AND ITS SETTING
Background of the Study
students who always present on school and listen in the class with respect seem
to be engaged in class in the eye of the others including the instructor. But
other engagement measure: cognitive, behavioral and emotional engagement that
seems a different story. In traditional teaching, the teacher measures only the
behavior of student engagement in the class; just like classroom participation,
attendance of student, and turning in homework on time, that are some examples
on how teachers evaluated the students engagement in the classroom. Through
conducting a study of connecting students’ impression of environment in school
with behavior, the authors gave one of the first pieces of empirical research
that supports the feasibility of the multidimensional perspective, which had
already been to a great extent hypothetical (Wang and Eccles,. 2013).
In UM Tagum
College, it has been observed that
students only have short listening span when it comes to mathematics subject.
Mathematics educators in the school use different strategies in teaching so
that the students will be more engage to their work and have confidence in the
ability to succeed their emotional feeling towards mathematics. This problem is
based from the grades and performance of junior high school students in this
Meanwhile, this study is replication of Thomas Kindermann
where we included the teacher efficacy as one of the independent variable with
its indicator: strategies and classroom management, and we also excluded some
of its independent of variable since the researchers would like to utilize path
analysis and broaden this study in the local areas to anticipate the persuasive
elements among students engagement towards mathematics. Henceforth, this study
was concentrated just on Peer support, Teacher Efficacy and Motivation that
were hypothesized to predict the student engagement in mathematics. Moreover,
path analysis was utilized to test the influence of Teacher Efficacy directly
and indirectly to motivation and peer group towards student engagement towards
mathematics among the UM Tagum College junior high school students. It is an approach which is a
straightforward extension of multiple regressions. Its aim is to provide
assessments of the magnitude and importance of hypothesized causal connections between
sets of variables. Likewise, it would enable us to indicate a model and
relationships between variables. Lastly, there is a need to conduct a study
where testing the most influential factors that effects student engagement
towards Mathematics. Further, these results will help to know what could be the
factor to help the class more engaged.
Statement of the Problem
aims to find what are the factors affect the students engagement in the
classroom, particularly in mathematics subject in UM Tagum College.
seeks the answers of the following questions:
What is the level of Peer Supports in terms of:
Peer Influence (Peer Pressure)
Role Models (Parents)
What is the level of Teacher Efficacy in terms of:
2.1 Instructional Strategies
What is the level of Motivation in terms of:
What is the level of Students Engagement towards
Mathematics in term of:
Behavioral Engagement; and
Is there significant relationship among:
Support and Students Engagement towards Mathematics;
Support and Teacher Efficacy;
Support and Motivation;
Efficacy and Student Engagement towards Mathematics;
Efficacy and Motivation; and
and Students Engagement towards Mathematics?
6. Do the Peer
support, Teacher Efficacy and Motivation influences the Students Engagement
7. What model
best fits Students Engagement towards Mathematics?
following hypotheses were tested at 0.05 levels of significance:
1. There is
no significant relationship between Peer Support and Students Engagement
2. There is
no significant relationship between Peer Support and Teacher Efficacy.
3. There is
no significant relationship between Peer Support and Motivation.
4. There is
no significant relationship between Teacher Efficacy and Student Engagement
5. There is
no significant relationship between Teacher Efficacy and Motivation.
6. There is
no significant relationship between Motivation and Students Engagement towards
7. There is
no domain in the Peer support, Teacher Efficacy and Motivation that
significantly influences/determines the Student Engagements.
Peer support may
tremendously affect a child’s capacity to work in the classroom. Making a
positive peer connection between a general instruction and special education
understudy may lead to a development in the two students. Studies demonstrate
that, in some cases, students keep on engaging in high amounts of correspondence
with other students (Tepstra and Tamura, 2008 cited from Candace, 2016).
