Chapter IV

This chapter presents the results of this investigation

and is divided into two parts: (1) Descriptive Data

Analysis, and (2) Inferential Data Analysis.

Part One, Descriptive Data Analysis, presents the

descriptive data on the level of teaching pedagogical

content knowledge, teaching strategies, and academic

performance of STE students in Mambusao National High

School.

Part Two, presents the inferential data on the

difference on the level of teaching pedagogical content

knowledge, teaching strategies, and academic performance of

STE students and its relationship.

Below is the presentation of the descriptive and

inferential with respective analysis and interpretation. In

analyzing the data, the following statistics were employed:

Mean, Standard deviation, AnoVa, T-test and Pearson r. The

0.05 level of significance was used as criterion for

interpretation of inferential test result.

 44

Descriptive Data Analysis

Teaching Pedagogical
Content knowledge
of STE Teachers

Data shows that the level of teaching pedagogical

content knowledge of STE teachers is found to be “Very High”

(M=4.5795, SD=.30921)

Table 2. Level of teaching pedagogical content knowledge of

STE Teachers
Variable N Mean Description Standard
Deviation
Teaching 100 4.58 Very High .31
Pedagogical
Content
Knowledge
Scale Description
4.21-5.00 Very High
3.41-4.20 High
2.61-3.40 Average
1.81-2.60 Low
1.00-1.80 Very Low

The “Very High” level of teaching pedagogical content

knowledge of teachers implies that STE teachers have a deep

understanding of both the subject matter they teach and the

most effective methods for conveying that content to their

students. Such proficiency equips the STE teachers with a

diverse toolkit of teaching strategies tailored to the

specific needs and learning styles of their students. They

excel in crafting engaging lessons that resonate with

learners, fostering a dynamic and supportive classroom

environment conducive to active participation and meaningful

 45

learning. Moreover, teachers with high PCK can communicate

complex concepts clearly, providing multiple explanations

and examples as needed to ensure comprehension. They are

skilled at designing assessments that accurately gauge

student understanding and offering constructive feedback to

facilitate growth. Importantly, their adaptability enables

them to adjust their teaching approaches in response to

student needs, fostering inclusive learning environments

that promote success for all learners. Overall, high

pedagogical content knowledge empowers teachers to deliver

effective instruction, cultivate deeper student

understanding, and nurture a positive and enriching

educational experience.

As a support on this, according to Shulman, (2013) A

high level of teaching pedagogical content knowledge for

teachers refers to their specialized knowledge in creating

effective teaching and learning environments for students.

This knowledge encompasses the integration of subject-

specific content knowledge with pedagogical knowledge

tailored to teaching that particular subject. Shulman

categorized teacher knowledge into seven categories,

highlighting the significance of pedagogical content

knowledge as a fundamental element crucial for effective

 46

teaching. Shulman's work emphasizes the importance of

teachers not only possessing content knowledge but also

understanding how to teach that content effectively, making

it a cornerstone of quality teaching practices.

Teaching Strategies
employed by the STE Teachers

Data shows that the level of teaching strategies

employed by the STE teachers is found to be “Very High”

(M=4.4925, SD=.23042)

Table 3. Level of teaching strategies employed by the STE

teachers
Variable N Mean Description Standard
Deviation
Teaching 20 4.49 Very High .23
Strategy

Scale Description
4.21-5.00 Very High
3.41-4.20 High
2.61-3.40 Average
1.81-2.60 Low
1.00-1.80 Very Low

The “Very High” level of teaching strategies employed by the

STE teachers implies that teachers use advanced methods and

techniques to help students learn effectively. This includes

using a variety of instructional approaches, such as hands-

on activities, group discussions, visual aids, and

technology integration, to engage students and meet their

 47

individual needs. These teachers are skilled at planning

lessons that cater to different learning styles and

abilities, ensuring that all students have the opportunity

to succeed. Additionally, they continuously assess student

progress and adjust their teaching methods accordingly,

providing feedback and support to help students reach their

full potential.

