Statement of the Problem

The main objective of this study was to develop a questionnaire that will determine the

mathematics perseverance within the Project-Based Learning approach of students in the

Institute of Teacher Education (ITEd) in Davao Del Norte State College, Panabo City, Davao

Del Norte.

Specifically, the study sought answers to the following questions:

1. What factors influence college students' mathematics perseverance within the project-

based learning approach?

2. Does the questionnaire on the mathematics perseverance of college students within

the Project-Based Learning approach generate reliable scores?

2. METHODS

2.1 Research Design

This study utilized an explanatory sequential research design characterized by qualitative

inquiry followed by collecting and analyzing quantitative data to explain and interpret the

qualitative results (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Qualitative and quantitative research designs

investigated the factors influencing students' mathematics perseverance within the context of

PBL. This study's sequential design comprehensively explored the complex factors influencing

students' perseverance in mathematics education within the PBL framework.

Qualitative research designs focus on collecting data that provides a naturalistic view of

social phenomena and understanding the meaning of the social world from the perspective of

social actors in an actual setting (Elliott et al., 2023). This type of research uses methods such as

in-depth interviewing and ethnographic observations to gather empirical evidence and develop
theories (Cruz & Sarmiento, 2022). On the other hand, according to Creswell & Creswell (2018),

quantitative research involves validating objective theories by exploring connections between

different factors. These factors are often measurable through instruments, enabling the collection

of numerical that can be analyzed using statistical methods.

The qualitative phase of the research involved collecting in-depth qualitative data to

explore further and contextualize the quantitative findings. Key Informant Interview (KII)

influenced by the works of researchers like Creswell and Creswell (2018), Elliott et al. (2023),

and Cruz and Sarmiento (2022), was employed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the

mathematics perseverance within PBL. KII, as suggested by Howard (2016) and Damonte

(2023), involved in-depth conversations with students who demonstrate mathematical

perseverance. The aim is to gain deeper insights into their experiences, perceptions, and

perspectives related to perseverance in mathematical problem-solving within the PBL approach.

These interviews with key informants possessing expertise in the field will contribute a nuanced

perspective that complements the quantitative findings. Qualitative data analysis techniques,

such as thematic analysis, were employed to identify recurring themes, patterns, and detailed

descriptions that elucidate the quantitative findings and provide a deeper understanding of the

factors influencing students' perseverance in mathematical tasks.

The quantitative phase of the research involves developing and administering a survey

instrument to assess students' mathematics perseverance within the PBL framework. The survey

includes items designed to measure various facets of PBL implementation. Data collected from

the survey were analyzed using statistical techniques, including Exploratory Factor Analysis

(EFA), to identify latent factors influencing students' perseverance. EFA is a statistical method

used in quantitative research to identify the underlying structure of a dataset by focusing on a

smaller number of essential items called factors (Markham et al., 2023). This phase provides

quantitative insights into the relationship between PBL implementation factors and students'

mathematics perseverance.

The researchers used an explanatory sequential research design to address the objectives.

Explanatory sequential research design is well-suited for instrument development. This design

allowed for the initial collection and analysis of qualitative data to establish the underlying

structure and validity of the instrument. Subsequently, the quantitative phase offered a deeper

understanding of these factors, providing contextual insights and enriching the interpretation of

qualitative findings. Through techniques like EFA, the quantitative phase provided insights into

the essential factors influencing students’ mathematics perseverance within the PBL framework.

By integrating both qualitative and quantitative approaches, this design ensured a robust and

comprehensive development process for the assessment instrument. It facilitated its validity,

reliability, and effectiveness in measuring students' perseverance in mathematics education

within the PBL framework.

2.2 Research Participant

The study participants in the KII were exclusively comprised of five high-achieving ITEd

mathematics students at one of the state colleges in Panabo City. Studies have indicated that

students who exhibit more extraordinary perseverance in problem-solving achieve higher levels

of success in mathematics (Cutumisu & Bulut, 2017; Fung et al., 2018). These students have

consistently demonstrated exceptional proficiency and success in mathematics, showcasing

advanced problem-solving skills, a deep understanding of mathematical concepts, and a strong

intrinsic motivation to excel in the subject (Ziernwald et al., 2022).

 On the other hand, the respondents for this study's quantitative phase comprised 101

ITEd students. Based on the guidelines provided by Bujang et al. (2013), the minimum sample

size required for EFA with a response format with four or more items is three participants per

item. Since this study had 30 items of test questionnaire, the minimum sample size is 90. While

the minimum requirement is 90, using more than this, such as 101 respondents, enhances the

quality and reliability of the exploratory factor analysis, aligning with best practices for ensuring

robust and generalizable findings (White, 2022).

