INVESTIGATING STUDENTS’ GRAPHING SKILLS IN RELATION

TO THEIR ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN MATHEMATICS

An Undergraduate Thesis

Presented to

The Faculty of the College of Education

JOSE RIZAL MEMORIAL STATE UNIVERSITY

The Premiere University in

Zamboanga del Norte

Katipunan Campus

In Fulfilment for the Requirements

of Research in Mathematics II

Prepared By:

Elsie Gumoc

December 2022
 Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction

Many students find the transition from high school

to college mathematics classes containing advanced

mathematics difficult. Undergraduate students frequently

have difficulty understanding mathematical topics in a

system that stresses symbolic algebraic and graphing

skills. Graphing skills are a crucial talent for pupils,

particularly those studying mathematics. Many sources,

however, stated that many students lack graphical skills.

Graphs are graphical representations of numerical

systems and equations. Understanding graphs (graph

interpretation) is a vital skill that all students need

in their daily lives since they must make sense of and

communicate with the information offered in graphs.

Furthermore, communicating quantitative information

allows the graphs to be comprehended more quickly and

easily. The graph can also show the outcome of the

experiment, as well as evaluate the conclusion (Meisadewi

et al., 2017).

Interpretation, modeling, and transformation are the

three components of graphing skills. The ability to

transform graphs into spoken statements and extract

information from graphs is known as interpretation. The

ability to put real-world situations into graphs is known

as modeling. Transformation, on the other hand, is a

component that combines both interpretation and modeling

by allowing observation and drawing multiple graphs

depicting occurrences (Kwon, 2002, as cited in Uzun et

al., 2012).

Despite the significance of graphing skills in

learning development and everyday life, it has been noted

that novice or expert learners have difficulty

constructing and reading graphs. Students' graphing

skills were assessed, and the results revealed flaws and

challenges in graphical comprehension, including issues

identifying variables, linking variables, selecting the

proper graph for a certain set of data, interpreting

patterns, and presenting data using graphs (Glazer et

al., 2011).

Jose Rizal Memorial State University - Katipunan

Campus, one of the university's leading campuses. It

pledged to give advanced professional, technical, and

entrepreneurial training to produce highly skilled,

innovative, and self-renewing persons and has a

reputation of generating clever and competent students.

However, may be jeopardized if its mathematics students'

graphing skills were not considered.

 This study aimed to evaluate the first year and

second year BSED Mathematics students' graphing skills in

relation to their academic performance in mathematics. In

addition, the researcher also intended to identify how

age and year level affects the students graphing skills.

The study was only applicable and limited to first-year

and second-year BSED Mathematics students of Jose Rizal

Memorial State University – Katipunan Campus S.Y. 2021-

2022. Hence, anyone who does not meet the study's

parameters was not permitted to participate.

There were only few people who conducted this study

within 5 years validity, that’s why the researcher

extended the scope of related studies beyond 5 years to

support the study.

Significance of the Study

It was hoped that this study will add to the body of

knowledge on students' abilities regarding graphing

skills in the field of education. During the past decade,

researcher examined how students struggled in graphing.

Revelations of the students' abilities regarding graphing

skills in relation to their academic performance in

mathematics had given parents, teachers, and students a

new weapon to increase academic success. With the

findings from this study, administrators, parents,

teachers, and students were able to develop strategies

that were desired to improve students’ graphing skills.

Objectives of the Study

This study aimed to investigate the 1 st and 2nd year

BSED-Mathematics students of Jose Rizal Memorial State

University-Katipunan Campus’ graphical skills in relation

to their academic performance.

The specific objectives were to:

1. determine the respondents’ profile in terms of:

1.1 age

1.2 year level;

2. determine the graphing skills of the respondents:

a. Self- Evaluation

b. Performance;
 3. determine the respondents’ academic performance in

mathematics; and

4. determine the relationship between graphing skills

and the academic performance of the respondents.

5. Determine the significant difference between the

respondents graphing skills when grouped according

to their profile.

Theoretical Framework

This study was anchored on the following theories.

Bodner, Klobuchar and Geelan (2001) explained that

Constructivist theory in its various forms is based on a

generally agreed principle that learners actively

construct meaning from their own experience as they

strive to reconcile present experiences with already

existing knowledge. Students are no longer viewed as

passive absorbers of knowledge as facts are poured into

their brains; rather they assimilate and make sense of

new ideas by connecting them to what they already know.

The main assumption is that students do not enter the

learning situation as a tabula rasa. Through interaction

with the physical and social worlds, students construct

knowledge prior to being exposed to formal instruction.

The extensive exposure of students to graphs outside

schools may play a critical role in students’ graphical

ability as they enter the learning situation with a

substantial amount of knowledge about graphing.