It also suggests the teachers’ mastery of various

instructional approaches and methodologies tailored to meet

the diverse needs of their students. These teachers possess

a versatile toolkit of pedagogical techniques honed through

experience and ongoing professional development. Their

adeptness enables them to engage students effectively,

creating dynamic and interactive learning experiences that

foster curiosity, critical thinking, and active

participation. By leveraging a range of strategies such as

cooperative learning, inquiry-based instruction, and

differentiated instruction, they can cater to the individual

learning styles and preferences of their students, thereby

maximizing learning outcomes. Additionally, teachers with

strong teaching strategies can effectively manage classroom

dynamics, ensuring a conducive environment for learning

while promoting collaboration and mutual respect among

students. Their ability to adapt their approaches based on

 48

student responses and evolving educational trends

underscores their commitment to continuous improvement and

student success. In essence, high proficiency in teaching

strategies empowers educators to deliver impactful

instruction that inspires, motivates, and empowers students

to achieve their full potential.

In connection with this, according to the study of

Subramani, (2023) an effective teacher who operates a

teaching strategy constantly renews themselves

professionally to provide students with the highest quality

education. This teacher fearlessly embraces new teaching

strategies and technologies, ensuring that their teaching

practices are always evolving and improving. It signifies a

commitment to excellence, continuous growth, and the ability

to create a stimulating and supportive educational

environment that maximizes student learning outcomes.

The top five (5) teaching strategies

employed by the STE teachers

Data shows that the level of the top five (5) teaching

strategies employed by the STE teachers is found to be “Very

High” (M=4.5960, SD=.14993)

 49

Table 4. Level of the Top five (5) Teaching Strategies

employed by the STE Teachers

Variable N Mean Description Standard

Deviation
Top Five 5 4.60 Very High .15
(5)
Teaching
Strategies
Scale Description
4.21-5.00 Very High
3.41-4.20 High
2.61-3.40 Average
1.81-2.60 Low
1.00-1.80 Very Low

Table 5. The Top Five (5) Teaching Strategies employed by

the STE Teachers

Top The Top Five (5) Teaching Strategies Mean

1 Cooperative Learning 4.69
2 Differentiated Instruction 4.67
3 Regular Review and Revision 4.65
4 Creative Engagement 4.64
5 Feedback and Reflection 4.33

If the top five teaching strategies utilized by

teachers, including cooperative learning, differentiated

instruction, regular review, feedback and reflection, and

creative engagement, are rated highly, it implies a

multifaceted and dynamic approach to education. Cooperative

learning fosters collaboration and peer interaction,

promoting a supportive classroom environment where students

learn from each other. Differentiated instruction recognizes

 50

diverse learning styles and abilities, ensuring that all

students are challenged at their appropriate level. Regular

review maintains continuity in learning, reinforcing

concepts and preventing knowledge gaps. Feedback and

reflection encourage continuous improvement, empowering

students to assess their progress and make necessary

adjustments. Finally, creative engagement sparks curiosity

and innovation, making learning both enjoyable and

meaningful. A high rating across these strategies signifies

an inclusive, stimulating, and effective teaching

environment, where students are actively engaged in their

learning journey and are supported in reaching their full

potential. Ultimately, the “Very High” level of the top five

(5) teaching strategies of teachers implies that teachers

are exceptionally proficient in utilizing the most effective

methods to help students learn.

Considering this, according to the study of Annilkumar,

(2024) teachers are constantly renewing themselves

professionally to provide students with the highest quality

education. This involves fearlessly incorporating new

teaching strategies and technologies into lessons, ensuring

that students are actively engaged, focused, and connected

to the learning process. Effective teaching strategies cater

to diverse learners, promote cooperation, and foster

 51

student-centred learning, ultimately creating an engaging

and supportive learning environment for both teachers and

students

Level of the Academic Performance

of STE students

Data shows that the level of academic performance of

STE students is found to be “Outstanding” (M=91.9200,

SD=2.88038)

Table 6. Level of Academic Performance of STE students

Variable N Mean Description Standard

Deviation
Academic 100 91.92 Outstanding 2.88
Performance
Scale Description
90-100 Outstanding
85-89 Very Satisfactory
80-84 Satisfactory
75-79 Fairy Satisfactory
Below 75 Did not meet the expectation

The “Outstanding” level of academic performance of STE

students. It shows that students have fully grasped the

concepts taught to them by their teachers. They exhibit

mastery across a wide range of competencies and can

proficiently complete the learning tasks assigned to them.

