ORAL COMMUNICATION APPREHENSION AND SPEAKING SKILLS OF GRADE 10

STUDENTS IN MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY AT NAAWAN

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENTAL SCHOOL

REGGY A. SABILLA

An Undergraduate Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of the
College of Education and Social Sciences
Mindanao State University at Naawan
9023 Naawan, Misamis Oriental
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the
Degree of

Bachelor of Secondary Education in English

December 2015
 The Undergraduate Thesis attached hereto entitled “ORAL COMMUNICATION
APPREHENSION AND SPEAKING SKILLS OF STUDENTS OF GRADE 10 STUDENTS IN
MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY AT NAAWAN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENTAL SCHOOL”
prepared and submitted by Reggy A. Sabilla in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Bachelor of Secondary Education in English was successfully defended and approved
on October 9, 2015.

ROSALINA L. DIVINAGRACIA JACKIE LOU A. VALDEZ

Member Member

MILAGROS M. HAMBRE, Ph. D.

Thesis Adviser

The Department of Secondary and Elementary Education endorses acceptance of this

Undergraduate Thesis Proposal in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Secondary Education in English.

BELLA S. AMARGA
Chairperson, Department of Secondary and Elementary Education

This Undergraduate Thesis is hereby officially accepted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Secondary Education in English.

MILAGROS M. HAMBRE, Ph. D.

Dean
College of Education and Social Sciences

ii
 BIOGRAPHICAL DATA

NAME : Reggy Allona Sabilla

ADDRESS : Purok 3, Poblacion, Naawan, Misamis

Oriental

DATE OF BIRTH : July 29, 1996

PLACE OF BIRTH : Tuburan, Naawan, Misamis Oriental

PARENTS : Roseller G. Sabilla

Marites A. Sabilla

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

ELEMENTARY : Naawan Central School

Poblacion, Naawan, Misamis Oriental
March 2008

SECONDARY : Mindanao State University at Naawan

Integrated Developmental School
Naawan, Misamis Oriental
March 2012

TERTIARY : Mindanao State University at Naawan

College of Education and Social Sciences
Naawan, Misamis Oriental
Bachelor of Secondary Education major in
English
June 2016

MEMBERSHIP IN ORGANIZATIONS : Member, Circle of English Majors

(2012-2013)

: Treasurer, Circle of English Majors

(2013- 2014)

: Social Manager, Circle of English Majors

(2014-2015)

: Member, Circle of English Majors

(2012-2016)

iii
 : Member, Education Society (2012-2014)

: Member, Association of Student Teachers

in Region X (2014-2016)

: Member, College of Education and Social

Sciences (2012-2016)

AWARDS RECEIVED : Dean’s List Awardee:

2nd semester (2013-2014)

: Vice Chancellor’s List Awardee:

2nd semester (2014-2015)

SEMINARS/ WORKSHOPS ATTENDED : K-12 Seminar

February 4, 2013
MSU-IIT, CED Amphitheater, Iligan City

Love, Sex and Lasting Relationship

Seminar-Workshop
February 20, 2013
MSUN, Function House, Naawan

Seminar Workshop on Journalism

February 27, 2013
MSUN, Audio Visual Room, Naawan

K to 12 Seminar
July 26, 2013
MSUN, Function House, Naawan

Science Teaching in the 21st Century

Classroom Seminar-Workshop
September 21, 2013
MSUN, Audio Visual Room, Naawan

AQF, PQF and Outcomes Based

Education
February 15, 2014
MSUN, Function House, Naawan

Researches, Seminar and Workshop in

Mathematics and Science Education
October 11, 2014
MSUN, Audio Visual Room, Naawan

(Facilitator) English for Sale!

March 11, 2015
MSUN, Function House, Naawan

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author would like to thank the Almighty God for giving her good health,
spiritual guidance, and strength all throughout the thesis paper.