Angra and Gardner (2016) proposed a paradigm for

describing how students generate graphs and retrieve

information from them. The framework incorporates

cognitive abilities such as analysis, integration, and

design purpose that students should consider when dealing

with graphs. These cognitive skills are critical for

learning growth and play a significant role in kids'

classroom challenges. The established framework connects

the activity of active graph formation with the process

of graph interpretation.

The Exploratory data analysis by Tukey (1977) is a

graphical, informal, and robust approach to data analysis

that focuses on the appearance of graphs to reveal

insights about the data rather than generating formal

inferences from statistical computations.

Conceptual Framework

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Graphing Lessons in  Graphing Skills

Mathematics:
 Academic
 plotting of points Performance
 graphing linear
equations
 graphing quadratic
equations
 Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Study

Chapter II

Review of Related Literature

If students' skills in creating and extracting

graphs are improved, their capacity to link variables to

one another through graphical representation may be

boosted. Students become more conscious of the variables

included in the graph when they are assigned to

assignments that entail active graph development. Reading

and identification are two steps in the process of

obtaining information from graphical representations.

Students' capacity to read graph coordinates is linked to

their ability to assign variables in graphs (Remziye,

2018; Nixon et al., 2016).

Understanding the labels of individual lines and

assigned captions is vital in getting information from

graphs when there are several dependent variables (Dart &

Radley, 2018). Prior topic knowledge in graph building

and extraction is required for effective reading and

comprehension of graphs. Sketching line chart abscissa,

ordinates, and scales are examples of prior graph

knowledge. Reading and interpreting graphs require skills

in interpreting graphical structures, which include

identifying elements provided in graphs (Phage et al.,

2017).

It has been suggested that accurate graph

identification or interpretation does not begin with

reading, but rather with understanding the graphical

structure (Glazer, 2011). This implies that understanding

the structure of graphs is critical for getting

information from them. The comprehension effect of the

graph, on the other hand, is highly dependent on the

visual information on the graph. This shows that when all

of the graphical components have been recognized and

processed, and can be understood using the methods and

procedures employed during a graphical analysis,

successful learning and understanding occurs (Dart &

Radley, 2018; Nixon et al, 2016).

Although graphical interpretations are prevalent in

education, particularly in the subject of natural

science, active graph building is rarely done

independently in the classroom. When compared to non-

active graph formation, active graph construction can

serve as the focal point of a learning activity in which

the process of comparing and identifying graphical

variables becomes more successful (Harsh & Schmitt-Harsh,

2016; Nixon et al., 2016).

 According to the findings of a study on the active

construction of graphs, active construction of graphs has

a considerable positive impact on a student's learning

progress (Meisadewi et al., 2017; Stern, Aprea & Ebner,

2003). The right techniques for building and extracting

graphs can help pupils enhance their problem-solving and

critical thinking abilities (Duijzer et al., 2019;

Stefanel, 2019). According to surveys, the most common

graph building mistake students make is underestimating

scales on axes graphs (Angra & Gardner, 2017; Glazer,

2011; Stern et al., 2003). This error occurs when the

scales on the axes are not in sequence or order, like if

the data is categorical rather than ordered in intervals.

Graphs are frequently utilized in the classroom

since they are a good source of knowledge and information

(Glazer, 2011; Taylor, 2010; Opfermann, Schmeck &

Fischer, 2017). However, passive graph presentations are

insufficient, as knowledge on how to make and design

graphs is also required for graphical learning and

comprehension (Harsh & Schmitt-Harsh, 2016; Stern et al.,

2003; Taylor 2010).

Learning materials and other sources of knowledge

are typically presented in one of two formats: text or

diagrams. The common use of these two main sources of

knowledge can aid in the process of accommodation and

assimilation, resulting in a much better grasp of

concepts (Gates, 2018). When text and other graphical

representations from graphs are appropriately linked and

connected, students' knowledge of the subject or

conceptual understanding of the domain develops (Schnotz

& Bannert, 2003).

In this case, the information acquired from graphs

might be utilized to deduce other information that could

be extracted from the graph. Information retrieved from

the graph could be combined with the other graphical

elements to provide additional ideas for the graph's

reader (Glazer, 2011; Stefanel, 2019). The information

from the statement obtained from the graph is referred to

as a mental proposition. A propositional statement

produced from graphical analysis is the statement "when

the temperature increases, the pressure increases."

During graphical analysis, students' mental models are

used to generate new mental propositional ideas (Lin &

Chiu, 2017; Schnotz & Bannert, 2003).

The aim of viewing the graph or the question that

needs to be answered using the graph affects pupils'

capacity to process information from graphs. However,

reading a graph without first evaluating all of the

individual data points on the graph might lead to

misinterpretation and confusion. Students can find links

among variables in the graph by looking at each data

point individually. The link could demonstrate how the

degrees of one variable influence the degrees of another,

as well as how connections can be used in physical

concepts or real-life situations (Nixon et al., 2016).

 Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

Research Method

This study used the descriptive method via simple

random sampling. Using the descriptive survey, the

researcher was able to describe the level of proficiency

in students graphing skills in relation to their academic

performance in mathematics. Through this, the researcher

elaborated the elements that influence students' graphing

skills, characterized the relationship between students'

graphing skills and their academic performance in

mathematics and explored the significant differences

between students' graphing skills.

Research Respondents

The study's respondents were the first year and

second year BSED-Mathematics students who were officially

enrolled in Jose Rizal Memorial State University

Katipunan Campus, S.Y. 2021 – 2022. The population of the

study was thirty-one (31) BSED-Mathematics Students. The

researcher used simple random sampling in which she only

chose a subset of individuals from a more extensive set.

Each individual was chosen randomly, entirely by chance.

The sampling method used in this study provides higher

reliability and will not provide any bias.

Research Setting

The research was conducted at Jose Rizal Memorial

State University, a public institution located in

Barangay Dos, Katipunan, Zamboanga del Norte. This was

managed by the Campus Administrator and the Student

Affairs and Services Organization. This was a premier

university in Zamboanga del Norte and its missions were

to give advanced professional technical and special

instructions for specific objectives, as well as to

encourage research and extension services, advanced

studies, and progressive leadership in education,

agriculture, the art and sciences, engineering and other

fields.

Research Instruments

The instruments used to collect data were the

standardized questionnaires adopted from Dedmon (2014)

and Nelson (n.d.). This was to investigate the students

graphing skills in relation to their academic performance

in mathematics. These were used in collecting data for

data analysis and interpretation. It was tallied

according to self-evaluation graphing linear and

quadratic equations and graphing tasks using linear and

quadratic equations.

Data Gathering Procedure

In gathering the data, the letter of permission was

made by the researcher. Then, it was signed by the

research teacher and the research adviser of the

researcher. After that, the letter was brought to the

office of the Associate Dean of the College of Education

and was personally signed and approved by the Associate

Dean. Afterwards, it was submitted to the Campus

Administrator's office for validation and was

successfully validated. Few days after, the researcher

conducted the study. At first, the researcher explained

the purpose of the survey to the respondents. Then, the

instruments were distributed to the respondents. After

answering the questionnaires, the researcher retrieved

them all.

All the data will be tallied using Microsoft Excel

2010 and was subjected for statistical computation using

the same software.

Data Analysis

In analyzing the data, the researcher used the

following tools:
 Frequency and Percentage was used to determine the

profile of the respondents.

Mean was used to determine the level of the

respondents’ skills.

Chi-Square was used to determine the relationship

between graphing skills and the respondents’ academic

performance.

In determining the skill level of students’

proficiency in graphing in relation to their academic

performance in mathematics for first-year and second-year

students in Jose Rizal Memorial State University -

Katipunan Campus, the following scale was used:

Rating Continuum Interpretation

4 – Always(A) 3.26 – 4.0 Highly Proficient (HP)

3 – Sometimes(S) 2.51 – 3.25 Proficient (P)

2 – Rarely(R) 1.76 – 2.50 Slightly Proficient (SP)

1 – Never (N) 1.0 – 1.75 Not Proficient (NP)

The following scoring was used in grading the

respondents score in graphing linear equations:

Scores Interpretation

9 – 10 ---------------- Highly Proficient (HP)

7 – 8 ---------------- Proficient (P)

5 - 6 ---------------- Moderately Proficient (MP)

3 – 4 ---------------- Slightly Proficient (SP)

1 – 2 ---------------- Not Proficient (NP)

The following scoring was used in grading the

respondents score in graphing quadratic equations:

Scores Interpretation

5 --------------- Highly Proficient (HP)

4 --------------- Proficient (P)

3 --------------- Moderately Proficient (MP)

2 --------------- Slightly Proficient (SP)

1 --------------- Not Proficient (NP)

In determining the skills of students in graphing

linear equations the following rubrics was used:

Novice Intermediate Proficient Advanced Exemplary

1 2 3
4 5
APPEARANCE
AND VISUAL
APPEAL

Graph is Criteria All Two One All

constructe are not criteria components component criteria
d neatly, met in all are not of the of the are done
points are three done criteria criteria neatly,
evident components neatly and could have could have creating a
and neatly , but a this been done been done smooth and
plotted, recognizab distracts more more very
and the le picture from the neatly. neatly. recognizab
lines are is overall le
joined produced. appearance picture.
neatly. of the
picture.
GRAPH AND
PLOTTED
POINTS

The graph Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent

is did not made 7 or made 4 or made 1-2 had made
constructe attempt to more more small no errors
d complete errors in errors in errors in in the
according the graph the graph, the graph, the graph, graph,
to or plot plotting plotting plotting plotting
instructio the points and/or and/or and/or and/or
ns, points connection connection connection connection
are of the of the of the of the
evident points. points. points. ponts.
and
correctly
plotted.
The lines
connect
points in
the
sequence
listed.

Source: RCampus. (n.d.)

