Download Comparison of LET Performance: BSEd-Bio vs. Physical Science Graduates in Gen Ed and Pro E and more Schemes and Mind Maps Biological Sciences in PDF only on Docsity!
Journal of Educational and Human Resource Development 4:119-132 (2016) Southern Leyte State University, Sogod, Southern Leyte, Philippines
Licensure Examination Performance of
BSEd-Biological and Physical Science Graduates in a
State University in Northern Philippines
Solita Evangeline S. Ba ˜nez* & Corazon G. Pardo
University of Northern Philippines, Vigan City, Ilocos Sur, Philippines
Abstract This study analyzed the licensure examination for teachers (LET) performance of the Bachelor of Secondary Education (BSEd)-Biological and Physical Science Graduates in the University of Northern Philippines. Utilizing the descriptive-correlational method, it involved the BSEd graduates major in Physical and Biological Sciences, School Years 2012-2013 to 2014-2015. The study employed documentary analysis of records of the graduates. Mean, analysis of variance, and multiple regression were used to analyze the data. Results showed that most of the respondents had graduated in public high schools and a great majority of them attended LET review. Their performance in the College Admission Test (CAT) is almost equally distributed from very good, good and passing, and nearly all of them obtained a passing mark in the Teaching Aptitude Test (TAT). The overall LET performance of the respondents is above the National Passing Percentage in general education, professional and major subjects. Respondents’ LET performance in 2015 is significantly higher than their performance in 2014. The performance of the LET takers in general education is higher in 2015 than in 2014. The respondents with high achievement in professional education subjects attended LET review and with high College Admission Test have better overall LET performance along general education and professional education components. The respondents with higher achievement in general education subjects have better performance in the specialization aspects. The institution may implement higher cut-off score in the College Admission Test. The college may conduct activities related to the licensure examination to prepare thoroughly the LET takers.
Keywords: College admission test; Teaching aptitude test; Attendance in LET review; Academic achievement
Introduction
In the world, education plays an important part of nation’s development. It is the vehicle through which development on the different aspects of society is carried out. Providing good education is a fundamental responsibility of any institution of learning whether it is run by the government or by private individuals. These institutions are the ones that will build the foundation of a strongly developed
country. Quality education for the students is needed in a nation to solve or alleviate poverty. Literacy is considered one of the greatest assets in a nation. Nowadays, one must identify new formulae, new techniques and strategies that will meet the demand of the changing norms of the society. Accustomed ways and traditional practices cannot solve problems. There must be a search for new assumptions in restructuring some deteriorating schools/universities. The
*Correspondence: solitabanez@yahoo.com (^) ISSN (Print):2545-9 7 40;(Online):2545-9 759
critical need for quality education becomes even more pronounced in the context of growing complexity of the roles of educational institutions as they operate in response to the evolving shift like social systems and structure. In order to accelerate the transformation process to “world-class” universities, a few governments – China, France, Germany, Japan, Russia and Spain, for example – have launched the so-called “excellence initiatives”, consisting of additional funding to boost the performance of their university sector (Salmi,2016). Likewise, the Philippine government provided initiatives such as: additional budget was given to education sector. The aforementioned country implemented the K-12 program which required that only qualified teachers will teach to attain quality education. Attaining quality education has been the long obsession of all agencies concerned as well as the individual teachers, parents and school administrators. Numerous programs that have been instituted in the 1980s like Program for Decentralization of Elementary Education (PRODED) and Secondary Education Development Program (SEDP) were implemented to improve the instructional skills of teachers in the elementary and secondary levels, respectively. Others, included the BEC, RBEC and then, the K- Basic Education Curriculum that took effect in School Year 2011-2012 for the Kindergarten and 2012-2013 in the Secondary. Excellence, as the target of educational institutions requires high educational standards which include outcomes of expected learners. However, to achieve quality and excellence, certain elements must be considered. Quality education is the fruit of quality teaching and quality supervision (Brusoni, 2014) Licensure Examination for Teachers is one way of improving the educational system of a country. This act of professionalizing the teacher profession was implemented in the Philippines through the enactment of Republic Act 7836 or otherwise known as the “Philippine
Teachers Professionalization Act of 1994” on December 16, 1994. The enactment of the law did not mean that the teachers in the Philippines were not “professional”. Rather it is a means to strengthen and improve not just the teachers, but also the quality of education and the whole educational system in general. By improving the teachers, results will be optimized because the students will naturally follow the steps of those who lead those (Teaching principles, 2013). Studies were conducted to evaluate the performance pre-service teachers’ and follow-up graduates, enable the institutions to appraise the curricular offerings and come up with plans that will certainly equip the students with the best possible training suited to maximise their contributions to the society. In evaluating teacher’s competence and performance of students, there is a need to measure the outcomes. Rabanal (2016) found out that teacher education graduate respondents failed to achieve the passing rate in the Licensure Examination for Teachers. The respondents performed above the national percentage of passing. LET performance was significantly related to fourth year high school average grades, high school graduated from, residence while studying, and field of specialization and only parents’ occupation did not yield significant relationship. On the other hand, academic achievement of the respondents in general Education, professional education, and major courses significantly correlates with the LET performance. James and Dan (2015) studied the effectiveness of teachers certified by the National (U.S.A) Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) in Washington State, which has one of the largest populations of National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs) in the nation. Based on value-added models in math and reading, they found out that NBPTS certified teachers are about 0.01-0. student standard deviations more effective than non-NBCTS with similar levels of experience. Certification effects vary by
Figure 1. The Conceptual Paradigm shows the relationship between the profile of the respondents and their LET performance.
