Explicit Instruction in Teaching General Mathematics and the Application of Concrete - Pictorial-Abstract Approach - Performance Study for Grade 11

Sep 2, 2026

The study examined grade 11 senior high school students’ performance in General Mathematics during the 2022-2023 school year using explicit instruction and the concrete–pictorial–abstract approach. A quasi-experimental design with pretest and posttest was implemented in the second grading period. Participants included 45 ICT B students and 42 ICT C students under the TVL strand, selected through purposive sampling. Results showed very poor initial performance that improved after instruction, with significant gains in both control and experimental groups, demonstrating effectiveness of explicit instruction and the approach in improving learning outcomes.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages14

Reading Time35 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract and Findings

Research Design and Participants

Pretest and Posttest Performance

Mean Gain Scores and Statistical Results

Instructional Objectives and Activities

| Explicit Instruction in Teaching General Mathematics and the Application of Concrete – Pictorial-Abstract Approach
Deborah E. Bandahala
Teacher – III Baliwasan Senior High School – Stand Alone Department of Education, Zamboanga City Division | | | --- | --- | | ABSTRACT: This study determined the performance of grade 11 senior high school students using explicit instruction in teaching General Mathematics and the application of concrete – pictorial-abstract approach during the school year 2022-2023. The study utilized the quasi-experimental research design employing pretest and posttest in general mathematics during the second grading period. The participants of this study were 45 Grade 11 students of ICT B and 42 students of ICT C under TVL – Strand. Purposive sampling technique was utilized in determining the samples of the study. The findings revealed that Grade 11 students had very poor performance in general mathematics, but that performance improved when the teachers gave explicit instructions and employed the concrete-pictorial-abstract approach. Grade 11 students in the control and experimental groups increased their mean gain scores, which proved that explicit instructions and application of the concrete-pictorial-abstract approach were effective in teaching General Mathematics. It is highly recommended that teachers are advised to apply their learnings in teaching General Mathematics to Grade 11 senior high school students using explicit instruction and a concrete-pictorial-abstract approach in order to demonstrate a commitment to improving existing practices and ultimately enhancing the learning outcomes of the students.
KEYWORDS: Concrete – Pictorial-Abstract Approach, Explicit Instruction, General Mathematics | | | Performance of Grade 11 Senior High School Students Before Explicit Instruction & CPA Application | | | | Performance of Grade 11 Senior High School Students After Explicit Instruction & CPA Application | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Control Group | | Experimental Group | | Control Group | | Experimental Group | | | Grade | Description | Grade | Description | Grade | Description | Grade | Description | | 80.00 | Satisfactory | 78.00 | Fairly
Satisfactory | 80.00 | Satisfactory | 85.00 | Very
Satisfactory | | Pretest Result of the Control Group | | | Pretest Result of the Experimental Group | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Mean | Equivalent | Description | Mean | Equivalent | Description | | 5.56 | 70.00 | Did not meet expectations | 5.09 | 70.00 | Did not meet expectations | | Posttest Result of the Control Group | | | Posttest Result of the Experimental Group | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Mean | Equivalent | Description | Mean | Equivalent | Description | | 11.78 | 80.00 | Satisfactory | 13.31 | 85.00 | Very Satisfactory | | | Control | | Experimental | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Variables | Mean | Std. | Mean | Std. | | Pretest | 5.56 | 1.94 | 5.09 | 1.26 | | Posttest | 11.78 | 2.35 | 13.31 | 1.92 | | Mean Gain Score | 6.22 | 0.41 | 8.22 | 0.66 | | Respondents | Mean Gain Scores | t-value | P-value | Interpretation | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Experimental | 8.22 | 4.890 | .000 | Significant | | Control | 6.22 | | | | | Respondents | Control | Experimental | t-value | P-value | Interpretation | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Pretest | 5.56 | 5.09 | 4.274 | .000 | Significant | | Posttest | 11.78 | 13.31 | 2.989 | .000 | Significant | | Objectives | Strategies/ Activities | Time Frame | Persons
involved | Resources Needed | Expected Outcomes | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | PPA 1: Administration of Pretest & Posttest | | | | | | | Administer Pretest & Posttest every quarter | Administering the Pretest & Posttest every quarter | First Semester of Every School Year | 􀁸 Subject Group Head
􀁸 Teachers
􀁸 Students | Printed Copy of the Modules, Lesson

FAQs

What research design was used to evaluate the teaching strategies?

A quasi-experimental design with pretest and posttest in General Mathematics was used during the second grading period.

Who were the participants of the study?

The study involved 45 Grade 11 ICT B students and 42 Grade 11 ICT C students under the TVL strand, selected using purposive sampling.

What were the main findings after applying explicit instruction and the concrete–pictorial–abstract approach?

Students’ performance improved from very poor pretest results, and mean gain scores increased, indicating that explicit instruction and the approach were effective.

Sep 2, 2026

Uploaded by Olivia Brown