American Journal of Educational Research
ISSN (Print): 2327-6126 ISSN (Online): 2327-6150 Website: http://www.sciepub.com/journal/education Editor-in-chief: Ratko Pavlović
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Educational Research. 2016, 4(18), 1281-1284
DOI: 10.12691/education-4-18-6
Open AccessArticle

An Assessment of Grade 8 Geometry Teaching Guide of the K to 12 Basic Education Program Based on Van Hiele Model of Geometric Thinking and Department of Education’s Standards

Gerome H. Bautista1, and Dominga C. Valtoribio2

1Assistant Instructor 3, Saint Mary’s University, Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines

2Dean, School of Graduate Studies, Saint Mary’s University, Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines

Pub. Date: December 06, 2016

Cite this paper:
Gerome H. Bautista and Dominga C. Valtoribio. An Assessment of Grade 8 Geometry Teaching Guide of the K to 12 Basic Education Program Based on Van Hiele Model of Geometric Thinking and Department of Education’s Standards. American Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 4(18):1281-1284. doi: 10.12691/education-4-18-6

Abstract

Using the descriptive method of research, this study focused on the assessment of the Grade 8 geometry teaching guide of the K to 12 Basic Education Program based on the van Hiele model of geometric thinking and Department of Education’s standards. The four modules of the teaching guide namely: Reasons Behind Reasoning, Triangle Congruence, Inequalities in Triangles, and Parallelism and Perpendicularity were assessed vis-a-vis the levels of thinking: Level 0 (Visualization/Recognition), Level 1 (Analysis), Level 2 (Ordering), Level 3 (Formal Deduction) and Level 4 (Rigor). The learning competencies, instructional activities and assessment tasks were classified according to the levels. Frequencies and percent values were used to analyze the presence of the levels in the teaching guide. In assessing the consistencies, as well as the presence of some features necessary for geometric instruction, DepEd’s levels of assessment or the Knowledge, Process, Understanding and Products (KPUP) framework was used. It was found out that in terms of the model, the teaching guide bordered on Analysis, Ordering and Formal Deduction. Recognition, and Rigor were given less emphasis in the teaching guide. The guide is commendable for the comprehensive presentation of relevant learning activities and its tendency towards the development of higher order thinking skills. However, there were inconsistencies in the use of the DepEd’s KPUP model. It is recommended that the DepEd may consider the use of the model as a framework to develop the teaching guide’s components. It is also recommended that future researchers consider results of the instruction based on students’ van Hiele levels of thinking.

Keywords:
assessment teaching guide content analysis geometric thinking

Creative CommonsThis 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]  Agno, L. N. (2009). The learning process. Principles of Teaching 1: A Modular Approach. Quezon City, Metro Manila: C&E Publishing, Inc.
 
[2]  Crawford, J. (2011). Do you have three curricula? Using Power Standards to Build An Aligned Curriculum: A Process Manual. California: Corwin: A SAGE Company
 
[3]  Crowley, M. L. (1987). The van hiele model of the development of geometric thought. Teaching and Learning, K-12 – 1987 Yearbook. Virginia, USA: NCTM.
 
[4]  DepEd Order No. 31, s.2012. Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of Grades 1 to 10 of the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) Effective School Year 2012-2013. Office of the Secretary, Department of Education, Pasig City.
 
[5]  K to 12 Curriculum Guide, Mathematics, Grade 1 – 10 (2012). Diliman, Quezon City: University of the Philippines – National Institute of Science and Mathematics Education (NISMED).
 
[6]  National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Commission on Standards for School Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Natl Council of Teachers of.
 
[7]  Niven, I. (1987). Can geometry survive in the secondary curriculum? Teaching and Learning, K-12 – 1987 Yearbook. Virginia, USA: NCTM.