BARRIERS IN DELIVERY OF TEACHING ARALING PANLIPUNAN TO LEARNER’S BEHAVIOR AND PERFORMANCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the effects of barriers in delivery of teaching Araling Panlipunan to learners behavior and performance of the grade 6 students in Santa Cruz Elementary School. This study answered the following questions: (1.) What are the barriers in delivery of teaching Araling Panlipunan in terms of: (1.1) language(1.2) motivation (1.3) social and cultural (1.4) lack of learning materials and (1.5) emotional factors? (2.) What is the level of learners behavior in terms of: (2.1) initiative (2.2) courteousness (2.3) honesty (3). What is the mean performance of the learners in terms of second quarter grade? (4.) Is there a significant effect in the barrier in delivery of teaching Araling Panlipunan and learners behavior? (5.) Is there a significant affect in the barrier in delivery of teaching Araling Panlipunan and learners performance? Descriptive design was utilized to systematically analyze the data. Survey and Research-made questionnaire in the form of a 5-point Likert scale was used in the study. The adapted rubrics and criteria are also used in grading the performance tasks of the respondents. Mean, standard deviation, frequency and percentage were used for the descriptive questions while T-test for the inferential questions. The researcher further reveals the Language, Motivation, Social and Cultural, Lack of Learning Material and Emotional Factor was observed to have any significant effect to the learners behavior and learners performance as to their second quarter grades. In accordance with the findings, the conclusions were made: The research further reveals that the Delivery of Teaching Araling Panlipunan to the Learners Behavior as rated by the group of respondents respectively has significant effect, the first hypothesis was rejected. Therefore, since was observed to have any significant effect the Language, Motivation, Social and Cultural, Lack of Learning Material and Emotional Factor to the learners performance as to their second quarter grade the second hypothesis was rejected. Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, the following recommendations are hereby endorsed. (1) Teachers may pay attention and use appropriate language with the approaches include a safe learning environment, a sense of responsibility, self- discipline and self- motivation to the learning barriers of the students that may affects on their academic performance. (2.) Teachers may implement the flipped classroom model, this methodology was the students complete readings or watch videos to grasp the content of the subject at home and complete activities, which would often be set as homework. It may refer to the changes that student actions can have on the ability to maintain good performance in the classroom. (3.) Teachers may focus on the achievement of students in the classroom. Require a comprehensive strategy of setting high educational standards, challenging students to meet the requirements, encouraging students to ask questions, and making adjustments to meet the needs of every pupil to improve student achievement. (4.) The next research may use other indicators to get more data about the relationship of the delivery of teaching to learners behavior and performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".