Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter I
Introduction
size, relative position of figures, and the properties of space. (Olson, 2012)
sense of accuracy and utility of these deductions, is impressive, and has been a
Schwartz (2014) said that when people recall their geometry learning
Hiele Theory intended to provide with the actual experiences that will help
“many students, their lack of geometry understanding is due in part from a lack of
final chapters of the book, thus students enter high school geometry only knew
1
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
what the name of the shapes and they only memorize the formulas but they don’t
remember it. It turns out that Fulton introduced the seminal work on geometric
aspects. According to Conolly (2010) many students struggle with geometry and
do not perceive its value. Teachers become frustrated with the slow progress of
most students. In line with this the van Hiele Geometric understanding was
created.
also the participant’s level of understanding using the said develop examination.
The van Hiele theory has been applied to clarify students' difficulties with
school geometry. In this theory if students do not taught at the proper van Hiele
level that they are at or ready for it, will face difficulties and they cannot
understand geometry. The therapy that offered for students by this theory is that
they should go through the sequence of levels in a specific way (Usiskin, 1982).
2
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
theory called the van Hiele Model of Geometric Thinking. His research findings
suggest the usefulness of using lesson plans based on the two theoretical
mathematics. In this study the model was neither proved nor disproved but just
environment and take parted, up to eight lab activities. He also used van Hiele
reasoning.
Based on the studies stated above, the researchers would like to develop
learners. It’s an examination that can help learners to be aware in their level of
create new and helpful strategies for the learners to learn and to have a depth
understanding in Geometry.
3
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Theoretical Framework
Pierre van Hiele and Dina van Hiele-Geldof, a husband-and wife team
Dutch educators made an observation to their students and notice that they
involving levels of thinking in geometry known as van Hiele Theory. This theory
explains why many students find geometry as hard subject, especially with formal
proofs. The van Hieles believed that writing proofs requires thinking at a
comparatively high level, and that many students need to have more experiences
2002)
processes used in geometric contexts. The level describes how we think on what
types of geometric ideas we think about, rather than how much knowledge we
4
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
list all the properties the student knows, but not discern which
object.
is not understood.
geometry class.
5
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
The products of thought at each level are the same as the objects of
thought at the next level. The objects (ideas) must be created at one level so that
relationships among these objects can become the focus of the next level. The
van Hiele Theory also presents four related characteristics of the levels of
6
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Analysis of
deductive
systems
Deductive
systems of
properties
Relationship
Level 4 Rigor
among
properties
Properties
Level 3 Deduction
of Shapes
of Shapes
Level 1 analysis
Shapes
Level 0 Visualization
Figure 1
7
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
concepts.
mathematical terms.
tasks.
8
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Conceptual Framework
Figure 2
9
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
b. Item Analysis
c. Normality Test
d. Reliability Test
b. Item Analysis
c. Normality Test
d. Reliability Test
pilot testing with restriction and without the restriction of van Hiele’s Level
a. Grade 7 competencies
b. Grade 8 competencies
c. Grade 9 competencies
d. Grade 10 competencies
e. Overall competencies
10
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
For the school administration, to help them plan the teaching strategy
For the teachers, to help them improve their ability in teaching geometry
For the learners, they will find out what level of understanding they have
in geometry and they can also improve what level they did not excel.
For other researchers, this study will serve as reference for the future
University of the Philippines Main Campus School Year 2017-2018 in all junior
11
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Examination.
geometric understanding.
proceed to the next level or simply satisfy the original idea of the
Definition of Terms
The following terms were defined for this study will be encountered
12
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Determinant Examination.
the items of the test on the basis of their difficulty value and discriminated index.
instrument, a 100 – item multiple choice examination that was used to determine
Normality test. It refers to the formula that obtained the normality of the
examination and proves that it comes from the normal distributions of scores of
the respondents.
consistent and stable using the split-half method and using the Spearman-Brown
formula.
13
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Table of Specification. This refers to the matrix that contains the number
14
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
CHAPTER II
This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies that the
Related Literature
Conolly (2010) as cited by Maga (2014), on his study “The impact on Van
subject substantially different from other high school math courses. With this
framework in mind, teachers are better prepared to assess their students and
Howse, M. (2014). The Van Hiele theory of geometric thought describes the
geometry (Van Hiele 1984). The basis of the theory is the idea that a student’s
15
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
1999).
