Anda di halaman 1dari 47

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study


One of the most main goals of education is to prepare the
students

to

be

globally

competitive

individual

for

the

challenges of the future. Wherein, a high level of performance in


Mathematics is required. Since, it is used throughout the world
as an essential partner/tool in many different fields, including
medicine, engineering, natural science, economics and etc. It
also has the largest scope among all the subject areas especially
if the student encountered problem solving activities in the
subjects.
Apparently, most of the students hate Mathematics because it
requires logical reasoning and deductive thinking from the basic
to the complex concepts of Mathematics.
Mathematics,

thus,

hinder

themselves

in

They tend to ignore


many

future

career

opportunities. Since Mathematics help us to develop skills needed


for the success of our career.
On the other hand, the competence in learning, how to learn
throughout

ones

life

in

this

changing

world

entails

the

experience and the total training of an individual. It is the

vehicle for developing students logical thinking and higherorder cognitive skills. It is our way to our dream since it will
make us smarter and have a great advantaged to those who hate
Math. Students should really continue enhancing their Mathematics
skills.
Learning Mathematics is fun and exciting. Instead of mere
memorization

of

formulas

and

procedures

and

general

facts,

different learning activities and exercise should be done to help


students continuous selfimprovement and learning.
The researcher believes that the result of this study would
serve an aid to know the level of performance encountered by the
students in solving complex numbers. Nevertheless, in knowing the
performance level of the students, it is possible to conclude
their difficulties encountered by the students. It also motivates
them that the problem solving involving complex numbers is easy
to understand.

Statement of the Problem


This study aimed to determine the Level of Performance in
Complex Numbers of the Selected Dormers of MinSCAT Main.
Specifically, this sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of performance in solving complex numbers


of the selected dormers of MinSCAT Main in terms of:
1.1 Addition
1.2 Subtraction
1.3 Multiplication
1.4 Division

2. Is

there

performance

significant
in

solving

difference

complex

on

numbers

the
of

the

level

of

selected

dormers of MinSCAT Main in terms of addition, subtraction,


multiplication and division?

Statement of Hypothesis
1. There

is

no

significant

difference

on

the

level

of

performance of the selected dormers of MinSCAT Main in terms


of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.

Significance of the Study


The

findings

of

this

study

bear

significance

to

the

following persons as they would be benefited by the results,


administrators, teachers, students and future researchers.
The results of this study will serve as a guide of the
administrators in upgrading the quality of instruction.
Similarly, this will help teachers to easily determine the
performance of their students in different operations of complex
numbers.
It will also serve for the students as an aid to know their
level of performance in complex numbers. This will serve as their
guide to what extent they will excel to the topic and a basis for
their improvement throughout the learning process.
Lastly, this will serve as the reference of the future
researcher in pursuing the same field of the study and in seeking
for related information/studies needed on their research.

Scope and Limitation


This study was focused on the level of performance of the in
solving

complex

numbers

in

terms

of

addition,

subtraction,

multiplication and division. The respondents of this study are


only second year college dormers of MinSCAT Main, 2015 2016 .
The indicator of the students abilities would be their scores
obtained in the given questionnaires.
Specifically,

this

study

is

only

limited

on

answering

specific questions presented in the statement of the problem.


The study was conducted in MinSCAT Main, Alcate, Victoria
last June October, 2015.

Definition of Terms
The following terms was operationally defined for further
understanding of the study.
1. Addition

is

the

process

of

combining

two

or

more

numbers to form one number.


2. Complex Number is the topic used by the researcher. It
refers to the sum of a real number and an

imaginary

number.
3. Competency

Level

it

was

the

researcher

wants

to

measure. This is ability of the commuters and dormers in


executing different operations in complex numbers.
4. Division the reverse operation of multiplication
5. Imaginary numbers is a multiple of i, where i is the
square root of -1.
6. Mathematics is an exact science that deals which deals
with the study of numbers, figures and other mathematical
concepts.
7. Multiplication

is

adding

the

number

to

itself

in

particular number of times


8. Operation was applied in solving a certain problem.
9. Subtraction

is

an

operation

that

undergoes

to

process of subtracting one number to another number.

the

Theoretical Framework
Logic
without

which

any

requires

theoretical

no

specific

framework,

and

thinking

is

positive

research

without

any

theory is chaotic and incoherent. A theory without facts becomes


fantasy,

uncontrolled

imagination,

reverie.