In determining the skills of students in graphing

quadratic equations the following rubrics was used:

NOVICE PROFICIENT ADVANCED EXEMPLARY

1 2 3
 4

Minor No errors No errors No errors

errors exist when exist when exist when
exist when the the student the student
the student determines if determines
student determines the parabola if the
OPENING determines if the opens in an parabola
OF THE if the parabola upward or opens in an
PARABOLA parabola opens in downward upward or
opens an upward direction. downward
upward or or The student direction.
downward downward provides The student
direction. direction. justification can provide
for his/her a rationale
thinking. for his/her
thinking by
making a
reference
to each
equation.

The The axis The axis of The axis of

student of symmetry is symmetry is
determines symmetry determined determined
the axis is for every for every
of determined equation. No equation.
AXIS OF symmetry for each errors exist No errors
SYMMETRY for each equation and the exist and
equation and no student shows the student
and minor errors some of the shows all
errors exist. steps for steps for
exist. determining determining
the axis of the axis of
symmetry. symmetry.

An attempt The vertex is The vertex

is made to The vertex determined is
determine is for each determined
VERTEX the vertex determined equation and for each
for each for each no errors equation
equation, equation exist. Some and no
but some and no steps for errors
minor errors determining exist. All
errors exist. the vertex steps for
exist. are shown. determining
 the vertex
are shown.
Source: RCampus. (n.d.)

Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter showed the data gathered the results of

the statistical analysis done and interpretation of

findings. These were presented in tables following the

sequence of the specific research problem about

Investigating Students’ Graphing Skills in Relation to

their Academic Performance in Mathematics.

Table 1 Respondents’ Profile in terms of “Age”

Age Frequency Percentage

19-20 15 48%

21-22 15 48%

23 and above 1 4%

TOTAL 31 100%
 Table 1 showed the respondents’ profile in terms of

age. It presented that there were 15 or 48% of the

respondents whose ages started from 19-20 years old,

there were also 15 or 48% of the respondents whose ages

started from 21-22 and 1 or 4% of the respondents whose

age was 23 and above. Thus, there were 31 respondents who

participated in the study.

The findings revealed that majority of the

respondents were 19 to 22 years old and only 1 of them

has the age of 23 and above.

Table 2 Respondents’ Profile in terms of “Year Level”

Year Level Frequency Percentage

First Year 14 45%

Second Year 17 55%

TOTAL 31 100%

Table 2 showed the respondents’ profile in terms of

year level. It presented that there were 14 or 45% of the

respondents who participated in the study were first year

BSED Mathematics students and 17 or 55% of the

respondents who participated in the study were second

year BSED Mathematics students in the School Year 2021-

2022.
 The findings revealed that majority of the

respondents who participated in the study were second

year BSED Mathematics students.

Table 3 Graphing Skills of the Respondents in terms of

“Self- Evaluation; Graphing Linear Equations”

Skills Weighted Mean Verbal

Description
2.87 Proficient
A. I can generalize and express
patterns using algebraic
expressions.
B. I can make tables and graphs 3.06 Proficient
to represent data.
C. I can describe the 2.84 Proficient
relationship between variables.
D. I can find and interpret 2.97 Proficient
the slope of a line.
E. I can recognize that slope 2.65 Proficient
measures the rate of change in
an algebraic expression.
F. I can determine slopes as 2.74 Proficient
being undefined, zero, positive
and negative.
G. I can identify a linear 2.87 Proficient
equation, when given the graph
of a line, two points on the
line, or the slope of the
line.
H. I can identify the x- and 3.42 Highly
y-intercepts. Proficient

I. I can identify the initial 2.77 Proficient

values of a linear function.
J. I can identify and graph 3.16 Proficient
linear equations using ordered
pairs/tables.
GRAND MEAN 2.45 Slightly
Proficient

Table 3 showed the graphing skills of the

respondents in terms of self-evaluation; graphing linear

equations. The self-evaluation under graphing linear

equations presented that the respondents’ weighted

average in the skills of graphing linear equation was

2.45 which was interpreted as slightly proficient.

The findings revealed that the respondents’ overall

evaluation on their skills in graphing linear equations

was only slightly proficient.

Table 4 Graphing Skills of the Respondents in terms of

“Self- Evaluation; Graphing Quadratic Equations”

Skills Weighted Mean Verbal

Description
3.39 Highly
A. I can find and plot the x-
Proficient
and y- intercepts of a
quadratic equation.
B. I can identify which form of 3.13 Proficient
quadratic equations I am given.
C. I can identify and define 3.10 Proficient
quadratic variables.
D. I can plot the vertex of a 3.23 Proficient
parabola.
E. I can draw a parabola’s 2.90 Proficient
axis.
F. I can find the direction of 2.77 Proficient
a parabola’s opening.
G. I know how to express a 3.00 Proficient
quadratic equation into its
general form.
H. I can graph a quadratic 2.84 Proficient
equation with a double root.
I. I can graph a quadratic 2.65 Proficient
equation with two roots.
J. I can graph a quadratic 2.84 Proficient
equation with a no real roots.
GRAND MEAN 2.99 Proficient

Table 4 showed the graphing skills of the

respondents in terms of self-evaluation; graphing

quadratic equations. The self-evaluation under graphing

quadratic equations presented that the respondents’

weighted average in the skills of graphing quadratic

equations was 2.99 which was interpreted as proficient.

