ANNEX B.1 Basic Research Proposal Template
DEPARTMENT OF THE EDUCATION
National Capital Region
DIVISION OF PASIG
Caruncho Avenue, Pasig City
Title of the Study: ___________________________________________________
(Non-BERF/Basic Research Proposal)
Proponent/s ________________________________________________________
School: _____________________________________________________________
Introduction and
Rationale
Literature Review
Research Questions
Scope and Limitations
Research
Methodology
Sampling
Data
Collection
Ethical Issues
Plan for Data
Analysis
Timetable/Gant Chart
Activities
Timeline
Pre-Implementation
Implementation
Proper
Post Implementation
Cost Estimates
Plans for Dissemination
and Advocacy
References
Items
Cost/Unit
Number
Total Cost
ANNEX B.2 Action Research Proposal Template
DEPARTMENT OF THE EDUCATION
National Capital Region
DIVISION OF PASIG
Caruncho Avenue, Pasig City
Title of the Study: The Use of Card Games in Enhancing Student’s Problem
Solving Skills in Physical Science among Grade 11 Non-STEM Students
(Non-BERF/Action Research Proposal)
Proponent/s _Ginalyn Bramaje____________________________________
School: _Buting Senior High School__________________________________
Context and Rationale
The goal of science education is to help students develop a
deep understanding of abstract concepts. But results of the National
Achievement Test (NAT) in secondary science contradict this goal. In
2007, NAT was reported to have a 51.8% passing and in 2008 it was
57.8%. This is very far from the government’s target criterion level of 75%
(Lapus, 2009). Moreover, in 2003, the Philippines ranked 41st and 42nd
in Mathematics and Science out of 45 participating countries in the
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS).
According to Martin, Mullis, Gonzales, Gregory and Smith (2004),
Filipino learners are weak in terms of mastery level in mathematics and
science when they finished high school. In the field of Chemistry alone,
Filipino learners have 30% average correct answers in TIMSS. This is very
low and far from the international average of 45% correct answers.
One of the factor attributed to the achievement in science is
problem solving skills. In the study of Burshall (2008) cited that problemsolving is a process of an ongoing activity in which we take what we
know to discover what we don't know. It involves overcoming
obstacles by generating hypo-theses, testing those predictions, and
arriving at satisfactory solutions. Thus, students have poor problem
solving skills based on the result of their formative and summative
assessment given by the teacher.
Among the effective instructional strategies that promote
student-centered learning in a large class size is Using Card Games
(Perdavis, 2001). According to the study of Tenney and Houck Card
games on Introductory Biology and Introductory Chemistry results to
improvement in students’ problem solving skills, retention of concepts,
and study skills.
The study therefore proposes an intervention using card games
which aims to address the problem on poor problem solving skills of the
Non STEM students in Physical Science
Proposed Innovation,
Intervention & Strategy
Action Research
Questions
Use Card Games to enhance Students Problem Solving Skills during
lesson proper as a strategy.
How do Non STEM students enhance their problem solving skills in
Physical science using card games?
Action
Research
Methodology
Participants/
other sources
of data and
Information
Data
Gathering
Methods
Forty Grade 11 Non STEM students will be the participants of this
study.
Data Analysis
Plan
The researchers will do data triangulation using the data sources
identified above to validate the effectiveness of the intervention.
Quasi Experimental group design will be used in comparing pretestposttest accuracy and reliability.
Action Research Work
Plans and Timelines
Data collection includes the card games made by the teacher.
Pretest-posttest of problem solving topics such as stoichiometry, and
balancing chemical equation, accomplished formative assessment
worksheets and responses of students in the focus group discussion.
PreImplementation
Implementation
Proper
Post
Implementation
Activities
Timeline
1. Construction of card
games which will be used
as tool
2. Validation of card games
by 4 science experts
3. Identification of
participants using the
formative assessment
results in stoichiometry
and balancing chemical
equation (chemistry) which
is part of Physical science.
4. Secure approval from
the principal and parent
consent.
5. Orientation of students
which are involve in the
study.
6. Administration of the
validated test as pre-test.
1st week of August
2018
2nd week of august
2018
5. Meet the experimental
group 1hour and 40
minutes every Monday
and Thursday and the
control group every
Tuesday and Friday.
6. During the lesson
proper the teacher will
use the card games as
tool to enhance their
problem solving skills in
the experimental group
while the control group
will use the usual class
discussion.
September 2018
9. Administration of the
post test
10. Conduct focus group
discussion on how the
3rd week of
October 2018
3rd week of August
2018
3rd week of august
2018
to
October 2018
students find the lesson
and the activity.
11. Displaying of student’s
output on the Bulletin
Board
12. Sharing my paper in
learning action cells.
14. Submitting my papers
for free publication in the
Schools Division Office
and DepEd-NCR
Cost Estimates
Items
Cost/Unit
Office supplies for
the project

