THE SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS: A BASIS

FOR PROPOSED SCIENCE LABORATORY ACTIVITIES

_________________________

A Thesis Proposal Presented

to the Faculty of the Graduate School
Our Lady of the Pillar College - Cauayan
Cauayan City, Isabela

_________________________

In Partial Fulfilment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Education
Major in Science Education

_______________________

RUBENSTEIN VILLEGAS CARLOS

 CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

In today’s generation, developing various skills are

indispensable but challenging at the same time because of

different factors that can influence and affect the will,

cognition, behavior, perceptions, attitude and actions of an

individual especially among students nowadays wherein

globalization, high-technologies and rampant influence of

social media are considered part of their daily lives.

Formal education or schooling plays a vital role in

enhancing the students to be globally competitive by

providing different activities for them to integrate and

acquire adequate skills needed including science process

skills. One of the purposes and goals of schooling is to

teach students how to think, how to have an in-depth

understanding and how to deal and solve a certain problem.

Schools are providing different activities like

experimenting, reasoning and analyzing for the students to

explore and open their mind for the different and wide

scientifically-based concepts. Moreover, teachers have big

role in encouraging the students to participate to those

activities, directing and guiding to properly digest and

synthesize those activities for them to improve and develop

their knowledge, adopt and adjust their mind to the wide

range of issues and concepts and to evaluate if those

science process skills through activities that they learned

are effective to execute and solve many problems

independently. Thus, teachers must teach and provide facts,

concepts and theories to encourage and help students to

explore and conduct scientific investigations.

Scientific process skills are strategies and techniques

that can contribute to the students’ scientific, critical

and analytical thinking ability which is used to understand

a complex and unstructured situation and can help to

formulate a solution that will provide answers on a specific

problems. Scientific process skills can be considered a

weapon of student in their academic and life journey at the

same time because it will provide options of understanding

that is scientifically-based which influence by the formal

education.

But one of the problems that may encounter in

integrating these scientific process skills among students

is their mindset which majority of the students nowadays are

lacking of these skills because of the influence of what

people called “Globalization” which affects and have huge

impact in the students’ daily lives wherein they are only

relying on what internet will say on the different activity

problems that provided by their school aiming that they will

learn and acquire those skills. Instead that globalization

will help the students to expand more their knowledge and

develop those scientific process skills because of easy

access to everything, it is opposite of what is happening

nowadays which in fact globalization makes the students

indolent that is why the scientific process skills of

today’s students seem to be missing.

Nowadays, learners are more experiential than the

generation before them. Most of them knows how to operate

gadgets and switch from one TV channel to another at an

early age. This gave them the confidence that they adapt in

their learning process.

Scientific process skills are defined as a set of

broadly transferable abilities, appropriate to many science

disciplines and reflective of the behavior which the basic

process skills provide a foundation for learning the

integrated skills (Padilla, 2018). Scientific process skills

are directed and related to the both cognitive and

psychomotor abilities that can be use in problem solving,

conducting investigations, exploring information based on

concepts and theories and considered as the foundation of

scientific method. Scientific process skills can be measured

through two groups which is basic scientific process skills

including planning experiments, predicting, classifying,

interpreting, measuring, inferring, applying concepts,

creating graphs, communicating data, observing, and

measuring while integrated process skills including

identifying variables, constructing hypothesis, tabulating

and graphing data, defining variables, designing

investigations, and experimenting. These skills are thinking

skills which can be utilized to build and develop knowledge

so that the students can solve problems and formulate a

results, furthermore these skills are integrated or imparted

to an individual’s design and conduct experiments in the

laboratory. (Andini, 2018).

When students acquire these scientific process skills

as early as possible, they can carry these throughout their

life journey and by carrying these skills they can develop

it through the different experiences that they may encounter

as they conquering their path. These scientific process

skills are not just skills that can be easily acquire

through formal education but it is a long-term process of

combination of experiences, knowledge and of course

education.

If a students have these skills they will be able to

think abstractly in solving problems and will have positive

impact on the student’s performance that includes process

skills, conceptual understanding, problem solving and

learning outcomes (Irwanto, 2017).

Some are saying that the students’ scientific process

skills can be provided and acquired during learning process

in the classroom, laboratory and other trial facilities that

are conducting experiments and science activities like

biology which characterized as a study that encompasses

natural phenomena and widely-scope concepts of life

sciences. It is required to provide education to

accommodates and supports the students’ scientific process

skills (Andini, 2018), but other people will say that these

kind of skills can also be learned through the experiences

and challenges that may encounter in their life but there

are no supporting details that may prove that it is an

acceptable points.

Teachers’ academic preparation plays a big role on how

the students learn in school. An innovative teacher is able

to motivate students to hone their science process skills

through though provoking questions. As the teacher futhers

her education through post graduate studies, he/she is more

able to think of ways on how the concepts she wants to

explain be understood and applied by the learners.

Society, schools, teachers, parents and the students

itself should collaborate to develop, impart and help the

student to learn the scientific process skills which will

serve as the foundation of the students’ mind to process the

information scientifically, actively, and purposively that

gradually developing abilities and increasingly emphasized

the independent attitude towards solving problems.

In general, scientific process skills is important for

students as it is the foundation for developing or enhancing

the mastery of concepts and thinking skills that are

necessary in this generation. Moreover, in order to keep the

scientific and technological developments that are

continuously happening in the world, the science process

skills should also develop constantly because through these

skills it may be possible to formulate and find a solutions

to the problems that will be encountered during change and

transformation of the world.

To sum up, Science and Technology develops rapidly

which is considered a big factors in enhancing scientific

process skills of an individual especially by the students

wherein these subjects are usually part of their academic

life. If students embrace these subjects and try to explore

and understand every concepts, facts, ideas and theories

under these courses and make a critical, analytical and

scientifically analysis it will lead them to acquire and

develop the scientific process skills that are necessary

component to think, find and formulate right solutions to

solve problems that they may be encountered though out their

life.

Particular in Mabini National High School, the learning

process done by Grade 10 Learners who are actively seeking

and finding their own natural science’s concepts can

certainly not be separated from the science process skills

that they have. These Learners seem to need the science

process skills in their activities to find the right science

concepts. These Science process skills become their driving

wheel of discovery and development of facts and concepts as

well as the growth and the development of attitudes and

values.

A common problem, however, as observed in the

Legislative District 2 setting, is that SPS acquisition

is impeded due to some factors such as the ways on how SPS

is developed in the science classrooms. There are cases

that students were not given the chance to develop their

thinking skills because they are not allowed to think fully

by themselves. Concepts, knowledge and theories were already

provided in the students’ books. Moreover, some

students were first lectured by the teachers with the

necessary concepts and information before proceeding to

experiments. These impede the development of SPS among JHS

learners.

From the different aspects of science process skills,

this research was fueled by the need to make sense of the

assessment of the science process skills of high school

students in the Legislative District 2, Schools Division of

Isabela, Hence, this study will undertake.

Theoretical Framework of the Study

Education is one of the ways to change life, change

values and change fate of ones individual. K-12 program is a

part of the proposed educational reforms of the Philippines

present president which shifts Philippine basic education

system to twelve years plus kinder from the current ten

years. The framework has stars to symbolize the students who

are the center of K-12 program.

 This study was anchored on the theories of the

following well known authorities which are closely relevant

to the researchers study.

Cognitive development theory by Jean Piaget(1980), he

is a French speaking Swiss theorist who said that children

through actively constructing knowledge through hands-on

experience. He suggested that the adult’s role in helping

the child learn was to provide appropriate materials for the

child to interact and construct. Theory of Constructivism is

generally attributed to Jean Piaget (1980), who articulated

mechanism by which knowledge is internalize by learners. He

suggested that through processes of accommodation and

assimilation, individuals construct new knowledge from their

experiences. When individual failure leads to learning; when

we act on the expectation that the world operates in one way

and it violates our expectations, we often fail. But by

accommodating this new experience and reframing our model of

the way the world works, learn from the experience of

failure and failure of others.

The motivation theory by Abraham Maslow (1943) states

that Maslow subsequently extended the idea to include his

observation of humans’ innate curiosity. Maslow said on his

theory that through the curiosity of the human they become

motivated to do things on their own way. They are being

 motivated to finish and work harder. His theories are

parallel to other theories of human development psychology,

some of which focus on describing the stages of growth in

humans.

The Research Paradigm

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT OUTCOME

1. Profile of the
respondents;

1.1. Science
Determination
Teachers of:
a. Age
b. Sex
c. Educational
1. Profile
Attainment of the
d. Marital
status
respondents
e. Position
f. Nature of
Appointment
2. Science
g. Years in process
Service
h. Years of
skills of
Teaching the the high
Science
Subject
school Proposed Improvement of
i. Eligibility students Science Science
1.2. High school laboratory process skills
students Activities to of the Junior
a. Age enhanced the High School
b. Sex Student’s Students
c. General
average in Science
science Process Skills
2. Assessment of
teachers on high
school student’s
science process
skill as to;
a. Measuring
b. Predicting
Process
c. Inferring
d. Interpreting
e. Making Models
 FEEDBACK

This study uses a research paradigm of IPOO or Input

Process Output and Outcome model which illustrates the

direction of the study. In the context of the development of

this study, the input includes Profile of the Teacher-

respondents in terms of; Age, Sex, Educational Attainment,

Marital status, Position, Nature of Appointment, Years in

Service, Years of Teaching the Science Subject, Eligibility,

while the students are their age, sex and general average in

science. The assessment of the teachers on the science

process skills of the learners will also be included as to

their ability to measure, predicting process, inferring,

interpreting and making models. Moreover, a correlation will

also be utilized by the researcher in order to determine the

significant difference on the on the assessment of teachers

on the Science process skills of the high school students

when grouped according to their profile whereas a chi-square

test will be used to determine the significant relationship

of science process skills of the high school students

between their profile.

The profile and other variables will be analyzed and

interpreted. These variables, as intervening factors, are

assumed to have influenced on their science process skills.

The outcome of this study will be sued as basis for

developing a science laboratory activities which is

perceived to further enhance the science process skills of

the learner.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the Science process skills

of Junior high school students for school year 2020 - 2021

which will serve as a basis for proposed science laboratory

activities.

Specifically, this study seeks to find answers the

following questions;

1. What is the profile of the respondents;

1.1. Science Teachers

a. Age

b. Gender

c. Educational Attainment
 d. Marital status

e. Position

f. Nature of Appointment

g. Years in Teaching the Science Subject

h. Eligibility

1.2. High School Students

a. Age

b. Gender

c. General average in Science

2. What is the assessment of the teachers on science process

skills of the high school students in terms of:

a. Measuring

b. Predicting Process

c. Inferring

d. Interpreting

e. Making Models

3. Is there a significant difference on the assessment

between the teachers and students in terms of the process

skills of learners?

4. Is there a significant difference on the assessment of

teachers on the Science process skills of the high school

students when grouped according to their profile?

5. Is there a significant relationship of science process

skills of the high school students when grouped according

to the student’s profile?

6. What Science laboratory activities should be proposed?

Assumptions

1. There is a great factor of role of teachers on the

development of science process skills of the high

school students.

2. There is a great factor of the science process skills

on the academic performance of the high school

students.

3. The results of the assessment of Science process skills

of the high school students will serve basis for the

development of enhanced laboratory science activities.

Hypothesis

This study will be guided by the following null

hypothesis herein stated;

 1. There is no significant difference on the assessment of

teachers on the Science process skills of the high

school students when grouped according to their

profile.

2. There is no a significant relationship of science

process skills of the high school students when grouped

according to the student’s profile.

Significance of the Study

This study is expecting to come up with some findings

for which recommendations could be forwarded. These

recommendations will use to further enhance the science

process skills of the high school students through the

proposed enhance science laboratory activities that will be

designed by the researcher. To this end, the result of this

will be use as an effort to alleviate problems related to

the following:

Administrators. The results of this study will help

them enrich their administrative capability. This will also

get them through a series of training which will be a

positive opportunity in their personal concern, school and

community.

Parents of the students. As the primary guardian and

teacher at home, This research would be able to give them an

idea of what their students are doing in school specifically

in the subject science. They will have an idea why it is

imperative for their students/children to perform science

laboratory activities.

Students. The primary beneficiary of this research will

be benefited because it encourage them to reflect on their

own learning. Moreover, this may allow the students to

realized the inadequacy of their skills, be responsible in

their own learning and to be more active in the learning

process that lead to greater enhancement of their science

process skills.

Teachers. Because they will be the primary vessel in

providing the knowledge to the students. The results of this

study may heighten the teachers to integrate science

process skills in teaching science subjects

School. This research will also benefit the school, so

they will anticipate the need for procurement of additional

science laboratory equipment and apparatus for the

utilization of science laboratory activities of the

students, also the additional teachers and everything that

they should be anticipating for.

Researcher. The result of this study will greatly help

him in handling her students in the school and serve as his

guide in enhancing the learners Knowledge, Skills and

Attitude in attaining the goal of the Department of

Education. Furthermore, the researcher will gained insights

on the need for teachers to emphasized the science process

skills in teaching science.

Future Researchers. They can use the results of this

research as a basis for the future researches that will be

conducted.

Scope and Delimitation

The scope of this study is on the assessment of science

process skills of high school students who are currently

enrolled for the School Year 2020 – 2021. The variables to

be included will be the profile of the science teachers and

the grade 10 students. In the assessment of the science

process skills of the students, the following indicators

will be used such as; measuring, predicting process,

inferring, interpreting and making models. The researcher

will look into the significant differences on the assessment

of science process skills when group according to teacher’s

profile and significant relationship of the science process

skills to the profile of the students. This study covers

only the schools under the Legislative District 2 (LD 2) of

the Schools Division Office of Isabela. The municipalities

under this legislative district are Benito Soliven, Gamu,

Naguillian, Palanan, Reina Mercedes and San Mariano. Palanan

will not be included for this study due to its geographical

location and the financial capacity of the researcher to

conduct on the said area.

The findings of this study are delimited to the context

of the science process skills of grade 10 high school

students which results will be utilized as basis in

providing a science laboratory activities.

Definition of Terms

To have a better understanding of the contents of this

study, some key terms are defined conceptually and

operationally as follows:

Assessment. Refers to the wide variety of methods or

tools that educators use to evaluate , measure , and

document the academic readiness , learning progress , skill

acquisition , or educational needs of students.

 Education. It is the wealth of knowledge acquired by an

individual after studying particular subject matters or

experiencing life lessons that provide an understanding of

something.

Inputs. It is a way of evaluating changes from an

intervention or development program.

Inferring. It refers to an explanation based on an

observation. It is a link between what is observed and what

is already known (Santos & David 2017). In this study, it

refers to how the learners will create inferences about

observations they made about a mystery object during their

laboratory activities.