Conceptual Framework
This study revolved around a framework as illustrated above:
Objectives
This study aimed to analyse the Licensure Examination Performance of BSE-Biological and Physical Science Graduates in a State University in Northern Philippines from School Year 2012-2013 to 2014-2015. Specifically, it sought to:
- determine the profile of the respondents along: HS average grade, College Admission Test, Teaching aptitude test, attendance in LET review and their level of academic achievement of the respondents for the past three years taken singly and as a whole in terms of :
a) General Education subjects; b) Professional Subjects; and c) Major subjects.
- determine the level of LET performance of the respondents for the past three years taken singly and as a whole in terms of:
a) General Education subjects; b) Professional Subjects; and c) Major subjects.
- determine the significant difference in the LET performance of the respondents in the past three years.
- determine the significant influence of the respondents’ profile on their LET performance.
Methodology
This study made use of the descriptive - correlational method of research. It involved the BSEd graduates major in Physical and Biological Sciences of the University of Northern Philippines -CTE during the School Years 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 who took the LET. The study also employed documentary analysis of the records of graduates from the UNP Registrar, CTE, UNP Testing Center and PRC. Likewise, the UNP CAT ratings of the respondents were interpreted using the following norms of the UNP Testing Center:
75 & above - Passed
Below 75 - Failed
The grades of the graduates in their general education, professional and major subjects were interpreted using the UNP grading system as follows:
Table 1. Respondent’s Profile on HS Graduated from, LET Review, CAT] & TAT.
Profile
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 As A Whole PS BS PS BS PS BS f % f % f % f % f % f % % f Type of High School Graduated from Public 7 77.78 12 85.71 5 100 11 84.62 10 90.91 13 100 58 89. Private 2 22.22 2 14.29 - - 2 15.38 1 9.09 - - 7 10. Total 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100 Attendance in LET Review Yes 9 100 6 42.86 3 60 11 84.62 10 90.91 12 92.31 51 78. No - - 8 57.14 2 40 2 15.38 1 9.09 1 7.69 14 21. Total 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100 College Admission Test Passed 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100 Average 82. Teaching Aptitude Test 33 and above/Passed 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 10 90.91 13^100 64 98. 30-32/Low Passed -^ -^ -^ -^ -^ -^ -^ -^1 9.09^ -^ -^1 1. Total 9 100 14 100 5 100 13 100 11 100 13 100 65 100 Average 49.
Point Score Numerical Average 1.00 97- 1.25 94- 1.5 91- 1.75 88- 2.0 85- 2.25 82- 2.5 79- 2.75 76- 3.00 75 4.0 72- 5.0 71 & below
The LET rating was interpreted as above and below the National Passing Rate. The TAT was interpreted using the following norms of the UNP Testing Center:
Numerical Average Descriptive Rating 33 and above -Passed 30-32 -Low Passed Below 30 -Failed
Frequency and percentages, Mean, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Multiple Regression were used to analyze the data.
Respondents were not subjected to harm in any way. Full consent was obtained from the participants prior to the study and the adequate level of confidentiality of the research data was ensured.
Results and Discussion
Table 1 shows the profile of the respondents along HS average grade, CAT, TAT, attendance in LET review and their level of academic achievement from School Year 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 in terms of General Education subjects, Professional Subjects and Major subjects. Table 1 exhibits that in general, most ( or 89.23%) of the respondents had graduated in public high school and a great majority of them attended LET review (51 or 78.46%). All of them passed the College Admission Test (CAT) with an overall mean of 82.22, and almost all of them (64 or 98.46) obtained a passing Teaching Aptitude Test (TAT) with a mean of 49.02.
