Differentiated instruction using tiered lessons in inorganic chemistry

Differentiated instruction using tiered lessons in inorganic chemistry
IJCE
Differentiated instruction using tiered lessons in
inorganic chemistry
Frederick G. Tadifa
Department of Biological and Physical Science, College of Arts and Sciences, Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State
University, Philippines
Email: ftadifa@gmail.com
The paradigm shift in teaching and learning strategies has been a great challenge to every
educator at present. The modern approach to teaching is utilized in order to prepare students to
meet the needs of every industry in the global context. As a part of the change, this study
utilizes Differentiated Instruction using the Tiered as a methodological approach to learning. It
determined the performance of the students on several measures and tested for the significant
difference between the scores of the two groups. The respondents of this study were BS in
Fisheries students from Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University-South La Union
Campus. Two groups were randomly chosen, assigned as experimental group (N=30) and
control group (N=30), and were matched according to their IQ. Pre-test, posttest, chapter test,
and rubric-assessed outputs were used to assess the respondents’ performance. Frequency
count, percentage, mean and t-test were employed to treat the data. The findings of the study
showed significant improvement on the performance of the two groups in their posttest, chapter
test, and in the outputs. The experimental group, however, performed better than the control
group in the different performance measure. This implies that Differentiated instruction using
Tiered Learning is an effective approach in the teaching and learning of Chemistry.
Keywords: teaching strategy, student centered, tiered lessons, student performance, projects
INTRODUCTION
One of the most important resources that organizations
worldwide need at present is human resources. These
are people that run machines and cater the need of every
client in an organization. In order to utilize human
resources effectively and efficiently, they should be
equipped with knowledge, skills and ability that can be
acquired through education. As mentioned by Vinluan
(2007), one way of producing globally competitive
graduates and uplifting the living conditions of every
person in the country is through science education.
In the Philippine scenario, most families put more
emphasis on education since they believe it is a way of
changing for the better the lifestyle in the future. Indeed,
as Fernandez (2002) stated, education occupies a vital
role in the attainment of individual’s dream. That is why
the education agency in the country continually upgrades
the quality of education offered by different institutions.
Notwithstanding, are a lot of changes that give emphasis
on designing curriculum and preparing instructional
materials as has been implemented by the Commission
on Higher Education (CHED). One of the changes that
have been given attention to is the shift from a
conventional method of teaching and learning to a
modernized approach to classroom instruction. A
significant part of the curriculum of many institutions is
Science and Technology.
Meanwhile one subject in the general education
curriculum of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) is
General and Inorganic Chemistry. In many HEIs, General
and Inorganic Chemistry is enrolled by students taking up
B. S. Biology, B. S. Mathematics, B. S. Psychology, B. S.
Fisheries in their general education courses. Also, with
students of teacher education program majoring in
science courses. This subject indeed is very essential in
preparing a student to face the highly-industrialized
world.
Yet despite the importance of the subject
Chemistry, students still do not realize it. It can be seen
often times in the attitude of students towards the subject.
Gallagher (2000) in Tadifa (2009) cited reasons why
students do not take chemistry seriously: It is hard for
them to see the significance of what is being taught;
General chemistry concepts are taught and assessed in
terms of facts, mathematical representations, and
procedural knowledge without emphasizing conceptual
understanding; Chemistry is presented in the most
abstract or symbolic level. Most of the students feel that
the abstract nature of chemistry concepts is always
confined to the four corners of the classroom; and In
traditional chemistry classroom settings, students rarely
experience the source question of inquiry, critical and
logical reasoning, the challenges or the surprises in real
International Journal of Chemistry Education
Vol. 1(1), pp. 001-012, June, 2017. © www.premierpublishers.org. ISSN: 2169-3342
ResearchArticle

