SMT beliefs
2. The practices of teachers
2.3. Results of the interview
not realizing right away that the answer of S1 is not really possible.
Lastly, of the eight (8) HPS teachers whose practices lean towards SMT, four (4) used powerpoint presentations in their classes. With only one monitor for the whole class, the students were no longer given the opportunity to explore. Although there were some indications that the students were exchanging talks with each other and would really want to participate in the classroom discussion, still, the focus of the teacher was on the monitor, wondering if the powerpoint presentation will work or not. It looked like the teachers have not yet mastered the full utilization of the newly acquired technology as a tool for teaching. However, considering the potentials that the audiovisual aids can offer, these four teachers might soon be observed having their practices lean towards IMT.
All teachers responded no to this question. This implies that their practices now are different from their practices a few years ago.
Question # 2: (For those who answered no in # 1): In what way are your practices different?
Their responses are summarized in Table 25.
Table 25
Teachers’ Answers to Interview Que stion # 2
HPS LPS Total
Answers f % f % f %
• Values and other subjects are now integrated like grammar, science.
20 100 20 100 40 100
• We use now problem solving approach, or we inject practical work as an application.
20 100 20 100 40 100
• We have group work activities now. 20 100 20 100 40 100
• We use concrete objects or visual aids now.
20 100 20 100 40 100
• There is mental problem activity now. 20 100 1 5 21 52.5
• We use powerpoint presentations now. 8 40 0 0 8 20
• We include problem-posing activity now.
4 20 0 0 4 10
Notably, all the answers given are activities and strategies they employ in conducting their classes.
Question # 3: Why did you change your practices?
All participants said that changes were implemented primarily because ideas like values integration, problem solving approach, group work activities, and the use of visual aids have been prescribed by the DECS. Moreover, everyone also said that their colleagues had influenced them on the specific manner on how the change will be
adopted. Twenty (20) or 50% of the participants; 12 from HPS and 8 from LPS admitted that they were influenced by the seminars they attended. They implement the mental problem activity because this is one of the recommendations in a seminar that the concerned teachers attended.
Follow up question on Question # 3: If these changes were prescribed by DECS, or influenced by colleagues or due to a result of seminar, do you agree with them?
Answers to the follow up question (unedited version):
• These are officials from DECS, and they are supposed to know better. When they prescribed these changes, we believe that this is for the good of the students.
• Our supervisors, principals and area coordinators constantly check our lesson
plans. When they observe us, they will always look for these integrations, group works and other activities they suggested. So we need to agree with them.
Question # 4: Are you happy with your current practices?
Only 14 or 35% of the participants; 10 HPS and 4 LPS are happy with their current practices, while the remaining 26 or 65% are partly happy. Nobody has admitted to be unhappy with their current practices.
For some who answered “partly”, these are their reasons:
• We welcome the changes and suggestions, but these cause us a lot of additional
works. We need to think about the values integration, problem solving and group work activities. We need to prepare our visual aids also.
• The group work activities are only suited for higher sections. We will not finish
anything, if we also implement group work in the lower sections. Individual work naman pag dating sa Achievement Test. Then yung result, kasama sa performance rating naming.
• Problem solving approach is not always possible. What if, the students cannot really solve problems?
• Nagagalit ako pag lakad sila nang lakad sa classroom. Ang gulu-gulo nila. Kaso,
sabi sa seminar, maganda raw yung relax ang mga bata at pag pinapabayaan silang mag-discuss. Ewan ko rin lang. Pero sinusubukan ko.
• Noong students pa kami, pag ang sagot ko walang units, mali na agad. Kaya
natuto ako. Ngayon, may solution lang ng kaunti, dapat may point na. E bakit sa MTAP contest, answers without units are considered wrong?
• It’s very tedious and time-consuming to have our powerpoint presentations. Then we still have to encode our lesson plans. Minsan nga yung iba sa amin, dito na sa school natutulog.
• Medyo uncomfortable ako sa problem-posing, lalo na kung magagaling yung mga
bata. Minsan, nahihirapan akong sagutin yung problem na itinanong ng mga bata. Mabuti kung masagutan nila yung problem ng sila-sila lang. Pag nagkagulo na sila dahil hindi nila makuha yung tamang sagot, kinakabahan na ako.
It seems that DECS policies have a great influence on the teachers’ practices. This is similar to the findings of Putnam et. al. (1992) when they observed a Grade 2 teacher who simply arranged her students in groups to comply with the state and district calls for such strategy. However, the Grade 2 teacher was not able to implement cooperative learning properly. This result also affirms the findings of Bernardo and Limjap (2002) that “most teachers define goals of math education based entirely on what external authorities prescribe” (p. 73).
In addition, results of seminars seem to influence some of the teachers to try out cooperative learning. Although some of the teachers such as H2, H4, H5 and H9 do not completely adhere to the cooperative learning strategy, they still implement it in their classes. This, again may be a case cited by Guskey (1986), that teachers have to see positive results first, before they change their beliefs.
Whether these teachers are just waiting for concrete positive results or not, they are willing to leave their comfort zone just to keep abreast with the latest trends in teaching mathematics. Despite their exposure to a very traditional way of teaching mathematics where the teacher is perceived to be the sole authority in the room, these teachers are still open to changes as shown in their willingness to accommodate problem- solving approach, letting students to work in groups and providing the students concrete models to manipulate. They employed these changes despite their discomfort. Although
the change seems to be superficial at the beginning, the potential is still there that these teachers might embrace the beliefs and practices of an inquiry math tradition, so long as they could see the advantages of embracing this tradition.