Varied Intervention Models: Its Effect on Students’ Retention Score

Charita A. Luna¹, Janneth Q. Rondina¹ and Nerissa V. Dazo^1,

¹University of Science and Technology of Southern Philippines, Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines

Cite this paper:
Charita A. Luna, Janneth Q. Rondina and Nerissa V. Dazo. Varied Intervention Models: Its Effect on Students’ Retention Score. American Journal of Educational Research. 2020; 8(5):321-324. doi: 10.12691/education-8-5-15

Abstract

The study used a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design. The experimental groups were exposed to three intervention models: Differentiated Intervention Model, Re-teaching Intervention Model, Modularized Intervention Model. Questions in posttest and retention were all multiple choice. The data were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, ANCOVA Unequal n’s. The analysis of the data revealed that those who were exposed to differentiated intervention model retained more mathematical concepts compared to those exposed to re-teaching model but is as good as those students exposed to modularized model. Furthermore, retention of students exposed to re-teaching have comparable retention of those who underwent modularized model. The researchers recommend that mathematics teachers may employ any of the three models but preferably used differentiated model to improve students’ retention in mathematics. Modules may be used as intervention to help students increased performance since it only need teacher’s presence as consultant.

Keywords:
intervention models differentiated intervention retention

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Ordinario, C. U. Low Nat Scores May Worsen Under K-12, Manila, Philippines. (2013).
[2]	Anderson, L. W. & Krathwol, D. R. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. NewYork: Longman, (2001).
[3]	Ketterlin-Gelle, L. R., & Yovanoff, P.Diagnostic assessments in mathematics to support instructional decision making. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(16), 1-11. (2009).
[4]	Tomlinson, C.A. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. Virginia: ASCD (2001).
[5]	Lalley, J. P., Miller, R. H. Effects of Pre-Teaching and Re-Teaching on Math Achievement and Academic Self-Concept of Students with Low Achievement in Math (2006).
[6]	Gani, P. S. Diagnostic assessment of senior secondary two students achievement in quantitative aspect of Economics in Akwanga Educational Zone, Nasarawa state. Unpublished M.Ed. thesis. Department of Educational Foundations, University of Jos. (2015).
[7]	Valiandes, S. Evaluating the impact of differentiated instruction on literacy and reading in mixed ability classrooms: Quality and equity dimensions of education effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation. Vol. 45, p17-26. 10p. (2015).
[8]	Dosch, M., and Zidon, M. "TheCourse FitUs": Differentiated Instruction in the College Classroom. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Vol26 n3 p343- 357 2014. 15 pp. (2014).
[9]	Devesh, S. and Nasseri, D. A. Effectiveness of Mathematics Module in Foundation Programme in Majan College(2014).
[10]	Graham, L., Berman, J., & Bellert, A. Sustainable learning: Inclusive practices for 21st century classrooms. Port Melbourne: Cambridge University Press(2015).
[11]	McMullen, F. & Madelaine, A. Why is there so much resistance to Direct Instruction? Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 19(2), 137-151. (2014).
[12]	Mentz, E., & Van Zyl, S. Introducing cooperative learning: students' attitudes towards learning and the implications for self-directed learning. Journal of education, (64), 79-110. (2016).
[13]	Ogunkunle, R. A. & Henrietta, O. A. Effect of differentiated instructional Strategies on students’ retention in geometry in FCT senior secondary schools, Abuja, Nigeria. (2014).