Tadifa FG 002
life. Thus, students often interpret the subject as difficult
as mentioned in the study of Cruz (2007). This can be
attributed to the fact that the chalk-talk method in
Chemistry instruction still remains a dominant approach
in the classroom. Thus, students tend to be bored with
the subject and lead to disinterest of the lesson. It is no
wonder that the result sometimes is poor performance of
students in the subject.
The above statement is one of the reasons why subject
area coordinators as well as academic officers keep on
reiterating their faculty members to vary their teaching
approach. And one way to vary the conventional
approach or teacher-centered approach to learning is
through project method which is a student centered.
The differentiated instruction is one of the
modern teaching and learning pedagogy in science
instruction. In here, there is one objective set by the
teacher that is achieved by students in different means.
These means involves other fields such as literary
compositions (song or a poem), visual and arts (painting),
and construction and craftsmanship (making gadgets).
The aforementioned statements and other researches
then motivated the researcher to determine the
effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction using Tiered
lessons in the performance of students enrolled in
Chemistry. This time, students were given the chance to
achieve the set objectives for the lesson on their own
means. These mean includes poem or song writing,
cartoon or comic strip making, and model making.
Technicalities of the projects particularly the structure is
likewise considered thus the researcher sought for the
opinion of experts in creative writing, educational
technology, and building designs.
All of these precipitating factors, therefore, formed the
impetus for the conduct of this research.
Conceptual Framework
The foregoing study is supported by the following
theories of teaching and learning namely John Dewey’s
principle of teaching that the learner should be the center
of learning, Constructivist theory of learning, Gardner’s
theory of multiple intelligence and Vygotsky’s theory on
the development of scientific concepts.
First, John Dewey’s principle of teaching states that the
child should be the center of learning. He emphasizes the
participation of the child in solving problem and that
gaining insight and accumulating ideas can be effectively
achieved through personal great efforts. John Dewey’s
principle of learning states that child or the students learn
effectively through the personal struggles in which they
must investigate, accumulate ideas, process information,
and put ideas into practical use. He emphasized that a
learner learns best while doing and reflecting on the
topics to be learned. The manipulation of objects allows
the students to be the center of the teaching and learning
process for they perform activities that allow them to
comprehend better towards the subject matter.
Differentiated instruction is based on the idea that
not all students are alike and they have multiple options
for taking information and making sense of ideas. (Hall,
2002).The model of differentiated instruction requires
teachers to be flexible in their approach to teaching and
adjusting the curriculum and presentation of information
to learners rather than expecting students to modify
themselves for the curriculum. Classroom teaching is a
blend of whole-class, group and individual instruction.
Differentiated Instruction is a teaching theory based on
the premise that instructional approaches should vary
and be adapted in relation to individual and diverse
students in classrooms.
Tomlinson and Jarvis (2009) noted that
Differentiation is an approach to curriculum and
instruction that systematically takes student differences
into account in designing opportunities for each student
to engage with information and ideas and to develop
essential skills. Differentiation provides a framework for
responding to differences in students’ current and
developing levels of readiness, their learning profiles, and
their interests, to optimize the match between students
and learning opportunities. These three dimensions of
student difference can be addressed through adjustments
to the content, process, products, and environments of
student-learning, and each is justified by a research-
based rationale.
Tiered instruction facilitates concept learning,
building on skills and prior knowledge through the use of
flexible grouping (Rogers, 1993 in Richard and Omdal,
2007). The tiering of lessons allows required skills to be
gained at a learning rate better matched to the students’
instructional level. Tiered
instruction
is based on the existing
skills and knowledge of the learners. Learner placement
within a tiered level is based on a pre-assessment
(formative assessment) score that measures the learners’
background knowledge and the level of the required skills
for the content application. Tiered lessons support
learners with low skills and minimal prior knowledge in
gaining meaningful academic growth. It provides learners
with high skills and above-average background
knowledge the opportunity to go beyond the basics and
add depth, complexity, and universal connections to the
content. Tiering of instruction can be based on content,
process, and/or product (Nordlund, 2003; Pierce &
Adams, 2005;).
Research Paradigm
This foregoing study has the framework that is
illustrated in the form of paradigm.
The inputs comprise the learning strategies or
approaches to learning that are used by the researcher.
These include the Traditional Approach to Learning (TAL)
and the Differentiated Instruction using Tiered Lessons.
These approaches to learning were utilized by the
researcher in discussing selected topics in Chemistry.
The process comprises of the student teacher-interaction
as intervened by the different approaches to learning.
The experimental group as well the control group will
undergo pre-test, posttest, and chapter test to determine
their performance. On the other hand, the experimental
group prepared projects in the form of poem or song,
comic strips, and models as their output. Their prepared
projects are based on the tiered group they belong. On
the part of the control group, instead of projects, students
had quizzes, assignments, and seat works as their
output.
Statement of the Problem
This study utilized Differentiated Instruction using Tiered
lessons as a methodological approach of teaching in
General and Inorganic Chemistry.
Specifically, it sought answer to the following specific
problems:

Int. J. Chem. Edu. 003
. INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Figure 1. The Research Paradigm
1. What is the performance of the students in Chemistry
after being exposed to Differentiated Instruction using
Tiered lessons and traditional approach in the:
a. Pre-test
b. Posttest
c. Chapter test
c. Students’ outputs along
c.1. poem and song writing
c.2. model making
c.3. making comic strip
c.4. assignments
c.5. recitation
c.6. quiz
2. Is there a significant difference between the
experimental group and the control group in the pretest,
posttest, and chapter test results?
Definition of Terms
The study investigates the effectiveness of input
learning strategies on techniques done by teacher in
executing lesson. These include the traditional approach
employing lectures, recitations, tests, and quizzes and
the Differentiated learning that uses Tiered lessons
where the objectives of the lessons were achieved in
different ways involving poems/song writing, comic strip
writing, and model making in explaining concepts in
Inorganic Chemistry namely matter, atom, and elements.
The concepts mentioned in the subject are the suggested
topics covered by the students in Chemistry.
The teacher-learning process refers to the
teacher-student interaction involve in the discussion of
topics in General and Inorganic Chemistry using
I. LearningStrategies
A. Traditional
Approach to
Learning
B. Differentiated
Instructions
II. Concepts in
Chemistry
A. Matter
B. Atom
C. Elements
I. Teaching and
Learning Process
A. Experimental
Group
a. Pre-test
b. Posttest
c. Chapter test
d. Students Output
d1. Poem or song
d2. Comic strip.
d3. Model Making
B. Control Group
a. Pre-test
b. Posttest
c. Chapter test
d. Students Output
d1. Quiz
d2. Assignment
d3. Recitation
Enhanced
Syllabus in
Inorganic
Chemistry