Interpreting. It refers to an attempt to figure out

what has been observed (Santos & David 2017). In this study,

it is the ability of the students to give meaning out from

the results of their gathered data and observation.

Making Models. It refers to the representation of an

idea, an object or even a process or a system that is used

to describe and explain phenomena that cannot be experienced

directly (Padilla 1990). In this study, it is the ability of

the students to provide a way of explaining complex data to

presenting as a hypothesis. It is the way they mentally

visual and linking it with theory and experiments.

Measuring. It refers to a collection of quantitative or

numerical data that describes a property of an object or

event according to martin (2006). In this study, it is the

ability of the students to compare a quantity within a

standard unit or the modern units of measurements

Performance. It is the accomplishment of a given task

measured against preset known standards of accuracy,

completeness, cost, and speed.

Predicting Process. It refers to the educated guess

based on good observations and inferences bout an observed

event or prior knowledge.

 CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES AND STUDIES

This chapter presents a number of related foreign and

local literature and studies from authors, both foreign and

local, which the writer believed to very helpful in gaining

broader background knowledge about the present study. The

materials are thought to be significant and perceived to

have certain relatedness with the study which the writer

though to have contributed to the in-depth presentation of

the analysis and final completion of the study.

Related Literature

Science Process Skills (SPS) are defined as

transferable skills that are applicable to many sciences and

that reflect the behaviors of scientists. They are the

skills that facilitate learning in physical sciences, ensure

active student participation, have students develop the

sense of undertaking responsibility in their own learning,

increase the permanence of learning, and also have students

acquire research ways and methods, that is, they ensure

thinking and behaving like a scientist. For this reason, it

is an important method in teaching science lessons. SPS are

the building-blocks of critical thinking and inquiry in

science (Ostlund, 2012).

Science Process Skills are based on scientific inquiry

and teaching science by inquiry involves teaching students

science process skills, critical thinking, scientific

reasoning skills used by scientists (Pratt & Hackett, 1998)

and inquiry is defined as an approach to teaching, the acts

scientists use in doing science and it can be a highly

effective teaching method that helps students for

understanding of concepts and use of process skills (Yager &

Akçay, 2010).

Science Process Skills are essential for teaching

science content knowledge and scientific inquiry because

teachers who have a poor understanding of the science

process skills are less likely to have a positive attitude

towards them and are, therefore, less likely to teach them

to their students (Cain, 2002). Science Process Skills

instruction also promotes positive attitudes toward science

among students; thus, the avoidance of teaching the process

skills can be detrimental (Bilgin, 2016). Many researches

stated that teachers who are deficient in the science

process skills are less equipped to use inquiry in their

classrooms (Aka et al., 2010; Lotter et al., 2012; Marshall

et al., 2013). Similarly, teachers who are not familiar with

science processes or have low interest in science processes

are not likely to teach science by inquiry. Teachers’

competence in the science process skills has also been found

to promote a positive attitude towards science (Bilgin,

2016).

Science Process Skills are in two categories which are

basic and integrated skills. Basic process skills include

observing, inferring, measuring, communicating, classifying,

predicting, using time space relations and using numbers.

Integrated process skills include controlling variables,

defining operationally, formulating hypotheses, formulating

models, interpreting data and experimenting,).

Science process skills (SPS) are divided into basic and

integrated processes. Basic processes are the fundamental

activities required in scientific inquiry and they are the

key skills that underlie all scientific investigations. The

integrated science processes skills (ISPS) are the complex

activities that form the method of actual inquiry and extend

beyond the basic processes into problem-based scientific

explanations. The basic process skills (BSPS) consist of

observing, classifying, communicating, measuring, predicting

and inferring while the integrated science process skills

(ISPS) include identifying and controlling variables,

formulating and testing hypothesis, interpreting data,

defining operationally, experimenting and construction of

models (Miller, [Link]., 2012).

Over the years, several arguments have been put

forwards for the use of lab activities in science education.

One of them has to do with a particular interpretation of

the following Chinese saying: tell me, I'll forget; show me,

I'll remember; involve me, I'll understand. 'Involve me '

has been understood in a restrict way, that is ask me to do

things in the lab, with lab apparatus, reactants, and so on,

ignoring or at least not valuing thinking about what happens

in the lab. Of course people can forget what they listen to

and they may remember what they watch but this raises a

question: what do they remember from the scene? is it the

visual and/or spectacular part of the activity or is it its

meaning? And when they do practical things themselves (so

that they are immerse in the scene) based on a screenplay-

like worksheet, then what guarantees do teachers have that

they understand the scene they are playing? is handling

apparatus enough to yield understanding?

The purpose of secondary science education is to equip

young learners with scientific process skills, to enable

them to define existing problems, observe events in their

society, analyze and hypothesize possible solutions,

conclude and generalize and apply gathered information for

the betterment and advancement of his community (Aktamis, &

Ergin, 2013). A scientifically literate individual, who

mastered these skills, can comprehend the very nature of

science which could increase the standard and quality of his

life and survive the challenges of everyday life. Hence,

these process skills influence the personal, societal and

global lives of an individual because these skills provide

the necessary tools to combat everyday problems, perform

scientific researches, and produce novel scientific

knowledge and information. These skills can be acquired by

an individual through well-designed science activities

(Huppert, Lomask & Lazarorcitz, 2012).

 Laboratory activities have long been advocated in

science classrooms as an ideal way for students to challenge

naïve conceptions first-hand and develop scientific

understandings (Singer, Hilton, & Schweingruber, 2005.

Millar (2004) suggests that students’ experience with

natural phenomena in laboratory activities can be messier or

more ambiguous than other forms of instruction such as

lectures and textbooks and because of this, they may present

particular challenges for students trying to learn science.

According to Ngoh (2014), a student should possess

mastery of the necessary science process skills (SPS) in

order to succeed in science inquiry and hands-on science

activities. These skills encompass the 12 basic science

process skills, which were further classified into two,

namely basic and integrated. These two classes of SPS form

the foundation and method of actual scientific inquiry that

are often used in science classes. The basic SPS include

observing, classifying, communicating, measuring and using

numbers, predicting, making inferences, and using spacetime

relationship. On the other hand, the integrated SPS include

identifying and controlling variables, making hypotheses,

interpreting data, defining operationally, and

experimenting.
 Mbewe, Chabalengula, and Mumba (2010) and Huppert,

Lomask, and Lazarowitz (2012) reiterated that the SPS

acquisition is the chief objective of science education

because of the fact that SPS is needed by every individual

in whole citizenry, and not just the scientific community.

Huppert and colleagues further pointed out that since SPS

are applicable to all elements of the community, everyone

should be knowledgeable on how it could be applied in

everyday living. Furthermore, Olufunminiyi and Afolabi

(2010) stipulated that SPS enable learners to become more

creative problem-solvers, reflective thinkers, innovative

and inventive individuals, which are needed qualities for

national development in terms of science and technology.

A common problem, however, as observed in the school

settings, is that SPS acquisition is impeded due to some

factors such as the ways on how SPS is developed in the

science classrooms. International studies (NRC, 1996), for

instance, reveal that students were not given the chance to

develop their thinking skills because they are not allowed

to think fully by themselves. Concepts, knowledge and

theories were already provided in the students’ books.

Moreover, Aktamis and Ergin (2013) revealed that students

were first lectured by the teachers with the necessary

concepts and information before proceeding to experiments.

This impedes the development of SPS among learners, and this

type of educational setting is exactly the opposite of what

the science education framework aims to develop among the

learners.

Science process skills as the building blocks from

which suitable science tasks are being constructed must be

considered by the new national science curricula and the way

they are expressed in textbooks. To develop science process

skills.

Science content taught in science classrooms should be

used (Nyakiti et al, 2010) Science process skills form the

core of inquiry-based learning. To learn to do science is to

master the science process skills and to apply them in

scientific investigation (Ngoh, 2015).

Teachers with sufficient Science Process Skills can

teach efficiently and their students perform effectively

(Miles, 2010)

According to Nwosu and Okeke (2015), science process

skills are mental and physical abilities and competencies

which serve as tools needed for the effective study of

science and technology as well as problem solving and

individual societal development. According to Ozgelen

(2012), science process skills are thinking skills that

scientists use to construct knowledge in order to solve

problems and formulate results. The implication is that

science process skills are inseparable from the practice of

science and play a key role in both formal and informal

learning of science content. They are important tools for

producing and arranging information about the world around

us based on prior knowledge.

According to Sukarno, Permanasari, and Ida (2013),

science process skills and mastery of science concepts are

inextricably intertwined, interrelated and mutually

reinforcing. Jack (2013) opines that using science process

skills is an indicator of transfer of knowledge that is

needed for problem solving and functional living. Opateye

(2012) observes that science process skills affect personal,

social and global lives of individuals. Science process

skills have been broadly categorized into two viz.: basic

and integrated science process skills (Padilla, 2012; Keil,

Haney, & Zoffel, 2014; Aziz & Zain, 2010). The basic science

process skills are observation, classification, prediction,

inferring, communicating and measuring. The basic process

skills are foundational tools for construction of new

knowledge. The integrated science process skills are

controlling variables, defining operationally, formulating

hypotheses, interpreting data, experimenting and formulating

models.

The integrated science process skills are the terminal

skills for solving problems or doing science experiments.

The integrated science process skills are science process

skills that incorporate or involve the use of different

basic science process skills (Rambuda & Fraser, 2014; Aziz &

Zain, 2010; Mutlu & Temiz, 2013). They are higher level

cognitive skills (Aydin, 2013). The basic science process

skills are not separate and distinct from integrated science

process skills but provide the foundation or advancement to

the more complex integrated skills (Rambuda & Fraser, 2014).

According to Keil, Haney and Zoffel (2014), integrated

science process skills are needed to be scientifically

literate; which is the ability to grasp essential science

concepts, to understand the nature of science, to realize

the relevance of science and technology in their lives and

to willingly continue their science study in school or

beyond school. According to Aydin (2013), there is a shift

to training students in a way that enables them to access

knowledge, to distinguish what knowledge is necessary and to

generate new knowledge on the basis of the knowledge they

have accessed. In the view of Koray et al. (cited in Aydin,

2013), this shift is only possible through the mastery and

acquisition of integrated science process skills.

In accordance with the nature of science, the process

of science learning should ideally rest on the scientific

process. The scientific process involves a variety of SPSs

(Towle, 2013). When viewed from the level of SPSs, then

observing skills is an initial skill in the process of

science. This is followed by higher process skills such as

the skills of measuring, classifying, and ending with the

highest skill, namely, experimenting (Rezba et al., 2015).

SPSs can be used as alternative solutions to improve the

effectiveness of science learning process, because learning

that is oriented to SPSs will always involve cognitive or

intellectual, manual, and social skills which, if integrated

into a single learning unit, will form three dimensions of

skills namely, basic skills, followed by the skills of data

collection / developing / processing, and the highest is the

skill to investigate or experiment (Bryce et al, 2012). The

development of SPSs enables students to acquire the skills

necessary to solve everyday problems (Aydoğdu et al., 2014).

Students who use the SPSs will have a positive attitude

towards science.

The research of Temiz, et al (2006) states that when

testing SPSs five basic capabilities will emerge, which are

naming, generalizing data, interpreting data, identifying

variables, and formulating hypotheses.

Learning with SPSs in junior high school requires a

deep understanding of concepts because junior high school

students are still in the development period of

intelligence, creativity, language skills, learning

motivation, and mental and physical conditions. In line with

that, Karamustafaoglu (2011) argues that SPSs will not

develop in students when the learning process does not

accommodate the occurrence of scientific activities that can

trigger the growth of scientific attitudes, sharpen the

process skills in students, so as to become capable to

actively participate in an investigation. Therefore, it is

the responsibility of teachers to develop students' SPSs as

supporters in developing the mastery of the concept of

science, so as to provide better learning outcomes (Rizal,

2014).

Temiz, Taşar & Tan (2016) state that the science

process skills are part for which it is never separated all

at once having the central role in developing the conceptual

understanding of students in the learning activities. The

condition makes the reason of why the science process skills

are very important to develop and assess.

Durmaz & Mutlu (2014) explain that when the learning

done with more accentuated to the science process skills, it

will impact more positive to the students’ learning results.

Thus, the assessment of science process skills are very

important component in the chemistry learning. The condition

happens as the assessment can support the students to be

more hard to study continously and support the teachers to

increase their qualities in the learning process (Badu,

2012).

According to Dirks, at al (2006) science process skills

can be taught to students in the form of exercises in making

graphs, analyzing data, creating research designs, writing

scientific papers, and scientific discussions. According to

Buntod, at al (2010) learning with SPS should be routinely

practiced with the goal of bringing out individuals who can

conduct research, ask questions, achieve scientific

knowledge by using scientific thought, and even use

knowledge to solve problems encountered in everyday life.

 The assessment is one of the teachers’ responsibilities

to know the students capabilities in obtaining their

learning objectives. The success of learning result

assessment is determined by the teachers’ abilities in

constructing and using the measurement tools correctly, and

analyzing data resulted (Guntur, Sukadiyanto & Mardapi,

2014). However, in fact, there are still many teachers have

no instruments of assessments to the science process skills

in specific.

The findings of Luky (2014) states that in science

learning, most students only memorize the parts of the

organs and processes in the human excretion system but are

unable to apply them in real situations, thus students are

prone to forget and insensitive to the problems in human

life associated with the excretory system. These findings

suggest that students have not been able to relate concepts

that have been studied with real-world phenomena and

concepts being studied. This indicates that the application

of the conceptual change process of students to science

learning has not been done by science teachers. The reason

is that most science teachers still do not have a sufficient

level of understanding of the conceptual change process, so

that science learning is still limited to the delivery of

material according to the curriculum (Gamze & Mustafa,

2014). It is very important for the teacher to know about

the findings on the SPSs characteristics, so they can apply

an appropriate learning strategy. Given that learning by

prioritizing SPSs will make students active in learning and

teachers can easily persuade students to process new

information through concrete experience and can facilitate

students to achieve the goals of science learning, so that

the learning objectives that have been formulated from each

basic competency can be achieved and students are able to do

the study thoroughly. Learning by being oriented to SPSs can

also encourage students to discover their own facts,

concepts of knowledge and foster the attitudes and values of

student personality. Therefore, the SPSs is an important

component in the implementation of learning because it can

affect the development of students' knowledge (Ango, 2002).

This SPS has a function as an effective competency to study

science and technology, problem-solving, individual and

social development.

The science process skills are those of thinking used

to build knowledge in solving the problems. This condition

happens as the measurement of science process skills

measurement of the students in the practicum activities is

difficult to achieve. The difficulties encountered when

doing the science process skills measurement is when there

are so many students. The other challenges are when there

are no assessment standards, so the teachers have many

difficulties in assessing the students’ learning results

(Setiani, 2011).