Related Studies
The van Hiele model is considered one of the most important models in
teaching geometry and the geometric concepts and thoughts are developed
through five phases within an educational program. These phases represent the
summarize what he learned and employ it in his daily life activities (Tall & Pegg,
Thinking” had found out that effective learning occurs as students actively
as they engage in discussion and reflection using the language of the learning
useful asset and tool to the geometry teacher in the classroom. The significant
16
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
this study also suggest that there is a need to provide more interactive and hands-
on learning activities for geometry learning at the lower secondary school level.
According to CCSSI (2010); Cobb and Yackel (1995). The Van Hiele theory
geometry instruction. Activities like those described in this article draw on well-
Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) (CCSSI 2010). During certain
stages of the activities, students were prompted to share their ways of reasoning
students had opportunities to not only reflect on their own thinking but also critique
the reasoning of their classmates. These student practices are consistent with the
quadrilaterals of the third year high school students in selected public schools in
Lanao del Sur. The result revealed that out of 409 respondents, 312 belonged to
level of entering third year high school students which confirmed the findings of
17
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
other researchers such as Usiskin (1982), Ginez (2006),Tan and Yebron (2008)
and Dindyal (2007) that majority of the third year high school students have a
level of understanding lower than level 3 (deduction). The study implies that most
of the students were at level 0 (pre-cognition) which shows the difficulty of the
subject which was expected among the participants. It was recommended that
students must undergo evaluation of Van Hiele’s level to be aware of their status
in geometric understanding.
The study conducted by San Gabriel in 2011, the respondents were 196
third year of FVR National High School. They were classified according to the Van
Hiele’s levels (level 0, level 1, level 2, level 3) using a teacher made test. The
research revealed that 44% of the students were at level 0; 37% were at level 1;
18% were at level 2; and only 1% are at level 3. None of the respondents were at
level 4 of van hiele’s levels. It implies that majority of the students were on level 0
Synthesis
The van Hiele model is one of the most important models in teaching
geometry as stated by Tall and Pegg (2005) and Clements(2003). Idri (2007) and
Conolly (2010) as cited by Magna (2014), the van Hiele Theory levels is useful
asset and tool on teachers as the teach geometry. In Solaimans’ study as cited in
18
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
MATHED (2013) as cited in Maga (2014), using van Hiele theory, it was found
that most of the students reached only level 0 of van Hiele levels Geometric
thought and stated that students found difficulties in the said subject.
Based on the review literature and studies cited by the researchers, van
think geometrically. Through this theory, teachers can improve the teaching and
understanding a learner has, it will guide the teacher to think critically and
creatively and utilize the best and appropriate strategies and techniques to be
implemented in his lesson so that learners understand the lesson well. In line with
this, the reviewed literatures and studies cited by the researchers will serve as a
understanding of learners.
19
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Chapter III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the respondents of the study and the statistical
investigation. Specifically, the research method, the population and sample size,
the sampling technique, the instrument used and the data gathering procedures
together with its development and the corresponding statistical treatment for
For the dry run testing, the researchers selected Grade 10 students,
Year (S.Y) 2017 – 2018, where some of the researchers conducted their practice
teaching. It was composed of 79 participants. For the pilot testing, the researcher
20
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Senior High School Main Campus, School Year (S.Y.) 2017 – 2018. The
participants for the pilot testing were students of the researchers’ adviser, Mr. Ian
Joseph Saguindan.
Sampling Technique
The researchers utilized Convenience Cluster Sampling. For the dry run
testing, the researchers chose Grade 10 students, section Genesis and Leviticus
of Eulogio Rodriguez Integrated School, School Year (S.Y.) 2017 – 2018, where
some of the researchers conducted their practice teaching. The said participants
Sabordo for Grade 10 – Genesis and Ms. Jo-Ann O. Villanueva for Grade 10 –
Leviticus. For the pilot testing, the researcher chose Grade 11 Science,
School Year (S.Y.) 2017 – 2018. The participants for the pilot testing were
Genesis and Leviticus of Eulogio Rodriguez Integrated School, School Year (S.Y.)