Tadifa FG 004
Differentiated Instruction using the tiered lessons that will
be exposed to Experimental Group and lecture method
that will be exposed to Control Group as intervention
strategies.
The output is an Enhanced Syllabus in Inorganic
Chemistry that is an instructional plan on how to conduct
the topics in General and Inorganic Chemistry after
determining the difference between the performance of
the experimental and control group.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The method used in this study was the true experimental
research design particularly the pretest-posttest control
research design. The experimental method of research is
a procedure involving controlled manipulation of
conditions for the purpose of studying the relative effects
of various treatments applied to members of a sample.
Source of Data
The primary source of data for this study involved
students taking up Bachelor of Science in Fisheries at
Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University-South La
Union Campus particularly at Institute of Fisheries.
Specifically, the students were enrolled in General and
Inorganic Chemistry (Chemistry 101). The levels of IQ
were determined as superior, above average, average
and below average. The assigning of group
(Experimental and Control Group) is done through a
fishbowl technique. Table 1 presents the distribution of
the students categorized according to their IQ level.
Table 1. Grouping of students according to their level of IQ
Levels of IQ Experimental Group Control Group
Superior 1 1
Above average 7 7
Average 24 24
Below Average 3 3
Total 30 30
The respondents are all regular first year students and
are coming from different public institutions in nearby
towns of La union as well as Pangasinan.
The experimental group as well as the control group was
handled by the same teacher (the researcher) to avoid
the teacher factor in the performance of the students.
The class using tiered lessons approach was conducted
in the following procedures:
1. The teacher introduced the lesson. This time the mind
of the students are stimulated to think what could be the
lesson to be learned and the expected output.
2. The teacher utilized an example of output that explains
the concepts of the lesson. For instance, the teacher
presents a song to the class that reflects the concepts.
3. The classified the students in the experimental group
according to types of learners. These types include
linguistics learners, logical-mathematical learners,
musical learners, bodily kinesthetic learners, and spatial
visual learners. This was done by letting the students to
take a test online to determine their strengths.
4. Selected students presented their projects such as
reciting their poems.
5. The teacher assessed the student’s outputs and gave
supplements to concepts that were not presented in the
students’ output.
Moreover, the researcher conducted a chapter test both
to the experimental and control group. This was done to
prepare the respondents for the posttest particularly the
experimental group for they are not exposed to pencil
and paper test.
Meanwhile, the schedule of the two sections as
respondents was consecutive. This was to avoid the time
factor that may affect the experimental and control group
of the study.
Instrumentation and Data Collection
The following are the data gathered and the
corresponding instrumentation used for this study.
The researcher included topics in General and Inorganic
Chemistry for the experiment during the midterm of the
first semester. The list of specific topics is listed below:
Matter
a. Classification of Matter
b. Properties of Matter
c. Changes in Matter
d. States of Matter.
e. Energy and Matter
1 Law of Conservation of Energy
Atom
a. Atomic Theory
b. Subatomic Particles
c. Electron Configuration
Elements
a. Classification of Elements
b. Periodic Table
a. Performance. The performance of students was
measured by the result of their pretest, posttest, chapter
test, and their output.
1. Pre-test and Posttest. The researcher
administered a pre-test and posttest to both the
experimental and control groups. The test material was
adopted from the study of Tadifa (2009). Prior to the
administration of pre-test and posttest, the researcher
determined the validity and reliability of the test
instruments.
Validity of the Pretest-Posttest. According to Garret
(1980), the content validity of a test may also be
determined reliably by persons considered in the field.
The content validity of the pretest-posttest was
determined by the pooled judgment of five competent
Chemistry instructors. The evaluators included five
instructors from DMMMSU SLUC Agoo La Union. Each
instructor was given questionnaires and their response
on the content validity of the pretest-posttest was tallied.
Comments and suggestions were considered in t he
questionnaire and became the basis for further
improvement of the test instruments.
The evaluation revealed that the test material
prepared by the researcher has a weighted mean of 4.5
and has a descriptive equivalent of very high validity.
Chapter Test. The researcher gave a test to both the
experimental and control groups after every chapter of
the chosen topics in Chemistry 1. There were three

chapters of the subject matter, thus, the researcher
prepared three chapter tests. The paper-and-pencil test
prepared by the researcher was used to assess learning
of the students throughout the experiments. The tests
also give a chance for the experimental group to review
for their posttest.
Students’ Output
Experimental Group – The researcher gave a series of
projects in relation to the topics in Chemistry as stated
above. In this group, the researcher introduced the
lesson, and then assigned projects to the students to
strengthen their knowledge.
Model making. The students who are logical-
mathematical learners were assigned to design a model
to explain the topics. The students used raw materials
found inside the campus and within their houses as in
constructing their models.
Another topic from is the distribution of elements in the
energy level and sublevels of an atom. The researcher
introduced the topic on electron configuration, after
which, the students were assigned to construct an
electron mnemonic distribution.
The points given to the prepared models are based on a
rubrics formulated by Cosares (2006).
Making Comic strip. The visual-spatial learners were
assigned to a comic strip using their knowledge and
imagination to animate the topics.
The students, after the introduction of the instructor
regarding the atomic theory, prepared a comic strip. The
content of the comic strip includes the atomic theory
proposed by John Dalton and the supporting or opposing
ideas of the theories.
Another topic in the subject is the periodic trends. This
topic discussed the pattern of the arrangement of the
elements in the periodic table according to their
properties. The students again prepared a comic strip for
this topic, the content of which includes the trends of the
periodic properties when reading the periodic table from
left to right and top to bottom.
The comic strips prepared by the students were rated
according to the adapted rubrics from the Cosares
(2006).
Song and Poem Writing. Upon introducing the topics,
the students who are musical and linguistics learners
were assigned to composed a poem to elaborate the
topics in the subject. Also, the musical learners are given
the opportunity to give a tune to their compositions.
The concepts of matter, its classifications, phases and
the changes it undergoes was described by the students
through a poem. Selected students were chosen to recite
their poems for further processing of the lesson. The
students were also asked to adopt a tune of their choice
for the poem.
The students also composed songs about locating the
elements in the periodic table. The contents of their
compositions include the group number, period number,
and the block where the elements can be located.
The assessment of their compositions was based on the
adapted rubrics formulated by Cosares (2006).
Traditional Approach to Learning – A series of lecture
was conducted to the control group using the traditional
approach to learning and teaching, after which the
students was assessed learning using the following
paper-and-pencil tests.
Assignments. The researcher gave assignments to
students to students to follow up students learning the
classification of matter, properties of matter, and the
changes it undergoes. The researcher assessed the
students’ output using a prepared answer key.
Quiz. A series of questions was prepared as a quiz for
the control group. This is to assess their learning in the
listed topics covered by the researcher’s experiment.
Recitation. The researcher discussed the topics on
periodic table, its history, how to locate elements, and
periodic trends. Throughout the discussion, students
were called to answer a question related to the topic. The
students expressed their ideas verbally.
The number of points for this assessment was equal to
the number of points assigned in the projects done by the
experimental group. This is for the researcher to compare
the gathered data from the different groups accurately.
Data Analysis
A pretest and a posttest were given to each
group to assess their performance in the given topics in
Chemistry. The result of the pre-test and posttest as well
as the chapter tests of the students was treated using the
frequency count. The mean scores were computed and
each value is assigned a descriptive rating for.
Displayed below is the descriptive interpretation of the
mean scores for the pre-test and posttests.
Score Range Descriptive Rating
41 – 50 Outstanding
31 – 40 Very Satisfactory
21 – 30 Satisfactory
11 – 20 Fair
1 – 10 Poor
Chapter tests were also given to both experimental and
control group. There were three chapters throughout the
duration of the experiment thus the researcher prepared
three chapter tests. Each test is composed of 50 points.
Displayed below the descriptive equivalent of the score
ranges for the chapter tests:
Score Range Descriptive rating
31 – 60 Fair
1 – 30 Poor
Moreover the outputs of the students in the experimental
and controlled group were recorded to further determine
their performance. To determine the scores of the
students exposed to TAL, a 30-point score was assigned
for assignment, 20 points was assigned for the quiz and
10 points was assigned to recitation. They had two
quizzes, two assignments and two recitations during the
duration of the study, thus the total accumulated points of
120.
For the projects of students exposed to the
treatment, a rubric was used to assess students’ output.
A twenty-point rubric scale was used for the model-
making. There were two projects for the model making,
thus, it has an overall total of 40 points. On the other
hand, a ten-point rubric scale was used in poem and
song writing. There were two sets of poems/song
presented or a total of 20 points. A thirty-point rubric
scale was used for the comic strip writing. There were