In a study of such peer mentoring program
(Walker, 2012a), the work by the peer coaches uncovered that student drew upon
educational procedures and interconnected substance to help their peers in
difficult. To their peers, these clarifications were novel and provided another
thinking about mathematics issues, even those issues were not complex to
answer. Without a doubt, there have been various studies that demonstrate the
adequacy of peer academic support for the learning of mathematics in school and
Relationships of students with peer at
school are one of their fundamental in learning environment. Historically, consideration
regarding factors that encourage scholastic improvement has for the most part
centered around educators and guardians. In any case, peers make children’s
opportunity at school passable and enjoyable. They give fellowship, amusement,
sentiments of having a place, help, individual approval, and emotional support
(Hamm and Zhang, 2010 cited from Kindermann, 2015). Overall, it doesn’t appear
to be the situation that peer influence essentially happen at the expense of
learning. Espinoza and Knifsend (2012) found that there is a correlation in
peer support and students’ engagement at the school.
to Sherin, 2002 cited from Franke, M. et al.,
2015) Looking at the estimation of student
engagement in mathematical classrooms, researchers have started to expand
manners by which educators can guide students correspondence. Research
indicates how difficult it is for instructors as academic tensions that exist,
educators attempting to oversee student engagement with each other thoughts
that is related with math objectives and the unpretentious move that happen as
students are guided to move from sharing new plans to participate in shared thought.
to Skinner & Pitzer (2012) Students
that is motivated can be easily to notice by the teacher and peers. In fact,
all of major motivational conceptions lay on student engaging and disaffection
as key components of how inspiration shows itself in the school and is conveyed
to instructors, guardians, and peers.
One of the common works of a teacher is to
teach knowledge to children. Teachers are also the ones who helps his students
learn more and be engaged in the learning process. Recent researches indicates
that teachers’ comments on their teaching reflect important beliefs that
influence teacher-student interactions and teacher’s success in producing
student achievement gains. Researchers labeled these beliefs as teacher’s self
efficacy- the extent to which teachers believe they can affect student
learning. Teacher efficacy is primarily concerned with having a positive
influence on students’ learning. (Gibson and Dembo, 1984; Ashton, 1985 as cited
by Gencay, O. A. (2015).
Teacher efficacy is the belief of a teacher
in his capability to organize and execute courses of action required to
successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular area of
learning. Teachers with a higher sense of efficacy are less critical of
students when they make mistakes and
exhibit more enthusiasm about teaching. Highly efficacious teacher are more
likely to use student-centered learning strategies, while teachers with low
efficacy tend to use teacher-centered strategies. Higher teacher efficacy is
also associated with higher students’ achievement, higher sense of learning
efficacy in students, and more positive student attitude toward school and
teachers. Thus, the importance of teacher efficacy is well established. Moran et al.,(1998), Ashton and Webb,
(1986), Allinder, (1994), Moore and Esselman, (1992), Anderson et al., (1988)
cited by Gencay, O.A (2015).
In recent years there has been a lot of
investigation on teacher efficacy as an important factor underlying teaching
and learning. Research suggests that teacher efficacy may underlie critical
instructional decisions including the use of instructional and classroom
management strategies. Woolfolk et al., (1990), Tschannen-Moran, (2000); cited
by Gencay, O. A. (2015).
Classroom management is the process by
which teachers and schools create and maintain appropriate behavior of students
in classroom settings. The purpose of implementing classroom management
strategies is to enhance social behavior and increase student mathematics
engagement. Effective classroom management principles work across almost all
subject areas and grade levels . An effective classroom management
increases meaningful mathematics
learning and decreases negative behaviors. Therefore, it is important to use
effective classroom management strategies as they serve as both prevention and
intervention methods that promote positive outcomes for students. (Kratochwill,
et. al., 2015)
Classroom management involves teacher actions
to create a learning environment that encourages positive interaction, active
engagement in learning, and self-motivation. Such an environment optimizes
opportunities for all students to learn
in mathematics ( Brophy, 2006). Research on classroom management has
shown that good classroom management is a result of conscious long-term
prevention and patient effort on the part of the teacher (Emmer & Sabornie, 2014). In
the investigation of Protheroe, (2007), a classroom management is effective
when students are actively engaged in doing mathematics, solving challenging
problems, making interdisciplinary connections, sharing mathematical ideas, and
using multiple representations to communicate mathematical ideas.