2017-2018 for the dry run testing. It composed of thirty-six (36) boys and forty-
three (43) girls. Their ages were range from 15 to 21 years old and they are
homogenous in terms of academic standing. For the pilot testing, the respondents
21
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
fifty-five (55) boys and forty-three (43) girls. Their ages were range from 17 to 18
years old. The said respondents are completers of Junior Geometry and
Instrumentation
the research which found in appendix. The first examination used for dry run
testing was content validated by the researchers’ adviser, Mr. Ian Joseph
22
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
From one hundred sixty (160) items, it became a hundred (100) items after
conducting the dry run testing, item analysis, reliability and normality of the first
exam. It was also content validated by the researchers’ adviser, Mr. Ian Joseph
Triangle Congruence 13
Inequalities in Triangle 5
Parallelograms 9
Triangle Similarities 9
Circles 7
Coordinate Geometry 7
Total 100
Figure 4. The numbers of items per topic in Level of Geometric Understanding a Determinant
23
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
examination which was content validated by researchers’ adviser, Mr. Ian Joseph
Saguindan, then revised and content validated for three times. Researchers sent
a request letter asking permission to Mr. Romeo E. Bandal, principal, thru Ms.
Cynthia M. Delino, assistant to the principal and head of Math Department and
cooperating teachers namely Ms. Emily A. Labang and Ms. LD Babylon H. Carloy
respondents took one - hundred (100) minutes to finish the said examination.
retained. It also computed the reliability and normality of the said exam.
Researchers revised the examination and sent a request letter asking permission
University of the Philippines Senior High School Main Campus. Respondents took
seventy (70) minutes to finish the examination. After conducting a pilot testing,
researchers repeated the item analysis and obtained the reliability and normality
of the examination.
24
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
1. The researchers used the relative frequency formula. It will also be used to
𝑓
𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = 𝑥 100%
𝑛
items divided by the number of such items. The arithmetic mean was used
in this study to get the average score of the results of the dry run and pilot
testing.
Formula:
∑x
x̅ =
n
distribution that is the square root of the arithmetic mean of the squares of
the deviation of each of the class frequencies from the arithmetic of the
25
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Formula:
Ʃ(𝑥 − 𝑥̄ )2
𝑠=√
𝑛−1
n=sample size
4. The item analysis is a statistical technique which is used for selecting and
discriminated power. A process to assess the quality of the items and a test
Formula:
Σ𝑥
Index of Difficulty = 𝑥 100
𝑁
Where: Σ𝑥 = the sum of scores of correct answer of the upper and lower
groups of respondents
respondents
26
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
b. Discrimination Index
Formula:
𝑅𝑈−𝑅𝐿
Discrimination Index = 𝑁𝐺
Where: RU = right response of the half of the respondent who got highest
scores
LU = right response of the half of the respondents who got lower scores
consistent and stable using the split-half method and the Spearman-Brown
Formula:
6Σ𝐷2
𝑟ℎ𝑡 = 1 − 3
𝑁 −𝑁
2(𝑟ℎ𝑡 )
𝑟𝑤𝑡 =
1 + (𝑟ℎ𝑡 )
27
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Figure 5. The Interpretation of Correlation Coefficient Value for the reliability of the examination.
greater than 0.05, we do not reject the idea that the set of scores comes
Formula
(∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑎𝑖 𝑥(𝑖) )
2
W= ∑𝑛 2
𝑖=1(𝑥𝑖 −𝑥̅ )
Where :
𝑎𝑖 are given by
28
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
𝑚𝑇 𝑉 −1
(𝑎𝑖 , … 𝑎𝑛 ) =
(𝑚𝑇 𝑉 −1 𝑉 −1 𝑚)2
Where 𝑚 = (𝑚1 , … 𝑚𝑛 )𝑇
distribution
29
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Chapter 4
methodology and specific objective of the study. This study is developing level of
questions:
The data were presented following the order of the statement of the problem:
Determinant Examinaton.
∑𝑥 ∑𝑥
𝑥̅ = 𝑥̅ =
𝑛 𝑛
Where: 4492
𝑥̅ =
79
x = scores of the respondents
𝑥 = 56.86
n = number of respondents
30
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
∑(𝑥−𝑥̅ )2
∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ )2 s=√
𝑠=√ 𝑛−1
𝑛−1
8893.4684
where: s=√ 79−1
n= number of respondents
The dry run testing had a mean 56.86 and standard deviation 10.678. It
b. Item Analysis
20% Easy
38%
Moderate Easy
Moderate Difficult
Difficult
41%
n = 160
Based on Figure 6.1, most of the items in dry run testing were moderate
difficult which is forty-one percent (41%). Thirty-eight percent (38%) of the items
are difficult, twenty percent (20%) of the items were moderate easy and 1% of the
31
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Based on figure 6.2, most of the items have a discrimination indices range
from 0.01 to o.25 with a percentage of sixty-nine percent (69%). Most of the items
retained came from the class interval from 0.01 to 0.25 and some of items came
from -0.24 up to 0.