The findings revealed that the respondents’ overall

evaluation on their skills in graphing quadratic

equations was proficient.

Table 5 Respondents Graphing Skills in Solving Linear

Equations

Scores Frequency Verbal Description

5-6 2 Not Proficient

7-8 6 Proficient

9-10 23 Highly Proficient

Table 5 showed the respondents graphing skills in

solving linear equations. It presented that 2 respondents

scored started from 5 to 6 which was interpreted as not

proficient, 6 respondents scored started from 7 to 8

which was interpreted as proficient and 23 respondents

scored started from 9 to 10 which was interpreted as

highly proficient.

The findings revealed that majority of the

respondents were highly proficient in solving linear

equations.

Table 6 Respondents Graphing Skills in Solving Quadratic

Equation

Scores Frequency Verbal Description

1 2 Not Proficient

2 3 Slightly

Proficient

3 5 Moderately

Proficient

4 12 Proficient

5 7 Highly Proficient

Table 6 showed the respondents graphing skills in

solving quadratic equations. It presented that 2

respondents scored 1 which was interpreted as not

proficient, 3 respondents scored 2 which was interpreted

as slightly proficient, 5 respondents scored 3 which was

interpreted as moderately proficient, 12 respondents

scored 4 which was interpreted as Proficient and 7

students scored 5 which was interpreted as highly

proficient. On the other hand 2 of the respondents scored

0 that’s why only 29 respondents were recorded.

The findings revealed that majority of the

respondents were proficient in solving quadratic

equations.

Table 7 Respondents’ Performance in Graphing Linear

Equations

Graph Description Weighted Mean Verbal Description

Appearance and Visual 3.97 Proficient

Appeal

Graph and Plotted 4.39 Advanced

points

Grand Mean 4.18 Advanced

Table 7 showed the respondents’ performance in

graphing linear equations. It presented that in the graph

description on appearance and visual appeal the weighted

average was 3.97 which was interpreted as proficient and

in the graph description on graph and plotted points the

weighted average was 4.39 which was interpreted as

advanced. Thus, the grand mean was 4.18 which means

advanced.
 The findings revealed that the respondents’ skills

in graphing linear equations were advanced.

Table 8 Respondents’ Performance in Graphing Quadratic

Equations

Graph Description Weighted Mean Verbal Description

Opening of the 3.13 Advanced

Parabola

Axis of Symmetry 3.06 Advanced

Vertex 3.06 Advanced

GRAND MEAN 3.08 Advanced

Table 8 showed the respondents’ performance in

graphing quadratic equations. It presented that in the

graph description on the opening of the parabola the

weighted average was 3.13 which was interpreted as

advanced, in the graph description on the axis of the

symmetry the weighted average was 3.06 which was

interpreted as advanced and in the graph description on

the vertex the weighted average was 3.06. Thus, the grand

mean was 3.08 which means advanced.

The findings revealed that the respondents’ skills

in graphing quadratic equations were advanced.

Table 9 Respondents’ Academic Performance in Mathematics

Grade Meaning Frequency Overall Percentage

Academic

Performance

1.4 – Very 6 1.42 19%

1.1 Good

2.5 – Good 25 1.63 81%

1.5

TOTAL Good 31 1.52 100%

AVEARGE

Table 9 showed the respondents’ academic performance

in mathematics. It presented that 6 or 19% of the

respondents received a grade in mathematics in between

1.4 to 1.1 during the School Year 2021-2022 which was

equivalent to very good and 25 or 81% of the respondents

received a grade in mathematics in between 2.5 to 1.5

during the School Year 2021-2022 which was equivalent to

good. It also showed that the average academic

performance of the respondents who received a grade in

between 1.4 to 1.1 was 1.42 which was equivalent to very

good and the average academic performance of the

respondents who received a grade in between 2.5 to 1.5

was 1.63 which was equivalent to good. Hence, the total

average of the respondents’ academic performance was 1.52

which means good.

 The findings revealed that majority of the

respondents received good grades in mathematics during

the School Year 2021-2022.

Table 10 Relationship between Graphing Skills and the

Academic Performance of the Respondents

Statistic df P-value Decision

19.2 2 <0.001 Reject Ho

Table 10 showed the relationship between the

graphing skills and the academic performance of the

respondents. It presented that the p-value obtained in

Investigating the Students’ Graphing Skills in Relation

to their Academic Performance in Mathematics was <0.001.