2.3 Interim Phase: Questionnaire Development

An expert-validated interview guide designed for the study was conducted on 5

participants, who were high-achieving ITEd mathematics students. The researchers audio-

recorded the entire conversation with the consent of the participants. After gathering responses

from the participants, data were transcribed and translated. Then, 30 significant statements were

arranged to form the study questionnaire.

2.3 Research Instrument

The questionnaire, composed of 30 statements derived from participants' responses in the

initial phase of the study, was a testament to the crucial role of the participants. Through Google

Forms, the first section of the questionnaire included a warm greeting, an overview of the study's

purpose, and an explanation of the participants' vital role in its success. The second section was

the consent form, asking participants to select either I agree or I do not agree to indicate their

willingness to participate in the study. The third section listed the items with clear instructions

for completing the questionnaire, along with a description of each level of the 5-point Likert

scale.
2.4. Data Gathering Procedure

Asking for Permission to Conduct the Study. The researchers prepared a permission

letter for the study, which was addressed to the dean of the Institute and signed by the adviser,

institute dean, and program chairperson.

General orientation and seeking of consent from research participants. The

researchers provided the participants with a study summary and explained the ethical

considerations in data collection. They requested the respondents to sign an informed consent

form to indicate that they were fully aware of their participation in the study. The researchers

collected the consent forms the same day the respondents completed the interviews and

questionnaires.

Qualitative inquiry. Before commencing the interviews, the researchers established

communication with the participants to explain the purpose and nature of the study. The

researchers conducted the interviews upon mutual agreement, ensuring participants had

sufficient time and space to express their perspectives. During the interview sessions, the

researchers engaged in interactive dialogue with the participants, facilitating an open exchange

of ideas and insights. Following the completion of each interview, the researchers reviewed the

responses to ensure clarity and comprehensiveness, addressing any potential ambiguities or

omissions. The researchers audio-recorded the entire conversation with the consent of the

participants. Upon completion of the qualitative interviews, transcriptions were carefully

reviewed for accuracy and completeness, with any discrepancies addressed promptly.

Survey. The researchers disseminated the questionnaires to the respondents via Google

Forms, allowing ample time for completion. During this period, researchers were available to

interact with the respondents to address any questions or concerns. After the respondents
submitted their responses, the researchers reviewed the data to ensure all items were completed.

The quantitative data collected was then transferred to Microsoft Excel. Once compiled, the data

was sent to an official statistician for analysis and interpretation using appropriate statistical

methods.

2.5 Data Analysis

Variables were defined and named in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

(IBM SPSS 25) data editor in the data analysis process. Scores from each respondent, initially

recorded in Microsoft Excel, were imported into SPSS. After transferring the values, the data

were cleaned to ensure that all values were consistent with the expected scales, enhancing both

the accuracy and utility of the data. Additionally, any missing data were identified and removed.

Then, the analysis of the data started.

Exploratory Factor Analysis. This method was used to uncover the underlying factor

structure of college students' perseverance in mathematics within the PBL framework. It

helps to reduce many items into significant, concise sets grouped into factors, thereby

identifying critical factors related to student's readiness for the course. This analysis

addressed research question number one.

Reliability Analysis. This method was used to assess the internal consistency of the

questionnaire items. It examines the intercorrelation among items to ensure homogeneity

within the questionnaire, thereby determining its reliability. This analysis addressed

research question number two.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis

The data was analyzed using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) on the 30 questionnaire

items. The factors were rotated using the Varimax method, a common approach in EFA, to

determine the factorability of the correlation matrix and estimate the likely number of factors.

Initially, the correlation matrix of the sub-components was reviewed for correlations among the

items, which did not exceed 0.50, making EFA appropriate. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)

measure of sampling adequacy was 0.912, exceeding the minimum value of 0.60, indicating

suitable sampling adequacy for factor analysis. Additionally, the significant result of Bartlett’s

sphericity test confirmed sufficient correlations among the items. These results support the

appropriateness of factor analysis.

The items were then ordered and grouped based on their factor loadings. According to

Streiner (1994), as cited by Samuels, a cut-off score of 50% for factor loadings is typically used.

This threshold is chosen because higher factor loadings enhance the purity of a variable's

measure of the construct, ensuring that only the most relevant and impactful items are included

in the discussion of each factor.

The analysis meticulously identified four factors, with their Cronbach’s alpha values in

Table 1. While a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.500 is considerable, Nunnally (1978), a renowned

authority in the field, recommended a minimum value of 0.700 for acceptable reliability in factor

analysis. Consequently, only factors meeting this stringent criterion were considered in the study,

ensuring the reliability of the factors under discussion.

