Scribd
Upload
57 views

PROBABILITY & STATISTICS - Final Examination: Dinah Fe T. Olitan

1. The document summarizes two thesis papers on mathematics education. The first examines the effectiveness of teaching factoring polynomials through geometric physical models. The second looks at the mathematical performance of sixth grade students in solving word problems. 2. Both papers include statistical data from pre-tests and post-tests of control and experimental groups. The first paper finds a significant difference in pre- and post-test scores between the groups. 3. The second paper finds a significant difference in comprehension and transformation errors between a diagnostic test and interview, but no significant difference for process skills and encoding ability.

Uploaded by

Dinah Fe Tabaranza-Olitan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
57 views

PROBABILITY & STATISTICS - Final Examination: Dinah Fe T. Olitan

1. The document summarizes two thesis papers on mathematics education. The first examines the effectiveness of teaching factoring polynomials through geometric physical models. The second looks at the mathematical performance of sixth grade students in solving word problems. 2. Both papers include statistical data from pre-tests and post-tests of control and experimental groups. The first paper finds a significant difference in pre- and post-test scores between the groups. 3. The second paper finds a significant difference in comprehension and transformation errors between a diagnostic test and interview, but no significant difference for process skills and encoding ability.

Uploaded by

Dinah Fe Tabaranza-Olitan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Dinah Fe T.

Olitan
PROBABILITY & STATISTICS – Final Examination
Masters in Engineering Management

Thesis Title: Effectiveness of Teaching Factoring Polynomials through Geometric Physical Models

Author: Pedro S. Vargas

Statistical Data:
Table 3
Profile of Third Year High School Students
in Terms of their Pre-test Results in Factoring Polynomials
No. of Control Experimental
Factoring Polynomials
Items Group Group
1. Common Monomial Factors 6 1.7 2.47
2. Perfect Square Trinomials 8 2.62 3.47
3. Quadratic Trinomial 9 2.72 3.62
4. Cubic Polynomial 7 2.30 2.45
Total Mean 9.30 12.01

Table 4
Profile of Third Year High School Students
in Terms of their Post-test Results in Factoring Polynomials
No. of Control Experimental
Factoring Polynomials
Items Group Group
5. Common Monomial Factors 6 3.55 4.20
6. Perfect Square Trinomials 8 4.12 6.08
7. Quadratic Trinomial 9 6.45 8.25
8. Cubic Polynomial 7 5.08 6.12
Total Mean 19.20 24.65

Null Hypothesis:

1. There is no significant difference between the means of the pre-test and post-test of the control group and the
means of the pre-test and post-test of the experimental group.

Computed Values:
Table 7
Test of Significance Between the Means of the Pre-test and Post-test of the Experimental and Control Group
Group Pre-test Post-test Mean Gain Computed Critical Significance
t-test t-ratio Level
1. Experimental 12.01 24.65 12.64 21.53 2.02 0.05
2. Control 9.34 19.20 9.86 13.92 2.02 0.05

Interpretation of the Statistic:


The null hypothesis was rejected. The results showed that there was a significant difference between the means
in the pre-test and post-test in lessons on factoring polynomials in both control and experimental groups.
Thesis Title: The Mathematical Performance of Grade Six Pupils in Solving Word Problems in the District of Sta.
Margarita

Author: Rowena R. Delabajan

Statistical Data:
Null Hypothesis:

1. There is no significant difference between the mathematical errors committed by the grade six at risk pupils in
the diagnostic test and those obtained in the diagnostic interview along the following aspects:
a. Comprehension
b. Transformation
c. Process Skill
d. Encoding Ability

Computed Values:
Interpretation of the Statistic:
There is a significant difference in comprehension and transformation errors committed by grade six “at risk”
pupils in diagnostic test and diagnostic interview.
However, for process and encoding, no significant difference exists. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted. There
is no significant difference in the errors committed by the “at risk” pupils I the diagnostic test and diagnostic interview
along process and encoding.

You might also like