26%
Retained Items
Eliminated Items
74%
n = 160
In figure 6.3, it shows that out of 160-item multiple choice examination,
seventy-four (74%) of the items which is equal to one hundred eighteen (118)
items were retained and twenty-six (26%) of the items were eliminated which is
32
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
c. Normality Test
Test of Normality
Shapiro-wilk
Statistic df Significance
0.968 79 0.514
Since the p-value obtained by the Shapiro-Wilk test of 0.514 is greater than
the p-value of 0.05, the researcher did not reject the idea that the set of scores
comes from normal distribution. It means that the test is approximately normal.
33
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
6Σ𝐷2 2(𝑟ℎ𝑡 )
𝑟ℎ𝑡 = 1 − 3 𝑟𝑤𝑡 =
𝑁 −𝑁 1 + (𝑟ℎ𝑡 )
According to Figure 5, the reliability of the initial test 𝑟ℎ𝑡 is 0.53 and the
reliability of the whole test 𝑟𝑤𝑡 is 0.69. Since the reliability of the whole test
∑𝑥 ∑(𝑥−𝑥̅ )2
𝑥̅ = s=√ 𝑛−1
𝑛
Where: Where:
4950 s=√
11 370.49
𝑥̅ = 98−1
98
𝑥 = 50.51 s = 10.827
34
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
The pilot testing had a mean 50.51 and standard deviation 10.827. It
means that the scores in pilot testing range from 39.68 to 61.34.
b. Item Analysis
13% 14%
Easy
Moderate Easy
n = 100
Figure 7.1 shows that thirty – seven percent (37%) of the items of the pilot
moderately difficult, thirty- six (36%) of the items were moderate easy, fourteen
percent (14%) were difficult and the remaining thirteen percent (13%) of the items
were easy.
n = 100
35
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Given Figure 7.2, most of the discrimination indices of the pilot testing
range from 0.01 to 0.25 with fifty-one percent (51%), thirty-five percent (35%) of
the items were between 0.26 to – 0.50, 12% has an indices from -0.24 – 0, and
1% between -0.74 - -0.50 and -0.49 - -0.25. Most of the items were retained came
from the indices 0.01 – 0 25. The other items retained came from index 0.26 up
12%
Retained Items
Eliminated Items
88%
n = 100
Based on the figure 7.3, most of the items in pilot testing were retained with
the total of eighty-eight (88) and twelve (12) items were eliminated out of 100-
c. Normality Test
Test of Normality
Shapiro-wilk
Statistic df Significance
0.988 98 0.538
36
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Since the p-value obtained by the Shapiro-Wilk test of 0.538 is greater than
the tabular value of 0.05, the researcher did not reject the idea that the set of
scores comes from normal distribution. It means that the test is approximately
normal.
6Σ𝐷2 2(𝑟ℎ𝑡 )
𝑟ℎ𝑡 = 1 − 3 𝑟𝑤𝑡 =
𝑁 −𝑁 1 + (𝑟ℎ𝑡 )
37
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
According to Figure 5, the reliability of the pilot testing 𝑟ℎ𝑡 is 0.72 and the
reliability of the whole test 𝑟𝑤𝑡 is 0.84. Since the reliability of the whole test
obtained is high relationship between the odd and even items. Thus the whole test
Level 0 Level 0
3%
13% 14%
Level 1 Level 1
10% Level 2 18% Level 2
65% 9% 0%
Level 3 68% Level 3
0%
Non-mastery Non-mastery
n = 98
n = 98
Grade 8 Overall Competencies
Level 0
14%
level 1
11%
Level 2
5%
65% Level 3
5%
Non-mastery
n = 98
Figure 8.1 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing with restriction in Grade 7 Competencies.
