Background of the Study Thestudents who always present on school and listen in the class with respect seemto be engaged in class in the eye of the others including the instructor. Butother engagement measure: cognitive, behavioral and emotional engagement thatseems a different story. In traditional teaching, the teacher measures only thebehavior of student engagement in the class; just like classroom participation,attendance of student, and turning in homework on time, that are some exampleson how teachers evaluated the students engagement in the classroom. Throughconducting a study of connecting students’ impression of environment in schoolwith behavior, the authors gave one of the first pieces of empirical researchthat supports the feasibility of the multidimensional perspective, which hadalready been to a great extent hypothetical (Wang and Eccles,. 2013).
(SECOND PARAGRAPH)In UM TagumCollege, it has been observed thatstudents only have short listening span when it comes to mathematics subject.Mathematics educators in the school use different strategies in teaching sothat the students will be more engage to their work and have confidence in theability to succeed their emotional feeling towards mathematics. This problem isbased from the grades and performance of junior high school students in thispresent quarter.Meanwhile, this study is replication of Thomas Kindermannwhere we included the teacher efficacy as one of the independent variable withits indicator: strategies and classroom management, and we also excluded someof its independent of variable since the researchers would like to utilize pathanalysis and broaden this study in the local areas to anticipate the persuasiveelements among students engagement towards mathematics. Henceforth, this studywas concentrated just on Peer support, Teacher Efficacy and Motivation thatwere hypothesized to predict the student engagement in mathematics. Moreover,path analysis was utilized to test the influence of Teacher Efficacy directlyand indirectly to motivation and peer group towards student engagement towardsmathematics among the UM Tagum College junior high school students. It is an approach which is astraightforward extension of multiple regressions.
Its aim is to provideassessments of the magnitude and importance of hypothesized causal connections betweensets of variables. Likewise, it would enable us to indicate a model andrelationships between variables. Lastly, there is a need to conduct a studywhere testing the most influential factors that effects student engagementtowards Mathematics. Further, these results will help to know what could be thefactor to help the class more engaged. Statement of the Problem This studyaims to find what are the factors affect the students engagement in theclassroom, particularly in mathematics subject in UM Tagum College.This studyseeks the answers of the following questions:1.
What is the level of Peer Supports in terms of: 1.1Peer Influence (Peer Pressure) 1.2Role Models (Parents)2.What is the level of Teacher Efficacy in terms of: 2.
1 Instructional Strategies 2.2 ClassroomManagement3.What is the level of Motivation in terms of:4.
What is the level of Students Engagement towardsMathematics in term of:4.1 Emotional Engagement;4.2 Behavioral Engagement; and4.3 Cognitive Engagement?5.Is there significant relationship among:5.1 PeerSupport and Students Engagement towards Mathematics;5.
2 PeerSupport and Teacher Efficacy;5.3 PeerSupport and Motivation;5.4 TeacherEfficacy and Student Engagement towards Mathematics;5.5 TeacherEfficacy and Motivation; and5.6 Motivationand Students Engagement towards Mathematics?6. Do the Peersupport, Teacher Efficacy and Motivation influences the Students Engagementtowards Mathematics?7.
What modelbest fits Students Engagement towards Mathematics?HypothesisThefollowing hypotheses were tested at 0.05 levels of significance:1. There isno significant relationship between Peer Support and Students Engagementtowards Mathematics.2. There isno significant relationship between Peer Support and Teacher Efficacy.3. There isno significant relationship between Peer Support and Motivation.4.
There isno significant relationship between Teacher Efficacy and Student Engagementtowards Mathematics.5. There isno significant relationship between Teacher Efficacy and Motivation.6. There isno significant relationship between Motivation and Students Engagement towardsMathematics.7. There isno domain in the Peer support, Teacher Efficacy and Motivation thatsignificantly influences/determines the Student Engagements. RRLPeer Support Peer support maytremendously affect a child’s capacity to work in the classroom.
Making apositive peer connection between a general instruction and special educationunderstudy may lead to a development in the two students. Studies demonstratethat, in some cases, students keep on engaging in high amounts of correspondencewith other students (Tepstra and Tamura, 2008 cited from Candace, 2016). In a study of such peer mentoring program(Walker, 2012a), the work by the peer coaches uncovered that student drew uponeducational procedures and interconnected substance to help their peers indifficult. To their peers, these clarifications were novel and provided anotherthinking about mathematics issues, even those issues were not complex toanswer.