This level of performance indicates that students are

consistently engaged and able to tackle challenging

 52

activities with ease. They have access to the necessary

materials and resources to excel in their studies.

Furthermore, it signifies a multitude of positive

factors contributing to their success. Firstly, it reflects

their strong grasp of the subject matter across various

disciplines, indicating a deep understanding of key concepts

and principles. This level of mastery often results from

dedicated study habits, critical thinking skills, and a

genuine curiosity for learning. Moreover, outstanding

academic performance suggests effective engagement with

course materials, including active participation in class

discussions, thorough completion of assignments, and

diligent preparation for assessments. Additionally, high-

performing students typically exhibit strong problem-solving

abilities, analytical thinking, and the capacity to apply

their knowledge to real-world scenarios. Their achievements

may also be indicative of supportive learning environments,

including quality instruction, access to resources, and a

culture of academic excellence within their school or

educational institution. Ultimately, outstanding academic

performance underscores not only individual student

achievement but also the collective efforts of educators,

families, and communities in fostering a conducive learning

 53

environment that nurtures success and fosters lifelong

learning.

In relation to this, according to the study of Arnaiz

et al. (2018) emphasize the role of effective schools in

achieving comprehensive student development beyond

expectations, considering their previous performance and

socio-economic backgrounds. They highlight successful

educational interventions that lead to significant

improvements in academic results, challenging previous views

on academic performance and inequalities. In addition,

Flecha and Buslon (2016) and other researchers have

conducted studies focusing on successful educational

interventions that have led to significant improvements in

academic results. Their research challenges previous views

on the determinants of academic performance by emphasizing

the effectiveness of specific interventions in enhancing

student outcomes.

Inferential Data Analysis

Difference between Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge and
Academic Performance of STE Students
 54

Table 7 shows the Analysis of Variance (AnoVa) on the

difference between teaching pedagogical content knowledge

and academic performance of STE students.

Data shows that there is a “no significant difference”

in the teaching pedagogical content knowledge and academic

performance of STE students, F = 1.381, p>0.05.

Table 7. AnoVa result in the Difference in Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Academic Performance

Source of Variation SS df MS F Sig.

Between Groups 1.514 12 .126 1.381 .191
Within Groups 7.951 87 .091
Total 9.465 99
p<0.05 significant @5% alpha level
p>0.05 not significant @5% alpha level

The result shows that there is “no significant

difference” in teaching pedagogical content knowledge and

academic performance of STE students. When there is "no

significant difference" in teaching pedagogical content

knowledge and academic performance of STE (Science,

Technology, and Engineering) students, it suggests several

possible scenarios. Firstly, it may indicate that the

teaching methods employed by instructors are uniformly

effective across different groups of students, regardless of

their specific academic focus. This implies a high level of

instructional competence and adaptability on the part of

 55

teachers, who are able to tailor their pedagogical

approaches to meet the diverse needs of STE students.

Alternatively, it could imply that factors outside of

pedagogical content knowledge, such as student motivation,

prior academic preparation, or extracurricular support, play

a more significant role in influencing academic performance

within the STE disciplines. Additionally, the absence of a

significant difference might highlight the importance of

other variables, such as classroom environment, student-

teacher interactions, or access to resources, in shaping

student outcomes in STE subjects. Overall, the finding of

"no significant difference" underscores the complexity of

educational dynamics and suggests the need for further

research to better understand the multifaceted factors that

contribute to student success in STE disciplines.

This also implies that factors other than the teacher's

knowledge of pedagogy, such as student engagement, classroom

management, and individual learning styles, may have a more

substantial influence on academic outcomes. Additionally, it

may indicate that while pedagogical content knowledge is

important, its direct impact on student performance might be

less significant compared to other aspects of teaching and

learning environments.
 56

In the study by Agoro and Akinsola (2013), it was

observed that there was variation in the depth of

pedagogical knowledge between sampled English Language and

Mathematics teachers. Despite this lack of distinction in

pedagogical knowledge levels among teachers, the study did

not find variations in student academic performance based on

these differences. The specific level of pedagogical content

knowledge possessed by teachers in English Language and

Mathematics did not directly correlate with differences in

student academic achievement.