38
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Based on figure 8.1, with the restriction of van Hiele’s Level of Geometric
Understanding, there were thirteen percent (13%) of the participants who reached
level 0 (Visualization), three percent (3%) were at level 1(Analysis), ten percent
(10%) were at level 2 (Informal Deduction) and nine percent (9%) were at level 3
were at level 1 and none of the participants reached level 2 and 3. For the Grade
(14%), eleven percent (11%) was at level 1 and five percent (5%) were at level 2
and 3. The sixty-five percent (65%) of the participants did not reached any level in
Grade 7 competencies.
c. Grade 8 Competencies
n = 98 n = 98
39
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Level 0 4% 1%
5%
Level 0
20% Level 1 Level 1
11%
43%
12% level 2
Level 2
Level 3
8% 79%
17% Level 3 Non-mastery
n = 98 n = 98
13% Level 0
41% 11% Level 1
Level 2
23%
Level 3
12%
Non-mastery
n = 98
Figure 8.2 The Levels of Geometric Understanding of the PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing with restriction in Grade 8 Competencies
Based on Figure 8.2, there are seven percent (7%) of the participants
(53%) were at level 2 and seven percent (7%) were at level 3 in Axiomatic
five percent (5%) were at level 1, twenty-six (26%) were at level 2, and thirteen
percent (13%) were at level 3. In Inequalities of Triangle, four percent (4%) were
at level 0, one percent (1%) was at level 1, five percent (5%) were at level 2 and
eleven percent (11%) were at level 3. Parallel and Perpendicular lines, there were
40
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
twenty percent (20%) of the participants were at level 0, twelve percent (12%)
were at level 1, eight percent (8%) were at level 2, and seventeen percent (17%)
the participants reached level 2 but forty-one percent (41%) of them did not
a. Grade 9 Competencies.
Level 0 Level 0
17% 19%
Level 1 34% Level 1
44%
Level 2 Level 2
23% Level 3
33% Level 3
Non-mastery Non-mastery
8% 6%
n = 98 10% 6%
n = 98
Level 0
Level 0 24%
20% 39% Level 1
Level 1
Level 2
Level 2 16%
17% Level 3
62% Level 3
15% Non-mastery
1% Non-mastery
0% 6%
n = 98
n = 98
Figures 8.3 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing with restriction in Grade 9 Competencies
41
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Figure 8.3 shows that there were nineteen percent (19%) of the
percent (8%) were at level 2 and thirty-three percent (33%) were at level 3 in
(34%) of the participants were at level 0, six percent (6%) were at level 1 and
another six percent (6%) were at level 2, and ten percent (10%) were at level 3.
For the third topic, Basic Concepts of Trigonometry, twenty percent (20%) were at
level 0, seventeen percent (17%) were at level 1, one percent (1%) was at level 2
and none of the participants reached level 3. For Grade 9 overall competencies,
most of the participants reached level 0 with twenty-four percent (24%) and
sixteen percent (16%) reached level 1. On the other hand, thirty-nine percent
(39%) of the participants did not reach any level of the van Hiele’s Geometric
Understanding.
d. Grade 10 Competencies
Level 0
18%
13% Level 0 Level 1
39%
28% Level 1 7%
9% Level 2
6%
Level 2 Level 3
7% Level 3 30%
Non-mastery
43%
Non-mastery
n = 98
n = 98
42
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Level 0
27% 23% Level 1
7% Level 2
19% Level 3
24%
Non-mastery
n = 98
Figures 8.4 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the PUP Senior High School Grade 11
pilot testing with restriction. For the topic, Circles, twenty-eight percent (28%)
were at level 0, seven percent (7%) were at level 1, forty-three percent (43%)
were at level 2 and nine percent (9%) were at level 3. For the last topic,
seven percent (7%) were at level 1, six percent (6%) were at level 2 and thirty
percent (24%) were at level 2, nineteen percent (19%) were at level 0, nineteen
percent (19%) reached level 3, and seven percent (7%) were at level 1.
Unfortunately, twenty-seven percent (27%) of the participants did not reached any
43
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Number of Students
Level 3 0
Level 2 2
Number of Students
Level 1 2
n = 98
Level 0 6
0 2 4 6 8
Figures 8.5 The Levels of Geometric Understanding of the PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing with restriction in all Grade Level Competencies.