Based

on

this

requirement, several theories are presented.


According to Jerome Bruners Constructivist Theory, as cited
by Hurst, the purpose of education is not to impart knowledge,
but instead to facilitate a childs thinking and problem solving
skills which can then be transferred to a range of situations.
Specifically, education should also develop symbolic thinking in
children.
problem

Also,

solving

curriculum
skills

should

through

the

foster

the

development

processes

of

inquiry

of
and

discovery. It should be designed so that the mastery of skills


leads to the mastery of still more powerful ones.
On the other hand, Bandura noted on his theory the social
influences on learning and distinguished between learning and
performance, distinction behaviorists would not make. Learning is
the acquisition of some symbolic representation that serves to
guide

future

behavior.

The

future

behavior

may

or

may

not

actually occur. Bandura believes that in naturalistic settings we


learn new behaviors through observation of models and the results
of their own actions. Cognitive processes also play an important

role in our learning, a specially our sense of self efficacy.


According to Bandura, our self-efficacy, our beliefs about our
ability to perform a specific task, play a major role both in the
effort that we put forward and resulting learning. (Hannum, 2008)
Likewise,

cognitive

and

associative

learning

play

an

important role in the performance of the students in the problem


solving

because

these

processes

involve

continuous

learning

process which is necessary to determine the level of skills and


ability in some areas may greatly affect ones performance for
the learning cannot be connected from one idea to another.
Moreover, Bruner believed that the subject matter should be
represented in terms of the childs way of viewing the world and
advocated

teaching

by

organizing

concepts

and

learning

by

discovery. He also asserted culture should shape notions through


which people organize their views of themselves and others and
the world in which they live. Also, that intuitive and analytical
thinking should both be encouraged and rewarded.
Also,

Lewins

Theory

of

Learning,

as

cited

by

Ceraspe,

believed that an individual lives in space which is usually his


environment. He suggested that the development of an individual
was the product of the interaction between inborn predispositions
(nature)

and

life

experiences

(nurture).

The

behavior

of

an

individual is always geared toward some goal or objective and it

is precisely this intention that matters most in the performance


of behavior. These intentions supposedly follow field principles
and

are

influenced

by

psychological

forces

such

as

how

the

individual perceives a situation.


Vygotsky thought that the social world played a primary role
in cognitive development. He saw language as a major tool not
only for communications but also for shaping individual thought.
He started cognition within a historical and cultural framework
because he believes that was the only way that cognition could be
understood. Vygotsky placed an emphasis on social and cultural
aspects of learning. Certain aspects of Vygotskys work have
influenced

education,

especially

his

concept

of

the

zone

of

proximal development. (Hannum, 2005).


Calderon (2004) cites that trial and error theory involves
that trying a series of solution using all available information
and techniques known until the correct solution to a problem is
found. Insight, understanding and systematic procedure are used
in trying to solve a problem especially in Mathematics.
Furthermore, the Theory of Cognitive Development proposed by
Jean

Piaget

focused

on

how

learners

interact

with

their

environment to develop complex reasoning and knowledge. Students


in

their

constructivist
application.

classroom
During

learn

this

concepts

application

while

process,

exploring
students

explore various solutions and learn through discovery. Throughout


the learning experience, meaning is constructed and reconstructed
based on the previous experiences of the learner.
As teachers, there are specific things that they can do to
help pupils remember what they learn. One of these is to make
sure that the pupils see the relationship between the information
they learned and reduce memorization to a minimum.

10

Conceptual Model
On the basis of the forgoing theoretical framework, the
Conceptual Framework is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Hypothesized difference among the variables of the
study.
Level of Performance in Complex Numbers
of the selected dormers of MinSCAT Main in terms of:

Addition,
Subtraction,
Multiplication, and
Division

Figure 1 shows the hypothesized difference on the level of


performance in complex numbers of the selected dormers of MinSCAT
Main.
Specifically, as shown above, the major variable of the
study is the level of performance of the selected dormers in
complex

numbers.

These

are

measured

in

terms

of

addition,

subtraction, multiplication and division of the complex numbers.


This study tried to determine the significant difference in
solving complex numbers as performed by the respondents. This was
indicated by the double-headed arrow.
11

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In this portion of the study, literature and studies found


in books, articles and magazines and even in the internet about
the students level of performance are presented and reviewed.
The purpose is to show that the content and subject matter in
this study are supported by the authorities.