Tadifa FG 006
two projects presented in this category thus the overall
total is 60 points. The descriptive equivalent of the scores
of each project is shown on the next page.
On the other hand, the technical presentation of
the projects was considered, thus, the researcher
involved the expertise of English instructor, Civil
Engineering instructor, and Technological Education
instructor to assess the poem and song, models and
comic strips respectively. The content of the projects was
assessed by a Science instructor including the
researcher itself. The overall total of the score for the
students’ output in the experimental group is equal to 120
points. The accumulated scores of the students output is
interpreted using the descriptive equivalents below:
Rating Scale for the Poem/Song
7.8 – 10.3 Exemplary
5.2 – 7.7 Accomplished
2.6 – 5.1 Developing
0 – 2.5 Beginning
Rating Scale for the Comic Strips
0 – 7.5 Beginning
Rating Scale for the Model Making
0 – 5.0 Beginning
Rating Scale of the Mean Score on the Overall
Students’ Output
Score Range Descriptive rating
25 – 48 Fair
1 – 24 Poor
The significant difference between the student
performance in the pre-test and post test and in the
chapter test was determined using the paired t-test.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Performance of Experimental Group
Table 2 presents the performance of the
experimental group in the pre-test, posttest, chapter
tests.
The table below shows the experimental group
indexing a mean score of 19.20 of out of 50 in the pre-
test describe as “fair” performance. The result implies
that the students have a very low comprehension of the
topics discussed. However, the result of the pre-test
served as a diagnosis on what concepts needed to be
emphasized during the discussion.
On the other hand, the posttest of the
experimental group has a mean score of 33.87 described
as “very satisfactory”. The result of the posttest indicates
an improvement of scores from the pretest since the
topics have been already discussed prior to the conduct
of test. Moreover, improvement of the performance could
be attributed to the activities done by the students during
the experiment. It was noted that the students in this
group made projects. The manipulation of objects in
making projects may have strengthened the retention of
concepts in the students’ memory. The improvement of
the performance of the students coincides with the result
of the study of Perez (2009) wherein she exposed her
experimental group to virtual field trip as an strategy to
deliver the concepts in Science. She found out an
improvement of the performance of the students exposed
to virtual field trip describing it as very satisfactory and
outstanding performance.
In the chapter test, the mean score of 102.1 out of 120
has a descriptive rating of “very satisfactory”.
Table 2.Performance ofthe Experimental Group
Student Activity Performance
Mean Descriptive Rating
Pre-test 19.20 F
Posttest 33.87 V S
Chapter test 102.10 VS
Overall mean 51.72 VS
Legend: F- Fair, VS- Very Satisfactory
The chapter tests were given as formative tests
enhanced retention of the concepts on the mind of the
students. The manipulation of objects that stimulates
creativity may have influenced the retention of concepts
in the minds of students. The result of chapter test is the
same with the result of Cosares’s (2001) study, in which
the students exposed to portfolio assessment performed
better than those exposed to traditional assessment. He
further noted in his findings that students exposed to non-
traditional assessment had higher performance not only
in posttest but also in other means like formative test.
Performance of Experimental Group in the Outputs
Table 3 on the next page presents the
performance of the experimental group in terms of their
outputs presented in the form of poem/song, comic strips,
and models.
The table reveals the performance of the students
according to the criteria used:
Poem and Song Writing. In terms of the ideas used in
the compositions, the group got a mean score of 6.43 out
of 10. In terms of organization of their thoughts, the
students got a means score of 6.63. With regards to
choice of words, the students got a mean score of 5.95
and a mean score of 6 for presentation. The mean score
describe the experimental group as “accomplished” in
composing poems and songs indicating a very good
performance. This means that the students have original
ideas and can arrange logical compositions. The words
used in their compositions are descriptive words that try
to create images and they present their ideas creatively
using colored graphics as their background.
Comic Strip Writing. Table 3 shows that in terms of
originality, the experimental group had a mean rating of
22.18 out of 30 indicating that the group is an
“accomplished” group. With regard to the concepts and

