| 000 | 08910nam a2201225Ia 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 000 | 07092ntm a2200229 i 4500 | ||
| 001 | 46432 | ||
| 003 | 0 | ||
| 005 | 20250921111110.0 | ||
| 008 | 141112n 000 0 eng d | ||
| 010 |
_z _z _o _a _b |
||
| 015 |
_22 _a |
||
| 016 |
_2 _2 _a _z |
||
| 020 |
_e _e _a _b _z _c _q _x |
||
| 022 |
_y _y _l _a2 |
||
| 024 |
_2 _2 _d _c _a _q |
||
| 028 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 029 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 032 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 035 |
_a _a _b _z _c _q |
||
| 037 |
_n _n _c _a _b |
||
| 040 |
_e _erda _a _d _b _c |
||
| 041 |
_e _e _a _b _g _h _r |
||
| 043 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 045 |
_b _b _a |
||
| 050 |
_a _a _d _b2 _c0 |
||
| 051 |
_c _c _a _b |
||
| 055 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 060 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 070 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 072 |
_2 _2 _d _a _x |
||
| 082 |
_a _a _d _b2 _c |
||
| 084 |
_2 _2 _a |
||
| 086 |
_2 _2 _a |
||
| 090 |
_a _a _m _b _q |
||
| 092 |
_f _f _a _b |
||
| 096 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 097 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 100 |
_e _e _aTaguba-Lucas, Maria Isabel. _d _b4 _u _c0 _q16 |
||
| 110 |
_e _e _a _d _b _n _c _k |
||
| 111 |
_a _a _d _b _n _c |
||
| 130 |
_s _s _a _p _f _l _k |
||
| 210 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 222 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 240 |
_s _s _a _m _g _n _f _l _o _p _k |
||
| 245 | 0 |
_a _aPerformance patterns in calculus based on the interactive factors of learning for curricular framework development / _d _b _n _cMaria Isabel Taguba-Lucas. _h6 _p |
|
| 246 |
_a _a _b _n _i _f6 _p |
||
| 249 |
_i _i _a |
||
| 250 |
_6 _6 _a _b |
||
| 260 |
_e _e _a _b _f _c _g |
||
| 264 |
_3 _3 _a _d _b _c46 |
||
| 300 |
_e _e _c26 cm. _axiv, 157 pages : _billustrations |
||
| 310 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 321 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 336 |
_b _atext _2rdacontent |
||
| 337 |
_3 _30 _b _aunmediated _2rdamedia |
||
| 338 |
_3 _30 _b _avolume _2rdacarrier |
||
| 340 |
_2 _20 _g _n |
||
| 344 |
_2 _2 _a0 _b |
||
| 347 |
_2 _2 _a0 |
||
| 362 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 385 |
_m _m _a2 |
||
| 410 |
_t _t _b _a _v |
||
| 440 |
_p _p _a _x _v |
||
| 490 |
_a _a _x _v |
||
| 500 |
_a _aThesis (Ph.D.) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, 2011.;A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Arts, Sciences and Education, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Education major in Educational Administration. _d _b _c56 |
||
| 504 |
_a _a _x |
||
| 505 |
_a _a _b _t _g _r |
||
| 506 |
_a _a5 |
||
| 510 |
_a _a _x |
||
| 520 |
_b _b _c _aThis study sought to analyze the relationship of the interactive factors of learning-curriculum, instruction and performance. This study focused on the performance patterns of selected students in Calculus under the integrated and subject-centered curricular approaches based on the interactive factors of learning. The study also aimed to look into the performance of students in the two curricular approaches and looked into how teachers assessed their present curricula and teaching. It attempted to gain the following objectives: (1) find a significant difference between the integrated and subject-centered approaches in terms of the three interactive factors of learning, (2) find a significant relationship among the three interactive factors of learning under the two approaches and; (3) develop a framework that is based on the results of the study. The researcher considered four (4) selected universities in Manila that offered Calculus to the students under any degree program. The population of the study consisted of students who had already taken the three (3) Calculus subjects and faculty who have taught the calculus subjects namely: Mathematical Analysis I, Mathematical Analysis II and Mathematical Analysis III under the integrated approach and Analytic Geometry, Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus under the subject-centered approach. The researcher used both purposive sampling and cluster sampling. The study employed ex post facto method of research. The method categorizes or assesses the data and then probes for relationships. The performances of the students in Calculus, the faculty assessment on curriculum and instruction was identified, recorded, analyzed and interpreted under the two different curricular approaches using descriptive method. Furthermore, the significant relationship of curriculum and performance; instruction and performance; and curriculum and instruction were examined under each specified curriculum using correlation method. There were two types of