Related Literature
Dicdican (2007) stressed that pupils performance lies on
the expertise of the teacher, his effectiveness to attain the
objectives of the lesson, willingness to provide varied learning
activities for interactive or cooperative learning and initiative
to ask questions that develop critical thinking skills.
While, according to Zanzali (2006), the levels of content
mastery and the skills necessary to carry out certain standard
algorithms

are

satisfactory.

The

mastery

of

problem

solving

skills, however, among the students is still at low. Efforts to


upgrade and thus help students to mastery the problem solving
skills should be planned and implemented. It is hoped that the

12

data

generated

by

this

research

can

contribute

towards

the

upgrading of teaching and learning mathematics in Malaysia.


Also, according to him, there is a general agreement among
mathematics

educators

that

students

need

to

acquire

problem

solving skill, learn to communicate using mathematical knowledge


and skills, and develop mathematical thinking and reasoning, to
see

the

interconnectedness

between

mathematics

and

other

disciplines. Based on this perspective, this research looked into


the levels of problem solving ability amongst selected Malaysian
secondary school students. Research findings also showed that
students have fairly good command of basic knowledge and skills,
but

did

not

show

the

use

of

problem

solving

strategies

as

expected. Generally, these students have a low command on problem


solving skills. Most of the students were unable to use correct
and suitable mathematical symbols and vocabulary in providing
reasons and explanations for certain problem-solving procedures.
It is hope that these findings will serve as a reference for
educators in improving the learning and teaching of mathematics
in general and problem solving instruction in particular.
Likewise, Jakimovik in 2010, problem-solving competencies of
the majority of students are of very low levels. Each year more
than half of students didnt even attempt to solve the problems,
and only a small percent of those who tried did it correctly. the

13

diagnostic testing on these two context problems show serious


lack of understanding of these types of problems and very low
levels of strategic competence of the majority of the first year
students, prospective elementary school teachers. Approximately
93 %, 91 %, 94 % and 98 %, each year respectively, earned 0
points on the first problem, and 88 %, 89 %, 94% and 91%, each
year respectively, earned 0 points on the second problem. The
reasons behind the high percent of students who earned 0 points
on each problem are indeed complex and require a substantial in
depth investigation. A list of some of the possible related
factors, a set of goals of mathematics education for elementary
school

teachers

practicing

and

the

necessary

changes

mathematics

instruction

at

other

Fisico

in

planning

teacher

and

training

departments.
On
should

the
be

extensively

given
in

hand,
more

(2005)

opportunities

mathematical

and

suggested
to

expose

logical

that

pupils

and

engage

problem

solving

situations. Schools may indulge in mathematics competitions. Such


competitions help students make sound and logical conclusions
promote discipline as students to solve as many problems as
possible
being

in

held

the
and

process.

Today,

intensified

in

14

mathematics

the

competitions

elementary,

secondary

are
and

tertiary

levels

to

motivate

and

arouse

students

interest,

prestige and achievement in mathematics.


Furthermore, Knuth et. al. (2005) stated that a multiple
values response to the literal symbol interpretation task was
associated with success which is larger task that a relational
view

of

the

equal

sign

was

associated

with

success

on

the

equivalent equations talk. Additionally, the likelihood that the


student would use the recognize equivalence strategy in eight
grade was greater than the acquired relational understanding of
the equal sign in the sixth and seventh grade, suggesting it
matters when students acquire a relational understanding of the
equal sign. That teachers failed to see these connections is not
necessarily surprising, given these tasks are not ones typically
posed to students.

Related Studies
Berguera (2009) in her study entitled Level of Performance
in Solving number and Word Problems in Algebra of Second Year
Students in Selected National High Schools in Naujan South and
East District found out that student respondents from Naujan
South

have

better

performance

than

student

respondents

from

Naujan East in solving number problems while they have shown the

15

same level of performance in word problems. She recommended that


students should be given more exercises in solving both number
and word problems to enhance their abilities and master some
techniques

in

interpreting

mathematical

problems

to

further

improve students problem solving ability.