Table 3. Performance of Experimental Group Along the Outputs (Poem/song, Comic Strip, Models)
Students’ Output Performance
A. Poem or Song Composition
Ideas 6.43 Accomplished
Organization 6.63 Accomplished
Word Choice 5.95 Accomplished
Presentation 6.00 Accomplished
Overall mean 6.25 Accomplished
B. Comic Strip
Originality 22.18 Accomplished
Concepts 18.70 Accomplished
Illustrations 17.92 Accomplished
Color Harmony 12.48 Developing
C. Model making
Attractiveness 16.00 Accomplished
Originality 17.00 Accomplished
Graphic Relevance 16.48 Accomplished
Color Harmony 16.53 Accomplished
Table 4. Performance of Controlled Group
Student Activity
Performance
Mean Descriptive rating
Pre-test 18.6 F
Posttest 29.97 S
Chapter test 96.03 VS
Legend: F-Fair, S-Satisfactory, VS-VerySatisfactory
illustrations presented, the students had a mean score of
18.70 and 17.92 which describes them as “accomplished”
group of students. With regards to the color harmony,
however, the students only got a mean score of 12.48 or
“developing” stage. The result implies that the students
have a remarkable performance on designing a comic
strip. The remarkable performance of the students is
similar to the finding of Eslabra, (2003) where he
observed a better performance of his students who
underwent comic strip in their Science lessons.
Model-Making
The same table reveals that the students had a mean
rating of 16 out of 20 in terms of attractiveness, a mean
score of 17 out in terms of originality, and a mean score
of 16.48 and 16.53 for graphic relevance and color
harmony, respectively. The scores had a descriptive
rating of “accomplished” which means that the students
have a remarkable performance in model making. Their
models are attractive and show originality and the
combination of colors is good.
The result of the performance of the students along their
outputs is closely similar to the findings of Cosares
(2006), that the students who were exposed to poetry
writing, comic strip writing and creative writing have result
to accomplished and admirable performance. It can be
concluded then that the accomplished and remarkable
performance of the students can be observe and
expected when they are given the opportunities to be
creative in learning the concepts. Moreover, the
remarkable performance of the students in Chemistry
with their projects is closely related to the findings of
Draper (2004), where students have more understanding
their project as well as the concepts of the subject they
are enrolled.
The overall performance of the students in the
experimental group is accomplished which is similar to
the result of the study of Masiong (2013) where he noted
an improvement in the performance of his students using
problem-based method in teaching physics.
Performance of the Control Group
Table 4 as shown in the next page presents the
performance of the control group along with their pre-test,
posttest, chapter test and their outputs.
The pre-test mean score of 18.6 out of 50 describes the
control group performing “fairly”. This is similar with the
performance of the experimental group in the pretest
revealing poor concept acquisition of different topics in
Chemistry. These results of the pre-test then for the two
groups served as a diagnostic test as a basis in
implementing the experimental intervention plan.
Meanwhile, the posttest mean score of 29.97 out
of 50 implies a “satisfactory” performance of the control
group. Apparently, the result of the posttest of the control
group shows an improvement from their pre-
test performance. This may have been due to the fact
that the topics covered have been discussed in the class
and must have been retained on the minds of the
students. This is also in accordance with the result of the
posttest of the experimental group.
On the other hand, the chapter test mean score
96.03 interpreted as a “very satisfactory” shows that there
is a minimum committed error and indicating a
remarkable performance. This may have resulted from

Tadifa FG 008
Table 5.Performance of Control Group Along the Outputs (Quizzes, Assignments, Recitation)
Student Output Performance
Quiz 14.00 Accomplished
Assignment 20.65 Accomplished
Recitation 5.00 Developing
Table 6.T-test Result of the Performance of the Control and Experimental Group in the Pretest and Post Test
Group Pre-test Posttest Diff. tc value t-value
Expt’l group 19.2 33.87 -14.67 17.038 2.045*
Control group 18.6 29.97 -11.37 11.744 2.045*
Diff 0.6 3.9
tc value 0.542 2.999
t-value 2.045 2.045*
Legend:* Significantat 0.05 Level
students still having fresh minds in the retention of
concepts given the short interval of discussion and tests.
This chapter test result as a form of formative test
coincides with the performance of the experimental
group.
Performance of the Control Group in their Outputs
Table 5 presents the performance of the control
group along their outputs in the form of quizzes,
assignments and recitations.
The above table reveals the students having scored in
their quizzes and assignment 14 out of 20 and 20.65 out
of 30 respectively where both has a corresponding
equivalent of “accomplished learners”. Their recitation
performance, however, has a mean score of 5 out of 10
which means that the group is still in the developing
stage.
It can be recalled that the quiz was given right
immediately after the lecture thus students have a good
retention of the concepts. Moreover, assignments are
given to the students to be taken outside the classroom
providing them with an opportunity to have access of
better resources. On the other hand, recitations allow
students to express themselves verbally and on the spot.
The “developing” descriptive rating can be attributed to
the fact that most students hardly express their ideas
using the language of instruction.
The above result is similar to the findings of Cosares
(2006). His control group performed traditional
assessment such as quizzes, assignments, and recitation
and found out that the students’ performance on their
assignment is “developing” and their recitation,
“acceptable”. This is indicative satisfactory and fair
performance when exposed to traditional assessment.
Comparison of the Performance of the Control and
Experimental Group along Pretest and Posttest
Table 6 presents the test of significant difference
conducted on the performance of the experimental group
and control group along the pre-test and posttest.
Reading the table horizontally, demonstrate the
difference between the pre-test and the posttest of the
experimental group and control group. The pre-test mean
score of the experimental group is 19.2 while their
posttest has an average of 33.87. The difference
between the two mean scores is 14.67. It has a critical
value of 2.045 and a computed t-value of 17.038. This
result demonstrates a significant difference between the
two scores at 0.05 level of significance. The significant
difference of the two scores means that there is an
improvement in the performance of the experimental
group.
On the other hand, the pre-test and posttest of
the control group has an average of 18.6 and 29.97
respectively. The two scores have a difference of 11.37.
The computed t value is 11.744 while the critical value is
2.045. Since the computed t value is greater than the
critical value, it was deduced that there is a significant
difference between the two scores at 0.05 level of
significance.
Both results imply that there is an improvement of
the performance of the two groups. This may have been
due to exposure of the students to the topics which were
discussed to them.
However, despite group performance revealing a
significant difference between their respective pretest and
posttest scores, the experimental groups performed
better as revealed in their posttest mean scores of 33. 87
and 29.97 respectively. The result implies that the
Differentiated approach using tiered lessons led to a
better performance of the experimental group. This can
be attributed to exposure to Tiered lessons which
provided an opportunity for students to manipulate
objects, made them busy and developed their creativity
and higher order thinking skills.
Reading the table vertically, experimental group and the
control group have a mean score of 19.2 and 18.6,
respectively. The two scores has a difference of 0.6. The
computed t value is 0.542 which is lesser than the
tabulated t value of 2.045. Hence, there is no significant
difference on the performance of the two groups in their
pre-test and it implies that the two groups are
comparable. The result is similar to the findings of
Ramirez (2007), wherein she assigned two groups as
respondents of her study. Prior to the conduct of her
study, she administered pre-test to both groups that the
result revealed that the two groups were comparable in
terms of their thinking skills at the onset of the study.
Meanwhile, the posttest of the experimental and
control group revealed a mean score of 33.87 and 29.97,
respectively. The two scores have a difference of 3.9.
The computed t value is 2.999 while the tabulated t value
is 2.045. The computed t value is greater than the t value