Without a doubt, there have been various studies that demonstrate theadequacy of peer academic support for the learning of mathematics in school andcollege settings. Relationships of students with peer atschool are one of their fundamental in learning environment. Historically, considerationregarding factors that encourage scholastic improvement has for the most partcentered around educators and guardians. In any case, peers make children’sopportunity at school passable and enjoyable. They give fellowship, amusement,sentiments of having a place, help, individual approval, and emotional support(Hamm and Zhang, 2010 cited from Kindermann, 2015). Overall, it doesn’t appearto be the situation that peer influence essentially happen at the expense oflearning. Espinoza and Knifsend (2012) found that there is a correlation inpeer support and students’ engagement at the school.
Accordingto Sherin, 2002 cited from Franke, M. et al.,2015) Looking at the estimation of studentengagement in mathematical classrooms, researchers have started to expandmanners by which educators can guide students correspondence. Researchindicates how difficult it is for instructors as academic tensions that exist,educators attempting to oversee student engagement with each other thoughtsthat is related with math objectives and the unpretentious move that happen asstudents are guided to move from sharing new plans to participate in shared thought. Accordingto Skinner & Pitzer (2012) Studentsthat is motivated can be easily to notice by the teacher and peers.
In fact,all of major motivational conceptions lay on student engaging and disaffectionas key components of how inspiration shows itself in the school and is conveyedto instructors, guardians, and peers. Teacher Efficacy One of the common works of a teacher is toteach knowledge to children. Teachers are also the ones who helps his studentslearn more and be engaged in the learning process. Recent researches indicatesthat teachers’ comments on their teaching reflect important beliefs thatinfluence teacher-student interactions and teacher’s success in producingstudent achievement gains. Researchers labeled these beliefs as teacher’s selfefficacy- the extent to which teachers believe they can affect studentlearning.
Teacher efficacy is primarily concerned with having a positiveinfluence on students’ learning. (Gibson and Dembo, 1984; Ashton, 1985 as citedby Gencay, O. A.
(2015). Teacher efficacy is the belief of a teacherin his capability to organize and execute courses of action required tosuccessfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular area oflearning. Teachers with a higher sense of efficacy are less critical ofstudents when they make mistakes andexhibit more enthusiasm about teaching. Highly efficacious teacher are morelikely to use student-centered learning strategies, while teachers with lowefficacy tend to use teacher-centered strategies. Higher teacher efficacy isalso associated with higher students’ achievement, higher sense of learningefficacy in students, and more positive student attitude toward school andteachers. Thus, the importance of teacher efficacy is well established. Moran et al.,(1998), Ashton and Webb,(1986), Allinder, (1994), Moore and Esselman, (1992), Anderson et al.
, (1988)cited by Gencay, O.A (2015). In recent years there has been a lot ofinvestigation on teacher efficacy as an important factor underlying teachingand learning. Research suggests that teacher efficacy may underlie criticalinstructional decisions including the use of instructional and classroommanagement strategies. Woolfolk et al., (1990), Tschannen-Moran, (2000); citedby Gencay, O.
A. (2015). Classroom management is the process bywhich teachers and schools create and maintain appropriate behavior of studentsin classroom settings.
The purpose of implementing classroom managementstrategies is to enhance social behavior and increase student mathematicsengagement. Effective classroom management principles work across almost allsubject areas and grade levels . An effective classroom managementincreases meaningful mathematicslearning and decreases negative behaviors. Therefore, it is important to useeffective classroom management strategies as they serve as both prevention andintervention methods that promote positive outcomes for students. (Kratochwill,et.
al., 2015) Classroom management involves teacher actionsto create a learning environment that encourages positive interaction, activeengagement in learning, and self-motivation. Such an environment optimizesopportunities for all students to learn in mathematics ( Brophy, 2006). Research on classroom management hasshown that good classroom management is a result of conscious long-termprevention and patient effort on the part of the teacher (Emmer & Sabornie, 2014). Inthe investigation of Protheroe, (2007), a classroom management is effectivewhen students are actively engaged in doing mathematics, solving challengingproblems, making interdisciplinary connections, sharing mathematical ideas, andusing multiple representations to communicate mathematical ideas. A student’s constant failure in a school subject andmathematics in particular can make him to believe that he can never do well onthe subject thus accepting defeat.
On the other hand, his successful experiencecan make him to develop a positive attitude towards learning the subject. Thissuggests that student’s attitude towards mathematics could be enhanced througheffective teaching strategies. It has in fact been confirmed that effectiveteaching strategies can create positive attitude on the students towards schoolsubjects (Akinsola & Olowojaiye, 2008). Several studies in the area of mathematicshave shown that instruction, especially at the secondary school level remains overwhelminglyteacher-centered, with greater emphasis being placed on lecturing and textbookthan on helping students to think critical across subject area and applyingtheir knowledge to real-worlds situation. There is a need to adopt some of therecent instructional strategies, along with some traditional practices thathave been overlooked and underutilized in secondary mathematics (NationalCouncil of Teachers’ of Mathematics, 2000). Such practices include individualexploration, peer interaction, and small group work each of which emphasizesthe use of multiple approaches to problem solving, active student inquiry, andthe importance of linking mathematics to students’ daily life. A key componentin reform is the movement from traditional to reform instructional practices inmathematics is the importance of examining the effects and relationship amongtypes of instructional practices that student receives and their resultingachieving and attitudes towards mathematics. Studies related to instructionalpractices and academic achievement have suggested that the quality of teachers’instructional messages affects children’s task involvement and subsequentlearning in mathematics (Cornel, 1999 and Butty, 2001).