Similarly, Castillo (2009) revealed in her study, Level of
Performance in Problem Solving in Mathematics of Grade Six Pupils
in

Selected

Public

Intermediate

Schools

in

Bongabong

South

District, S.Y. 2008-2009, that majority of the pupil respondents


have a good performance in problem solving achievement, however
there is still a need among the pupils to improve and increase
mean performance in mathematics. She recommended that the teacher
should exert more effort in improving the level of performance in
problem solving of pupils. They should assist pupils in problem
solving

difficulties

by

introducing

varied

activities

and

involving them to unusual degree of realism. Teachers should also


make

problem

solving

interesting,

allow

pupils

to

experience

success and introduce varied problem solving activities. Teachers


should emphasize reading carefully and analytically in order to
understand the meanings of the word problems.
Perez (2010) in her study, Problem Solving Performance in
Algebra of Second Year Students in Three Selected National High
School in Naujan found out that the respondents from

16

three

schools

have

varying

levels

of

performance

in

solving

word

problems such as age problem, work problem, mixture problem,


investment problem, and uniform motion problem since they have
different kinds of learning system.
Likewise,

based

on

the

finding

on

the

study

Level

of

Performance in Solving Word Problems involving two and three


dimensions among third year students in Two National High Schools
of Naujan West Ditrict conducted by Fababaer (2010), revealed
that student respondents in School A generally have demonstrated
a very high performance in area of rectangle, high in area of
square, low in triangle and very low in trapezoid. But they were
able to identify the given and formula to be used. While on
School B shown a very high performance in area of rectangle,
averge in square and very low in triangle and trapezoid.
Also,
rectangular

it

was

prism

concluded
and

volume

that
of

in

terms

triangular

of

volume

prism,

of

pyramid,

cylinder and sphere, the both School A and B got a low and very
low performance respectively.
Furthermore, in the study conducted by Montana (2011), the
Level of Performance in Signed Numbers, gender, dialect, family
income and organizational involvement do not affect the mastery
and

competency

level

of

the

students.

Also

the

educational

materials have no significant relationship with the students

17

performance level. Though, if these materials were used properly,


these

would

be

great

help

with

their

studies.

The

study

revealed that the performance of students in solving problems


involving signed numbers is differing to each other.
Silmilarly, in the study, Gender Disparity in Mathematics
Performance of Selected Students at Mindoro State College of
Agriculture and Technology, Arenillo (2008) found out that the
male and female students have demonstrated varying levels of
performance in Mathematics across four year levels. Second year
students have shown invariably good performance. Generally, both
gender groups performed very satisfactorily in their mathematics
courses. Results further indicate that mathematics performance of
the students is not influenced by the gender except in the third
year

level

where

males

have

outperformed

the

females.

She

recommended that the Mindoro State College of Agriculture and


Technology faculty in Mathematics should engage their students in
more problem solving tasks to come up with empirical evidences of
the conceptual and procedural knowledge level of their students.
Results, in turn may give better dimensions of gender difference.

18

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodology research design,


research locale, respondents of the study, sampling technique,
research instrument, scoring and quantification, data gathering
procedure, data processing method and statistical treatment of
data employed in analyzing and interpreting data pertaining to
the variables of the study. This chapter presents the

Research Design
The descriptivecomparative method of research was employed
in this study to describe and compare the level of performance of
the students in solving complex numbers.
This research design describes systematically, factually,
accurately and objectively a phenomenon. Zulueta (2003) defined
this design as a method which considers two entities without
manipulating

their

values

but

rather

establishing

formal

procedure for obtaining criterion data on the basis of which one


can compare and conclude which of the two variables is better.

19

Research Locale
This

study

was

conducted

in

Mindoro

State

College

of

Agriculture and Technology located at Alcate, Victoria, Oriental


Mindoro. It was 15 km away from the town proper of Victoria.
Specifically, this school satisfied the criterion in the
selection of the research locale.

Respondents of the Study


The respondents of the study were composed of 15 Second Year
College dormers of the given locale. The distribution of these
respondents was shown in Table I.
Table I. Distribution of the Respondents

Respondents

Population

Sample

Dormers

680

15

Sampling Technique
A systematic random sampling technique was used to determine
the number of the respondents of the study.

20

Research Instrument
The major instrument of the study used is a set of forty
(40) item test. This set of test was selfstructured and other
was

generated

from

the

lessons

in

complex

numbers.

This

is

composed of four parts.


Part I

deals with adding complex numbers with 10 items

scored as 10 points.
Part II contracts with subtracting complex numbers with 10
items scored as 10 points.
Part III deals with multiplying complex numbers with 10
items scored as 10 points.
Part IV contracts with dividing complex numbers with 10
items scored as 10 points.