cartolina

scissors

construction
paper
10.00
30.00
200
80.00
Report materials
and supplies

ink for
printer

ink for
marker
crayons
Subject/Research
Participants

food and
beverages
(snacks)
Duplication
services(reports)

Post and
pre-test

Worksheet

Letter for
parent
consent
Transportation
allowance
Plans for Dissemination
and Advocacy
References
November to
December, 2018
Number
Total
Cost
15 pcs
1 pc
1 ream
1 box
150
30.00
200.00
80.00
460.00
1000
130
1 set
1 bottle
1000
130
1130.00
0.75
0.75
0.75
80 pcs
320 pcs
80 pcs
60
160
60
280.00
1000
1000
1000
1. Sharing my paper in learning action cells.
2. Submitting my papers for free publication in the Schools Division
Office and DepEd-NCR
Tenney, A., & Houck, B. (2004). Learning about Card
games: Team learning's effect on problem
solving. Journal
of
College
Science
Teaching, 33(6), 25-29.
Strike, K.A., and Posner, G.J. (1982). Problem Solving and
science teaching. European Journal of Science
Education, 4(3), (pp 231-240).
ANNEX B. 4 Summary of Comments and Revision Form
DEPARTMENT OF THE EDUCATION
National Capital Region
DIVISION OF PASIG
Caruncho Avenue, Pasig City
Summary of Comments and Revisions
Proponent/s:_______________________________________________________________________
Title:______________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Comments/Suggestions/
Recommendations
Action Taken
Conforme:
____________________
_____________________
Printed name and Signature
Printed name and Signature
Evaluator
Evaluator
Page no. and
Paragraph
reflecting the
changes done
Evaluator who
Suggested
ANNEX B.3 Research Ethics Review Form
DEPARTMENT OF THE EDUCATION
National Capital Region
DIVISION OF PASIG
Caruncho Avenue, Pasig City
Research Ethics Review Form
Research Title
Proponent/s
School
Indicators
Compliance
Yes
No
Comments
Action Taken
Remarks
(to be accomplished by
reviewer)
(to be accomplished
by researcher)
(to be
accomplished by
reviewer)
The proposal
1. Assures confidentiality, privacy and
security of sensitive data
2. Shows that participation of the
study is voluntary and secures
consent from participants
3. Provides information to the target
participants about the objectives
and outputs of the study
4. Provides mechanism/plan for data
collection involving vulnerable
participants (ex. homeless,
prisoners, elderly, etc.)
5. Addresses ethical issues in case
the topic involves sensitive issues
(eg. violence, drug additction,
abortion, etc.)*
6. Assures the safety of the
participants for study involving
experiments (eg. chemicals,
laboratories, etc.)
7. shows no biases in
instruments/data collection tools
(ex. gender, religion, ethnicity,
class)
*Reference: Research Ethics Committee, Philippine Normal University
Remarks:
For Compliance
For issuance of Permit
Evaluated by: ______________________________________
Date: _______________________
DEPARTMENT OF THE EDUCATION
National Capital Region
DIVISION OF PASIG
Caruncho Avenue, Pasig City
Research Title
Use of Process Approach in Enhancing the Writing Skills of
Grade 12-HUMSS in the Creative Non-fiction class in
Buting Senior High School
Please check only one.
Schools Division
District
School
Research Category
Action Research
Basic Research
Research
Category
Agenda Please check only one.
Teaching and Learning
Child Protection
Human Resource Development
Governance
DRRM
Gender and Development
Inclusive Education
Others:___________________________________
Maria Criselda M. Reyes
Master Teacher II
Proponent/s
School
Contact Information
Endorsed by:
Buting Senior High School
0995-4904670
MONETTE P. VEGA
Principal II
School Head
ANNEX C.1
Evaluator’s Scoring Sheet for Action Research Proposal
Name/s of Researcher/s:_________________________________________________________
School/Office:____________________________________________________________________Titl
e:___________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Criteria
Context
Increasing levels of Quality and Descriptions
Not
described
(no
points)
Presents a general
description of the
problem or issue as its
focus of inquiry
(8 points)
The educational relevance and
timeliness of the research of the problem
or issue are shown. The need to conduct
action research as a way to address or
improve the situation is explained.
(12 points)
The nature, extent and salience of the
identified problem or issue are
comprehensively discussed. Different
aspects of action research setting are
elaborated showing in depth and critical
