10.01.2016 Views

International Teacher Education Conference 2014 1

itec2014

itec2014

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>International</strong> <strong>Teacher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>Conference</strong> <strong>2014</strong><br />

Research Participants<br />

The treatment groups were composed of First Year Bachelor of Secondary <strong>Education</strong> (BSEd I) students of<br />

Eng. 2: Writing in the Discipline during the Second Semester of Academic Year 2012-2013. They were equated<br />

according to group size, mental ability, and vocabulary ability.<br />

Mental ability was based from the results of the Mental Ability Test (MD5 Mental Ability Test) which is one<br />

of the components of the entrance examination.<br />

The respondents were grouped using Randomized Matching. Randomized matching means matching subjects<br />

first and then randomly assign to groups. Hence, from the result of the MD5 Mental Ability Test, the researcher<br />

segregated the names of students who have above-average mental ability. Considering that this study needed<br />

four treatment groups, he then drew four names and randomly assigned each one to each of the four treatment<br />

groups. The same process was repeated for students who have average and/or low mental ability until the desired<br />

number of respondents per group was completed and equated.<br />

As to vocabulary ability, the scores obtained by the students in the Gate-MacGinitie Reading Test<br />

(Vocabulary Test only) was treated as raw scores and became the basis of equating the four groups in vocabulary<br />

ability.<br />

Table 1 presents the distribution of the research participants in four (4) treatment groups and table 2 shows<br />

the scores of the participants in both mental ability and vocabulary ability tests.<br />

Table 1 Distribution of the research subjects in treatment groups<br />

Treatment Groups (TG)<br />

TG1: MLI with full visual and verbal cues 15<br />

TG2: MLI with limited visual and full verbal cues 15<br />

TG3: MLI with limited visual and no verbal cues 15<br />

TG4: MLI with no visual and full verbal cues 15<br />

Total 60<br />

n<br />

Table 2 Mental ability and vocabulary ability scores of the research participants<br />

Research T 1 T 2 T 3 T 4<br />

Subjects MA VA MA VA MA VA MA VA<br />

1 96 39 96 34 96 45 96 39<br />

2 91 37 91 34 91 40 91 33<br />

3 88 38 88 35 88 41 88 39<br />

4 83 36 83 34 83 39 83 34<br />

5 78 38 75 34 78 34 75 33<br />

6 65 34 70 36 65 24 70 30<br />

7 61 31 61 31 61 36 61 39<br />

8 57 32 57 36 57 23 57 33<br />

9 52 27 52 29 52 24 52 34<br />

10 50 36 50 34 50 35 50 35<br />

11 45 36 45 33 45 36 45 28<br />

12 36 40 36 34 36 34 36 35<br />

13 33 23 33 29 33 36 33 28<br />

14 27 35 27 30 27 33 27 35<br />

15 17 34 17 36 17 30 17 36<br />

Total 58.6 34.4 58.73333 33.26667 58.6 34 58.73333 34.06667<br />

Instruments<br />

Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary Test. For the purpose of equating the subjects of this study in terms of their<br />

vocabulary skills, the researcher administered the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. This reading test was<br />

40

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!