21

Scoring and Quantification


The result of test obtained by the student respondents will
be described using the following:

Score

Description

910

Very High

78

High

56

Average

34

Low

1-2

Very Low

Data Gathering Procedure


The

researcher

distributed

personally

the

set

of

questionnaires to the respondents. Direction for answering the


test was explicitly stated to guide the students in answering the
test. It was also read and explained for the respondents to
answer properly. The researcher retrieved the materials and made
sure they were returned completely.

22

Data Processing Method


After the retrieval of the questionnaire, the researcher
tabulated and processed the data manually through the use of the
description in the scoring and quantification presented above.
Quantitative data were analyzed and the results were interpreted.
Data table was made to organize, summarize and analyze the data
on how variables differ with each other.

Statistical Treatment of Data


After tabulating the data gathered from the questionnaire,
they were analyzed and interpreted using Frequency and Percentage
Distribution, Mean and OneWay Analysis Of Variance.
The following statistical formulas were used in the study.

1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution


Formula:
where:
percentage
frequency
total number of respondents

23

2. Mean
Formula:
where:
= mean
= symbol for summation
X = nth individual observation
n = total number of observation

3. One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)


Table:
Source of
Variation

Degree of
Freedom

Sum of
Squares

Mean of
Squares

Between
Groups
Within
Groups
Total

Formula:

mean square between


mean square within

24

F-ratio

Critical
Value

Results

sum of square between


sum of square within
degrees of freedom between
degrees of freedom within

25

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the results and discussions of data


generated based on the problems of the study.

1. Level of performance in complex numbers of the dormers

1.1 Addition of Complex Numbers

Table 1.1 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of


the

level

of

performance

in

adding

complex

numbers

of

the

dormers.
It can be noted that 10 or 66.67% of the respondents got
scores between 9 to 10. Three or 20% obtained scores between 78.
Only 2 (or 13.33%) scored between 56.
Based

on

the

foregoing

results,

it

implies

that

the

respondents have a high level of performance in adding complex


numbers as shown by the computed mean of 8.57.
This can be denoted that the most of the respondents are
familiar with the rules of adding complex numbers in order to
arrive with the correct answers.

26

Table

1.1

Frequency

and

Percentage

distribution

of

the

respondents level of performance in complex numbers in terms of


addition.

Level of
Performance

Frequency

Percentage

Description

910

10

66.67

Very High

78

20

High

56

13.33

Average

34

Low

12

Very Low

Total

15

100

Mean: 8.57

Description: High

1.2 Subtraction of Complex Numbers

Table 1.2 presents the frequency and percentage distribution


of the level of performance in subtracting complex numbers of the
dormers.
Most of the respondents (66.67% or 10 out of 15)fell within
910 brackets. There are three (or 20%) who got scores between 5
to 6. While, two (or 13.33 %) were scored between 78.

27

The computed mean of 8.43 denotes that the respondents have


a high level of performance in subtracting complex numbers.
Specifically,

it

can

be

inferred

that

majority

of

the

respondents got the correct answer since they know the rules
involved in subtracting complex numbers.

Table

1.2

Frequency

and

Percentage

distribution

of

the

respondents level of performance in complex numbers in terms of


subtraction.

Level of
Performance

Frequency

Percentage

Description

910

10

66.67

Very High

78

13.33

High

56

20

Average

34

Low

12

Very Low

Total

15

100

Mean: 8.43

Description: High

28

1.3 Multiplication of Complex Numbers

Frequency

and

percentage

distribution

of

the

level

of

performance in multiplying complex numbers of the dormers is


shown in Table 1.3.
Ten (10) or 66.67% of the respondents scored between 9 to
10. Twenty percent or three (3) of the respondents got scores
between 12. Two (or 33.33%) who got scores between 56.
The findings showed as indicated by the computed mean of
7.63 that the level of performance of the dormers in multiplying
complex number is high.
This suggests that the respondents have enough knowledge on
the rules concerning multiplication of complex numbers in order
to arrive with the correct answer.

29

Table

1.3

Frequency

and

Percentage

distribution

of

the

respondents level of performance in complex numbers in terms of


multiplication.

