International Teacher Education Conference 2014 1

International Teacher Education Conference 2014
85.00 – 89.99 Average
80.00 – 84.99 Low
75.00 – 79.99 Very Low
Results
The results are presented in accordance to the order of the Statement of the Problem as stated above.
1. Majority of the education students as respondents of the study were female (73%) who are mostly below
17 years old (72%). The survey of the respondent’s type of secondary school graduated disclosed that most of
them were from public high schools (78%). In terms of socio-economic status/index, the profile showed that
majority of the respondents’ mothers are college level (42%) but mostly work as unskilled or service workers
(50%). Furthermore, majority of their fathers are also college levels (45%) who are working as middle-level
manager or professional, mid-size business owner or military officer (40%). The family income reported by the
respondents indicated that a great majority have low yearly family income (73%). The profile also revealed that
most of the respondents belong to a family with five (5) members (30%). Moreover, the grade point average
(GPA) in English 1 of the respondents is low as based from the standards set by NONESCOST. The survey also
manifested that the respondents have positive attitude toward the use of multimedia language instruction.
2. The vocabulary achievement of each treatment group before and after exposure to multimedia language
instruction is high (See tables 4 and 5).
Although the obtained mean of scores by each treatment group before and after experiment were similarly
interpreted ‘high’, increase in scores were noted in the posttest. After the treatments, TG1 (video: full visual and
verbal cues) obtained the highest mean (38.07); T2 (still picture, text and audio: limited visual and full verbal
cues) obtained the second highest mean (37.40); T3 (still picture and text: limited visual and no verbal cues)
ranked third (36.80); and T 4 (audio only: no visual and full verbal cues) ranked fourth (34.53).
Table 4 Vocabulary achievement of each treatment group before exposure to respective multimedia language instruction
Treatment Group N Mean Sd Interpretation
T 1 15 31.47 6.43 High
T 2 15 31.27 4.22 High
T 3 15 32.13 6.55 High
T 4 15 31.27 5.56 High
Table 5 Vocabulary achievement of each treatment group after exposure to multimedia language instruction
Treatment Group N Mean Sd Interpretation
T 1 15 38.07 6.15 High
T 2 15 37.40 2.69 High
T 3 15 36.80 5.62 High
T 4 15 34.53 5.80 High
3. Results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed no significant differences on the vocabulary
achievement among the four treatment groups before and after exposure to multimedia language instruction (See
tables 6 and 7):
Table 6 Significant difference on the vocabulary achievement of the four treatment groups before exposure to multimedia language
instruction
Sources of Variation Sum of Squares DF Mean Squares F-ratio F-Prob. Interpretation
Between Groups 7.60 3 2.53
Within Groups 1861.33 56
0.08
33.24
Total
1866.93 59
0.973 Not Significant
Significant at p ≤ 0.05 level
44