The lower capabilities of teachers in constructing

tests can be seen based on their activities whose never use

skill assessment instrument in the process of practicum. The

assessment of science process skill aspects are only based

on the teacher subjective assumption, i.e. when the students

seems doing good practicum, they will get good marks without

considering whole aspects concerning with the skills to be

measured. Otherwise, the existing assessment instruments in

some schools have been not referred to the special skills to

measure their capabilities in the practicum.

Synthesis

Science process skills are very useful in all aspects

and approach of educational system particularly in learning

science concepts. Majority of researchers and authors who

have the same topic which is science process skills

concluded that these skills are transferable and can

acquired by anyone especially by students. Basically, these

skills are applicable to face the science concepts because

if you develop and possess these skills it reflects to the

behaviors of scientist which exploring everything to find

answers and solutions to their curiosity.

Science process skills are mainly based on scientific

inquiry which means it is a necessary approach to teaching

because it involves teaching strategies and interaction

between teachers and students in order to develop science

process skills that is effective ways to understand wide

concepts of science. In existence, science process skills

are essentials for teaching science content, knowledge and

scientific inquiry so teachers must possess high level of

understanding and advance science process skills to bring

positive attitude and approach to the students because if

teachers have poor understanding of science process skills

most likely the teachers cannot bring enthusiasm and uplift

the attitude towards learning science concepts. A teacher

who is lack or deficient of these skills are not equipped to

acknowledge inquiry because it may give more confusion that

will result for poor understanding of students in particular

concepts.

Science helps students to develop scientific process

skills and vice versa because it may influence the personal,

societal, global lives of an individual because these skills

provide necessary tools to combat everyday problems.

Furthermore, these skills can be acquired by individual or

students through well-designed science activities. It is not

only an easy approach but it is a long process that involves

deep understanding, considering everything and of course a

step by step action to provide fully the different science

process skills towards the students. On the other hand,

these skills must possess mastery in order to succeed in

science inquiry. There are more factors that individual like

teachers and students must develop and possess to acquire

these skills because as they are trying to improve or learn

these skills, the counterpart approach should be consider,

encounter and most importantly to find solutions to solve a

certain condition.

Science process skills acquisition is the chief

objective of science which means the purpose of science is

to impart in learning or developing of a skills, habits and

quality that will help an individual like students.

Contrastingly, a common problem SPS acquisition is impeded

due to some factors like the mindset of teachers that they

must possess high develop science process skills, they are

not giving their students the opportunity to learn it

independently because some teachers think that they should

spoon-feed everything to their students to learn and develop

seriously all science process skills so the results due to

that mindset students are not thinking critically,

analytically, scientifically and independently which are

necessary components to develop science process skills that

have big influence to formulate solutions to the different

challenges and problems they may encounter inside and

outside of the school.

Local Literature

Science Curriculum Guide (2012), states that the K to

12 Curriculum is constructed around the three basic

dimensions of the nature of science. The first of these is

the science content of our scientific knowledge. The other

two important dimensions are, science process skills (SPS)

and scientific attitudes and values. All these could be

applied in our own locality as well as globally.

While science educators generally favor the use of

laboratory activities, Magnaye et al. (2005) report that

there is little evidence that laboratory activities are,

indeed, effective means of learning scientific concepts.

“Despite these claims [that laboratory experiences help

students learn scientific content], there is almost no

direct evidence that typical laboratory experiences that are

isolated from the flow of science instruction are

particularly valuable for learning specific scientific

content” (p. 88). They suggest that laboratory activities

may be effective for learning process skills, reasoning, and

how to deal with perplexing empirical data, but make a more

general call for reform. Specifically, they suggest that lab

experiences closely tied to instruction (integrated

instructional units) which provide more scaffolding from the

teacher and the curriculum text may be more effective in

helping students learn.

Skills refer to specific activities or tasks that a

student can proficiently do e.g. skills in coloring,

language skills. Skills can be clustered together to form

specific competencies. De Guzman (2017) iterated that it is

important to recognize a student’s ability in order that the

program of study can be so designed as to optimize his/her

innate abilities.

Panoy (2013) cited that the goal of science education

is to develop students’ skills and enables individuals and

to apply those skills in everyday lives. These skills affect

the personal, social, and global life of individuals.

Science Process Skills are necessary tool to produce

scientific information, to perform scientific research and

to solve problems.

According to Padilla (2012), students cannot excel at

skills they have not experienced or allowed to practice.

Mastery of integrated science process skills can only occur

after consistent practical sessions. This will allow for the

development of formal thinking patterns. Padilla (2012)

continues to aver that students need multiple opportunities

to work with these skills in different content and context

areas. In this regard science education teachers need to

help the learners to develop formal thinking patterns for

them to successfully master integrated science process

skills.

Basic process skills involved observation, measuring,

classifying, predicting and communicating while the

integrated process skills refer to controlling variables,

hypothesizing, experimentation and data interpretation.

(Errabo, [Link], 2018)

Oraye (2003) draws a distinction between observation

and interpretation, stating that activity is not enough.

Students must be taught how to think and talk; that is to

say, how to interpret their activities. These views indicate

that the array of semiotic resources in laboratory

activities is important for student learning and that both

action and language are central. However, the ways in which

students draw upon and orient themselves to these resources

is not well understood and a close examination of student

action and talk could improve our understanding of how

students learn from laboratory work. Within recent studies,

the notion of talking science has become increasingly

important and may provide some insight into linguistic

sense-making processes that accompanies lab activities, for

example how students engage in types of discourse such as

explaining, observing, and interpreting.

There are varied strategies for skills development.

Talisayon (2006) mentioned that general skills learned in

Science like complex problem solving , physical modeling,

and estimation have a wide range of applications from

science to finance.

Riovero, as cited by Coronado (2016), defines science

as more than of scientific knowledge. Science process skills

should be used as benchmark in planning lessons, however

science process skills should not be presented as separate

stand-alone lesson. These skills need to be connected with

important concepts. Thus, Science knowledge serves as a

background for lessons but should not take up the main

lesson. Instead, more emphasis must be given on activities

that enhance the understanding of science concepts and

improve science process skills. This implies that process

skills work hard with the scientific knowledge and

scientific attitudes to help students to think

systematically.

One of the goals of the new Philippine science

education framework is the development of 21st century

science process skills. Nurturing confident life-long

learners, with skills, attitudes and capacities to thrive in

complex societies is a high priority (Science Education

Institute-Department of Science and Technology, 2011).

Simultaneous with the beginning of the ASEAN

Integration in 2015, the Philippine educational system

introduced the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum. This

curriculum change calls for a paradigm shift in the policy

and practice of classroom assessment, emphasizing the

importance of formative assessment. This type of assessment

intends to help teachers in improving their instruction and

facilitate student reflection on their own progress. (DepEd

Order 8, s.2015).
 In teaching and learning science, “hands-on”

performance tasks require students to manipulate objects,

measure outcomes and observe results of their experimental

manipulations. These hands-on tasks are essential to capture

the process skills needed to perform certain tasks. Martin

et al. (2006) suggested that it is more important for the

learner to master the process skills and “do” science than

to merely learn the facts, concepts and theories of science.

In an inquiry based hands-on science learning, “doing”

science means applying the process. Science process skills

pertain to a “set of broadly transferable abilities,

appropriate to various science disciplines and reflective of

the behavior of scientists” (Padilla, 1990). Students are

practicing these process skills to understand how scientists

investigate and answer their own questions.

Synthesis

Science process skills is one of the three basic

dimensions of the nature of science that could be applied in

own locality as well as globally. Perceptibly, it is

necessary to recognize and consider students’ ability in

order to optimize the students’ innate abilities and skills

which is considered a normal activities that helps the

students in dealing with their own challenges in their

academic and life journey. If skills are clustered together

it can develop and form a specific competencies.

Authors have the same ideas regarding science practice

skills. Skills must practice and experience by students in

order to master it and carry out to solve certain problems

and to integrate critical and analytical analysis

independently that can influence and affects the personal,

social and global life of individuals. Through consistent

practical sessions, teachers will help their students

develop pattern of thinking that will provide opportunities

to explore different abilities and skills that will lead

them to develop and acquire different science process

skills. Furthermore, consistent practical sessions will help

the students master integrated science process skills.

In order to impart and develop science process skills

to the students, teachers should emphasize different

activities over lessons because through activities students

are developing their attitude and formulating thinking

patterns in order to analyze and answers different task or

questions indicated on their activities.

The K-12 curriculum became the main platform to change

calls for a paradigm shift and emphasize the formative

assessment which aims is to help teachers improve or develop

their way of instructions and teaching students to

facilitate and evaluate the student reflection on their own

way, perspectives and progression.

It is also emphasize about hands-on performance task

which is an effective way to encourage students to

manipulate objects, measure, observe, analyze, understand

and formulate something that will provide answers to a

specific task or questions that are developing around their

mid. By doing the activities, students are functioning

holistically in order to find all the correct answers in

every task, so this hand-on task will serve as a signal or

foundation for a students to encourage their mind to

function and develop the different science process skills

that are vital in every aspects of life.

Related Studies

Foreign Studies

Science Process Skills. According to Karamustafaoglu

(2011), understanding of Science process usually refer to

skills or abilities that must be owned by the scientists on

the process of scientific discovery. These skills are

divided into two groups: basic and integrated process

skills. The basic process skills include observing, asking

questions, classifying, measuring and predicting. Integrated

process skills include, identifying and defining variables,

interpreting data, manipulating materials, recording data,

formulating hypotheses, designing investigations, making

inferences and genralizations.

According to the study conducted by Akben (2015), the

importance of science literate individuals having scientific

process skills and using the inquiry method as a teaching

method during lessons are frequently emphasized. However,

when the level of incorporation of this method in the books

which are the main resources for the courses is examined, it

is seen that the experiments in the books tended to be at

the structured inquiry level. This can make students acquire

limited basic skills. Akben’s study was designed to make

prospective classroom teachers realize new experiments that

they can develop by adopting a critical look at the

experiments in textbooks. The prospective teachers developed

experiments at different levels of inquiry, identified the

science process skills which can be developed using these

experiments, and expressed the understanding they developed

with this practice. As a result of this research, conducting

the experiments included in the course books at different

levels of inquiry, the prospective teachers realized the

skills that can be developed in students, the relation of

these experiments with the daily life, and the fact that

conducting experiments can increase students' interest in

the course.

Learning of science is a process of construction and

reconstruction of previously held personal theories. It is a

process of continually refining existing knowledge and

constructing concepts in intricate organized networks that

are unique to each child and that provide explanatory and

predictive power and have used input from outside sources

(Martin, 2014).

Based on the study of Sukarno, et al. (2014), it is

concluded that science teachers' understanding of science

process skills (SPS) is still [Link] low science teacher

understanding to SPS have implications for science teaching-

learning activities, so that science teaching-learning

activities be poor to student teaching-learning activity

development. Some implications the low SPS of science

teachers, among others: still lack science knowledge

generally for science teachers, the low of learning quality

which stimulates development of students science process

skills,lack of students science process skills and the low

students mastery of science concepts generally.

 Gurces, et al. (2015) did a study in order to determine

using level of 10th and 11th grade students’ science process

skills. Science process skills predict knowledge and ways to

knowledge acquisition. Among students participating

different high schools, a significant difference is

determined in terms of basic, casual and experimental

process skills. According to the findings of Gurces, et al.,

it can be explained that students’ attending schools which

are general achievement level or acceptance order can cause

a significant difference in terms of potential use of

science process skills. This situation may stem from

different instructional methods, teachers’ content knowledge

and efficiency in the schools. In comparison of 10th and

11th grade students in terms of basic, casual and

experimental process skills, it is seen that 10th grade

students had higher means than 11th grade students at all.

There is a significant difference between 10 th grade

students and 11th grade students only in terms of basic

process skills. Because 11th grade students solve problems

based on knowledge due to preparation to entrance of

university exams, this situation may restrain their science

process skills.
 Aydogdu (2015) conducted a study that showed one of the

results that indicated that overall science process skills

of science teachers differed on the frequency of use of

these skills in the classroom and on in-service training on

these skills.

Akman, et al. (2012) conducted a study that revealed

the effect of "Constructivist Science Teaching Program"

developed by researchers for efficient and lasting

acquisition of scientific processing skills by 6 year olds

attending pre-school education institutions. The result of

the study, found significant difference between the

Preschool Scientific Processing Skills Scale scores of the

children in the experimental group who received

Constructivist Science Teaching Program and those of the

children who received traditional teaching [Link]

scores of the experimental group were found to be higher

than the scores of the children in the control group. This

result indicated that Constructivist Science Teaching

Program administrated to children attending pre-school

education groups is effective in the acquisition of

scientific processing skills.

The study of Baldwin and Wilson (2017) concluded that

shared book strategy allowed students to build both science

and literacy skills to support future science learning. The

hands-on, outdoor activity allowed students to connect talk

with their everyday lives and to bridge expectations.

Preschool is the perfect time to engage students in

scientific talk and scientific inquiry.

Teaching approaches in a science class can provide

opportunity to inculcate science process skills. These

skills need to be realized by teachers that it is important

in the learning of science and it serve as a scaffold to

other cognitive skills such as logical thinking, reasoning

and problem solving skills. It is especially important that

instruction to the task is clear and useful. Students should

be aware the science process skills that were to be acquired

and they should be guided through exploration questioning.

This implied that teachers should always give guidance

throughout the experiment or lesson in order for the

students to realize they are actually learning to acquire

the science process skills (Rauf , et al., 2013).

Feyzioglu (2013) investigated whether there exists a

correlation between science process skills and efficient

laboratory use among university students. The findings

indicated that a positively significant linear relationship

exists between high-level (integrated) science process

skills taught in laboratory applications and science

achievement (r = 0.746). Muzaffar and Muhammad (2011)

investigated the effect of inquiry laboratory teaching

method on students’ development of science process skills.

The results indicated that inquiry laboratory teaching

method is more effective in developing scientific process

skill among secondary school science students of biology.

Chebii, Wachanga and Kiboss (2012) investigated the

effect of practical activities in mastery of selected

process skills with experimenting being the focus. The

findings indicated that the experimental group had mastered

the skill better than the control group that was taught

using the conventional methods. A study by Jack (2013)

recommended that laboratories of secondary schools need to

be well equipped to enable the teachers to adapt methods

that will lead students to develop appropriate science

process skills. A study conducted in Turkey by Berberoglu et

al. (cited in Aydin, 2013) stressed that the method of

designing and implementing laboratory experiments should be

focused on development of higher level mental abilities

(integrated science process skills). The study also

indicated that to achieve this there is need to focus on

open ended experiments and activities that improve

creativity. A study by Sukarno et al. (2013) recommended

that science process skill teaching can be done by

development of teaching materials that are capable of

directing teachers and students to practice science process

skills. They also recommended the development of learning

models that provide opportunities for teachers and students

to co-develop science process skills.