Level of
Performance

Frequency

Percentage

Description

910

10

66.67

Very High

78

13.33

High

56

Average

34

Low

12

20

Very Low

Total

15

100

Mean: 7.63

Description: High

1.4 Division of Complex Numbers

Table

1.4

illustrates

the

frequency

and

percentage

distribution of the level of performance in dividing complex


numbers of the dormers.
Specifically, it can be seen that 10 (or 66.67%) out of the
15 respondents obtained scores between 7-8. Two (or 13.33%) who

30

got scores between 9-10 and also, between 56. Only 1 (or 6.67%)
was scored between 34.
Based on the findings, it entails that the respondents have
a high level of performance in dividing complex numbers as shown
by the computed mean of 7.23.
This can be meant that the most of the respondents managed
to get the correct answers because they were acquainted with the
rules in division of complex numbers.
Table

1.4

Frequency

and

Percentage

distribution

of

the

respondents level of performance in complex numbers in terms of


division.

Level of
Performance

Frequency

Percentage

Description

910

13.33

Very High

78

10

66.67

High

56

13.33

Average

34

6.67

Low

12

Very Low

Total

15

100

Mean: 7.23

Description: High

31

2. Differences in the level of performance in complex numbers of


dormers

Table 2.1 Summary Table of Oneway ANOVA of the respondents


level of performance in complex numbers

Source of
Variation

Degree of
Freedom

Sum of
Squares

Mean of
Squares

Between
Groups

28.87

9.62

Within
Groups

56

238.7

Total

59

267.57

F-ratio

F
Critical
Value

Results

2.26

2.77

Not
Significant

4.26

Table 2.1 shows the difference in the level of performance


of dormers in addition, subtraction, multiplication and division
of complex numbers.
As indicated, since the computed Fratio of 2.26 is less
than the tabular value of 2.77 at 0.05 level of significance
using the degrees of freedom (3,56), thus, the null hypothesis
was accepted. It means that there is no significant difference in
the level of performance in complex numbers of dormers.

32

It can be suggested that the level of performance of dormers


in terms of adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing complex
numbers were almost the same and do not differ with each other.
This may be due to the familiarity of the respondents on the
rules involved in the four fundamental operations used in complex
numbers. It is also possible that the students mastered the
complex numbers because it was taught to them by their teacher
effectively.
The findings affirm the study conducted by Dicdican (2007),
which found out that pupils performance lies on the expertise of
the teacher and his effectiveness to attain the objectives of the
lesson.
Likewise, it was upheld by Arenillo (2008) which revealed
that students have shown good performance in Mathematics.
Lastly, the result of the study denotes that dormers have a
high level of performance in complex numbers and they do not
differ significantly.

33

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This

chapter

presents

the

summary,

conclusions

and

recommendations made by the researcher.

Summary

1. Level of performance in complex numbers of the dormers

1.1 Addition of Complex Numbers


Results showed that 10 or 66.67% of the respondents got
scores between 9 to 10. Three or 20% obtained scores between 78.
Only 2 (or 13.33%) scored between 56. The mean score was

8.57.

1.2 Subtraction of Complex Numbers


Most of the respondents which is 66.67% (or 10 out of 15)
fell within 910 brackets. There are three (or 20%) who got
scores between 5 to 6. While, two (or 13.33 %) were scored
between 78. The mean score was 8.43.

34

1.3 Multiplication of Complex Numbers


Of 15 respondents, ten (10) or 66.67% scored between 9 to
10. Twenty percent or three (3) of the respondents got scores
between 12. Two (or 33.33%) who got scores between 56. The
computed mean score was 7.63.

1.4 Division of Complex Numbers


As shown in the results, 10 (or 66.67%) out of the 15
respondents obtained scores between 7-8. Two (or 13.33%) who got
scores between 9-10 and also, between 56. Only 1 (or 6.67%) was
scored between 34. 7.23 was the computed mean score.

2. Differences in the level of performance in complex numbers of


dormers
There is no significant difference in the level of
performance in complex numbers of dormers since the computed
Fratio of 2.26 is less than the tabular value of 2.77 at 0.05
level of significance using the degrees of freedom (3,56).

35

Conclusion
The researcher has come up with the following conclusions
based on the findings of the study.

1. Most of the respondents have a high level of performance in


adding complex numbers because of their familiarity with the
rules in addition of complex numbers to arrive with the correct
answers.

2. Majority of the respondents have a high level of performance


in subtracting complex numbers because they were aware in the
rules employed in subtracting complex numbers.