instrument utilized in this study in order to achieve the objectives. The instrument for curriculum assessment was a researcher-made patterned with Characteristics of Effective Curricula by Kentucky Academic Performance Standards (Missouri MSIP Performance Standards). The second instrument was for the instructional method. It was a researcher-made instrument following the instructional model identified by Robert Marzano (2000). The following results were drawn in the study: (1) the members of the faculty under the two curricular approaches agreed that the qualities of a good curriculum are present in both curricula; (2) among the different methods of instruction being used in teaching Calculus, Concept-Attainment method is the most frequently used method in both curricular approaches and the least is problem-based method; (3) the level of performance under the two approaches follows the same trending. Calculus 2 (Math Analysis II and Differential Calculus) is considered to have their best among the three calculus, followed by Calculus I (Math Analysis I and Analytic Geometry), and Calculus 3 (Math Analysis III and Integral Calculus) having their least performance; (4) there is no significant difference in the assessment of faculty in the entire criterion of a quality curriculum; (5) there is no significant difference in the assessment of the faculty in the Methods of Instruction: Social Interaction; Concept-Attainment; Concept-Development and Direct Instruction Methods; (6) there is a significant difference in the assessment of the faculty on the following Methods of Instruction: Integrative, Inductive, Problem-Based and Lecture Discussion Methods; (7) In Calculus 1 and 2, performance of students has a significant difference while in Calculus 3 there is no significant difference in the performance of students under the two curricular approaches; (8) under the integrated curricular approach, there is a High Correlation in the faculty assessment on curriculum and instruction and the degree of the relationship is significant; (10) in terms of relationship between curriculum and performance, it was found out that there is a Moderate Correlation under the integrated curricular approach and it is significant; (11) in the subject-centered curricular approach, a significant Moderate Correlation was established; (12) there is a Low Correlation between instruction and performance of the students under the integrated curricular approach; (13) in the subject-centered curricular approach, there is a Significant Moderate Correlation between instruction and students performance. Based on the results of the study, it was proven that there is a significant relationship established between curriculum and instruction; curriculum and performance; and instruction and performance in both integrated and subject-centered curricular approaches. At the end of the research, the researcher developed a framework showing the relationship of curriculum, instruction and performance. The following recommendations were formulated by the researcher: 1. Performance of the students in Calculus should be intensified through proper consideration of factors such as curriculum and instruction, 2. Encourage the faculty to make use of the different instructional method to deliver effective instruction and help students attain the good performance in Calculus. 3. Plan for curriculum development and enhancement to attain optimum performance and enhanced learning of students. 4. Consider the interrelatedness of curriculum, instruction and performance of students in curricular enhancement. 5. Models in curriculum development (theory and practice) must be considered and followed. _u |
||
| 521 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 533 |
_e _e _a _d _b _n _c |
||
| 540 |
_c _c _a5 |
||
| 542 |
_g _g _f |
||
| 546 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 583 |
_5 _5 _k _c _a _b |
||
| 590 |
_a _a _b |
||
| 600 |
_b _b _v _t _c2 _q _a _x0 _z _d _y |
||
| 610 |
_b _b _v _t2 _x _a _k0 _p _z _d6 _y |
||
| 611 |
_a _a _d _n2 _c0 _v |
||
| 630 |
_x _x _a _d _p20 _v |
||
| 648 |
_2 _2 _a |
||
| 650 |
_x _x _a _d _b _z _y20 _v |
||
| 651 |
_x _x _a _y20 _v _z |
||
| 655 |
_0 _0 _a _y2 _z |
||
| 700 |
_i _i _t _c _b _s1 _q _f _k40 _p _d _e _a _l _n6 |
||
| 710 |
_b _b _t _c _e _f _k40 _p _d5 _l _n6 _a |
||
| 711 |
_a _a _d _b _n _t _c |
||
| 730 |
_s _s _a _d _n _p _f _l _k |
||
| 740 |
_e _e _a _d _b _n _c6 |
||
| 753 |
_c _c _a |
||
| 767 |
_t _t _w |
||
| 770 |
_t _t _w _x |
||
| 773 |
_a _a _d _g _m _t _b _v _i _p |
||
| 775 |
_t _t _w _x |
||
| 776 |
_s _s _a _d _b _z _i _t _x _h _c _w |
||
| 780 |
_x _x _a _g _t _w |
||
| 785 |
_t _t _w _a _x |
||
| 787 |
_x _x _d _g _i _t _w |
||
| 800 |
_a _a _d _l _f _t0 _q _v |
||
| 810 |
_a _a _b _f _t _q _v |
||
| 830 |
_x _x _a _p _n _l0 _v |
||
| 942 |
_a _alcc _cBK |
||
| 999 |
_c32124 _d32124 |
||