analysis of the situation. (15 points)
Proposed
Intervention,
Innovation,
Strategy
(15 points)
Action
Research
Questions
(30 points)
Not
presented
(no
points)
Mentions an intervention,
innovation or strategy to
be tried out to address
the problem or issue
(8 points)
Outlines when and where the
intervention, innovation and strategy will
be undertaken, and who will be involved.
Activities to be undertaken are stated.
(12 points)
The rationale, extent and limitation of the
intervention, innovation or strategy are
explained in detail. Its plausibility as a way
to address the problem or issue is given
support
(15 points)
Not
stated
(no
points)
States aim,
objective or
general research
question (s).
(15 points)
Participants/
Other Sources of
Data/ Information
(10 points)
Not
stated
(no
points)
States the study’s target participants/ other sources of
data and information (ex. learners, teachers, parents,
documents, realia, learner’s produt, others)
(5points)
Data
Gathering
Methods
(10 points)
Not
described
(no
points)
Data Analysis
Plan
(10 points)
Not
described
(no
points)
Work Plan and
Timelines
(5 points)
Cost Estimates
(5 points)
Not
included
(no
points)
Not
described
(no
points)
(15 points)
Research questions specify the action
research variables or the focus of inquiry.
Key elements of the research question (s)
are reflected in the title of the proposal
(25 points)
Research question/s logically proceed/s from the
context of inquiry. It cleary relates to the
identified problems or issue, and conveys the
desired change or improvement
(20 points
Details are provided about the target participants (ex.
number, characteristics, sampling procedure, if any) and/or
other sources of data and information. Clear rationale for
their inclusion in the study is given.
(10 points)
Presents a general
Details of data gathering method/s are
Explains why data gathering methods are
description of the
provided: the specific kinds of data, how
suited to the nature and purpose of the study.
method/s to be
and when they will be collected (ex.
The data gathering methods are aligned with
employed for
pretest/posttest) describes any research
the research questions; research instruments,
gathering data
instrument (ex: test, scale, survey
if any, are appropriate for obtaining the desired
(5 points)
questionnaire, checklist, interview guide,
kind of data/information (10 points)
others) (8 points)
Presents a general
Details of methods of data analysis are
Selected methods of data analysis are
description of how the
given. Techniques (ex.
shown to be appropriate to the nature of
gathered data/information
quantitative/statistical, qualitative, or both
the data/information to be gathered and
will be analyzed
methods) as well as tools (ex. software) to
for addressing the research questions.
(5 points)
be employed are specified.
(10 points)
(8 points)
Includes a list of major activities
A detailed workplan is provided covering start to completion of the research.
and timelines
Timelines are realistic and show concretely how the research will unfold over the
(3 points)
allowed period; overall plan reflects the proponent’s capacity to concretize ideas
into clear and sequential steps to be undertaken. (5 points)
Includes list of major items
A detailed breakdown of items with corresponding costs is furnished. The item and
and estimated costs; the
costs reasonably reflect the funding needs of the research, and adhere to the BERF
total cost is shown
guidelines; overall plan reflects the proponent’s capacity to project specific expenses.
(3 points)
(5 points)
Total Score
Comments/Suggestions: (Provide a separate sheet, if needed)
Evaluated by: _________________________
Date: ______________________
Printed Name and Signature
When you are done with your evaluation, kindly return this form and the research proposal to our SEPS-P&R.
Thank you very much.
Score
ANNEX C. 2
Evaluator’s Scoring Sheet for Basic Research Proposal
Name/s of Researcher/s: ________________________________________________________
School/Office:____________________________________________________________________
Title:________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Criteria
Rationale of
Research
(10 points)
Increasing levels of Quality and Descriptions
Not
described
(no
points)
Presents a
general
description of the
topic or focus of
inquiry
(5 points)
Literature and
Proper
Citation
(10 points)
Research
Questions