3. The level of performance in complex numbers of the majority of


the respondents is high because they have enough knowledge on the
rules concerning multiplication of complex numbers.

4. Most of the respondents have a high level of performance in


dividing complex numbers because they were acquainted with the
rules involved in dividing of complex numbers.

5. The study revealed a no significant difference on the level of


performance in complex number operations of the dormers.

36

Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the
following are recommended:

1. The students are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the


rules in adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing complex
numbers.
2. Teachers should give focus on making their students acquainted
on the rules employed in the four fundamental operations of
complex numbers.
3. Students should also be exposed to different operations and
must be equipped with the skills because four operations will
always be applied in everyday life.
4. Similar studies should be conducted about complex numbers to
verify the results of the study.

37

BIBLIOGRAPHY

38

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. BOOKS
Dayrit, B. and Yap, A. (2002) Modern College Algebra (Revised
Edition 2002) Philippines: REX Book Store, Inc., Sampaloc,
Manila
Partible, Fe G. et. al. (2013) College Algebra (2013 Edition)
Philippines: MUTYA Publishing House, Inc., Malabon City

B. UNUBLISHED THESES
Montaa, M. D. (2011) Level of Performance in Signed Numbers
of the Second Year High School Students in Eastern Mindoro
College
Buergera, L. H. (2009) Level of Performance in Solving Number and
Word Problems in Algebra of Second Year Students in Selected
National High Schools in Naujan South and East Districts
Castillo, A. C. (2009) Level of Performance in Problem Solving in
Mathematics

of

Grade

Six

Pupils

in

Selected

Public

Intermediate Schools in Bongabong South District, S.Y. 20082009

39

Perez, C. O. (2010) Problem Solving Performance in Algebra of


Second Year Students in Three Selected National High School
in Naujan
Fababaer, L. M. (2010) Level of Performance in Solving Word
Problems involving two and three dimensions among third year
students in Two National High Schools of Naujan West Ditrict

40

APPENDICES

41

APPENDIX A
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

42

Name:

Date:

Course and Year:


Dorm Number:

Direction: Perform the indicated operations and reduce to the


form a + bi.

I. Addition

1. (5+11i) + (7+4i) =

6. i + 7i + (4) =

2. 15 + (-2+3i) =

7. 25 + 4i =

3. (2+5i) + (6+7i) =

8. (2+3i) + (16)+7 =

4. (3+2i)+(45i)+(5+8i) =

9. 3 + (72i) =

5. (1511i)+(45i)+2i =

10. (6+2i) + (46i) =

II. Subtraction

1. (1+6i) (8+2i) =

6.

2. (52i) (35i) =

7. 15 (3i21) =

3. (27i) (313i) =

8. 3

4. 4 (i+7) =

9. 25 6i (2i) =

5. 25 i =

10. (14+5i) (6+i) =

43

4 + 7) (2+3i)=

7 4 )=

III. Multiplication

1. (7+2i)(2+7i) =

6. (4+7)(3i) =

2. 2i(5+6i) =

7. (i+7i)(4) =

3. (73i)(4+25) =

8. 3(7+4) =

4. 100 (38i) =

9. (256i)(4+2i) =

5. 6(5+i) =

10. (14+5i)(6+i) =

IV. Division

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

(-4+2i)

25
(

24i)
3i

i
3i

7.
8.

i2 +2i+1
i+1

6.

-2

9.

10.

44

(-36)

2i
(

5
24i
3

i+3) i+1)
i+1
66i
11

APPENDIX B
CURRICULUM VITAE

45

CURRICULUM VITAE

Personal Data

Name: Desiree B. Evangelista


Address: Poblacion III, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro
Birthdate: December 21, 1996
Age: 18
Civil Status: Single
Religion: Roman Catholic
Email Address: desiiiii21@gmail.com

Educational Attainment

Undergraduate Course
Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics
Mindoro State College of Agriculture and Technology
Main Campus
Alcate, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro
46

Secondary
Aurelio Arago Memorial National High School
Main Campus
Leido, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro
S.Y. 2012 2013
Salutatorian
Academic Excellence in Mathematics Awardee
Most Outstanding Researcher Awardee
Active Girl Scouts of the Philippines Awardee

Elementary
Simon Gayutin Memorial Elementary School
Malayas, Poblacion III, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro
Salutatorian

47