When the literature is investigated, it is observed

that there has been a positive relationship between

students’ conceptual development and SPS (Wilke & Straits,

2006).

Term ‘alternative conceptions’ means that students hold

various conceptions which differ from the scientific one

accepted by scientific community (Çalık & Ayas, 2005).

In a study by Jeenthong, Ruenwongsa and

Sriwattanarothai (2014) to promote secondary students’

integrated science process skills, a pretest-posttest

control group design was adopted for the study with two

classrooms. The control group was taught by traditional

lecture supplemented with readings while the experimental

group experienced an intervention with the same content. The

findings at the end of the study revealed that students

experiencing an intervention gained a better understanding

of integrated science process skills. The implication in

these arguments is that science laboratories are the

contexts where integrated science process skills are

efficiently and progressively mastered. There exists a nexus

between active student involvement in the learning process

and the development of integrated science process skills.

There is also need for consistent and multiple practical

sessions to develop the integrated science process skills.

This will give the learners tools to interpret what they

observe and to design investigations to test their ideas.

Some studies have found that the low level of students'

SPSs is due to the generally insufficient or low SPSs that

science teachers and junior high school teachers have

(Aydoğdu, 2014: Harty & Enochs, 2015;) and teachers rarely

use these skills in their classes (Oloruntegbe & Omoifo,

2014), so that students' SPSs are difficult to develop.

Similarly, most Indonesian Junior High School students have

low SPSs. The Low SPSs of Indonesian students is reinforced

by the results of Anam's (2014) research which conducted a

study of thirty (30) representative students from 30 MI

(Madrasah Ibtidaiyah) in Sumedang Regency on Madrasah

Science Competence (MSC) activities. The results showed that

four (4) types of students' average process skills, namely

observing, planning experiments, classifying, and making

tables were in the less adept category, and were not adept

in concluding skills. The same is also the research result

of Sukarno et al. (2013) which states that the SPSs of

junior high school students in Jambi on the skill to reach a

conclusion, observation, predict, measure and classify is

still low.

Synthesis

To help individual especially scientist in scientific

discovery, they must have understanding of Science which

refer as skills or abilities. Science literate individuals

refer that you possess scientific process skills and if

inquiry is being utilized as a teaching method during

lessons, it will come up with a good process among students

regarding in developing or imparting scientific process

skills. However, if this method incorporated to the books

which is the main resources in classroom setting make

students acquire limited basic skills because books are

tended to be at the structured inquiry level. Due to this,

it is important for teachers to develop instructional

materials that is book-based but with deep and serious

assessment to their students different level of inquiry that

will give encouragement to the students that they can answer

and formulate solutions independently that is based on their

learnings before assessing it to the factual and conceptual

approach of text books because it may influence the thinking

and may give confusions to the students and may result for

acquiring limited skills.

Low science process skills among teachers will have

tremendous effect to the students. Generally, teaching

approaches in a science class will give opportunity to

inculcate science process skills, it is based on the same

ideas of the researchers. They also said that teachers will

serve as the foundation for their students to really acquire

and develop scientific process skills. Students have part to

acquire SPS but the majority is dependent on the strategies

and level of science process skills of a teachers. If the

teachers are having difficulties on the difference science

process skills obviously the students will also having

difficulty in developing SPS and the worst scenario is they

will be discouraged and feel that they are not good enough

because of lack of knowledge and poor implementation of

scientific process skills.

Making and developing instructional materials made by

teachers are proven based on the study of the different

researchers indicated in the related studies most especially

when teachers are making different experimental activities,

students are having good mastery rather that the control

group that was taught using conventional methods.

Furthermore, laboratories must be quipped to enable the

teachers to adapt methods that will give way for students

develop appropriate science process skills.

On the other hand, the method of designing and

implementing laboratory experiments should be focused on the

development of higher level mental abilities. This will give

the learners or students instruments to interpret and

analyze what they observe and to formulate and design their

own investigations to find solutions, test their ideas and

to compare and contrast their ideas to books which contains

scientific, factual and conceptual learning-based approach.

Local Studies

Maranan, V. M. (2017) evaluated that although many

students are in the “mastered” level, there are also many

students in lower level especially in the “low mastery” and

“no mastery” level who must be aided to improve their skills

and performance. In correlation between mastery in basic

process skills and performance in Science, observing and

predicting skills show significant relation with remembering

dimension; observing, inferring and predicting skills have

significant relationship with understanding dimension; only

classifying skill has no significant relationship to

applying dimension ; communicating and predicting skills are

significantly related to analyzing dimension; only inferring

is significantly related to evaluating; and all basic

process skills are significantly related to creating.

A study made by Barredo (2014) found out that

intervention materials contributed to better learning of the

concepts among students. Posttests and maintenance tests

indicated that students who were taught with material

employing the causal style of discourse had significantly

better retention of facts and concepts and were superior in

applying this knowledge in problem-solving exercises.

Furthermore, students learn best when they can build on past

experience, relate what they are learning to things that are

relevant to them, have direct "Hands-on" experience,

construct their own knowledge in collaboration with other

students and faculty, and communicate their results

effectively.

Gregorio (2012)studied that in order for an individual

to achieve “scientific literacy”, the inclusion of

modern and latest sciences in high school curricula

will become the guided path the experiences between

the history and current science education. Teachers should

emphasize science process skills through activities that are

usually conducted inside the classroom because experiences

likely heighten the understanding of the concept being

taught.

Aranes [Link]. (2014) conducted a study on Strategic

Intervention Material-Based Instruction (SIM-BI), Learning

Approach and Students‘ Performance in Chemistry. The result

showed that the use of SIM-BI is effective in terms of

improving students‘ performance and learning approach. The

surface learners performed equally well as the deep learners

when SIM-BI was used. The positive result of the survey

suggested that the SIM was appreciated and appealed to both

types of learners. The willingness and motivation of the

teacher to be innovative in her teaching will guide to

students to excel in Science and therefore acquire process

skills.

Developing science process skills is essential not only

to science but on how to apply science in everyday life.

They are cognitive skills which are used to understand and

develop the information; enable students to think

critically, decide and find answers to their curiosity. If

these skills are not acquired, students will find learning

difficult; they could not get meaningful learning

experiences. The absence of the latter contributes immensely

to the decline in the interest and to the negative attitude

toward science. Science education therefore, should

facilitate the necessary learning environment such as active

participation, life integration, meaningful learning for

science process skills be developed in schools. (Mirana

2018).

According to Mirana, V. P. (2018) revealed that

students have overwhelmingly highly positive attitude

towards science but not well-developed science process

skills. A highly positive attitude on the social context of

science but not on the context of a school science. Analysis

of the teaching approaches employed and the resources

available provide evidence to why the science process skills

were not properly acquired. Findings from this study also

show that teachers must provide interesting lessons in

science to develop science process skills which are the

foundations of critical thinking and higher order thinking

skills necessary for the technology-based society of today

and the future. Moreover, teachers’ mind set on how science

teaching be implemented must be properly reconsidered.

 Saldivar (2015) in a study found out that learners may

have mastered the basic objectives of science and that they

have met the basic grade level content standards but the

results also indicate that the learners’ performance is

satisfactory, generally, they do not excel in the subject.

The students performance is equated only at an average level

and not in any way considered as excellent. Although

mastery is a big factor in the assessment of how much the

student learned, but it does not equate to being excellent

in the subject.

A study conducted by Madronio (2015) looked into the

performance and achievement of students studying in the

province. The findings revealed that students from high

schools in the province have lower proficiency in science as

compared to those studying in highly urbanized area like the

Metro Manila. Factors identified includes not enough

equipment to use in the laboratory, lack of exposure to

activities that involves innovation in technology and lack

of enough materials that can be used for exploratory

learning.

Consistent to ndings of Rauf et al. (2013), the use

of
the inquiry method and continuous discussion in teaching
science is recommended by the researchers to promote the
inculcation of SPS inside the classroom. Both self- and
teacher- assessment SPS score sheet are recommended as
alternative strategies to the performance rubrics in
assessing
specic tasks. The researchers suggest the inclusion
of
science laboratory activities which engage the students
in designing and conducting experiments and controlling
variables. Rauf et al. (2013) also recommends the use of
various teaching approaches in a single lesson which could
provide opportunities for the inculcation and acquisition
of
science process skills in the classroom. Disclosure of the
students’ mastery on the process skills provides the
learners
an opportunity to determine their strengths and weaknesses
and to assist them in monitoring their own learning.
Emphasizing SPS in science teaching also requires
alignment
of achievement tests questions to include both “content”
and
“process skill” types of questions. The school
administration
should support the teacher’s initiative of conducting
science
inquiry skill stest (SIST) and process skills inventory.
Results
of the inventory could be used as baseline data for the
teacher
to adjust their instructional strategies and give emphasis
to
the students’ least mastered process skill. Moreover,
topics
concerning SPS assessment should also be included in the
school and division in-service trainings to enhance the
teacher skills in evaluating students SPS. Several
researches,
including those conducted by Karamustafaoğlu (2011)
and
Yakar (2014)underscore the signi cance of developing
and
assessing SPS levels among science students and pre-
service
teachers. More importantly, science teachers should begin
to
106
The Normal Lights
Volume 11, No. 1 (2017)
adapt alternative and adjunct strategies or tools in
assessing
their students level of SPS pro ciency . The ndings
of the
present action research have given the researchers the
insight
that students should not only experience being active
learners
in the classroom, they must also experience becoming
and
being active assessors or appraisers of their own
learning.
Hence, the researchers strongly suggest that science
teachers
provide students with a supportive environment where they
can effectively experience self-assessment of their SPS.
Moreover, the researchers are advocating the inclusion
of a
day-to-day SPS assessment and to use the results of these
assessments to modify teaching strategies based on the
identied students’ strengths and weaknesses.
Consistent to ndings of Rauf et al. (2013), the use
of
the inquiry method and continuous discussion in teaching
science is recommended by the researchers to promote the
inculcation of SPS inside the classroom. Both self- and
teacher- assessment SPS score sheet are recommended as
alternative strategies to the performance rubrics in
assessing
specic tasks. The researchers suggest the inclusion
of
science laboratory activities which engage the students
in designing and conducting experiments and controlling
variables. Rauf et al. (2013) also recommends the use of
various teaching approaches in a single lesson which could
provide opportunities for the inculcation and acquisition
of
science process skills in the classroom. Disclosure of the
students’ mastery on the process skills provides the
learners
an opportunity to determine their strengths and weaknesses
and to assist them in monitoring their own learning.
Emphasizing SPS in science teaching also requires
alignment
of achievement tests questions to include both “content”
and
“process skill” types of questions. The school
administration
should support the teacher’s initiative of conducting
science
inquiry skill stest (SIST) and process skills inventory.
Results
of the inventory could be used as baseline data for the
teacher
to adjust their instructional strategies and give emphasis
to
the students’ least mastered process skill. Moreover,
topics
concerning SPS assessment should also be included in the
school and division in-service trainings to enhance the
teacher skills in evaluating students SPS. Several
researches,
including those conducted by Karamustafaoğlu (2011)
and
Yakar (2014)underscore the signi cance of developing
and
assessing SPS levels among science students and pre-
service
teachers. More importantly, science teachers should begin
to
106
The Normal Lights
Volume 11, No. 1 (2017)
adapt alternative and adjunct strategies or tools in
assessing
their students level of SPS pro ciency . The ndings
of the
present action research have given the researchers the
insight
that students should not only experience being active
learners
in the classroom, they must also experience becoming
and
being active assessors or appraisers of their own
learning.
Hence, the researchers strongly suggest that science
teachers
provide students with a supportive environment where they
can effectively experience self-assessment of their SPS.
Moreover, the researchers are advocating the inclusion
of a
day-to-day SPS assessment and to use the results of these
assessments to modify teaching strategies based on the
identied students’ strengths and weaknesses.
The findings of the present action research have given

the researchers the insight that students should not only

experience being active learners in the classroom, they must

also experience becoming and being active assessors or

appraisers of their own learning. Hence, the researchers

strongly suggest that science teachers provide students with

a supportive environment where they can effectively

experience self-assessment of their SPS. Moreover, the

researchers are advocating the inclusion of a day-to-day SPS

assessment and to use the results of these assessments to

modify teaching strategies based on the identified students’

strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, according to Santos M. &

David, A. (2016), teachers need to emphasize the SPS in

teaching science, there is a need to continue and advocate

the use of SPS in teaching science subjects in the basic

education level. While integrating SPS in science classes

seem to be challenging task, there is a need for the

researchers and other teachers to practice it on a wider

scope in order to provide more evidence of its usefulness.

The researcher also commits to practice and advocate the use

of both self- and teacher-assessment as supplemental or

adjunct strategies in assessing students’ SPS. The

researchers believe that the use of both self- and teacher-

assessment would not only allow a more comprehensive and

holistic assessment of students’ SPS but also allows

students to acquire personal insights about their own

strengths and limitations and allows them to experience

self-awareness and even self-regulation. The researchers

also commit to advocate the need for science teachers to

adapt alternative and adjunct strategies or tools in

assessing their students’ level of proficiency of SPS. More

specifically for the first researcher/author, he commits to

both the use of these alternative assessment strategies and

in adjusting his instructional strategies based on such

assessment results. The researchers hopes that there will be

more initiatives among teachers in advocating alternative

assessment strategies, not only in science classes but in

other subjects or areas. In this way, teachers can have more

options to choose from when deciding on how they would

assess their students’ learning.

A study conducted by Bete (2020) attempted to assess

the knowledge and science process skills in learning of

Grade 8-Chemistry Student. It revealed that the student-

respondents’ knowledge belongs to “developing proficiency

level” while their process skills were rated as poor in

their grade 8-Chemistry subject. The students are partially

proficient in their scientific knowledge and skills. In

order to cater to the needs of the students regarding the

acquisition of knowledge and skills, various content

standard achievement test, intervention materials, and

modules needs to be developed and utilized.