Table 1

The Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient of the Factors

Factor Cronbach’s Alpha

Factor I 0.926
Factor II 0.893
Factor III 0.824
Factor IV 0.829

3.2. Factors of Mathematics Perseverance within the PBL approach of College Students

3.2.1. Resilience in Problem-Solving

Ten items under Factor I are classified as resilience in problem-solving (see Table 2).

Insert discussion keme with RRL 3-5

Table 2

The Factor Structure using Rotated Component Matrix for Factor I: Resilience in Problem-
solving
Item Item Statement Factor Score
Q14 I stay motivated to complete PBL math tasks even if I encounter 0.767
multiple failures.
Q18 I feel determined to finish every PBL math problem I start, regardless 0.730
of its difficulty.
Q27 I use logical reasoning to solve PBL math problems. 0.672
Q13 I continue to work on PBL math problems even when they seem 0.666
impossible to solve.
Q15 I am persistent in finding the right solution for PBL math problems, no 0.653
matter how challenging they are.
Q17 I remain calm and composed when facing difficult PBL math 0.650
problems.
Q16 I keep working on a PBL math problem until I find a satisfactory 0.599
solution.
Q19 I stay focused on PBL math tasks even when distractions are present. 0.562
Q8 I am proactive in using resources like textbooks, online tools, or peers 0.540
when I face difficult PBL math problems.
Q26 I approach each PBL math problem with curiosity and a desire to 0.507
understand it fully.
3.2.2. Growth Mindset

Factor II includes seven items identified as growth mindset (see Table 3). Insert

discussion keme with RRL 3-5

Table 3

The Factor Structure using Rotated Component Matrix for Factor II: Growth Mindset
Item Item Statement Factor Score
Q30 I feel a sense of accomplishment when I overcome difficulties in PBL 0.739
math tasks through persistence.
Q4 I find it rewarding to solve difficult PBL math problems. 0.709
Q9 I seek feedback on my PBL math work to improve my understanding 0.679
and solutions.
Q25 I often review my work to identify mistakes and learn from them in 0.653
PBL math tasks.
Q5 I believe that effort and perseverance are key to success in PBL math 0.612
tasks.
Q23 I use my previous experiences to help me solve current PBL math 0.602
problems.
Q11 I use a variety of methods to approach PBL math problems until I find 0.522
one that works.

3.2.3. Collaborative Learning

Four items under Factor III are categorized as collaborative learning (see Table 4). Insert

discussion keme with RRL 3-5

Table 4

The Factor Structure using Rotated Component Matrix for Factor III: Collaborative Learning
Item Item Statement Factor Score
Q21 I collaborate with my peers and consider their ideas to solve difficult 0.830
PBL math problems.
Q22 I discuss my thought process with peers to improve my understanding 0.691
of PBL math problems.
Q12 I seek help from my teacher when I am stuck on a PBL math problem. 0.623
Q24 I reflect on different strategies and choose the best one for solving PBL 0.546
math problems.
3.2.4. Self-efficacy

Four items under Factor IV are classified as self-efficacy (see Table 5). Insert discussion

keme with RRL 3-5

Table 5

The Factor Structure using Rotated Component Matrix for Factor IV: Self-efficacy
Item Item Statement Factor Score
Q3 I feel confident in my ability to overcome obstacles in PBL math 0.780
projects.
Q1 I believe in my ability to solve difficult PBL math problems if I keep 0.662
trying.
Q2 I take on challenging PBL math tasks with a positive attitude, knowing 0.602
I can figure them out eventually.
Q10 I set goals and make plans to tackle complex PBL math problems. 0.536

Mathematics Perseverance of the Students within PBL Approach Questionnaire

Insert here the final questionnaire – ako ra ani

4. CONCLUSION – edit, revise, and paraphrase in the context sa atong study, below is guide ra

na

The aim of the study is to identify the factors of the readiness of the students in Mathematics in

the Modern World course and make a questionnaire that would measure the readiness of the

students. To do this, the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was used. Based on the results, it

was revealed that there are five factors of the readiness of the students for the said course, which

now composes the Readiness of the College Students in Mathematics in the Modern World

Course Questionnaire. These factors are instructional strategies and values, learning strategies,

learning resources, learning beliefs, and social learning interactions. After doing the pilot testing

of the questionnaire, it was found out that Cronbach's alpha is 0.972 which exceeds the minimum
value. As such, this study showed that incoming students of Mathematics in the Modern World

are ready whenever they embody positive values and beliefs towards learning the course. Also,

readiness is also eminent whenever they know how to utilize various resources for learning, and

observe desirable behavior in the instructional process. Lastly, these students will likely be ready

whenever they can observe healthy social interactions in every task

5. REFERENCES – ibutang dre references sa discussion nnyo, APA format 7th edition