Table 7.Performance of the Tw o Groups in the Chapter Test
Statistical range Experimental Group (N=30) Control Group (N=30
F % DR f % DR
121 – 150 0 0 0 0
91 – 120 27 90 VS 18 60 VS
61 – 90 3 10 S 12 40 S
31 – 60 0 0 0 0
1 – 30 0 0 0 0
Legend: VS- Very Satisfactory; S- Satisfactory
Table 8. T test of significant difference of the Students’ performance along w ith Chapter test
Expt’l group Control group Diff. tc value t-value
102.1 96.03 6.07 2.121 2.045
hence, there is a significant difference of the two groups
exists at 0.05 level of significance in favor of the
experimental group. It can be noted from the result that
the student exposed to Differentiated instruction using
tiered lessons performs better than those student
exposed to traditional Approach to Learning.
The significant difference between the two scores
from the posttest of the two groups in favor of the
experimental group is similar to the findings of Masiong
(2013) observing a significant difference between
problem-based learning approach and Traditional
approach to learning in favor of the former.
This finding is also similar to the result of the study of
Stepsus (2005), wherein both groups in her experiments
exhibited improvement in their post test, but the group
exposed to videotapes instruction performed better than
the group exposed to didactic teaching approach. Acar,
B. and Tarhan, L. (2008), also mentioned a significant
difference of the performance of the students favoring
those who underwent case study approach in teaching
and learning biology.
The finding is likewise similar to the findings of Marasigan
(2007) in which the students performed better Chemistry
achievement test after exposure to modified learning
approach.
Moreover this result is consonant with the result of the
study of Perez (2009) where she made use of virtual field
trip as a strategy of teaching to her experimental group.
She concluded that if students are exposed to non-
traditional strategy such as virtual field trip, the
achievement level of the students may improve.
This further implies that when a teachers
explores non-conventional means in teaching and
assessing learning, students perform better.
Performance of the Two Groups in the Chapter Test
Table 7 presents a comparison of the
performance of the experimental group and the control
group in the chapter test.
As can be shown from the table, there are 27 students or
90% of the 30 students in the experimental group which
have a score within a 91-120 range described as “very
satisfactory”. This number is greater than the frequency
of the students in the control group of the same score
range with only 18 students or 60% belonging to the very
satisfactory range.
Moreover, there were 3 or 10% of the experimental group
have a score within the range of 61-90 with a descriptive
equivalent of satisfactory performance. This frequency is
lesser than the control group where 12 or 40% of the
group belong to the range with satisfactory rating.
The result implies that more students in the experimental
group performed better in their chapter test than the
students in the control group. It can be noted that the
students in the experimental group showed better
understanding towards the concepts through their making
of projects. The projects then, allowed students to
comprehend the subject matter and understand the
concepts better. This is similar to the findings of the study
of Barak and Dori, (2004) where their students who
participated in the IT-enhanced PBL performed
significantly better than their control classmates not only
on their posttest but also on their course final
examination.
This result is closely similar to the findings of Handa
(2000) explaining that Practical Problem Solving Tasks
promoted meaningful retention as evidenced by
significant higher meaningful retention test mean score of
the students exposed to practical problem solving tasks.
This only means that when students perform practical
problem solving and is involved in meaningful projects;
concepts are better retained on their minds easily.
Comparison of the Control Group and Experimental
Group’s Performance in the Chapter Test
Table 8 presents the test of significant difference of the
performance of the experimental group and control group
in the chapter test.
As can be seen in the table, the mean score of
experimental group is equal to 102.1 which is greater
than the mean score of the control group which is equal
to 96.03. The difference of the two scores is 6.07. The
computed t value of 2.121 is greater than the tabulated t
value of 2.045 implying a no significant difference of the
performance of the students along with chapter test. This
means that a significant difference of the two scores
exists in favor of the experimental group.
The result is parallel to the result of the study of Handa
(2000) noting a significant difference in the meaningful
retention of conceptual understanding of both students
after a month of intervention in favor of the practical