A student’s constant failure in a school subject and
mathematics in particular can make him to believe that he can never do well on
the subject thus accepting defeat. On the other hand, his successful experience
can make him to develop a positive attitude towards learning the subject. This
suggests that student’s attitude towards mathematics could be enhanced through
effective teaching strategies. It has in fact been confirmed that effective
teaching strategies can create positive attitude on the students towards school
subjects (Akinsola & Olowojaiye, 2008).
Several studies in the area of mathematics
have shown that instruction, especially at the secondary school level remains overwhelmingly
teacher-centered, with greater emphasis being placed on lecturing and textbook
than on helping students to think critical across subject area and applying
their knowledge to real-worlds situation. There is a need to adopt some of the
recent instructional strategies, along with some traditional practices that
have been overlooked and underutilized in secondary mathematics (National
Council of Teachers’ of Mathematics, 2000). Such practices include individual
exploration, peer interaction, and small group work each of which emphasizes
the use of multiple approaches to problem solving, active student inquiry, and
the importance of linking mathematics to students’ daily life. A key component
in reform is the movement from traditional to reform instructional practices in
mathematics is the importance of examining the effects and relationship among
types of instructional practices that student receives and their resulting
achieving and attitudes towards mathematics. Studies related to instructional
practices and academic achievement have suggested that the quality of teachers’
instructional messages affects children’s task involvement and subsequent
learning in mathematics (Cornel, 1999 and Butty, 2001).
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
A peer group is characterized as a
gathering of same age, fairly close friends and having similar routine through peer
influence. Teenagers make inquiries identifying with social personality
hypotheses, for example, “Who am I?” and “What do I need out of
life?” Feeling to be a piece of a gathering enables young people to feel
like they are in the right path to answer some of these inquiries. The youths gives twice as much energy with peers
than their guardians or different adult people that is the reason to consider
the impact or weights that companions put on each other (Castrogiovanni, 2002).
There are a some students who see different peer as a good examples. Teachers,
Guardians and peers who give answers to their questions of what they should
need to do in a social situation. Hence models, can be their inspiration or
discouragement. Modeling refers to each changes on how they think, behave or
the effects of what they have got by observing others (Ryan, 2000).
Teacher must provide an instructional
strategies and classroom management to motivate students to participate in the
classroom (Guy, 2010). Educators who adopt a relationship-building way to deal
with classroom management by concentrating on building up the entire individual
will probably enable students to create positive, socially-appropriate
behaviors. The attributes of effective teacher-student relationship are not
identified with the educator’s identity or whether the instructor is very much
preferred by the students. Instead, the connections are portrayed by particular
practices, procedures, and central mentalities exhibited by the educator
(Bender, 2003). Social and cultural context, guardians, self-understandings and
the impact of dynamic typical structures inside society formed by role models,
particularly those who is emotionally attached, decide student engagement or
disengagement. These decide understudies to pick between individual engagement
in school, or to ignore or basically dismiss learning opportunities (Dean and
This study is in
the light of the theory of involvement which refers to the amount of physical
and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience.
Thus, a student who is highly involved is one who devotes adequate energy to
studying, allots much time on campus, participates actively in student
organizations, and interacts frequently with faculty members and other
students. Conversely, a typical uninvolved student doesn’t give much time in
studies, spends little time on campus, abstains from extracurricular
activities, and has infrequent contact with faculty members or other students. The most
important factor in student learning and personal development during college is
student engagement, or the quality of effort students themselves devote to
educationally purposeful activities that contribute directly to desired out
A. W. (1984)
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the study
Significance of the Study
Definition of Terms
Support. Peer Support is an intervention involving one or more
classmates without disabilities providing academic and/ or social support to a
student with a disability. It also includes “student selection, peer
training, peer- delivered support, and adult monitoring” (Carter, Cushing,
Clark, & Kennedy, 2005, p.1 6).
Efficacy. teacher efficacy has been defined as the extent to which a
teacher believes he or she can influence students’ behavior and their academic
achievement, especially of pupils with difficulties or those with particularly
low learning motivation (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Guskey & Passaro, 1994).