The findings suggest that while pedagogical knowledge

is essential for effective teaching, other factors beyond

the depth of this knowledge may play a more significant role

in influencing student academic performance. This could

include teaching practices, classroom management, student

engagement strategies, and the overall learning environment

created by teachers. Therefore, the study highlights that

while pedagogical content knowledge is crucial, it may not

be the sole determining factor in student success,

emphasizing the multifaceted nature of effective teaching

and learning outcomes in educational settings.

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is a significant difference in teaching pedagogical

 57

content knowledge and academic performance of STE students

is hereby rejected.

Difference between Teaching

Strategies and Academic
Performance of STE Students

Table 8 shows the Analysis of Variance (AnoVa) on the

difference between teaching strategies and academic

performance of STE students.

Data shows that there is “no significant difference” in

the teaching strategies and academic performance of STE

students, F = 7.66, p> .05.

Table 8. AnoVa result in the Difference in Teaching

Strategies and Academic Performance of STE Students

Source of Variation SS df MS F Sig.

Between Groups .361 8 .045 .766 .639
Within Groups .648 11 .059
Total 1.009 19
p<0.05 significant @5% alpha level
p>0.05 not significant @5% alpha level

The result shows that there is “no significant

difference” in teaching strategies and academic performance

of STE students. When there is "no significant difference"

in the teaching strategies employed and academic performance

of STE (Science, Technology, and Engineering) students,

several interpretations can be made. Firstly, it suggests

that the various teaching strategies utilized by instructors

 58

within the STE disciplines are equally effective in

fostering student learning and academic achievement. This

finding underscores the versatility and adaptability of

pedagogical approaches within STEM education, indicating

that different methods, whether traditional lectures, hands-

on experiments, group projects, or technology-based

learning, can all yield comparable results. Additionally, it

may imply that the core content and concepts of STEM

subjects lend themselves well to a variety of instructional

techniques, allowing educators the freedom to choose methods

that align with their teaching style and student needs

without sacrificing academic outcomes. However, it is

essential to consider that the absence of a significant

difference does not negate the importance of teaching

strategies but rather highlights their collective efficacy

in supporting STE student success. Moreover, it underscores

the need for ongoing research and evaluation to continually

refine and improve teaching practices within STEM education,

ensuring that all students have access to effective learning

experiences that maximize their academic potential. Finally,

it suggests that there might be a need to reassess the

effectiveness of current teaching approaches within STE

disciplines or explore alternative factors that could

enhance student performance in these areas.

 59

Results of this study supports the findings of the

study conducted by Wiest, (2014) entitled "Strategies for

Educators to Support Students in STEM" highlights the

significance of effective teaching practices and positive

relationships with students in supporting their success in

STEM fields. While the study acknowledges the importance of

teaching strategies, it emphasizes that these strategies

alone may not be the sole factors influencing academic

performance in STEM education. Instead, the research

underscores the foundational role of good teaching practices

and positive interactions with students as crucial elements

in fostering a supportive learning environment for STEM

students.

This implies that beyond the specific methods used by

teachers, establishing positive relationships, providing

support, and creating an engaging learning atmosphere are

essential components in enhancing student performance in

STEM disciplines. By focusing on building strong teacher-

student relationships and implementing effective teaching

practices, educators can better support students in their

STEM education journey, ultimately contributing to improved

academic outcomes in these fields.

 60

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is a significant difference in teaching strategies and

academic performance of STE students is hereby rejected.

Relationship among Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge,
the top 5 Teaching Strategies
and Academic Performance of STE Students

Table 9 shows the relationship among Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge, the top 5 teaching strategies

and Academic Performance of STE Students.

The result revealed that there is “no significant

relationship” between teaching pedagogical content knowledge

and academic performance of STE students, r = .186, p>0.05.

There is a “no significant relationship” between the top 5

teaching strategies and academic performance of STE

students, r = -.455, p>0.05. There is “no significant

relationship” between teaching pedagogical content knowledge

and the top 5 teaching strategies, r = .747, p>0.05.

Table 9

Pearson r Among Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge,

the top 5 teaching strategies and Academic Performance of
STE Students

Variables r Sig
Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge
and Academic Performance .186 .064
Top 5 Teaching Strategies and Academic
Performance -.455 .441
Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge
and Top 5 Teaching Strategies .747 .147
p<0.05 significant @5% alpha level
 61

p>0.05 not significant @5% alpha level

The no significant relationship between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and academic performance of

STE students implies that other factors, such as students'

prior knowledge, individual learning styles, motivation, and

external influences, may play a more substantial role in

shaping academic achievement within STE disciplines.