(20 points)
Not
provided
(no
points)
Cites theories and/or previous
studies related to the present
research. Sources are properly
acknowledged.
(5 points)
Not
stated
(no
points)
States aim, objective
or general research
questions.
(10 points)
Participants/
Other Sources
of Data/
Information
(10 points)
Data
Gathering
Methods and
Research
Instruments
(20 points)
Data Analysis
Plan
(10 points)
Not
stated
(no
points)
States the study’s target participants/ other sources
of data and information (ex. divisions, districts,
offices, schools learners, teachers, parents,
documents, secondary data, others)
(5points)
Not
described
(no
points)
Presents a general
description of the
methods to be
employed for
gathering data
(10 points)
Work Plan and
Timelines
(10 points)
Cost Estimates
(10 points)
Not
described
(no
points)
Not
described
(no
points)
Not
described
(no
points)
The educational relevance and timeliness of
the research topic are shown. It explains the
need to conduct research to understand a
phenomenon, advance or validate
knowledge, improve a situation or address
an issue/problem
(8 points)
The nature, extent and salience of the research
topic are comprehensively discussed. Different
aspects of research setting are elaborated
showing in depth and critical analysis of the
situation. Policy implications, benefits and
limitations of the study are stated.
(10 points)
Viewpoints and issues underlying the present research are discussed and
synthesized; Critically evaluated to identify inconsistencies or gaps in current
knowledge or educational policy that the study intends to address; Constructs
are defined and presented in conceptual framework; citation of literature
sources is consistent (10 points)
Research questions specify the
variables or the focus of inquiry. Key
elements of the research questions are
reflected in the title of the proposal
(15 points)
Research questions logically proceed from the
context of the study; formulated to clearly show
the extent and different angles of inquiry (ex:
different variables of interest, relationships to be
probed, geographical and temporal scope)
(20 points
Details are provided about the target participants (ex.
number, characteristics, sampling procedure, if any) and/or
other sources of data and information. Clear rationale for
their inclusion in the study is given.
(10 points)
Details of data gathering methods are
Explains why data gathering methods are suited
provided: the specific kind of data, how
to the nature and purpose of the study. The data
and when they will be collected;
gathering methods are aligned with the research
describes any research instrument (ex:
questions; details about the research
test, scale, survey questionnaire,
instruments are presented such as their sources
checklist, interview guide) to be
or how they will be developed and by whom, and
developed or adopted
their appropriateness for obtaining the desired
(15 points)
kind of data/information (20 points)
Presents a general
Details of methods of data analysis are
Selected methods of data analysis are
description of how the
given. Techniques (ex.
shown to be appropriate to the nature of
gathered data/information
quantitative/statistical, qualitative, or both
the data/information to be gathered and
will be analyzed
methods) as well as tools (ex. software) to
for addressing the research questions.
(5 points)
be employed are specified. (8 points)
(10 points)
Includes a list of major A detailed workplan is provided covering start to completion of the research. Timelines are
activities and timelines realistic and show concretely how the research will unfold over the allowed period; overall
(5 points)
plan reflects the proponent’s capacity to concretize ideas into clear and sequential steps to
be undertaken. (10 points)
Includes list of major items
A detailed breakdown of items with corresponding costs is furnished. The item and
and estimated costs; the
costs reasonably reflect the funding needs of the research, and adhere to the BERF
total cost is shown
guidelines; overall plan reflects the proponent’s capacity to project specific expenses.
(5 points)
(10 points)
Total Score
Comments/Suggestions: (Provide a separate sheet, if needed)
Evaluated by: _________________________
Date: ______________________
Printed Name and Signature
When you are done with your evaluation, kindly return this form and the research proposal to our SEPS-P&R.
Thank you very much.
Score