Tadifa FG 010
Table 9.Performance of the Tw o Groups in the Chapter Test
Statistical Range Experimental Group (N=30) Control Group (N=30
F % DR f % DR
97 – 120 3 10 O 0 0
73 – 96 20 66.67 VS 20 66.67 VS
49 – 72 7 23.33 S 10 33.33 S
25 – 48
1 – 24
Legend: VS- Very Satisfactory; S- Satisfactory
problem solving task group. He found out in his study that
the students who performed practical problem solving
tasks have favorable scores in their achievement tests.
Comparison of the Performance of the Control and
Experimental Group in Their Outputs
Table 9 shows comparison of the performance of the two
groups along with their outputs namely poem/song
writing, comic strip sketching, and model-making for the
experimental group and quizzes, assignments, and
recitations for the control group.
The table reveals that there are 3 out of 30 or 10% of the
students from the experimental group fall under the score
range of 97–120 described as outstanding, 20 or 66.67%
are within the score range of 73–96 described as very
satisfactory, and 7 or 23.33% are within the score range
of 49-72 described as satisfactory.
With respect to the control group, 20 out of 30 or 66.67%
of the students are within the score range of 73-96 (DR=
very satisfactory), and 10 or 33.33% are within the score
range of 49-72 (DR= Satisfactory).
While the results indicate a similar performance of the
students in the two groups based on the distribution, the
difference observed between the two groups still
indicates a better performance in favor of the
experimental group. This indicates that more students in
the experimental group have learned better while
performing a real experience throughout the discussion of
the concepts in Chemistry. These students learned best
while doing projects that are related to the concepts
taught. The observed better performance of the
experimental group coincides with the result of the study
of Mendoza (2000), where the students learned better
from activities emphasizing real experiences. This simply
means that when students perform experience-based
activities in classes, they could comprehend well the
concepts taught.Likewise, the better performance is also
similar to the findings of Bal, (2016) where it was
revealed that the differentiated teaching approach in a
algebra lesson increases student achievement, and
students showed positive cognitive and affective
developments.
Summary
This study utilized differentiated learning using tiered
lessons in Inorganic Chemistry.
Specifically, it determined the 1) performance of students
in Chemistry as exposed to differentiated instruction
using Tiered Lessons and traditional approach measured
in terms of a) Pre-test, b) Posttest, c) Chapter test, and d)
Students’ Outputs namely poem or song writing, model-
making, and making comic strip (for experimental group)
and assignments, recitations, and quizzes (for the
control group); 2)significant difference between the
experimental group and the control group in the pre-test,
posttest, and chapter test results; 3)proposed an
enhancement in the syllabus in Chemistry based on the
result of the study.
The study employed the true experimental research
design particularly the pretest-posttest control research
design. Sixty students from Institute of Fisheries of
DMMMSU-SLUC are considered as respondents of this
study
A pre-test and posttest was given to the respondents to
assess their performance. The test instruments used was
items validated by five experts in the field of Chemistry
and was subjected to reliability test. Moreover, the
performance of the students was measured using chapter
test and the students’ output.
The data gathered were treated using frequency,
percentage, mean, and t-test.
Findings
The following are the salient findings of this study
1. Performance of students
a. The pre-test mean score of the experimental group is
19.2 while the pre-test mean score of the control group is
18.6. Both scores have a descriptive equivalent of fair
performance.
b. The posttest mean score of the experimental group is
33.87 while that of the control group is 29.97. Such
performance is described as very satisfactory and
satisfactory, respectively.
c. The chapter test of the experimental group has a mean
score of 102.1 while the mean score of the control group
is 96.03. Both scores indicate very satisfactory
performance.
d. The outputs of the experimental group have a mean
score of 87.87 describe as very satisfactory performance.
The poem or song has a mean score of 6.25 (DR =
Accomplished). The comic strip has a mean score of
17.82 (DR = Accomplished). The mean score of the
models prepared by the students is equivalent to 16.50
(DR = Accomplished)
e. The output of the students in the control group is
equivalent to 80.2 described as very satisfactory
performance. The quizzes of the students have a mean
score of 14 (DR = Accomplished). The assignments
submitted by students have a mean score of 21.65 (DR =
Accomplished). The recitations of the students have a
mean score of 5.00 (DR = Developing).
f. The pre-test of the Experimental group has a mean
score of 19.2 out of 50 while the post test is 33.87 out of
50. There is a significant difference between the two

score indicating an improvement of the performance of
the students from the pre-test to posttest.
g. There are 27 or 90% of the students from the
experimental group have a mean score within the score
range of 91 – 120 with respect to their chapter test. The
students are rated with very satisfactory. On the other
hand, there are 3 or 10 % of students have a score within
a range of 61- 90 with a rating of satisfactory. This
implies that most students perform very satisfactory.
h. There are 18 or 60 % out of 30 students have
a score within a range of 91 -120 with a rating of very
satisfactory. There are 12 or 40% out of 30 students have
a score within a range of 61 – 90.
g. The Pre-test of the control group is 18.6 with a
descriptive rating of fair while their posttest is 29.97 with
a descriptive rating of satisfactory. There is a significant
difference between the scores of the group indicating an
improvement by the students from their pre-test.
2. Test of Significant difference in the
Performance of the Control and Experimental Group
a. The computed t-value (t=0.542) is lesser than the
tabulated t-value (t=2.045) in pre-test of the control and
experimental group. The no significant difference
between the two scores implies that the two groups are
comparable in terms of the level of IQ.
b. The computed t-value (2.999) is higher that the
tabulated value 2.045 in the posttest of the experimental
and control group. The significant difference between the
two scores favored the experimental group.
c. The computed t-value (2.121) is higher than
the tabulated value (2.045) in the chapter test of the
experimental and control group. There is a significant
difference between the two scores favored of the
experimental group
d. There are 3 out of 30 students from the
experimental group who scored within the range of 97–
120 described as outstanding while no students however
scored such in the control group. Both, experimental and
the control group, have 20 out of 30 students who scored
within 73–96 ranged described as very satisfactory.
Within the score range of 49–72, there are 7 in the
experimental group who fell under the bracket while there
are 10 students from the control group who fell in the said
bracket. The result indicates a better performance in
favor of the experimental group.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of this study, the following
conclusions are drawn.
The students in the experimental group performed fair in
their pre-test and very satisfactory on their posttest,
chapter test and in their outputs (poem or song, comic
strip, models). On the other hand, the control group
performed fair in their pre-test and very satisfactory in
their posttest and chapter test. Although the student
output of the control group is very satisfactory, this is only
true to the quizzes and assignment because the
recitation is only satisfactory. Furthermore there is an
observed improvement of the scores of the two groups in
their pre-test and posttest as a result of the discussion
done.
There is a significant difference between the scores of
the experimental group and the control group along the
pre-test, posttest and chapter test which implies a better
performance in favor of the experimental group. On the
other hand, there are more students from the
experimental group who performed better compared to
the control group with respect to their outputs.
From the result of the study, an enhanced syllabus for
Inorganic Chemistry is developed and proposed.
Recommendations
Based on the conclusions drawn from this study,
the following recommendations are provided:
1. Instructors in any field must utilize the
differentiated learning particularly tiered lessons as an
approach to learning for this is an effective means to
allow learning to take place among students.
2. There should be a collaboration of the
instructor with other experts in terms of the technicalities
of the projects submitted by the students for a valid and
more reliable assessment. Moreover, the suggestions
and comments given by experts should be considered as
a basis for improvement.
3. With respect to instructional planning, syllabi
should be enhanced incorporating Performance-based
assessments because most students can learn better
while manipulating things in relation to their subject
matter.
4. Further study on Differentiated Instruction
Using Tiered Lessons is also recommended to be
undertaken considering this time students working as a
group and considering active role of students in the
assessment of projects.
REFERENCES
Acar B, Tarhan L (2008) Teaching Grade 5 Life Science
With a Case Study Approach. Research in Science
Education. 38(4): 401-420.
Bal AP (2016). The effect of the differentiated teaching
approach in the algebraic learning field on students’
academic achievements. Eurasian Journal of
Educational Research. 63: 185-204.
Barak M, Dori YJ (2005) Enhancing Undergraduate
Students’ Chemistry Understanding through Project-
Based Learning in an IT Environment. Science
Education Journal. 89(1): 117-139.
Boiser DC (2004). Teaching Made Easy: Strategies and
Styles. Quezon City Phoenix Publishing House Inc.
Cosares EP (2001) Portfolio Assessment in the
Performance and Attitude of Students in Science and
Technology IV. Master’s Thesis, Don Mariano Marcos
Memorial State University, South La Union
Campus, Agoo, La Union.
Cruz VC (2007) Chemistry Teachers Classroom in Topic-
Based Difficulty Levels. Master’s Thesis, Don
Mariano Marcos Memorial State University, Mid La
Union Campus, Agoo, La Union.
Draper AJ (2004) Integrating Project-Based Service-
Learning into an Advanced Environmental
Chemistry Course. Journal on Chemical Education.81
(2): 221-224.
Eslabra JC (2003). Comic Strip Module as an Innovation
to Teaching Science and Technology II.Master’s
Thesis, Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State
University, South La Union Campus, Agoo, La
Union.
Gallagher JJ (2000). Teaching for Understanding and
Application of Science Knowledge. Science Education
International. 10: 11-13.