Furthermore, it underscores the importance of considering a

multifaceted approach to education that addresses various

aspects beyond instructional strategies to enhance student

learning outcomes in STE subjects.

To strengthen this result, as indicated by the study

conducted by Krepf et al. (2018), suggests that despite the

importance of pedagogical content knowledge for effective

teaching, it may not directly translate into improved

academic outcomes for students in these fields. This finding

challenges the common belief that a deep understanding of

subject matter combined with effective teaching strategies

leads to enhanced student achievement. It implies that

factors beyond teachers' pedagogical content knowledge, such

as student engagement, instructional methods, and other

variables, play a more substantial role in influencing

academic performance in STE disciplines. Therefore, while

pedagogical content knowledge remains crucial for quality

 62

instruction, its direct impact on student success in

science, technology, and engineering may be less pronounced

than previously thought.

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is a significant relationship between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and academic performance of

STE students is hereby rejected.

The no significant relationship between the top 5

teaching strategies (top 1, cooperative learning; top 2,

differentiated instruction; top 3, regular review and

revision; top 4, creative engagement; and top 5, feedback

and reflection) and academic performance of STE students

implies that teachers need to delve deeper into various

other influential factors that might impact student

achievement in these subjects. While the identified teaching

strategies are undoubtedly valuable in educational settings,

their direct impact on academic outcomes in the STE appears

to be limited. Traditional teaching approaches might not

always be well-suited to the complexities and

interdisciplinary nature of science, technology,

engineering, and related fields. Hence, there's a need for

innovative pedagogical approaches tailored explicitly to the

points of these disciplines. Therefore, teachers should

broaden their scope of investigation beyond teaching

 63

methodologies alone. Factors such as student motivation, the

learning environment both at school and at home, as well as

the diverse learning styles of individual students, could

significantly influence their success in STE subjects.

The results contradict to the findings of the study

conducted by Alshammari and Mashouj (2024) that ‘cooperative

learning’ has been shown to be effective in various

settings, including college classrooms in Saudi Arabia. The

results of the study conducted in Saudi Arabia found that

cooperative learning led to better academic performance,

improved critical thinking skills, and increased motivation

among college students. The study also found that

instructors in Saudi Arabia often do not have time for

consultation with students due to tight lesson schedules,

making cooperative learning an effective way to provide

support and guidance to students outside of class time.

The results of this study do not support the findings

of the study conducted by Gentry, (2013) which examined the

effectiveness of ‘differentiated instruction’ on student

achievement in reading. The findings of Gentry's study

revealed a positive correlation between differentiated

instruction and student achievement in reading. Students who

were exposed to differentiated instruction methods exhibited

noticeable improvements in their reading skills compared to

 64

their peers who received conventional, one-size-fits-all

instruction. This suggests that the tailored and

personalized nature of differentiated instruction

effectively addressed the diverse needs of learners, leading

to enhanced reading comprehension, fluency, vocabulary

acquisition, and overall literacy development.

On the other hand, the result disagrees with the study

of De Boer et al. (2018) found that metacognitive strategy

instruction, which includes ‘regular review and revision’

had long-term effects on student academic performance. The

study found that students who received metacognitive

strategy instruction scored higher on academic assessments

than those who did not, and these effects were still evident

several months after the instruction. By incorporating

practices such as regular review and revision into their

study routines, students were able to enhance their academic

performance significantly. This finding underscores the

importance of not only acquiring metacognitive skills but

also integrating them consistently into one's learning

strategies. By incorporating practices such as regular

review and revision into their study routines, students were

able to enhance their academic performance significantly.

This finding underscores the importance of not only

 65

acquiring metacognitive skills but also integrating them

consistently into one's learning strategies.

However, results of the study contradict with the

findings of Campbell, (2023) that students who were exposed

to 'creative engagement' methods demonstrated higher levels

of academic achievement compared to their counterparts who

experienced traditional teaching methods. By incorporating

creativity into the learning process can lead to improved

educational outcomes which foster active participation and

engagement among students, making learning more enjoyable

and meaningful.

