Attitude and style and its effect on Children’s School
Achievement. International Journal of Psychological Studies Vol. 2, No 2: Department of
Human Development & Family studies, Faculty of Human Ecology University Putra Malaysia,
43400 Selangor, Malaysia E-mail abdolrezakordi@yahoo.com
Lamborn, S. D ., Mounts N. S. Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S.M. (2004). Patterns of
competenceand adjustment among adolescent from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent,
and neglectful families, child Development, 62, 1049-1065.
Ribeiro, L. (2009). Contruction and validation of four Prenting Styles Scale.
l