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework A peer group is characterized as agathering of same age, fairly close friends and having similar routine through peerinfluence. Teenagers make inquiries identifying with social personalityhypotheses, for example, “Who am I?” and “What do I need out oflife?” Feeling to be a piece of a gathering enables young people to feellike they are in the right path to answer some of these inquiries. The youths gives twice as much energy with peersthan their guardians or different adult people that is the reason to considerthe impact or weights that companions put on each other (Castrogiovanni, 2002).There are a some students who see different peer as a good examples. Teachers,Guardians and peers who give answers to their questions of what they shouldneed to do in a social situation.
Hence models, can be their inspiration ordiscouragement. Modeling refers to each changes on how they think, behave orthe effects of what they have got by observing others (Ryan, 2000). Teacher must provide an instructionalstrategies and classroom management to motivate students to participate in theclassroom (Guy, 2010). Educators who adopt a relationship-building way to dealwith classroom management by concentrating on building up the entire individualwill probably enable students to create positive, socially-appropriatebehaviors.
The attributes of effective teacher-student relationship are notidentified with the educator’s identity or whether the instructor is very muchpreferred by the students. Instead, the connections are portrayed by particularpractices, procedures, and central mentalities exhibited by the educator(Bender, 2003). Social and cultural context, guardians, self-understandings andthe impact of dynamic typical structures inside society formed by role models,particularly those who is emotionally attached, decide student engagement ordisengagement. These decide understudies to pick between individual engagementin school, or to ignore or basically dismiss learning opportunities (Dean andJolly, 2012) This study is inthe light of the theory of involvement which refers to the amount of physicaland psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience.Thus, a student who is highly involved is one who devotes adequate energy tostudying, allots much time on campus, participates actively in studentorganizations, and interacts frequently with faculty members and otherstudents.
Conversely, a typical uninvolved student doesn’t give much time instudies, spends little time on campus, abstains from extracurricularactivities, and has infrequent contact with faculty members or other students. The mostimportant factor in student learning and personal development during college isstudent engagement, or the quality of effort students themselves devote toeducationally purposeful activities that contribute directly to desired outcomes. Astin,A. W. (1984)Definition of Terms PeerSupport.
Peer Support is an intervention involving one or moreclassmates without disabilities providing academic and/ or social support to astudent with a disability. It also includes “student selection, peertraining, peer- delivered support, and adult monitoring” (Carter, Cushing,Clark, & Kennedy, 2005, p.1 6). TeacherEfficacy. teacher efficacy has been defined as the extent to which ateacher believes he or she can influence students’ behavior and their academicachievement, especially of pupils with difficulties or those with particularlylow learning motivation (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Guskey & Passaro, 1994).The conceptualization of teacher efficacy is based on the breadth of theteacher’s role.
In most studies, this involves only the classroom in which theteacher engages in education and teaching. Thus, the conceptualization in theliterature focused on the teacher’s perception of his or her own competence andon the ability of teaching as a professional discipline to shape students’knowledge, values and morality. Motivation.Motivationis the psychological feature that arouses a person to action toward a desiredgoal (Sansone & Harackiewicz, 2000). In this study, motivation is definedas the motivation for “learning” and has two indicators : intrinsicmotivation and extrinsic motivation. The definitions of the two indicator arederived from the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) whichis designed according to Eccles’ (1983, 2005) expectancy – value theory of achievement motivation. Intrinsic motivation means the degree to whichstudents perceive themselves to be participating in a task for the reasons suchas challenge, curiosity, and mastery. Extrinsic motivation has external motivating factors such asgrades, rewards, performance and competition or evaluation by others (Wigfieldet al.
., 2000). StudentEngagement. has been defined as “participation in educationally effectivepractices, both inside and outside the classroom, which leads to a range ofmeasurable outcomes” (Kuh et al., 2007), and as “the extent to which studentsare engaging in activities that higher education research has shown to belinked with high-quality learning outcomes” (Krause and Coates, 2008, 493)Similarly, Hu and Kuh (2001, 3) define engagement as “the quality of effortstudents themselves devote to educationally purposeful activities thatcontribute directly to desired outcomes”.