According to Derilo, R. C. (2019), for effective

science inquiry and hands-on science learning,

students should have a good mastery of the science

process skills (SPS) before applying the processes. In light

of the findings of this study, it is advised that the

science teachers integrate the development and enhancement

of the different basic and integrated science process

skills in their design of various classroom-and

laboratory-based activities to elevate students’ level of

SPS. The use of inquiry-based learning is also encouraged

for it is directed towards the cultivation of SPS among K to

12 learners. Science as a process will not run

properly without adequate science process skills. The

low level of SPS at the junior high school maybe the cause

of students’ inability to perform various experiment-based

activities, such as inquiry and discovery, and could

even be the reason behind failures in the

national and international assessments. Therefore, it

is recommended that science teachers address these

skills through proper designs of inquiry-based,

outcome-based learning opportunities and activities

that would foster the development and

enhancement of SPS. School administrators, in

coordination with the institutions’ science department, need

to develop a training program anchored towards the

development of students’ SPS. Also, the school may provide

institutional access to related studies and journals about

SPS.

Synthesis

Science process skills proved that these are skills

that are necessary components that have huge effect in the

cognitive skills of an individual regardless of races with

diverse cultures, belief and perception like here in the

Philippines.

The use of appropriate strategies and methods play a

role in teaching science. Learning concepts and acquiring

process skills in the subject is difficult.

Mastery is essential in developing science process

skills because it influence and improve the thinking

capabilities of an individual especially by students. It

affects the way how individual perceive and analyze a

certain problems or situation. If a students have poor

mastery it may lead to learning difficulty and they could

not get meaningful learning experiences and through that the

enthusiasm or the interest developed within the students

will turn to have negative approach towards the science

subject.

Science process skills are thinking or cognitive skills

which can be utilized to analyze, understand and develop

information, helps the students to think critically,

analytically and scientifically and to find and formulate

solutions to their curiosity.

The ideas pertaining to science process skills by

different researchers and writers of both local and

international studies and literature are the same that these

skills will facilitate the significant learning environment

which includes active participation, life integration,

meaningful learning for science process skills be developed

in schools. Just like the other study, science process

skills affects the attitude of the students toward learning

science concept and teachers are the one who in charge in

providing interesting lessons and conducive learning

environment that will help the students to be an active

assessors or appraisers of their own learning and where they

can effectively experience self-assessment of their science

process skills. Teachers should also practice and advocate

the use of both self- and teacher-assessment as supplemental

or adjunct strategies in assessing students’ science process

skills that are not only focusing on the comprehensive and

holistic approach or assessment to the students but also it

gives opportunity to the learners to have personal insights

on a certain topic and to have personal assessment on their

own capabilities and strengths towards learning those

concepts especially in science that is broad and complex.

Correspondingly, importance of alternative assessment

strategies and in adjusting instructional strategies based

on such assessment results, inquiry and hands-on science

learning to develop the mastery is a foundation to acquire

different science process skills that will help the students

for them to find solutions and answers to their own

curiosity independently and to apply it to life situation.

Science process skills cover everything if these skills

are not developed within the students it affects the

holistic development that includes cognitive abilities,

behavior and attitude of a students that may lead to failure

and will have poor approach in both education and life

situation. Both the teachers and the students must

collaborate to help each other to develop and impart the

different science process skills which are necessary for a

various condition that life may bring.

Mastery, inquiry-based assessment, outcome-based

learning opportunities and activities that would

foster the development and enhancement are the

essentials tools that both teachers and students must comply

and possess in order to achieve science process skills.

CHAPTER 3

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

This chapter contains the research design and the

methodology used in the conduct of this study. It

incorporated the sampling technique, sources of data, the

research subjects, population of the study, the instrument

utilized to gather data as well as the statistical tools

employed in processing data. This chapter shows how the

researcher came to the necessary data for the study, and how

these data were analyzed, interpreted and presented in the

best possible ways.

Method of Research
 This study envisioned to identify the science process

skills of junior high school students at Legislative

District 2. Hence, a descriptive survey method will be

employed in this study. The descriptive design identified

the student’s profile and how it relates to their science

process skills as observed by the teachers.

Respondents of the Study

The target locale and population for this study are the

schools under the Legislative District 2 (LD 2) of the

Schools Division of Isabela. The municipalities under this

legislative district are Benito Soliven, Gamu, Naguillian,

Reina Mercedes and San Mariano, Province of Isabela. Grade

10 high school students who are currently enrolled for the

School Year 2020 – 2021 will serve as respondents for this

study.

Data Gathering Instruments

In gathering the data needed for this study, the

researcher used a questionnaire checklist. The questionnaire

checklist were based from several sources like professional

books, periodicals and published research materials such as

the research of Martin (2006). Modifications are made to

suit the need for this study.

 The questionnaire contains the following: Part I –

Respondents’ profile in terms of; age, sex, educational

attainment, marital status, position, nature of appointment,

years in service, years of teaching the science Subject,

eligibility, while the students are their age, sex and

general average in science. Part II are the assessment of

the teachers on the science process skills of the learners

and also includes their ability to measure, predicting

process, inferring, interpreting and making models.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher had followed certain procedures in the

conduct of this study;

1. Obtaining Permission.

The researcher obtained an approval of the Schools

Division Superintendent at the Schools Division Office

of Isabela through securing a letter of request to

administer and retrieve the questionnaires from the

teacher and student-respondents. This ensures the

participation and involvement of the said school where

this study will be conducted.

2. Validation of the Questionnaire

 In coordination with research professor, a content

and face validity were made. In the validation of the

questionnaire to be used, the researcher tried-out the

sample questionnaires to science teachers in the three

high schools located within the municipality of Gamu

which are Mabini National High School, Gamu Rural

School Main and Gamu Rural Anex Isabela during the

second semester of the school year 2019-2020. This is

to test its reliability coefficient which has a result

of 0.7 and interpreted as within the acceptable

reliability.

3. Administration of the Questionnaire

The questionnaire was personally administered by

the researcher on the selected high school within the

Legislative District 2. The respondents were given

enough time to read and answer the items in the survey

instrument. All questionnaires were retrieved by the

researcher to ensure a hundred percent retrieval rate

and to validate vague responses and attend queries that

may arise.

4. Tabulation, Interpretation and Analysis of the Gathered

Data.

After the retrieval, the data were tallied,

tabulated, and computed to facilitate the analysis and

 interpretation of data through the guidance of an

adviser and statistician.

Statistical Tools

The study utilizes the following statistical tools that

will be needed in the analysis and interpretation of the

data gathered.

1. Frequencies and Percentage. In order to determine the

profile of the respondents, the frequency count and

percentage distribution was employed. The formula is:

P = ---- x 100

Where:

P = Percentage

f = Frequency

n = Total number of respondents

2. Weighted Mean This was utilized in treating the data in

answer on the assessment of teachers on the science

 process skill of the high school students. The formula

for weighted mean is:

WM = ∑fx

Where:

fx = weighted frequency of response obtained by

multiplying x or weight for each item in the choices

∑fx = summation of the obtained fx on each item

N = number of the respondents

A 5-point Likert scale was used to analyzed the

assessment on science process skills of the high school

students. The scale and qualitative descriptions are as

follows:

Point Range Scale Qualitative Interpretation

Description
5 4.21 – 5.00 High Level of Extensive experience
Competence in the skill area

4 3.41 – 4.20 Moderately High Good experience in

Level of the skill area
Competence
3 2.61 – 3.40 Average Level Some experience in
of Competence the skill area

2 1.81 – 2.60 Low Level of Little experience in

Competence the skill area

1 1.00 – 1.80 No Level of No experience in the

 Competence skill area

3. Pearson r. This tool was used to determine the

significant difference of the identified variables.

The formula is:

N Σ xy −(Σ x)(Σ y)
r=
√ ¿ ¿¿

where: r = Pearson r
N = Total number of population
Σ y = Summation of variable y
Σ x = Summation of variable x
Σx y = Summation of x and y
Σ x 2 = Summation of squared variable x
Σ y 2 = Summation of squared variable y

4. Chi Square Test ( x 2) A nonparametric test of

statistical significance appropriate when the data are in

the form of frequency counts, it compares frequencies

actually observed in a study with expected frequencies to

see whether they are significantly different. This will be

used to determine the significant relationship between the

science process skills when grouped according to the profile

of high school students.

Formula:

Where:

C = the degree of freedom

 O = observed value

E = expected value

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation

of the data according to the problems presented in this

study

Profile of the Respondents

Table 1

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents

Grouped According to Age

Age Frequency Percent

55 and above 2 13.3
50 – 54 2 13.3
 45 – 49 1 6.7
40 – 44 2 13.3
35 – 39 1 6.7
30 – 34 5 33.3
29 and below 2 13.3
Total 15 100

Table 1 presents the frequency and percentage

distribution of teacher-respondents as to their age. As

gleaned from the table, there are 5 or 33.3% who belong to

the age group 30-34 while the age groups of 55 and above,

50-54, 40-44 and 29 and below all have 2 or 13.3 responses

each and the age group 45-49 and 35-39 both have 1 or 6.7%

each.

This clearly means that majority of the teacher

respondents belong to the middle age group and are therefore

seasoned teachers already. Age does affect teaching

effectiveness, at least as perceived by students. However,

the effect does not begin until faculty members reach their

mid-forties.(Stonebraker, Stone, 2015).

Table 2

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents

Grouped According to Gen

Gender Frequency Percent

Male 4 26.7

Female 11 73.3

Total 15 100
 As seen from Table 2, majority of the respondents are female

with 11 respondents or 73.3 percent while there are 4 or 26.7

percent who are males.

School teaching has long been believed and thought of as a

woman’s profession and job because working with children was

associated with child‐care rather than teaching (Skelton 2009).

 Table 3

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents

Grouped According to Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment Frequency Percent

PhD/EdD Graduate 1 6.7
With PhD/EdD units 2 13.3
Masters Graduate 2 13.3
With Masters Units 10 66.7
Total 15 100

As gleaned on the table, majority of the respondents

have earned units in Master’s Degree with 10 or 66.7%. Those

who earned Units in Doctorate Degree (PhD/EdD) and Masters

Graduate both got 2 responses or 13.3% while 1 or 6.7 %

earned a PhD/EdD Degree.

Teachers who used to rely on textbooks have now begun

to innovate their own teaching methods and strategies. The

emphasis on continuing professional education (CPE), or

taking the masteral and doctorate degrees, has now been more

pursued by teachers who didn’t want to get left behind on

the educational changes happening around them. Having more

confidence in their teaching skill, teachers perform better

and so do their students. Past research has indicated that

the effects of having a master’s degree (relative to only a

bachelor’s degree) on student achievement partly vary by the

level of schooling and academic subject (Goldhaber, 2015)

Table 4
 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents
Grouped According to Specialization

Specialization Frequency Percent

General Science 6 40.0
Physical Science 4 26.7
Biological Science 4 26.7
Chemistry 1 6.7
Total 15 100

Table 4 shows the distribution of teacher-respondents

according to specialization.

As shown by the table, 6 or 40% have General Science as

their specialization, Physical Science and Biological Science got

4 responses or 26.7% each while Chemistry has only 1 or 6.7%

response.

During the past three decades, the field of teacher

knowledge has grown considerably, with studies specifically

categorizing the knowledge and skills that teachers must acquire

and apply. In this context, the development of instruments that

can provide reliable and valid estimates of teacher knowledge has

received considerable attention. Still, this work is based on the

premise that it is possible to examine how the teacher knowledge

base is associated with student outcomes, and as a consequence of

this, to develop empirically validated best practices.

(Kyriakides et al. 2014)

For science and mathematics, and particularly at secondary

level, a sizeable proportion of empirical results from Europe and

the USA support the importance of specialized teachers (Baumert

et al. 2010; Goe 2007).

Table 5

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents

Grouped According to Civil Status

Civil Status Frequency Percent

Single 6 40
Married 9 60
Total 15 100

As to the teacher-respondents civil status, 9 or 60%

are married while 6 or 40% are still single.

Students’ achievement or capability is sometimes

influenced by teacher marital status. Unmarried or single

teachers are more vigorous and are also dedicated to their

job. Without a spouce and children, the teacher can devote

most of his/her time to her work thereby is able to perform

better than the married ones who are saddled with family

responsibility and roles as teachers. However, married

teachers have higher satisfaction in their job. (Kong, 2008)

 Table 6

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents

Grouped According to Position

Position Frequency Percent

Teacher I 4 26.7

Teacher III 9 60.0

Master Teacher I 2 13.3

Total 15 100

Table 6 shows that among the teacher respondents, 9 or

60% are designated as Teacher III, four (4) or 26.7% are

teacher I and two (2) or 13.3% are Master Teachers.

School ranking may motivate teacher’s attitude towards

teaching. Professional rank is an important indicator of the

professional capacity of compulsory education teachers. A

rational professional rank evaluation system plays an

important role in mobilizing the enthusiasm of teachers,

improving the overall quality of teachers, and promoting the

development of education. (Yuyou et. al, 2018)

 Table 7

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents

Grouped According to Nature of Appointment

Nature of Appointment Frequency Percent

Regular 15 100
Total 15 100

As gleaned from the table, all of the teacher-

respondents’ nature of appointment is Regular. This clearly

means that they have job security.

Continued gainful employment is a highly desirable goal

for a graduate. In the Philippines, a great number of

professional teachers are geared towards positions in public

school. The salary is higher and the benefits are better as

compared to the private schools. A regular position in a

public or state-owned school is synonymous to job security

(Sagayno, 2019).

Table 8
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teacher-Respondents
Grouped According to Years of Teaching Science Subject

Years of Teaching Frequency Percent

Science
21 and above 5 33.3
16 – 20 0 0
11 – 15 2 13.3
6 – 10 3 20.0
1 – 5 5 33.3
Total 15 100

The table shows that 5 or 33.3% of the teacher

respondents have been teaching for 1 – 5 years and 21 years

and more respectively, three (3) or 20% have been teaching

for 6-10 years and two (2) for 11-15 years. No response was

given for 16-20 years in teaching.

The result is in line with Bustos-Orosa (2008)

theoretical model on good teaching. To wit, according to

Bustos-Orosa, there are four critical factors that influence

good teaching and these are personality-based dispositions,

teaching competence traits, content mastery and expertise,

and pedagogical knowledge.

Table 9
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents Grouped
According to Eligibility

Eligibility Frequency Percent

LET 11 73.3
PBET 4 26.7
Total 15 100

As to Eligibility, as shown in Table 9, 11 or 73.3% of

the respondents are LET Passers while 4 or 26.7% are PBET

Passers.

It has been a fact that all who seek to pursue teaching

as a career need to take the Licensure Examination for

Teachers or the LET. Aspiring teachers must now get a

license first before being able to teach in the public

schools. This is in part due to the lack of qualified

teachers in teaching specialization subjects or vocational

skills. (Velasco, 2013)

 Table 10

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Students Grouped

According to Age

Age Frequency Percent

14 96 26.7
15 229 63.6
16 35 9.7
Total 360 100

Table 10 presents the distribution of students as they

are grouped according to their age.