This implied that the null hypothesis was rejected since

p-value is less than the significance level. Furthermore,

this means that there was a significant relationship

between the respondents’ graphing skills and their

academic performance in mathematics.

Table 11 Significant Difference Between the Respondents

Graphing Skills When Grouped According to their Profile

Variables statistic df P-value Decision

Graphing Skills * -17.6 9 <0.001 Reject Ho

Age

Graphing Skills * 8.48 9 <0.001 Reject Ho

Year level
 Chapter V

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

This study was conducted at Jose Rizal Memorial

state Universitry, Brgy. Dos, Katipuan, Zamboanga del

Norte. There were 31 respondents who participated in the

study, 14 of them were first year BSED Mathematics

students and 17 of them were second year BSED Mathematics

student for the School Year 2021-2022. The specific

objectives were to 1()determine the respondents’ profile

in terms of (a)age, (b)year level; (2)determine the

graphing skills of the respondents (a)Self- Evaluation,

(b)Performance; (3)determine the respondents’ academic

performance in mathematics; and (4)determine the

relationship between graphing skills and the academic

performance of the respondents. The researcher used

simple random sampling as a method of research in which

she only chose a subset of individuals chosen from a

larger set. Each individual was chosen randomly entirely

by chance, such that each individual has the same

probability and also sometimes known as a method of

chances. In analyzing the data, the researcher used

Frequency and Percentage to determine the profile of the

respondents, Mean to determine the level of the

respondents’ skills and Chi-Square to determine the

relationship between graphing skills and the respondents’

academic performance.

Findings

The following were the findings of the study:

1.) Majority of the respondents were 19 to 22 years

old and only 1 of them has the age of 23 and

above.

2.) 45% of the respondents who participated in the

study were first year BSED Mathematics students

and the remaining 55% were second year BSED

Mathematics students.

3.) The respondents’ skills in graphing linear

equations were only slightly proficient.

4.) The respondents’ skills in graphing quadratic

equations were proficient.

 5.) Majority of the respondents were highly proficient

in solving linear equations.

6.) Majority of the respondents were proficient in

solving quadratic equations.

7.) The respondents’ skills in graphing linear

equations were advanced.

8.) The respondents’ skills in graphing quadratic

equations were advanced.

9.) Majority of the respondents received good grades

in mathematics during the School Year 2021-2022.

10.) There was a significant relationship between the

respondents’ graphing skills and their academic

performance in mathematics.

Conclusions

The study showed that the there was a significant

relationship between the respondents’ graphing skills and

their academic performance in mathematics. This implied

that the students graphing skills can affect their

academic performance in mathematics. Thus, a student who

had an excellent graphing skills will more likely to

receive excellent grades in mathematics. Therefore,

graphing skills are a crucial talent for pupils,

particularly those studying mathematics, understanding

and graphs (graph interpretation) is a vital skill that

all students need in their daily lives since they must

make sense of and communicate with the information

offered in graphs.

Recommendations

1.) Students should study hard to improve their

graphing skills in order to attain promising

grades in mathematics.

2.) Parents should encourage and assess their students

at home on honing their graphing skills together

with studying in mathematics.

3.) Teachers should develop strategies that are

desired to improve students’ graphing skills.

4.) Administrators should aim a new weapon to increase

academic success in mathematic.

Abstract
This study investigated the students’ graphing skills in

relation to their academic performance in mathematics.The

researcher wanted to know if the students graphing skills

can affect their academic performance in mathematics. The

specific objectives were to 1()determine the respondents’

profile in terms of (a)age, (b)year level; (2)determine

the graphing skills of the respondents (a)Self-

Evaluation, (b)Performance; (3)determine the respondents’

academic performance in mathematics; and (4)determine the

relationship between graphing skills and the academic

performance of the respondents. The researcher used

simple random sampling as a method of research in which

she only chose a subset of individuals chosen from a

larger set. In analyzing the data, the researcher used

Frequency and Percentage to determine the profile of the

respondents, Mean to determine the level of the

respondents’ skills and Chi-Square to determine the

relationship between graphing skills and the respondents’

academic performance. The result shows that there was

a significant relationship between the respondents’

graphing skills and their academic performance in

mathematics. Thus, the researcher recommende the

students, parents, teachers and school administrators to

work as group on developing the students graphing skills

in order to attain academic success in mathematics.

 REFERENCES

Angra, A., & Gardner, S. M. (2016). Development of a

framework for graph choice and construction. Advance
Physiology Education, 40, 123–128.
doi:10.1152/advan.00152.2015 Retrieved on June 20,
2022

Bahtaji, Michael Allan. (2020). Improving students

graphing skills and conceptual understanding using
explicit Graphical Physics Instructions. Cypriot
Journal of Educational Sciences. 15. 845-853.
10.18844/cjes.v15i4.5063. Retrieved on June 16, 2022

Bodner, G., Klobuchar, M., & Geelan, D. (2001). The many

forms of constructivism. Journal of Chemical
Education, 78(8), 1107.