Tadifa FG 012
Hall T (2002). Differentiated instruction. Effective
classroom practices report. National Center on
Accessing the General Curriculum, CAST, U.S. Office
of Special Education Programs.
www.cast.org/ncac/classroompractice/cpractice02.doc
Accessed July 16, 2016 .
Handa VB (2000). Influence of Practical Problem Solving
Task on Meaningful Learning and Retention in College
Chemistry. Master’s Thesis, University of the
Philippines. Diliman Quezon City.
Harada VH, Kirio C, Yamamoto S (2008). Project-Based
Learning: Rigors and Relevance in High Schools.
Library Media Connections.26(6):14-16.
Hoggang NG (2001) Physics Teaching in the Secondary
Schools of San Fernando City La Union. Master’s
Thesis. Saint Louis College. San Fernando City, La
Union.
Jackson B (2000). Chemistry Teachers do it with Bangs,
Smell and Colours. Science Education International.12:
23-28.
Lardizabal A, Bustos A, Bucu L, Tangco M (2000).
Principles and Methods of Teaching 3
rd
edition.
Phoenix Publishing. Quezon City, Philippines.
Marasigan AC (2007). Modified Useful Learning
Approach; Student Achievement, Critical Thinking and
Attitude in Chemistry. Master’s Thesis, University of the
Philippines. Diliman Quezon City.
Masiong DV (2013). Problem-Based Learning Approach
in Physics. Master’s Thesis, DMMMSU-SLUC
College of Graduate Studies.
Mendoza W. ( 2001) Learning and Teaching Styles of
Computronix College. Master’s Thesis, Don
Mariano Marcos Memorial State University, South La
Union Campus, Agoo La Union.
Nordlund M (2003). Differentiated instruction: Meeting
the educational needs of all students in your classroom.
Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Richards MRE, Omdal SN (2007). Effects of tiered
instruction on academic performance in a secondary
science course.Journal of Advanced Academics. 18(3):
424-456.
Perez MR (2009) Enhancing Conceptual and Experiential
Learning Performance of Science 1 Students
Using Virtual Field Trip Strategy. Master’s Thesis, Don
Mariano Marcos Memorial State University, South La
Union Campus, Agoo La Union.
Pierce R, Adams C. (2005).Using tiered lessons in
mathematics.Mathematics Teaching in the Middle
School. 11: 144–149.
Ramirez RPB.( 2007) Creative Activities in Chemistry
and Students Higher Order Thinking Skills.Master’s
Thesis, University of the Philippines, Diliman Quezon
City.
Tadifa FG (2009) Project-Based Learning in College
Chemistry. Masters Thesis, Don Mariano Marcos
Memorial State University, Agoo, La Union.
Tingle JB, Good R (2000). Effects of Cooperative
Grouping on Stoichiometric Problem Solving in High
School Chemistry. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching. 27(7): 671-683.
Tomlinson CA, Jarvis J. (2009). Differentiation: Making
curriculum work for all students through responsive
planning and instruction. In Renzulli JS, Gubbins EJ,
McMillen KS, Eckert RD, Little CA (Eds.), Systems and
models for developing programs for the gifted and
talented. Storrs, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Vinluan SM (2007). Performance of High School Biology
Students Using Traditional and Non-traditional
Assessment Tools. Master’s Thesis, Don Mariano
Marcos Memorial State University, South La Union
Campus, Agoo, La Union.
Accepted 22 May, 2017.
Citation: Tadifa FG (2017). Differentiated instruction
using tiered lessons in inorganic chemistry. International
Journal of Chemistry Education, 1(1): 002-010.
Copyright: © 2017 Tadifa FG. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are cited.

Differentiated instruction using tiered lessons in inorganic chemistry

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Differentiated instruction using tiered lessons in inorganic chemistry (20)

More from Premier Publishers (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Differentiated instruction using tiered lessons in inorganic chemistry