As shown on the table, 229 or 63.6% are 15 years old,

96 or 26.7% are 14 years old and 35 or 9.7% are 16 years

old.

Education in the Philippines is given an utmost

importance by the government. In fact, it is considered an

investment in the family as children are obliged to attend

school at an early age. An average Filipino usually spends

10 years in basic education – 6 for primary and 4 for

secondary. But with the introduction of K-12 program in

2012, another two years is added to basic education before a

student proceeds to college. Average years of schooling of

adults is the years of formal schooling received, on

average, by adults over age 15. (Lockyer, 2014)

 Table 11

Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Students Grouped

According to Gender

Gender Frequency Percent

Male 176 48.9
Female 184 51.1
Total 360 100

As shown on the table, 184 or 51.1 % of the students

are females while 176 or 48.9% of them are males.

Filipino women are enrolled in high school and college

at significantly higher rates than men. It is widely

accepted that women are more progressive in schooling than

men while also earning lower labor-market wages than men.

Parents’ understanding of gender wage inequities could

motivate them to invest more effort in their daughters’

educations, in hopes of boosting future incomes. Part of

this may be self-interest: In the Philippines, daughters

often play an important role in supporting parents later in

life; thus, investing in a daughter’s education could ensure

a source of income for parents themselves. (Gustafson, 2018)

Table 12
 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Students Grouped
According to General Average in Science

General Average Frequency Percent

95 – 100 2 0.6
90 – 94 57 15.8
85 – 89 171 47.5
80 – 84 111 30.8
75 – 79 19 5.3
Total 360 100

Table 12 presents the general average of students in

Science. As shown in the table, 171 or 47.5 percent of the

students has a general average of 85-89, 111 or 30.8% has

80-84, 57 or 15.8% has 90-94, 19 or 5.3% has 75 – 79 while 2

or 0.6% has 95-100 incurred grade in science.

The result implies that majority of the learners

acquire average grades in science and that they have met the

basic grade level content standards. However, the results

also indicate that though the learners’ performance is

satisfactory, generally, they did not excel in the subject.

(Derilo, 2019)

Assessment of Teachers On the Science Process Skills of the

High School Students grouped according to their Profile

Table 13
Assessment of the Teachers on Science Process Skills of the
High School Students

Science Process Skill Mean Description

A. Measuring
The students can be able to…
1. Selects appropriate type of Moderately
instrument 4.13
High
2. Selects appropriate units of Moderately
measurement 3.96
High
3. Uses measurement instruments properly Moderately
4.00
High
4. Applies measurement techniques Moderately
appropriately 3.75
High
5. Uses standard units Moderately
3.92
High
6. Uses measurements as evidence Moderately
3.83
High
7. Uses measurement to help explain Moderately
conclusions 3.75
High
8. They employ quantitative data for Moderately
their conclusions 3.58
High
Moderately
Category Mean 3.86
High
B. Predicting Process
The students can be able to…
1. Forms patterns/ extend patterns Moderately
3.83
High
2. Applies the process of predicting Moderately
appropriate situations 3.50
High
3. Checks the accuracy of predictions Moderately
3.50
High
4. Make an educated guess based on good
observations
3.38 Average
5. Make inferences bout an observed
3.25 Average
event or prior knowledge.
6. Formulate hypothesis on the
3.17 Average
observed phenomena
Moderately
Category Mean 3.44
High
C. Inferring
The students can be able to…
1. Describes relationships among events Moderately
observed 3.71
High
2. Utilizes information in making Moderately
inferences 3.54
High
 3. Separates appropriate from non- Moderately
essential information 3.50
High
4. Applies the process of inferring in
appropriate situations
3.13 Average
5. Interprets graphs, tables and other
experimental data
3.25 Average
6. Make explanation based on an
observation.
3.25 Average
Moderately
Category Mean 3.40
High
D. Interpreting Data Moderate
High
The students can be able to… Moderate
High
1. Identifies data needed and how to Moderately
measure it 3.71
High
2. Plans collection of qualitative and Moderately
quantitative data 3.71
High
3. Collects data as usable evidence Moderately
3.79
High
4. Constructs tables Moderately
3.54
High
5. Interprets data 3.13 Average
6. Makes valid conclusion 3.21 Average
Moderately
Category Mean 3.51
High
E. Making Models
The students can be able to…
1. Differentiates between a model and Moderately
the real thing 3.71
High
2. Identifies needs for models Moderately
3.54
High
3. Interprets models in terms of real Moderately
thing 3.46
High
4. Develops accurate and appropriate
models
3.38 Average
5. Mentally visual and linking it with
theory and experiments
3.08 Average
6. Provides a way of explaining complex
data to presenting as a hypothesis
3.13 Average
Category Mean 3.38 Average
Moderately
Overall Mean 3.54
High
 Table 13 shows that all of the Science Process Skills

resulted to an overall mean of 3.54 and described as

“Moderately High”.

As gleaned from the table, the obtained data indicates

that the students “Measuring” skill is moderately high with

category mean of 3.86. This implies that in terms of

measuring skills, the students are confident and

knowledgeable in measurement.

In terms of “Predicting Process”, obtained data yields

a category mean of 3.44 which is described as Moderately

High. This implies that they are able to formulate

predictions and can check if the predictions are correct.

It is however noted that the students exhibits average

skills on predicting especially on making inferences on

observed events and formulating hypothesis.

For inferring skills, the result shows a category mean

of 3.40 and described as Moderately High. It implies that

students are able to form conclusions based on facts derived

from observation. An inference is an interpretation or an

explanation of an observation. The observation is made using

our senses. To make an inference, we connect what we observe

to prior knowledge and the new information observed through

our senses. An inference can be made from more than one

observation, and it is not just a guess.

([Link]

For “Interpreting Data”, the data obtained shows a

category mean of 3.51 and with a description of Moderately

High. This implies that the students are able to Interpret

data which requires the application of other basic process

skills-- in particular, the processes of inferring,

predicting, classifying, and communicating. It is through

this complex process that the usefulness of data is

determined in answering the question being investigated.

Interpretations are always subject to revision in the light

of new or more refined data.

([Link]

process/[Link])

In the science process skill “Making Models”, the

Category Mean obtained is 3.38 and described as “Average”.

It is however noted from the table that in the items

“Differentiates between a model and the real thing”,

“Identifies needs for models”, and “Interprets models in

terms of real thing”, the data yields a result described as

Moderately High. This science process skill is in fact the

evaluative part of the whole learning in science. This may

imply that students can easily identify models from the

actual things but has average skills when developing and

visualizing actual models to make. Students perform better

in more complex cognitive domains such as analyzing and

creating. Students tend to be more creative when they have

positive outlook in the tasks they are doing. (Maranan,

2017)
 Table 14

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped
According to Their Age

t
Variable Age Mean SD df p value Decision Interpretation
Value

Measuring 40 and 3.72 0.50

above Not
13 0.69 0.500 Accept Ho
significant
Below 40 3.55 0.46

Predicting 40 and 3.46 0.53

Process above Not
13 0.52 0.612 Accept Ho
significant
Below 40 3.34 0.44

Inferring 40 and 3.48 0.55

above Not
13 0.60 0.561 Accept Ho
significant
Below 40 3.33 0.42

Interpreting 40 and 3.58 0.61

Data above Not
13 0.50 0.625 Accept Ho
significant
Below 40 2.44 0.47

Making 40 and 3.42 0.63

Models above Not
13 0.01 0.993 Accept Ho
significant
Below 40 3.43 0.43

Overall 40 and 3.54 0.55

above Not
13 0.49 0.632 Accept Ho
significant
Below 40 3.42 0.44
 Table 14 shows the test difference on the assessment of

teachers on the science process skills of the high school

students when grouped according to their age.

The data obtained shows that there is no significant

relationship between the teachers’ age and the Science

process skills of the high school students. Thereby, the

null hypothesis is accepted. The result implies that the

process skills demonstrated by the high school students is

not in any way related to the teachers’ age across the

lifespan.

Many positive and negative views have been put forward

regarding age and teaching. It is a general thought that as

age advanced , teachers loose the enthusiasm to teach.

(Shah, 2018)
 Table 15

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped According
to Their Gender

Variable Sex Mean SD df t Value p value Decision Interpretation

Measuring Male 3.61 0.44 Not
13 0.13 0.896 Accept Ho
Female 3.64 0.50 significant
Predicting Male 3.47 0.42 Not
13 0.35 0.734 Accept Ho
Process Female 3.37 0.50 significant
Inferring Male 3.42 0.42 Not
13 0.12 0.905 Accept Ho
Female 3.39 0.51 significant
Interpreting Male 3.55 0.56 Not
13 0.21 0.839 Accept Ho
Data Female 3.49 0.54 significant
Making Male 3.45 0.57 Not
13 0.13 0.901 Accept Ho
Models Female 3.42 0.52 significant
Overall Male 3.50 0.47 Not
13 0.14 0.890 Accept Ho
Female 3.46 0.51 significant

As shown by Table 15, the data obtained yielded a

result of Not Significant which means the null hypothesis is

accepted.

This implies that there is no significant difference

between the teachers’ gender and the process skills of the

high school students.

 This result agrees with the findings of the study made

by Oleyede [Link]., (2012) which states teaching and learning

knows no gender. Oleyede found out that there is no

difference on the skills acquired by students whether they

are taught by a female or a male teacher.

Table 16

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped
According to Their Educational Attainment

Educ. Mea t Value

Variable SD df p value Decision Interpretation
Attainment n
Measuring With 3.1 0.17
Postgrad. 9
degree
13 3.50 0.004 Reject Ho Significant
With 3.8 0.40
Masters 6
units
Predictin With 3.0 0.21
g Process Postgrad. 2
degree
13 2.67 0.019 Reject Ho Significant
With 3.5 0.45
Masters 9
units
Inferring With 3.0 0.18
Postgrad. 1
degree Not
13 2.70 0.180 Accept Ho
With 3.5 0.46 significant
Masters 9
units
Interpret With 3.0 0.19
ing Data Postgrad. 9
degree
13 2.54 0.025 Reject Ho Significant
With 3.7 0.52
Masters 1
units
Making With 3.0 0.13 13 2.27 0.041 Reject Ho Significant
Models Postgrad. 5
 degree
With 3.6 0.54
Masters 1
units
Overall With 3.0 0.17
Postgrad. 7
degree
13 2.81 0.015 Reject Ho Significant
With 3.6 0.46
Masters 8
units

Table 16 presents the test difference on the assessment

of teachers on the science process skills of the high school

students when grouped according to their educational

attainment.

For teachers with Post Graduate degrees, an overall

mean of 3.07 and SD of 0.17 was obtained while for those

with Master’s Units, a mean of 3.68 and SD of 0.46 was

noted. There is a Df of 13, t-value of 2.81, p-value of

0.015 which led to the decision to Reject the Null

Hypothesis and is interpreted as Significant.

This implies that the teacher’s educational attainment

is a valuable factor to the student’s acquiring science

process skills. The teacher’s advanced degrees in science or

education was a statistically significant predictor of

students’ science achievement. (Zhang, 2008)

 Table 17

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped According
to Their Specialization

Speciali t Value
Variable Mean SD df p value Decision Interpretation
zation

Measuring Gen. 3.93 0.34

Science
Reject
13 2.26 0.042 Significant
Ho
Bio/Phys 3.43 0.45
./Chem.

Predicting Gen. 3.62 0.46

Process Science
Accept Not
13 1.64 0.126
Ho significant
Bio/Phys 3.24 0.43
./Chem.

Inferring Gen. 3.65 0.48

Science
Accept Not
13 1.80 0.095
Ho significant
Bio/Phys 3.23 0.41
./Chem.

Interpreti Gen. 3.77 0.51

ng Data Science
Accept Not
13 1.67 0.119
Ho significant
Bio/Phys 3.33 0.49
./Chem.
Making Gen. 3.66 0.54
Models Science
Accept Not
13 1.49 0.161
Ho significant
Bio/Phys 3.27 0.46
./Chem.

Overall Gen. 3.73 0.45

Science
Accept Not
13 1.819 0.092
Ho significant
Bio/Phys 3.30 0.44
./Chem.

As gleaned on the table, the teachers’ specialization

is correlated to the students’ science process skills. An

overall decision of “Accept Ho” and interpreted as Not

significant was obtained. This implies that there is no

significant difference between the specialization of the

teachers with the process skills demonstrated by the

students.

As Adam Smith preached, specialized workers are better

able to hone their skills, become more efficient, and

require less transition time between tasks. (MacDougald,

2016) Sorting teachers by areas of strength allows them to

master subject content and spend more time on lesson

planning. In so doing, they are able to find ways to

innovate and improve their manner of teaching.

 Table 18

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped
According to Their Civil Status

Civil t Value
Variable Mean SD df p value Decision Interpretation
Status

Measuring Single 3.46 0.42

Not
13 1.15 0.270 Accept Ho
significant
Married 3.75 0.49

Predicting Single 3.31 0.43

Not
Process 13 0.59 0.563 Accept Ho
significant
Married 3.46 0.51

Inferring Single 3.28 0.40

Not
13 0.78 0.449 Accept Ho
significant
Married 3.48 0.52

Interpreti Single 3.40 0.50

Not
ng Data 13 0.62 0.548 Accept Ho
significant
Married 3.58 0.56

Making Single 3.33 0.48

Not
Models 13 0.55 0.592 Accept Ho
significant
Married 3.49 0.55

Overall Single 3.36 0.44 13 0.76 0.461 Accept Ho Not

significant
Married 3.55 0.52
 The data obtained on the table above shows that there

is no significant difference between the process skills of

the students with the teachers’ civil status therefore the

Null Hypothesis is accepted.

This implies that civil status is not a significant

predictor of science process skills of students. The civil

status of the teacher does not affect how much effort they

put into achieving or completing tasks. If one believes that

he/she is capable of achieving something,he/she will likely

stick to it until he/she succeeds. What is required are the

individuals’ self- efficacy and strong motives to face the

task. (Amuda, [Link], 2016)

 Table 19

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped
According to Their Position

Variable Position Mean SD df t Value p value Decision Interpretation

Measuring Teacher 3.62 0.50

I/II
Not
13 0.37 0.720 Accept Ho
significant
Master 3.75 0.16
Teacher I

Predictin Teacher 3.41 0.50

g Process I/II
Not
13 0.35 0.733 Accept Ho
significant
Master 3.28 0.22
Teacher I

Inferring Teacher 3.40 0.51

I/II
Not
13 0.13 0.898 Accept Ho
significant
Master 3.35 0.06
Teacher I

Interpret Teacher 3.51 0.57 13 0.13 0.897 Accept Ho Not

ing Data I/II significant

Master 3.46 0.08

 Teacher I

Making Teacher 3.44 0.55

Models I/II
Not
13 0.30 0.773 Accept Ho
significant
Master 3.32 0.08
Teacher I

Overall Teacher 3.48 0.52

I/II
Not
13 0.08 0.933 Accept Ho
significant
Master 3.45 0.13
Teacher I

Table 19 reveals the difference between the students’

process skills and the teachers’ position or designation in

the school.