Dart, E. H., & Radley, K. C. (2018). Toward a standard

assembly of linear graphs. School Psychology
Quarterly, 33(3), 350-355. doi:10.1037/spq0000269
Retrieved on June 20, 2022

Dedmon, M. (2014, August 8). 8th Grade MIU 8: Graphing

Linear Equations. Carsoncityschools.com.

Duijer, C., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Veldhuis, M.,

& Doorman, M. (2019). Supporting primary school
students’ reasoning about motion graphs through
physical experiences. ZDM Mathematics Education,
 51, 899-913. doi:10.1007/s11858-019-01072-6
Retrieved on June 20, 2022

Gates, P. (2018). The importance of diagrams, graphics

and other visual representations in STEM teaching.
In R. Jorgensen & K. Larkin (Eds.), STEM Education
in the Junior Secondary: The State of Play (pp.169–
196). doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5448-8_9 Retrieved on
June 20, 2022

Glazer, N. (2011). Challenges with graph interpretation:

a review of the literature. Studies in Science
Education, 47(2), 183-210.
doi:10.1080/03057267.2011.605307 Retrieved on June
20, 2022

Harsh, J. A., & Schmitt-Harsh, M. (2016). Instructional

Strategies to Develop Graphing Skills in the College
Science Classroom. The American Biology Teacher,
78(1), 49-56. doi:10.1525/abt.2016.78.1.49 Retrieved
on June 20, 2022

Irubric: Solving quadratic equations by graphing rubric.

RCampus. (n.d.). Retrieved June 29, 2022,from
https://www.rcampus.com/rubricshowc.cfm?
code=S4X642&amp;sp=true

Kwon, O. N. (2002). The effect of calculator‐based ranger

activities on students' graphing ability. School
Science and Mathematics, 102(2), 57-67. Retrieved on
June 20, 2022

Lin, JW., & Chiu, MH. (2017). Evaluating multiple

analogical representations from students’
perceptions In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit & H. F.
Fisher (eds.), Multiple Representations in Physics
(pp.71-91). Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-58914-
5_1 Retrieved on June 20, 2022

Meisadewi, N., Anggraeni, S., & Supriatno, B. (2017,

March). Improving Students’ Graphing Skills through
Quantitative-Based Lab Activities. In IOP Conference
Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 180,
No. 1, p. 012245). IOP Publishing. Retrieved on June
16, 2022

Nelson, S. (n.d.). Plotting &amp; Graphing Task. Teachers

Pay Teachers. Retrieved June 29, 2022, from
https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Plotting
-Graphing-Task-3818767
Nixon, R. S., Godfrey, T. J., Mayhew, N. T., & Wiegert,
C. (2016). Undergraduate student construction and
interpretation of graph in physics lab activities.
Physics Review Physics Education Research,
12,010104. doi:10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010104
Retrieved on June 20, 2022

Opfermann, M., Schmeck, A., & Fischer, H. E. (2017).

Multiple representations in physics and science
education – why should we use them? In D. F.
Treagust, R. Duit & H. F. Fisher (eds.), Multiple
Representations in Physics (pp.1-22). Springer. doi:
10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_1 Retrieved on June 20,
2022

Phage, I. B., Lemmer, M., & Hitge, M. (2017). Probing

factors influencing students’ graph comprehension
regarding four operations in kinematics graphs.
African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science
and Technology, 21 (2), 200-2010, doi:
10.1080/18117295.2017.1333751 Retrieved on June 20,
2022

Remziye Ergül, N. (2018). "Pre-service science teachers'

construction and interpretation of graphs."
Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(1),
139-144. doi: 10.13189/ujer.2018.060113 Retrieved on
June 20, 2022

Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and

interference in learning from multiple
representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2),
141–156. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00017-8 Retrieved
on June 20, 2022

Stefanel, A. (2019). Graph in Physics Education: From

representation to conceptual Physics Education
understanding. In G. Pospiech, M. Michelini & BS.
Eylon (eds.), Mathematics in (pp.195-231). Springer,
Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-04627-9_9 Retrieved on
June 20, 2022

Stern, E., Aprea, C., & Ebner, H.G. (2003). Improving

cros-content transfer in text processing by means of
active graphical representation. Learning and
Instruction, 13, 191–203. doi:10.1016/S0959-
4752(02)00020-8 Retrieved on June 20, 2022

Taylor, M. F. (2010). Making biology teaching more

 ““graphic””. The American Biology Teacher, 72(9),
568-571. doi:10.1525/abt.2010.72.9.9 Retrieved on
June 20, 2022

Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis (Vol. 2,

pp. 131-160). Retrieved on September 19, 2022

APPENDICES

Name (Optional): ________

Age: ___________
Year Level: _____________
Academic Grade in Mathematics
(COLLEGE AND ADVANCED ALGEBRA for 1st year): _________
(LINEAR ALGEBRA for 2nd year): _____

Self-Evaluation;
Graphing Linear
Equations
Score What does this mean?
4 Always
3 Sometimes
2 Rarely
1 Never
Skills 1 2 3 4
A. I can generalize and express patterns using
algebraic expressions.
B. I can make tables and graphs to represent data.