Results of this study refute to the results of

University of South Carolina, (2022) that engaging in

activities such as delivering ‘feedback and revision’ to the

entire class orally or through a shared written document, or

collectively examining sample student work to identify

common themes or apply evaluation criteria, may prove to be

more impactful than individually writing comments on each

student's work. These methods foster a collaborative

learning environment where students can benefit from

collective insights, peer interaction, and shared

understanding, ultimately enhancing comprehension, critical

thinking skills, and overall academic growth. Moreover, such

approaches promote a sense of community and mutual support

 66

among students, encouraging active participation and

facilitating the exchange of diverse perspectives, which are

essential elements in fostering a robust and dynamic

learning experience.

Hence, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is a significant relationship between the top 5

teaching strategies and academic performance of STE students

is hereby rejected.

The no significant relationship between Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Top 5 Teaching Strategies

(top 1, cooperative learning; top 2, differentiated

instruction; top 3, regular review and revision; top 4,

creative engagement; and top 5, feedback and reflection)

implies that the effectiveness of teaching strategies may be

more dependent on the learning strategies employed by

students rather than the specific teaching approaches

utilized by teachers. This suggests that students'

engagement, receptiveness to various learning methods, and

ability to adapt and apply what they've learned might have a

greater impact on their academic performance than the

instructional techniques employed by educators.

Further, regardless of the quality of teaching, if

students are not actively engaged or motivated to learn, the

impact of teaching strategies on their academic performance

 67

may be limited. For instance, even the most innovative and

well-designed teaching methods may fail to yield significant

results if students are not interested or lack the

motivation to participate fully in the learning process.

Moreover, students' receptiveness to various learning

methods is highlighted as a determining factor. Different

students have different learning preferences and styles, and

what works well for one student may not necessarily work for

another.

The outcome of this study contradicts the findings of

Sudin et al., (2021) The results indicated a significant

improvement in mathematics learning outcomes, with an

increase in the number of students achieving minimum mastery

learning percentages across cycles. A relationship between

'cooperative learning' and pedagogical content knowledge is

a classroom action research study focusing on a jigsaw type

cooperative learning model to enhance mathematics learning

outcomes of third-grade elementary school students.

Additionally, the study highlighted the positive impact of

the Jigsaw type cooperative learning model on improving

pedagogical content knowledge and verbal communication

skills among the students.

Conversely, the outcome of this research contradicts

the conclusions of Hall, (2013) ‘differentiated instruction’

 68

was effective for keeping high-ability students challenged

in heterogeneous classrooms. These practices include using

effective classroom management procedures; promoting student

engagement and motivation; assessing student readiness;

responding to learning styles; grouping students for

instruction; and teaching to the student's zone of proximal

development the distance between what a learner can

demonstrate without assistance and what the learner can do

with assistance.

However, the outcome of this research opposes the

conclusions of Nobes, (2019) the ‘regular review and

revision’ teaching strategy requires teachers to be able to

monitor students' understanding and provide feedback on

their progress. This can involve using formative

assessments, such as quizzes and discussions, to assess

students' understanding and identify areas where they need

additional support. It can also involve providing students

with opportunities to apply their knowledge and skills in

different contexts, such as through problem-solving

activities and projects.

On the other side, results of the study refute the

conclusion of Hooker, (2023) and Saad (2019) that the

'creative engagement' teaching strategy, which involves

nurturing students' interest and creative thinking

 69

abilities, has been found to have a positive impact on

student engagement and motivation compared to traditional

teaching methods. This approach can lead to increased

motivation to learn and explore new knowledge, and it can

also influence students' motivational factors, potentially

leading to increased interest in knowledge and know-how.

Teachers who implement creative strategies and leverage

technology in transformative ways are more likely to

perceive beneficial qualities in their students, including

critical thinking, problem-solving, and deep learning of

subject matter.

The result of the study disagrees with the result of

Muhammad (2023) that 'feedback and reflection' practice can

have a positive impact on student achievement. The study

found that teachers who engage in reflective practice are

better able to assess the impact of their teaching methods

on student learning outcomes and adjust their strategies

accordingly by improving their teaching in areas of

classroom activities, lesson planning, behavioral

management, and performance indicators. This suggests that

feedback and reflection can help teachers improve their

pedagogical content knowledge and ultimately enhance student

learning.
 70

Thus, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is significant relationship between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and the top 5 teaching

strategies is hereby rejected.