Table 3.
Level of LET Performance of the Respondents for the Past Three Years
Year/Major
N
General Education
Professional Education
Major
As a
Descriptive
Subjects
Subjects
Subjects
Whole
Rating DR
¯X^
% Passer
% Failure
¯X^
% Passer
% Failure
¯X^
% Passer
% Failure
¯X^
% Passer
% Failure
2013 PS
9
Above NPP
BS
14
50
Above NPP
As a Whole
23
Above NPP
2014 PS
5
80
20
80
20
60
40
80
20
Above NPP
BS
13
74
75
Below NPP
As a Whole
18
Above NPP
2015 PS
11
100
-^
100
-^
Above NPP
BS
13
100
-^
Above NPP
As a Whole
24
Above NPP
Overall
65
Above NPP
Norm:
September National Passing Percentage (NPP)
2013
-39.
2014
-34.
2015
-41.
Mean
-38.
respondents have lower performance than the Biological Science majors (75.44 vs. 78.79; 74.60 vs 75; 75.09 vs 81.15) in the past three years, but the mean ratings in each year remained highest in 2015 and lowest in 2014. This means that the respondents met the greatest difficulty in the major subject components of the LET. As a whole, the LET performance of the respondents in the past three years is highest along General Education subjects (79.95), followed by major subjects (77.51), and lowest in the major subjects (77.09). Likewise, the respondents who took the LET in 2015 performed highest (79.89), followed by 2013 takers (77.89), and lowest in 2014 (75.52). The above LET performance of the respondents are all above the national passing percentage (except that of Biological Science in 2014) released by the PRC and the Board for Professional Teachers (BPT) on November 23, 2013 which showed that only 25,755 secondary teachers out of 64,792 examinees (39. percent) successfully passed, while 26, secondary teachers out of 77,803 examinees (34.40%) successfully passed the Licensure Examination for Teachers (L.E.T.) given last August 17, 2014, and in September 2015, 34,010 secondary teachers out of 81, examinees (41.75%) successfully passed the Licensure Examination for Teachers (L.E.T.) given last September 27, 2015. The results are similar with that of Figuerres (2013) The above finding conforms to Rabanal (2016) who found out that teacher education graduate respondents performed above the national percentage of passing.
Comparing the LET performance of
the respondents from 2013 to 2015
As seen in Table 4, along General Education subjects, the F-ratio of 12.435 is significant at .05 level. This result implies that the LET performances in General Education of the respondents during the three periods tested are varied. This result is supported from the previous finding of this study that
the respondents obtained highest LET performance in General Education (84.04) in 2015, followed by 79.17 in 2013, and lowest in 2014 (76.70). In the professional education subject component of the LET, the F-ratio of 2.892 shows that the performances of the respondents in the past three years are not significant at .05 level. This means that the LET performances of the respondents in professional education subjects for the past three years are almost the same as supported by the overall passing mean ratings of 77. in 2013, 76.65 in 2014 and 79.42 in 2015. Likewise, in the major subjects’ component of the LET, the F-ratio of 1.523, indicates that the performances of the respondents are not significant at .05 level or are almost the same as backed up by the overall passing mean ratings of 77.48 in 2013, 74.80 in 2014 and 79.93 in 2015 On the contrary, in Table 4, the overall LET performance of the respondents in the past three years is significant at .05 level as manifested by the F-ratio of 4.210. This means that the overall LET performances of the respondents in the past three years are varied as supported by the mean ratings of 77.89 in 2013, 75.52 in 2014 and 79.89 in
Since the ANOVA on LET performance in terms of general subjects and overall yielded significant result, the data was further tested to Scheffe Multiple Comparison Procedure Test to determine which pair of means is significantly different. There is a significant difference in the LET performance of the respondents in General Education subjects between 2013 and 2015, and 2014 and 2015 as manifested from the mean differences of 4.86775 and 8.54167. This means that the LET performance of the respondents along general education is better in 2015 than the performance of the respondents in 2013, and in 2014. This is supported by the previous findings of the study that the performance of the respondents is highest along general education subjects in 2015 followed by 2013 and lowest in 2014.