C. I can describe the relationship between

variables.
D. I can find and interpret the slope of a line.

E. I can recognize that slope measures the rate of

change in an algebraic expression.
F. I can determine slopes as being undefined, zero,
positive and negative.
G. I can identify a linear equation, when given
the graph of a line, two points on the line, or
the slope of the line.
H. I can identify the x- and y-intercepts.

I. I can identify the initial values of a linear

function.
J. I can identify and graph linear equations using
ordered pairs/tables.

Source: Dedmon (2014)

 GRAPHING TASK

A) Create a coordinate graph with an appropriate scale for

the points below.
B) Label the x-axis and y-axis
C) Plot the points below and label them!

(9, 7)

(-10, -5)

Source: Nelson (n.d.)

 Rubric for Linear Graphing Task:

Does not Beginning Developing Meeting Mastering

meet to meet to meet expectatio expectatio
expectatio expectatio expectatio ns ns
ns ns ns
1 2 3 4 5

APPEARANCE
AND VISUAL
APPEAL

Graph is Criteria All Two One All

constructe is not met criteria components component criteria
d neatly, in all are not of the of the are done
points are three done criteria criteria neatly,
evident components neatly and could have could have creating a
and neatly , but a this been done been done smooth and
plotted, recognizab distracts more more very
and the le picture from the neatly. neatly. recognizab
lines are is overall le
joined produced. appearance picture.
neatly. of the
picture.
GRAPH AND
PLOTTED
POINTS

The graph Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent

is did not made 7 or made 4 or made 1-2 had no
constructe attempt to more more small graph,
d complete errors in errors in errors in plotting
according the graph the graph, the graph, the graph, or
to or plot plotting plotting plotting connection
instructio the points and/or and/or and/or errors
ns, points connection connection connection evident.
are of the of the of the
evident points. points. points.
and
correctly
plotted.
The lines
connect
points in
the
sequence
listed.
Source: RCampus. (n.d.)
 Self-Evaluation;
Graphing Quadratic
Equations
Score What does this mean?
4 Always
3 Sometimes
2 Rarely
1 Never
Skills 1 2 3 4
A. I can find and plot the x- and y- intercepts of
a quadratic equation.
B. I can identify which form of quadratic equations
I am given.
C. I can identify and define quadratic variables.

D. I can plot the vertex of a parabola.

E. I can draw a parabola’s axis.

F. I can find the direction of a parabola’s

opening.
G. I know how to express a quadratic equation into
its general form.
H. I can graph a quadratic equation with a double
root.
I. I can graph a quadratic equation with two roots.

J. I can graph a quadratic equation with a no real

roots.
Source: Dedmon (2014)
 GRAPHING QUADRATIC EQUATIONS

Graph the following quadratic equations. Find the axis of

symmetry and the vertex:

1. y=x 2 +5 2. y=x 2 −2 x+ 3

x = ________ x = ________
Vertex: __________ Vertex: __________
Point: ___________ Point: ___________

4. y=x 2 −2 x −1 3. y=− x 2+ 4 x − 2

x = ________ x = ________
Vertex: __________ Vertex: __________
Point: ___________ Point: ___________

5. y=− 3 x2 +5

x = ________
Vertex: __________
Point: ___________
Source: Nelson (n.d.)
Rubric for Graphing Quadratic Equations:

NOVICE PROFICIENT ADVANCED EXEMPLARY

1 2 3
4

No errors
exist when
No errors the student
Minor exist when determines
OPENING errors No errors the student if the
OF THE exist when exist when determines if parabola
PARABOLA the the the parabola opens in an
student student opens in an upward or
determines determines upward or downward
if the if the downward direction.
parabola parabola direction. The student
opens opens in The student can provide
upward or an upward provides a rationale
downward or justification for his/her
direction. downward for his/her thinking by
direction. thinking. making a
reference
to each
equation.

The axis of The axis of

symmetry is symmetry is
The The axis determined determined
AXIS OF student of for every for every
SYMMETRY determines symmetry equation. No equation.
the axis is errors exist No errors
of determined and the exist and
symmetry for each student shows the student
for each equation some of the shows all
equation and no steps for steps for
and minor errors determining determining
errors exist. the axis of the axis of
exist. symmetry. symmetry.

An attempt The vertex is The vertex

VERTEX is made to The vertex determined is
determine is for each determined
the vertex determined equation and for each
 for each for each no errors equation
equation, equation exist. Some and no
but some and no steps for errors
minor errors determining exist. All
errors exist. the vertex steps for
exist. are shown. determining
the vertex
are shown.
Source: RCampus. (n.d.)