Sincere thanks goes to the following:

Her father and Mother: Roseller G. Sabilla and Marites A. Sabilla for the utmost
care, discipline, inspiration, undying support, guidance and sustenance. She
wouldn’t have strived to become a professional and wouldn’t have grown to be an
organized person if it were not of them;

Her papa and mama: Vicente and Panya for the irreplaceable life and the struggle
and sacrifice on bearing her. She would have not been here without them;

Ms. Serpolette V. Bohol, for her comments, suggestions, untiring patience and
guidance towards this paper;

Ms. Juvy S. Arjona and Ms. Helen V. Idnay for the time given allowing the
researcher to conduct the study to the school;

Prof. Milagros M. Hambre for the brilliant ideas and expertise for the improvement
of this paper;

Ms. Rosalina L. Divinagracia and Ms. Jackie Lou A. Valdez for their sharing of
expertise and for thoroughly scrutinizing the paper;

Ms. Bella S. Amarga, the Chairman for Department of Secondary and Elementary
Education and Ms. Bella C. Mugot, former Dean of the College of Education and
Social Sciences for their moral support and encouragement;

Aljun, Queen Hazel and Laziel for the assistance during the study;

Circle of English Majors and College of Education and Social Sciences Student
Organization friends for the support and courage for making this paper
successful;

Cousins, niece and nephew, other relatives and good friends for their prayer and
support; and

Mindanao State University at Naawan Faculty and Staff, for the encouragements
and moral support.

Thank you very much!

REGGY A. SABILLA

v
Reggy Allona Sabilla. Mindanao State University at Naawan – College of Education
and Social Sciences. December 2015. ORAL COMMUNICATION APPREHENSION
AND SPEAKING SKILLS OF GRADE 10 STUDENTS IN MINDANAO STATE
UNIVERSITY AT NAAWAN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENTAL SCHOOL.

ABSTRACT

This study deals to find out the level of oral communication apprehension and speaking
skills of Grade 10 students using questionnaire and rubric as the instruments used. The
respondents were the Grade 10 students of Mindanao State University at Naawan Integrated
Developmental School. Random sampling was done, and 60, comprising 50% of the 120
respondents were chosen. Their speaking skills were tested on three different speaking activities.
Results revealed that the respondents obtained a rating of 4, comprising 50% of the total
respondents for the impromptu speaking, 4 for the clinical interview, comprising 53.33%, and 4
and 5, comprising 40% of the total respondents for the peer discussion. There was no significant
relationship between the level of oral communication apprehension and the speaking skills of the
respondents for the clinical interview (ρ > 0.032336) and peer discussion (ρ > 0.032067).
However, a significant relationship was observed between the level of oral communication
apprehension and the levels of speaking skills for the impromptu speaking (ρ > 0.052163). Based
on the results, it is highly recommended that teachers should vary techniques and strategies that
can help the students lessen their apprehension.

vi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background and rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2. Statement of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Objectives of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3.1. General objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3.2. Specific objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4. Significance of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.5. Scope and limitations of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.6. Definition of terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3. THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

3.1. Theoretical framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2. Conceptual framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4. MATERIALS AND METHODS

4.1. Research design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.2. Subject of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.3. Data gathering procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.4. Instrument to be used in the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.5. Data management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5. RESULTS
5.1. Levels of communication apprehension of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.2. Levels of speaking skills of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.3. Significant relationship between the levels of communication apprehension
and the speaking skills of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

6. DISCUSSION
6.1. Levels of communication apprehension of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.2. Levels of speaking skills of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3. Significant relationship between the levels of communication apprehension
and the speaking skills of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

vii
8. IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

LINE ITEM BUDGET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

GANTT CHART . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Description Page

1 Levels of oral communication apprehension among Grade 10

respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2 Survey of various speaking engagements among Grade 10

respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3 Summary of various speaking engagements among Grade 10

respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4 Correlation analysis between oral communication apprehension

and speaking skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Description Page

1 Conceptual framework of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2 Map showing the location of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3 Flow chart of the methods used in the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

x
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Description Page

1 Personal report of communication apprehension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

2 Rubrics for assessment of speaking activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

3 Questions for impromptu speaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

4 Questions for clinical interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

5 Topic for peer discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

6 Letter-request to the principal of MSUN-IDS for the conduct of the

study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

7 Letter to the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

8 Raw data on the Personal Report on Communication Apprehension

responses of the respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

9 Raw data on the rating for impromptu speaking of the respondents 59

10 Raw data on the rating for clinical interview of the respondents . . . . . 60

11 Raw data on the rating for peer discussion of the respondents . . . . . . 61

xi