Using Localized and Contextualized instructional Materials in Problem Solving: An intervention

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Localization is the process of adapting and relating the content of the curriculum to local condition, environment, and resources. Contextualization is the process of presenting lesson in meaningful and relevant context based on previous experiences and real-life situations. The goal of contextualization is to create conditions for more effective learning, expressed for example in higher grades and rates of retention in courses, and through progression to more advanced course work. This study investigated the implications of using localized and contextualized instructional materials in problem solving among Grade VI pupils in Mathematics.

METHODS

The respondents of this study was composed of all Grade VI pupils enrolled in Mataas na Lupa Elementary School, in the Municipality of Indang, Division of Cavite who were divided into two groups: control group and experimental group. The experimental group will be instructed with localized and contextualized materials in problem solving. The control group on the other hand will be instructed with non-localized and contextualized instructional materials.

RESULTS

In the pre-test, students in the Control group had a better performance (ave. = 9.0) than the Experimental group (average = 7.7). The dispersion of scores is similar in both groups (sd = 2.4). The minimum and maximum scores were higher in the Control group at 6 and 14, respectively, compared to the Experimental group where the lowest and highest scores were 4 and 13, respectively. In the post-test, students in the Experimental group have a higher average score (13.8) than students in the Control group (ave. = 12.8). However, scores in the Experimental group were more dispersed. The lowest score in the Experimental group was 8, slightly higher than the lowest score in the Control group which was 7. In both groups, the maximum score was 20.

DISCUSSIONS

In the pre-test, the average scores of the two groups are significantly different. In particular, the average score of the Control group is higher than the average score of the Experimental group. In the post-test, the average score of the Control group is no longer significantly higher than the average score of the Experimental group. There is no significant difference between the two groups. This could be an indication that the use of localized materials helped students in the Experimental group achieve better performance than the students in the Control group who used to have significantly higher scores prior to the intervention.