Given figure 8.5, with the restriction of van Hiele’s Levels of Geometric
Understanding and out of ninety-eight (98) participants in the pilot testing, only six
(6) of them were mastered level 0 (Visualization). Only two (2) of the six
that 2 out of 98 participants reached level 2. For level 3 (Deduction), none of the
44
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
80%
60% 55%
49%
40% 33%
20%
0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
30% 35%
33%
20%
21%
10%
2%
0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Grade 7 Overall competencies
50% 92%
55%
40% 33% 49%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Figure 8.6 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the 98 PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing without restriction in Grade 7 Competencies.
45
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Based on the given figure 8.6, without the restriction of the theory of van
participants were master level 0, fifty-five percent (55%) mastered level 1, ninety-
two percent (92%) were master level 2 and forty-nine percent (49%) were master
level 3 for the topic “C-nversions of Units of Measurements”. For Sides and
Angles of Polygon, thirty five percent (35%) were master level 0, thirty percent
(33%) were master at level 1, two percent (2%) of the participants were master
level 2 and twenty-one percent (21%) were master level 3. For the overall
percents (47%), forty-four percent (44%) were master level 1, thirty-five percent
(35%) were master level 3 and thirty-four percent (34%) were master level 0.
b. Grade 8 Competencies
Grade 8 Axiomatic of
Grade 8 Triangle Congruence
structure of Geometry
100% 100%
40% 40%
20% 20%
16% 16%
0% 0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
46
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Figure 8.7 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the 98 PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing without restriction in Grade 8 Competencies.
Figure 8.7 shows the participants who master each level of geometric
level 0, ninety-two percent (92%) were master level 1, and sixty-five percent
(65%) were master level 2 and sixteen percent (16%) were master level 3. For the
second topic, Triangle Congruence, sixty-four (64%) were master level 0, seventy
percent (70%) were master level 1, eighty five percent (85%) were master level 2
47
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
and si-teen percent (16%) were master level 3. In the third topic, which is
percent (76%) were master level 1, eighty-nine percent (89%) were master level 2
and forty nine percent (49%) were master level 3. In Parallel and Perpendicular
line topic, there were seventy-two percent (72%) of the participants mastered level
1, sixty-two percent (62%) were master level 1, six percent (6%) were master
d. Grade 9 Competencies
68% 10%
66% 0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
48
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Figure 8.8 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the 98 PUP Senior High School
Grade 11 STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing without restriction in Grade 9 Competencies
Figure 8.8 shows the percentage of participant who were obtained the
scores to master each level of the van Hiele’s Level of Geometric Understanding
without restriction of van Hiele Theory. For the first topic in Grade 9
seventy-one percents 71% also in level 2 and eighty-one percents (81%) of the
participants mastered level 3. For the second topic, Triangle Similarities, fifty six
(56%) were master level 0, thirty-three percent (33%) were at level 1, 655 were at
level 2 and fifty-six percent (56%) were at level 3. Overall, there were only
percent (76%), level 2 with eighty-nine percent (89%) and level 3 with forty-nine
49
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
b. Grade 10 Competencies
Grade 10 Circles
100%
81%
50% 65% 69%
17%
0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Figure 8.9 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the 98 PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing without restriction in Grade 10 Competencies.
Based on the figure 3.8, the participants who master each level in Grade 10
competencies without the restriction of van Hiele Theory was determined. For the
first topic, eighty-one percent (81%) of the participant were obtained the mastery
percent (61%) were at level 2 and thirty-five (35%) were at level 3. In Coordinate
50
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Geometry topic, sixty-five percent (65%) were at level 0, sixty-six percent (66%)
were at level 1, sixty-our percent (64%) were at level 2 and sixty-seven percent
(73%) were obtained the mastery at level 0, sixty-six percent (66%) were at level
1, sixty-seven percent (67%) were at level 2 and level 3 with forty-two percent
Overall Competencies
60%
50% 57% 57% 56%
40%
41%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Figure 8.9 The Level of Geometric Understanding of the 98 PUP Senior High School Grade 11
STEM, section 7 & 8, in the pilot testing without restriction in all Grade Level Competencies.