Table 6. Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting LET Performance along General Education Subjects. Model Variables Beta t Sig. t Sig. R^2 4 D R^2 1 0.748 0.56 0. Achievement in Professional Education subjects -0.748^ -8.957^0 2 0.774 599 0. Achievement in Professional Education subjects -0.713^ -8.723^0 Attendance in LET review 0.201 2.456 0. 3 0.796 0.633 0. Achievement in Professional Education subjects -0.648^ -7.762^0 Attendance in LET review 0.224 2.825 0. College Admission Test 0.195 2.368 0.
respondents who took the LET in 2014. This conforms to the previous finding of the study that the respondents who took the 2015 LET performed better than the respondents who took it in 2014. On the other hand, there is no significant difference between the performance of the respondents in professional education subjects and major subjects in 2013 and 2014, 2013 and 2015, and 2014 and 2015. This implies that more or less, the performances of the respondents in the year mentioned have the same level. The above findings is supported by Pardo and Tactay (2013) who found that as a whole, the respondents have almost equal performance in General Education (X=76.35) and Professional Education (X=76.69) components of the LET.
Significant influence of the
respondents’ profile on their LET
performance
Multiple regression analysis was conducted with LET performance along general education, professional education and major subjects as the dependent variables and profile as the independent variables. Results as presented in Tables 6-9. In model 1, the LET Performance of the respondents in General Education
is significantly influenced by their profile (R=.748, Sig F=.000) along achievement in professional education subjects (β= -.748, sig t = .000). This means that the higher the achievement in professional education subjects, the higher is the performance in the general education component of the LET. The corresponding linear equation for predicting the Y, therefore, Y=124.77-.748 (Profed). The R2 value of .560 implies that 56 percent of the variance of the dependent variable is explained by the independent variables considered in the analysis, and 44 percent is attributed to other factors not included in the study. Model 2 shows that when achievement in professional education subjects (β=-.713) and attendance in LET review (β=.201) are taken as a whole, tend to significantly influence the LET performance of the respondents along General Education (R=.774, F sig =.000). This entails that the respondents with higher achievement in professional education subjects and attended the LET review performed better in the General Education component of the LET. It is also evident that 59.9 percent of the variance of the GE component of LET is explained by the achievement in professional education subjects and attendance in the LET review. Model 3 shows that when achievement in professional education subjects (β=-.648),
Table 7. Multiple Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting LET Performance along Major Subjects. Model Variables Beta t Sig. t R R^2 4 D R^2 1 0.649 0.422 0. Achievement in Professional Education subjects -0.649^ -6.775^0 2 0.694 0.481 0. Achievement in Professional Education subjects -0.605^ -6.509^0 Attendance in LET review 0.248 2.667 0. 3 0.726 0.527 0. Achievement in Professional Education subjects -0.53^ -5.588^0 Attendance in LET review 0.276 3.055 0. College Admission Test 0.227 2.43 0.
Table 8. Multiple Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting LET Performance along Professional Education Subjects. Model Variables Beta t Sig. t R R^2 4 D R^2 .484 .234. 1 Achievement in GeneralEducation subjects -.649 -6.775.
attendance in LET review (β=.224), and CAT (β=.195) are taken as a whole, tend to significantly influence the LET performance of the respondents along General Education (R=.776, F sig =.000). This implies that the respondents with higher achievement in professional education subjects, attended the LET review, and obtained higher CAT tend to have higher performance in the General Education component of the LET. It is also evident that 63.3 percent of the variance of the GE component of LET is explained by these three independent variables. This observation could be explained by the equation Y = 87.015-19. (Professional Education)+3.517 (LET attendance)+.352(CAT).
Table 7 shows that the profile of the respondents (R= .649, Sig F=.000) on achievement in professional education subjects (β= -.649) significantly influenced their LET performance in Professional Education. This suggests that the higher is the grade in professional education subjects the higher is the LET performance in the same
component. The R2 value of .422 this variable account for 42.2percent of the variance. Model 2 presents that achievement in professional education subjects (β= -.605) and attendance in LET review (β= .248) significantly influenced the LET performance of the respondents along Professional Education (R=.694, F sig =.000). This means that the respondents with higher achievement in professional education subjects and attended the LET review performed better in the professional Education component of the LET. The R2 value of .481 implies that 48 percent of the variance of the dependent variable is explained by the independent variables considered in the analysis, and 52 percent is attributed to other factors not included in the study. Model 3 shows that when achievement in professional education subjects (β=-.530), attendance in LET review (β=.276), and CAT (β=.227) are taken as a whole, most likely to significantly influence the LET performance of the respondents along Professional Education (R=.726, F sig =.000). This implies that the
equation Y = 87.015-19.384 (Profed)+3. (LET attendance)+.352(CAT). The above observation is supported by Pardo and Tactay (2013) who found that all the components of the LET have high positive correlation with the pre-board performances of the respondents as supported by the computed r value ranges from .69 to .80. They concluded that the respondents who obtained high performance in the two preboard examination components tend to have higher performance in the LET. Ba ˜nez (2002) found that the CTE LET takers’ overall mean rating in their LET performance in general education, professional and major subjects was “Below Passing Mark”. Accordingly, the non-passers had low scores which pulled down the general averages of the passers. She also found that in the Main Campus when the six variables: average grade in senior high school, score in the UNP College Admission Test, average grade in general education, professional and major subjects when taken singly were not significantly related to their LET performance. However, the combined effects of the variables on LET performance showed significance at .05 level.