As shown on the table, the null hypothesis is accepted

and described as Not Significant. This means that there is

no significant difference between the teachers’ position

with the students science process skills.

Skilled teachers have the power to make a real

difference in the lives of students. But educators who

exemplify leadership skills within the field are able to

make an even greater impact. Teachers of different ranks

have different opportunities to participate in training and

undertake school duties. (Yuyou, 2018) The impact of the

position of the teachers on the process skills learned by

students is not evident. Whatever skills the students have

 is not in any way attributed to the position held by the

teachers.

Table 20

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped
According to Their Years of Teaching Science
Years of t Value
Variable Teaching Mean SD df p value Decision Interpretation
Science
Measuring 11 or 3.68 0.54
more Not
13 0.38 0.708 Accept Ho
10 and 3.59 0.43 significant
below
Predictin 11 or 3.40 0.57
g Process more Not
13 0.07 0.945 Accept Ho
10 and 3.39 0.40 significant
below
Inferring 11 or 3.42 0.59
more Not
13 0.21 0.838 Accept Ho
10 and 3.37 0.38 significant
below
Interpret 11 or 3.53 0.64
ing Data more Not
13 0.19 0.854 Accept Ho
10 and 3.48 0.45 significant
below
Making 11 or 3.43 0.62
Models more Not
13 0.04 0.965 Accept Ho
10 and 3.42 0.44 significant
below
Overall 11 or 3.50 0.58 13 0.18 0.857 Accept Ho Not
 more
10 and 3.45 0.41 significant
below

As shown on the table, results show that the null

hypothesis is accepted and described as Not Significant.

This clearly means that there is no significant difference

between the teachers’ number of years in teaching and the

students’ science process skills.

It is therefore evident that years of teaching science,

has no significant contribution to the science process

skills learned and demonstrated by the students. The same

finding was supported by a study made by Zhang (2008) which

concludes that teachers with a greater number of years of

science teaching experience were no more effective than

those with a lesser number of years experience in

influencing student science achievement.

 Table 21

Test Difference On the Assessment of Teachers On the Science

Process Skills of the High School Students When Grouped
According to Their Eligibility
Eligibilit t p
Variable Mean SD Df Decision Interpretation
y Value value

Measuring LET 3.63 0.49

Not
13 0.01 0.992 Accept Ho
significant
PBET 3.64 0.47

Predictin LET 3.41 0.47 Not

g Process 13 0.23 0.820 Accept Ho
PBET 3.35 0.52 significant

Inferring LET 3.41 0.50

Not
13 0.21 0.838 Accept Ho
significant
PBET 3.35 0.46

Interpret LET 3.51 0.52 Not

ing Data 13 0.07 0.947 Accept Ho
PBET 3.49 0.63 significant

Making LET 3.45 0.51

Not
Models 13 0.26 0.797 Accept Ho
significant
PBET 3.37 0.61
Overall LET 3.48 0.49 Not
13 0.14 0.888 Accept Ho
PBET 3.44 0.53 significant

As shown in Table 21, the data revealed an overall

interpretation of “Not Significant” therefore the null

hypothesis is accepted. This implies that the eligibility

of teachers has no significant difference on the process

skills of the students when they are grouped according to

their eligibility.

Licensure examination is vital for all those who wish

to become educators and be part of the roster of the

professional teachers. Eligibility makes the teacher

qualified to teach either in the public or in private

educational institution. However, it is a salient finding

in this study that the eligibility of the teachers does not

influence the process skills developed or demonstrated by

the students.

The results obtained is in agreement with the statement

of Guo [Link] (2012) wherein he states that teachers with

greater self-efficiency and more years of experience are

better instruments of teaching and learning as compared to

their eligibility which is not at all related to the skills

and knowledge acquired by students.

 Table 22

Test of Relationship Between the Level of Science Process

Skills of the Students and Their Profile
Level of Science Process p
Total df x2 Decision Interpretation
Skills value
Variable
No
Level/ Moderately
Average High
Low High
Level
Age 14 10 26 39 21 96 6 7.31 0.293 Accept Not
Ho significant
15 47 54 86 42 229
 16 4 7 14 10 35

Total 61 87 139 73 360

Male 29 43 69 35 176
Accept Not
Gender Female 32 44 70 38 184 3 0.11 0.990
Ho significant
Total 61 87 139 73 360

75 – 57 53 18 2 130
84
4 30 107 30 171
85 –
General 0 4 14 41 59
89 Reject
Ave. in 6 255.44 0.000 Significant
Ho
Science 90 –
95

Total 61 87 139 73 360

Table 22 presents the test of relationship between the

level of science process skills of the students and their

profile.

The data obtained reveals that there is no significant

relationship between the Science process skills of the

students with their age and likewise with their Gender,

therefore the null hypothesis is accepted.

As gleaned from the table, there is a significant

relationship between the level of Science process skills of

the students and their general average in Science. Students

averaging 75-84 are those who have no level, low level or

average level process skills, while those with average 85-89

have moderately high Science process skills and students

with high Science process skills are those averaging 90-95.

CHAPTER V

Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

This chapter presents the summary of the findings

established from the data gathered in the study. It also

gives the conclusion and the recommendation derived from

summary of findings of the study.

Summary of Findings
1. Profile of the Respondents

1.1 Teacher-Respondents

As to the Age of the respondents, 5 or 33.3% of them

are ages 30-34 and only 1 or 6.7% each belongs to age

bracket 35-39 and 45-49 respectively.

As to Gender, 11 or 73.3% are females while 4 or 26.7%

are males.

As to Educational Attainment, there were 10 or 66.7%

who has units in a Masters Degree while 1 or 6.7% has a

Doctorate Degree.

In terms of their specialization, most of the

respondents with a response of 6 or 40% has General Science

specialization while least is Chemistry with 1 or 6.7%.

As to their Civil Status, 9 or 60% were married while 6

or 40% were single.

As to their designated position, majority were Teacher

III with 9 responses or 60 percent. Least were the Master

Teacher I with 2 or 13.3%.

As to their nature of appointment, all of them were

Regular with 15 responses or 100%.

In terms of number of years teaching Science, 21 and

above and 1-5 both incurred 5 responses or 33.3% while

nobody belonged to the 16-20 years bracket.

 As to the respondent’s eligibility, majority, 11 or

73.3% were LET Passers while 4 or 26.7 has PBET Eligibility.

1.2 Student-Respondents

As to the age of the students, most of them are 15

years old with 229 or 63.6%, 96 or 26.7% are 14 years old

and 35 or 9.7% are 16 years old.

As to their Gender, 184 or 51.1 % of the students are

females while 176 or 48.9% of them are males.

In terms of their General average in Science, 171 or

47.5 percent of the students has a general average of 85-89,

111 or 30.8% has 80-84, 57 or 15.8% has 90-94, 19 or 5.3%

has 75 – 79 while 2 or 0.6% has 95-100 incurred grade in

science.

2. Assessment of Teachers on Science Process Skills of the

High School Students

In terms of skills in Measuring, the obtained data

indicates that the students “Measuring” skill is moderately

high with category mean of 3.86.

In terms of “Predicting Process”, obtained data yields

a category mean of 3.44 which is described as Moderately

High.
 For inferring skills, the result shows a category mean

of 3.40 and described as Moderately High.

For “Interpreting Data”, the data obtained shows a

category mean of 3.51 and with a description of Moderately

High.

In the science process skill “Making Models”, the

Category Mean obtained is 3.38 and described as “Average”.

3. Assessment of Teachers On the Science Process Skills of

the High School Students grouped according to their Profile

In terms of assessment of the teachers on science

process skills of the high school students, an overall mean

of 3.54 yielded a description of Moderately High. This

suggests that the students acquired above average process

skills in Science.

In terms of the significant difference on the

assessment of teachers on the science process skills of the

high school students grouped according to their age, it was

found out that there is no significant relationship between

the two variables.

For the test difference on the assessment of teachers

on the science process skills of the high school students

when grouped according to their gender, the result obtained

is “Not Significant”.

As to the test difference on the assessment of teachers

on the science process skills of the high school students

when grouped according to their educational attainment, it

was found out that the teacher’s educational attainment is a

valuable factor to the student’s acquiring science process

skills.

The test difference on the assessment of teachers on

the science process skills of the high school students when

grouped according to their specialization yielded a result

of “Not Significant” which implies that there is no

significant difference between the specialization of the

teachers with the process skills acquired by the students.

In terms of test difference on the assessment of

teachers on the science process skills of the high school

students when grouped according to their civil status,

results show that the two variables are not significant

which implies that the civil status of the teacher does not

affect how much effort they put into achieving or completing

tasks.

As to test difference on the assessment of teachers on

the science process skills of the high school students when

grouped according to their position, it was found out that

there was no significant difference between the two

variables. This signifies that whatever skills the students

acquired is not in any way attributed to the position held

by the teachers.

In terms of test difference on the assessment of

teachers on the science process skills of the high school

students when grouped according to their years of teaching

science, results show that the null hypothesis is accepted

and described as Not Significant. It is therefore evident

that years of teaching science, has no significant

contribution to the science process skills learned and

demonstrated by the students.

As to the test difference on the assessment of teachers

on the science process skills of the high school students

when grouped according to their eligibility, the data

revealed an overall interpretation of “Not Significant”

therefore the null hypothesis is accepted. This implies that

the eligibility of teachers has no significant difference on

the process skills acquired by the students.

4. Science process skills of the high school students when

grouped according to the student’s profile
In the test of relationship between the level of

science process skills of the students and their profile,

the data obtained reveals that there is no significant

relationship between the Science process skills of the

students with their age and likewise with their Gender,

therefore the null hypothesis is accepted.

However, it was found out that there is a significant

relationship between the level of Science process skills of

the students and their general average in Science. Students

averaging 75-84 are those who have no level, low level or

average level process skills, while those with average 85-89

have moderately high Science process skills and students

with high Science process skills are those averaging 90-95.

Conclusions

In the light of the aforementioned findings, the

following conclusions are drawn:

1. The null hypothesis stating that there is no

significant difference on the assessment of teachers

on the Science process skills of the high school

students when grouped according to their profile is

Accepted.

2. As per indicated in the findings, the null

hypothesis stating that there is no significant

relationship of science process skills of the high

 school students when grouped according to the

student’s profile is Partially Accepted.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study and the conclusion

drawn, the following are recommended:

1. The School Administrators plays an important role

on the lives of the students. It is therefore important that

they provide advancement opportunities for teachers by

allowing them to attend Seminars, workshops and trainings

which will greatly update and upgrade the teachers knowledge

on the subject they are teaching.

2. The parents are the primary guardians and teachers

inside the home. A periodic teacher and parent encounter

through meetings and conferences is thereby suggested and

encourage. This will foster better relationship between the

teacher and the parents and will keep the parents up-to-date

with how their children are coping in school specially on

the subject Science.

3. Since some of the students’ acquired process skill

on “predicting”, “inferring” and “making models” is

“Average” while in most of the skills is “Moderately High”,

they may be encouraged and assisted to improve these skills

to higher level of mastery through tutorials, workshops and

science intervention programs.

4. Teachers have a big responsibility to develop

students’ science process skills. Therefore, Science

teachers must be fully equipped with in-service trainings

and post-graduate courses to initiate activities and use

effective materials in their lessons in order to

help students develop their science process skills.

5. Students may be encouraged to raise the level of

their performance in Science, from low level to moderately

high Science process skills through concrete activities by

using appropriate materials to better understand abstract

concepts. The use of familiar materials and equipment from

the environment also provide an opportunity for science

courses when considering the scarcity of laboratory

equipment. The employment of these materials works well and

motivates students to plan different ways to complete

experiments.

6. Additional laboratory equipment and apparatus

should be purchased and provided to develop the learning

models that provide greater opportunities for students to

develop science process skills, such as lab-based learning

and exploration-based learning of the natural environment

around the school.

 7. Further studies should be done to look into the

needs of the students in order to acquire necessary science

process skills. A study on development of learning tools is

most welcome.

Bibliography

Published Materials

Irwanto, R. E. (2017). Students' science process skill and

analytical thinking ability in Chemistry learning. 1-2.
doi:[Link]
Akman, B. et al. (2012). The Effects of Constructivist
Science Teaching Program on Scientific Processing
Skills of 6-year Old Children. Turkey.
Akatamis, H. & Ergin, O. 2018. The effect of scientific
process skills education on students’ scientific
creativity, science attitudes and academic
achievements. AsiaPacific Forum on Science Learning and
Teaching 9 (1): 1-21.

Anam, R., (2014). Analisis Keterampilan Proses Sains Siswa

Madrasah Ibtidaiyah di Kabupaten Sumedang (Science
Process Skills Analysis of Madrasah Ibtidaiyah Students
in Sumedang Regency). Prosiding Konferensi Pendidikan
Dasar. SPs UPI, 20, 274 - 282.

Aranes, F., Espinosa, A. & Salviejo, E. (2014). Strategic

intervention material-based instruction, learning
approach, and students’ performance in chemistry.
International Journal of Learning, Teaching, and
Educational Research, 2(1), 91- 123.

Aydoğdu, B. (2015). The Investigation of Science Process

Skills of Science Teachers In Terms of Some Variables.
Department of Science Education, Turkey.

Aktamış, H., & Ergin, Ö. (2008). The Effect of scientific

process skills education on students’ scientific
creativity, science attitudes and academic
achievements. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning
and Teaching, 9(1), 1-21.

Badu, S. 2012. Implementasi evaluasi model Kirkpatrick pada

perkuliahan masalah nilai awal dan syarat batas, Jurnal
Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, Edisi Dies Natalis
ke-48 UNY Tahun 2012.

Baldwin K. and Wilson A. (2017). Acting Like Rain: preK

Students Engage in Science Talk and Head Outside to
Build Earth Science Knowledge and Process Skills.
National Science Teachers Association.

Barredo, K.J. (2014). Development on the academic

performance in science Using strategic intervention
material. Masters Thesis.

Basilio, T. (2013). Science conceptual learning and

constraints among selected grade7 students of Solano
 High School(Unpublished Graduate Thesis). Philippine
Normal University-North Luzon Campus, Alicia, Isabela

Bete, A.O. (2020) Students’ knowledge and process skills in

learning grade-8 chemistry. Master’s Thesis. Isabela
State University.