The conceptualization of teacher efficacy is based on the breadth of the
teacher’s role. In most studies, this involves only the classroom in which the
teacher engages in education and teaching. Thus, the conceptualization in the
literature focused on the teacher’s perception of his or her own competence and
on the ability of teaching as a professional discipline to shape students’
knowledge, values and morality.
Student Engagement. has been
defined as “participation in educationally effective practices, both inside and
outside the classroom, which leads to a range of measurable outcomes” (Kuh et
al., 2007), and as “the extent to which students are engaging in activities
that higher education research has shown to be linked with high-quality
learning outcomes” (Krause and Coates, 2008, 493) Similarly, Hu and Kuh (2001,
3) define engagement as “the quality of effort students themselves devote to
educationally purposeful activities that contribute directly to desired
M. T., & Peck, S. (2013). Adolescent educational success and mental health
vary across school engagement profiles. Developmental Psychology
D. (2002). Adolescence: Peer groups. Retrieved from
A. M. (2000). Peer groups as a context for the socialization of adolescents’
motivation, engagement, and achievement in school. Educational Psychologist,
Bender, W. L. (2003). Relational
discipline: Strategies for in-your-face students. Boston: Pearson.
G.D. (2007) How to Help Students Achieve. Chronicle of Higher Education. 53
(41), pp. B12–13.
K. and Coates, H. (2008) Students’ Engagement in First-Year University.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 33 (5), pp. 493–505.
S. and Kuh, G.D. (2001) Being (Dis)Engaged in Educationally Purposeful
Activities: The Influences of Student and Institutional Characteristics. Paper
presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference.
Seattle, WA, 10–14 April.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student
involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of
college student personnel, 25(4), 297-308.
Okoli, D. T. (2013). Sense of place and student
engagement among undergraduate students at a major public research
university (Order No. 3608379). Available from ProQuest Central.
(1501642536). Retrieved from
Dean, K.L., & Jolly, J.P.
(2012). Student identity, disengagement, and learning. Academy of Management
Learning and Education, 11(2), 228-243.
Thomas. (2015). Peer Group Influences on Students’ Academic Motivation. .
Bishop, J. P. (2012).
“She’s always been the smart one. I’ve always been the dumb one”: Identities in
the mathematics classroom. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,43(1), 34–74.
Megan L. Franke, Angela C. Turrou, Noreen M. Webb, Marsha Ing, Jacqueline Wong, Nami Shin, and Cecilia Fernandez, “Student
Engagement with Others’ Mathematical Ideas: The Role of Teacher Invitation and
Support Moves,” The Elementary School Journal 116, no. 1 (September 2015):
Walker, E. N. (2012a). Building mathematics learning
communities: Improving outcomes in urban high schools. New York, NY: Teachers
Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R.
(2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday
resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. M. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook
of research on student engagement (pp. 21-44). New York, NY: Springer.
Dembo, M. and Gibson, S. (1985) “Teachers’ Sense of
Efficacy: An Important Factor in School Improvement,” The Elementary
School Journal 86, no. 2 (Nov., 1985): 173-184.
Gencay, O. A. (2015). Teacher efficacy of Turkish
Physical Education teachers. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(9),
Kratochwill, T. et. al., (2015). Classroom
Megan L. Franke, Angela C. Turrou, Noreen
M. Webb, Marsha Ing, Jacqueline Wong, Nami
Shin, and Cecilia Fernandez,
“Student Engagement with Others’ Mathematical Ideas: The Role of Teacher
Invitation and Support Moves,” The Elementary School Journal 116, no. 1
(September 2015): 126-148.
Reyes, M. R.,
Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom
emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal
of educational psychology, 104(3), 700.
Burden, P. (2016). Classroom
Management: Creating a Successful K-12 Learning Community
N. (2007). “What Does Good Math Instruction Look Like?” Principal 7(1), pp.
Akinsola, M.K. & Olowojaiye, F.B. (2008).
Teacher Instructional Methods and Student Attitudes towards Mathematics.
IEJME-Mathematics Education, 3(1), 60-73.