Based on figure 8.9, without the restriction of the van Hiele’s Levels of
level 0, fifty-seven percent (57%) were master level 1, fifty-six percent (56%) were
51
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Chapter 5
This chapter presents the summary of the study, the conclusion drawn and
interpret the gathered data easily. Convenience Cluster Sampling was utilized to
data in the research. For the dry run testing, a 160-item multiple choice
examination was content validated by the researchers’ adviser, Mr. Ian Joseph
Saguindan. The researchers conducted its item analysis, and obtained the mean
and standard deviation, reliability and normality of the examination. From 160-
items, it was reduced to a 100-item multiple choice examination that was used in
the pilot testing. It also content validated by the researchers’’ adviser, Mr Ian
Joseph Saguindan. After the pilot testing, it went through the process of item
analysis and obtained its mean and standard deviation, reliability and normality
values to be declared as reliable and approximately normal test that came from a
52
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
b. Item Analysis
c. Normality test
d. Reliability test
b. Item Analysis
c. Normality test
d. Reliability test
pilot testing restriction and without the restriction of van Hiele’s Level of
a. Grade 7 competencies
b. Grade 8 competencies
53
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
c. Grade 9 Competencies
d. Grade 10 competencies
e. Overall competencies
Summary of Findings
1. Based on the collected data, the mean of the dry run testing of Level of
standard deviation is 10.68 which mean that the range of the scores is from
class interval from 0.01 to 0.25. The numbers of the items retained were
whole test and forty-two (42) items were eliminated. For the test of
greater than the tabular value 0.05, it indicates that the set of scores came
from normal distribution and the test is approximately normal. The reliability
2. Based on the collected data, the mean of the pilot testing is 50.51 and the
standard deviation is 10.83. Most of the items in dry run testing are
discrimination were between the class interval from 0.01 to 0.25 with fifty-
one percent (51%). The numbers of the items retained were eighty-seven
(87) and thirteen (13) items were eliminated from 100 items. For the test of
54
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
from normal distribution. Since the reliability of the whole test obtained is
high relationship between the odd and even items, thus the whole test is
reliable.
3. Based on the collected data, in pilot testing with restriction of van Hiele
level theory, 14% of the participants were at level 0 in the two topics of
topics, only 13% of the participants mastered level 0, 11% reached level 1,
23% were at level 2, and 12% were at level 3. In grade 9, 24% of the
15% were at level 15. In grade 10, 23% of the participants were at level 0,
7% were at level 1, 24% were at level 2 and 19% were at level 3. For the
the other hand, the result for the pilot testing without restriction of van Hiele
were at level 1, 47% were at level 2 and 35% were at level 3. In Grade 8,
63% of the participants were at level 0, 75% were at level 1, 61% were at
reached level 0, 43% were at level 1, 47% were at level 2 and 50% were at
level 3. In grade 10, 73% were at level 0, 66% were at level 1, 67% were at
level 2 and 42% were at level 3. For the overall competencies without
55
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
restriction of van Hiele Theory, level 0 and level 1 has the highest
Conclusion
(Visualization), only two participants from six who reached level 0 were
56
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Recommendation
4. Learners should give more emphasis, practice and focus on which levels of
geometric understanding they did not excel with, so that they will enhance
57
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
REFERENCE
A. Books
B. Electronics Source
28,2018)
http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/Math%20Curriculum%20Guide
%20Grades%201-10%20December%202013.pdf
58
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Fulton, B. (2013). Why students don’t Understand Geometry and How we can Fix
Howse, T. & Howse, M. (2014). Linking the van Hiele Theory to Instruction.
April 4, 2017)
from
http://geometryforall.yolasite.com/resources/Mason,%20Marguerite.%20Th
e%20van%20Hiele%20Levels%20of%20Geometric%20Understanding.%2
http://www.rolublog.com/2012/02/geometry-is-a-branch-of-mathematics-
concerned-with-questions-of-shape-size-relative-position-of-figures-and-
the-properties-of-space-geometry-arose-independently-in-a-number-of-
Schwartz (2014). Why do people have difficulty with Geometry? Retrieved from
https://www.education.com/reference/article/why-people-have-difficulty-
59
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
UKessays (2003). The van Hiele Theory of Geometric Thinking. Retrieve from
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/education/the-van-hiele-theory-of-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapiro%E2%80%93Wilk_test
C. Unpublished Master’sTheses/Dissertation
Maga, Raffy D. “Level of Understanding of Third year Public and Private Schools
of Pasig City in Solving Geometry Problems using van Hiele’s Model Basis
Philippines, 2014)
60
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
APPENDIX
61
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
Communication Letter
62
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
63