Bilgin,I (2016). The effects of hands-on activities

incorporating a cooperative learning approach on eighth
grade students’ science process skills and attitudes
toward science. J. Baltic Sci. Educ. 1:27-36.

Bryce, T., J. McCall., J. MacGregor., I. Robertson., &

R.A.J., Weston. (2012). Techniques For Assessing
Process Skills In Practical Science: Teacher’s Guide.
London, Oxford: Heinemann Educational Books.

Chebii, R., Wachanga, S., & Kiboss, K. (2012). Effects of

Science Process Skills Mastery Learning Approach on
Students’ Acquisition of Selected Chemistry Practical
Skills in School. Creative Education, 3, 1291-1296.

Chiappetta, E., & Koballa, T. (2002). Science Instruction in

the Middle and Secondary Schools (5th ed). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Coronado, R. (2016). Correlations Between Science Process

Skills and Test- Taking Abilities among Grade VIII
Students Input in Designing Test Matrix. Master’s
Thesis. Laguna State Polytechnic University, San Pablo
City Campus.

De Guzman, R. (2017). Assessment of Learning 2. Llorimar

Publishing, Inc.

DepEd Order 8 (2015). Policy guidelines on classroom

assessment for the k to 12 basic education program.

Gurces, A., et al. 2015. Determination of Levels of Use of

Basic Process Skills of High School Students, Turkey.

Gregorio, J. (2012). Module 6: Science education in the

Philippine society-lesson 13: Scientific literacy(A
Presentation). Retrieved from
[Link] [Link]/
Harty, H., & Enochs, L.G. (2015). Toward reshaping the
inservice education of science teachers. School Science
and Mathematics, 85(2), 125–135.

Harlen, W. (1999). Purposes and procedures for assessing

science process skills. Assessment in Education 6(1),
129–144.

Jeenthong, T., Ruenwongsa, P., & Sriwattanarothai, N.

(2014). Promoting Integrated Science Process Skills
through Betta-Live Science Laboratory. Procedia Social
and Behavioral sciences, 116, 3292-3296.

Lotter, C., Harwood, W.S., & Bonner, J.J (2012). The

influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers’ use
of inquiry teaching practices. J. Res. Sci. Teach.
44:1318-1347. doi: 10.1002/tea.20191.

Marshall, J., Horton, R., Igo. B., & Switzer DM (2013). K-12
science and mathematics teachers’ beliefs about and use
of inquiry in the classroom. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ.
7:575- 596.

Ministry of National Education [MONE]. (2013a). Ortaöğretim

fizik dersi öğretim programı, Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu
Başkanlığı [Secondary education physics curriculum,
Head Council of Education and Morality]. Ankara,
Turkey: Author.

Martin D. J. (2014). Elementary Science Methods: A

Constructivist Approach. Fifth Edition, CA: Thomson
Wadsworth, USA.

Mbewe, S., Chabalengula, V., & Mumba, E., 2010. Pre-service

teachers' familiarity, interest, and conceptual
understanding of science process skills. Problems of
Education in the 21" Century 22(1): 76-86.

Miles, E. (2010). In-service Elementary Teachers’

Familiarity, Interest, Conceptual Knowledge and
Performance on Science Process Skills. USA
Miller, M., Linn, R., & Grounlund, N. (2012) Measurement and
assessment in teaching. NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
p.60

Mutlu, M., & Temiz, K. (2013). Science Process Skills of

Students Having Field Dependent and Field Independent
Cognitive Styles. Educational Research Reviews, 8, 766-
776.

Muzaffar, K., & Muhammad, Z. (2011). Effect of Inquiry Lab

Teaching Method on the Development of Scientific Skills
through the Teaching of Biology in Pakistan. Language
in India, 11, 169-178.

Ngoh, T. (2015). Mastery of Science Process Skills. Kuala

Lumpur Malaysia.

Nyakiti, C. Mwangi, J. & Koyier, C. (2010). Mastering PTE

Science. Oxford University Press, Nairobi.

Oloruntegbe, K. & Omoifo C. (2014) Assessing process skills

in STME Going Beyond Paper and Pencil Tests.
Educational Thoughts, 1 (1), pp 25-36.

Opulencia, L. (2011). Correlates of Science Achievement

Among Grade-VI Pupils In Selected Elementary Schools
San Francisco District, Division of San Pablo City.
Laguna State Polytechnic University.

Ostlund, K. (2012). Science process skills: assessing hands-

on student performance. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Padilla, M. (2012). Science Process Skills.“Research Matters

to Science Teachers”.National Association for Research
in Science Teaching.

Padilla, M. (2012). The Science Process Skills. Research

Matters to the Science Teacher. ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No ED266961.

Panoy, B. (2013). Differentiated Strategy in Teaching and

Skills Development of Pupils in Elementary Science.
Master’s Thesis. Laguna State Polytechnic University,
San Pablo City Laguna.
Padilla, M.J. (1990). Science process skills. Research
matters to science teachers. National association for
research in science teaching.

Rambuda, A., & Fraser, W. (2004). Perceptions of Teachers of

the Application of Science Process Skills in Teaching
Geography in Secondary Schools in the Free State
Province. South African Journal of Education, 24, 10-
17.

Rauf R. et al. (2013). Inculcation of Science Process Skills

in a Science Classroom. Asian Social Science, Vol. 9,
No. 8; 2013 ISSN 1911-2017 E-ISSN 1911-2025 Published
by Canadian Center of Science and Education.

Rezba, [Link]. (2015). Learning and Assessing Science Process

Skills 4 th Edition. Richmond: Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Company.

Rillero, P. (1998). Process skills and content knowledge.

Science Activities, 35(3), 3-5.

Science Education Institute-Department of Science and

Technology, 2011. Science framework for Philippine
basic education. Manila: SEI-DOST & UP NISMED.

Santos, M.D. & David, A. P. (2017). Self – and teacher-

assessment of science process skills. The Normal
Lights, 11 (1), 91 – 108.

Sukarno et al. (2014). The Profile of Science Process Skill

(SPS) Student at Secondary High School (Case Study in
Jambi) Indonesia University of Education: Indonesia.

Towle, A. (1989). Modern Biology (Keterampilan Proses:

Bagaimana Mengaktifkan Siswa dalam Belajar (Process
Skills: How to Activate Students in Learning). Jakarta.
Grasindo Press.

Yager, R. & Akçay, H. (2010). The advantages of an inquiry

approach for science instruction in middle grades.
School Science & Mathematics, 110, 5-12.

Unpublished Materials
Aydoğdu, B. (2014). İlkogretim fen ve teknoloji ogretiminde
bilimsel süreç becerilerini etkileyen degişkenlerin
belirlenmesi (Identification of variables effecting
Scince Process Skills in primary science and technology
course). Unpublished Master Thesis. Dokuz Eylül
University, Educational Sciences Institute, İzmir.

Ewers, T.G. (2001). Teacher-directed versus learning cycles

methods: Effects on science process skills
mastery and teacher efficacy among elementary education
students. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Timothy Gorman.
University of Idaho, United States. ProQuest, UMI
Dissertations Publishing, 2001. 3022333.

Ngoh, T., 2014. Mastery of the science process skills.

Unpublished manuscript.

Journals and Magazines

Aka Eİ., Güven E., & Aydoğdu, M (2010). Effect of Problem

Solving Method on Science Process Skills and Academic
Achievement. Journal of Turkey Science Education.
7(4):13-25.

Andini, T. H. (2018). Scientific process skills: preliminary

study towards senior high school student in Palembang.
Journal of Biology Education , 4(3), 1-2. Retrieved
from [Link]
Akben, N. 2014. Improving Science Process Skills in Science
and Technology Course Activities Using the Inquiry
Method. International Research: Journal of Library and
Information Science: India. Volume (2).

Aydin, A. (2013). Representation of Science Process Skills

in Chemistry Curricula for Grades 10, 11, 12, Turkey.
International Journal of Education and Practice, 1, 51-
63.

Aziz, S., & Zain, A. (2010). The Inclusion of Science

Process Skills in Yemeni Secondary School Physics Text
Books. European Journal of Physics Education, 1, 44-50.
Ango, M. (2002). Mastery of science process skills and their
effective use in the teaching of science: An Educology
of science Education in the Nigerian context.
International Journal of Educology, 16(1), 11-
30.

Cajimat, R. (2015). Fundamental and derived scientific

literacy in the K-12 curriculum and revised basic
education curriculum.
Coronado, R. B. (2016). Correlations Between Science Process
Skills and Test Taking Abilities among Grade VIII
Students Input in Designing Test Matrix. Master’s
Thesis. Laguna State Polytechnic University, San Pablo
City Campus
Derilo, R. C. (2019). Basic and integrated sscience process
skills acquisition and science achievement of seventh-
grade learners. Journal of Education Studies, 6(1).
Retrieved from
[Link]
Durmaz, H., & Mutlu, S. 2014. The effects of an
instructional intervention on 7th grade students’
science process skills and science achievement.
Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal 43:
155-168.

Errabo, D., & Prudente, M., (2018) Mainstreaming Science

Investigation Skills of Grade 7 In-Service Teachers in
the Philippines. Journal of Educology, 19(5), 10-13,

Feyzioglu, B. (2013). An Investigation of the Relationship

between Science Process Skills with Efficient
Laboratory Use and Science Achievement in Chemistry
Education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6,
114-132.

Huppert, J., Lomask S., & Lazarorcitz, R., 2012. Computer

simulations in the high school: students’ cognitive
stages, science process skills and academic achievement
in microbiology. International Journal of Science
Education, 24(8), 803–821.
Jack. G. (2013). The Influence of Identified Student and
School Variables on Students’ Process Skills
Acquisition. Journal of Education and Practice, 4, 16-
22.

Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2011). Improving the Science Process

Skills Ability of Prospective Science Teachers Using I
Diagrams. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry
Education, 3(1), 26-38.

Keil, C., Haney, J., & Zoffel, J. (2014). Improvements in

Student Achievement and Science Process Skills Using
Environmental Health Science Problem Based Learning
Curricula. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 13,
1-17.

Kong, Y. (2005). A study of the relationship between job

engagement of middle school teachers and its relative
variables.1.5; no.11) [Link].
Org/[Link].

Madronio, E., 2015. Chemistry learning environment, attitude

and proficiency of generation Z learners. (Unpublished
master’s thesis). Saint Mary’s University, Bayombong,
Nueva Vizcaya

Maranan, V. (2017). Basic process skills and attitude toward

science: inputs to an enhanced students’ cognitive
performance. (L. S. University, Ed.) The Facultyof
Graduate Studies and Applied Research , 1-51.

Mirana, V. P. (2019). Attitude towards science and process

skills of junior high school students . Asia Pacific
Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 7(2), 1-8.
Retrieved from [Link]

Nwosu, A., & Okeke, E. (2015). The Effect of Teacher

Sensitization of Students Acquisition of Science
Process Skills. Journal of Science Teachers’
Association of Nigeria (STAN), 30, 39-45.

Olufunminiyi, A., & Afolabi, F., 2010. Analysis of science

process skills in West African senior secondary school
certificate physics practical examinations in Nigeria.
 American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research 5(4):
234-240.

Opateye, J. (2012). Developing and Assessing Science and

Technology Process Skills (STPSs) in Nigeria Universal
Basic Education Environment. Journal of Educational and
Social Research, 2, 34-42.

Rizal, M. (2014). Pengaruh Pembelajaran Inkuiri Terbimbing

dengan Multi Representasi terhadap Keterampilan Proses
Sains dan Penguasaan Konsep IPA Siswa SMP (The
Influence of Guided Inquiry Learning with Multiple
Representation of Process Skills of Science and Mastery
of Science Concept of Junior High School Students).
Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 2(3), 159-165.

Saldivar, C., 2015. Functional literacy in Chemistry of

Grade 9 students and science teachers under the K to 12
basic curriculum. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Saint
Mary’s University, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya,
Philippines.

Santos, M. &. (2017). The normal lights self-and teacher-

assessment of science process skills. Research Journal,
11(1), 1-107. doi:377-1224-1-PB-

Setiani, F. 2011. Pengembangan asesmen alternatif dalam

pembelajaran matematika dengan pendekatan realistik di
sekolah dasar, Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi
Pendidikan 15: 250-268.

Stonebraker, R J. (2015)Research in Higher Education volume

56, pages 793–812

Sukarno, Permanasari, A., & Idah, H. (2013). The Profile of

Science Process Skills Student at Secondary High School
(Case Study in Jambi). International Journal of
Scientific Engineering and Research, 1, 79-83.
Talisayon, V. (2006). Science-Related Attitudes and
Interests of Students. Paper presented in the IOSTE
XII Symposium, Penang, Malaysia, August 1-4, 2006.

Temiz, B., Taşar, M., && Tan, M. 2016. Development and

validation of a multiple format test of science process
skills,International Education Journal 7: 1007-1027.

Internet Sources of Materials

Amuda [Link] [Link]

EDUCATION -[Link]

Gustafson, Sarah. [Link]

school-program-shows-diverging-results-male-and-female-
students

Padilla, M. J. (2018). The science process skills. NARST

Research . Retrieved from [Link]
matters/science-process-skills
Yumusak, G. K. (2016). Science process skills in science
curricula applied in Turkey. Journal of Education and
Practice, 7(20), 1-2. Retrieved from
[Link]
[Link]
33412

[Link]
[Link]

[Link]
info/profiles/Philippines/ Education

[Link]
_of_Gender_and_Age_of_Teachers_on_Teaching_Students_Pe
rspective

need to emphasize the SPS

in teaching science, there is a need for the rst
researcher/
author to continue and advocate the use of SPS in teaching
science subjects in the basic education level. While
integrating SPS in science classes seem to be challenging
task, there is a need for the researchers and other
teachers
to practice it on a wider scope in order to provide more
evidence of its usefulness. The rst researcher also
commits
to practice and advocate the use of both self- and
teacher-
assessment as supplemental or adjunct strategies in
assessing
students’ SPS. The researchers believe that the use of
both
self- and teacher-assessment would not only allow a more
comprehensive and holistic assessment of students’ SPS but
also allows students to acquire personal insights about
their
own strengths and limitations and allows them to
experience
self-awareness and even self-regulation. The researchers
also
commit to advocate the need for science teachers to adapt
alternative and adjunct strategies or tools in assessing
their
students’ level of pro ciency of SPS. More
specically for
107
The Normal Lights
Volume 11, No. 1 (2017)
the rst researcher/author, he commits to both the
use of
these alternative assessment strategies and in adjusting
his
instructional strategies based on such assessment results.
The
researchers hopes that there will be more initiatives
among
teachers in advocating alternative assessment strategies,
not
only in science classes but in other subjects or areas. In
this
way, teachers can have more options to choose from
when
deciding on how they would assess their students’ le