Conclusion and
Recommendation
Most of the respondents graduated in public high schools and a great majority of them attended LET review. Their performance in the College Admission Test (TAT) is almost equally distributed from very good, good and passing, and almost all of them obtained a passing Teaching Aptitude Test (TAT). The overall LET performance of the respondents is above the National Passing Percentage from 2013 to 2015 along general education subjects, professional education subjects and major subjects. The LET performance of the respondents in 2015 is significantly higher than the performance of the respondents in 2014, and the performance of the LET
takers in general education is better in 2015 than in 2014. The respondents with high achievement in professional education subjects, attended LET review and with high College Admission Test have better overall LET performance and along general education and professional education components, while those respondents with higher achievement in general education subjects have better performance in the specialization aspects. Based on the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are hereby offered: A higher College Admission Test and stricter retention policy may be implemented by the College of Teacher Education in selecting students who will be specializing in Biological and Physical Science. This could be done by increasing the result of the College Admission Test from 78% to 82% or higher and maintaining a serious retention policy on who can stay in the program. The Physical and Biological Science majors should be encouraged to attend a formal LET review and more time should be focused on the field of specializations. There is a need to conduct a review of the Biological and Physical Science curriculum to align it with the framework set not only by the CHED but also by the PRC. Activities related to the licensure examination for teachers may be institutionalized like the conduct of qualifying exams, pre-board exams and mock examinations. Refresher courses must be integrated in special topics which will be handled through team teaching. A similar study may be conducted to revalidate the findings of the present study. Other researches may also be performed which will include variables not employed in this study.
References
Angeles, E. (2009) National higher education research agenda. Retrieved on January 25, 2016 from http:// www. tua. edu. ph/ downloads/ nehra.pdf
Ba ˜nez, S.E.S., (2002) Analysis of the UNP-CTE graduates’ performance in the licensure examination for teachers. University of Northern Philippines, Vigan, Ilocos Sur.
Brusoni,M. et al. (2014) The concept of excellence in higher education. Retrieved on March 18, 2016 from http:// www. enqa. eu/ indirme/ papers -and- reports/ occasional - papers/ ENQA % Excellence %20 WG %20Report The %20 Concept %20 of %20 Excellence %20in %20 Higher %20 Education. pdf
Esmeralda and Espinos (2015) in their study, “Teacher education graduates’ performance as predictor of Licensure Examination for Teachers’ results. Retrieved on December 10,2016 from http:// philair. ph/ publication/ index. php/ jpair/ article/ view/ 330
Figuerres,O. (2013) An analysis of the performance of the University of Northern Philippnes in the Licensure Examination for Teachers .Retrieved on December 13,2016 from http:// iamure. com/ publication/ index. php/ ije/ article /view/ 500
Galapon, E.U., Batin, J.B., and Naval, N.F., (2013), The Performance of the Bachelor of Science in Industrial Education in the 2013 Licensure Examination for Teachers
James C. and Dan G. (2015) National board certification and teacher effectiveness: Evidence from Washington. Retrieved on December 9, 2016 from http:// www. cedr. us/ papers / working/ CEDR %20WP %202015-3 NBPTS %20 Cert.pdf
Pardo, C. G., Tactay, A.R. (2013). Performance of examinees in the preboard examinations and 2013 Licensure Examination for Teachers
Rabanal ,G.C. (2016) Academic achievement and LET performance of the bachelor of elementary education graduates, University of Northern Philippines Retrieved on December 13,2016 from http:// www. ijsrp. org/ research- paper- 0616/ ijsrp- p5465.pdf
Rabanal, G.C. (2012). Performance of the Bachelor of Elementary Education 2012 Graduates, University of Northern Philippines
Salmi J. (2016). Excellence initiatives to create world-class universities: Do they work?Teaching principles (2013), History of Licensure Examination for Teachers: A Short Review .Retrieved on December 13, 2016 from http:// teaching- principles. blogspot. com /2013/ 07/history -of- licensure- examination- for.html.