Relationship among Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge,
Teaching Strategies and Academic
Performance of STE Students

Table 10 shows the relationship among Teaching

Pedagogical Content Knowledge, teaching strategies and

Academic Performance of STE Students.

The result revealed that there is “no significant

relationship” between teaching pedagogical content knowledge

and academic performance of STE students, r = .186, p>0.05.

There is a “no significant relationship” between the

teaching strategies and academic performance of STE

students, r = -.009, p>0.05. There is “no significant

relationship” between teaching pedagogical content knowledge

and the teaching strategies, r = .004, p>0.05.

Table 10

Pearson r Among Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge,

Teaching Strategies, and Academic Performance of STE
Students.

Variables r Sig
Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge
and Academic Performance .186 .064
Teaching Strategies and Academic
Performance -.009 .968
Teaching Pedagogical Content Knowledge .004 .986
 71

and Teaching Strategies

p<0.05 significant @5% alpha level
p>0.05 not significant @5% alpha level

The “no significant relationship” between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and academic performance of

STE students simply implies that the method of teaching

pedagogical content knowledge does not have an impact on the

academic performance of students in STE. In other words,

whether teachers focus more on teaching the content itself

or conveying that content, the overall academic outcomes for

students in these subjects remain similar. The effectiveness

of teaching may not be solely dependent on the specific

pedagogical approach employed. Other factors such as student

engagement, individual learning styles, classroom

environment, and external support systems may also play

significant roles in determining academic performance.

Results of this study contradicts to the findings of

Keller, Neumann, and Fischer (2017) that teacher’s

pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) has a positive impact on

students' academic achievement in physics. This suggests

that teachers who have a deep understanding of the content

they are teaching and how to effectively convey it to

students can have a significant impact on student learning.

In addition to that, based from the result of

Callingham et al., (2016) and Keller et al., (2017). that a

 72

positive effect of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge

on students’ achievement growth, mediated by high-quality

teachers’ instruction (e.g., the use of cognitively

challenging tasks that stimulate students’ mathematical

thinking in the classroom).

Thus, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is no significant relationship between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and academic performance is

hereby rejected.

The “no significant relationship” between teaching

strategies and academic performance of STE students implies

that regardless of the specific teaching methods employed,

the overall academic outcomes in STE subjects remain

relatively consistent. This suggests that factors beyond

instructional techniques may have a greater impact on

academic performance, such as student engagement, prior

knowledge, individual learning styles, and external factors

like socio economic background or access to resources.

Additionally, it indicates that educators have flexibility

in choosing teaching approaches based on their pedagogical

preferences or the needs of their students without

compromising academic achievement within the STE

disciplines. However, it also suggests the need for further

investigation into what specific elements contribute most

 73

significantly to academic success in these subjects, in

order to optimize teaching practices and support student

learning effectively.

The result contradicts to the study published in the

Journal of Educational Technology & Society by Daud, Hashim,

and Othman, (2019) that regular entry students had a

significant difference in academic performance compared to

APEL (Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning) entry

students, with regular entry students having a higher mean

score. These findings suggest that teaching strategies can

have an impact on academic performance, with regular entry

students performing better than APEL entry students. The

study also highlights the importance of meta-cognitive self-

regulation, time and study environment management, effort

regulation, and help-seeking in promoting academic

performance.

Thus, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is no significant relationship between strategies and

academic performance is hereby rejected.

The “no significant relationship” between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and teaching strategies

implies that teachers have flexibility in choosing their

instructional methods, as long as they are effective in

conveying content and facilitating student understanding.

 74

Additionally, it suggests that the focus should be on the

quality of teaching overall rather than solely on specific

pedagogical techniques or content expertise. Furthermore, it

underscores the importance of considering diverse teaching

approaches and adapting them to suit the needs of different

learners and contexts. Effective teaching and encourages

teachers to prioritize student engagement, comprehension,

and mastery of content regardless of the specific

instructional method employed.

Result of this study contradict to the findings of

Cochran, (2013) that teaching strategies, are the practical

applications of pedagogical content knowledge in the

classroom. Effective teaching strategies are based on a deep

understanding of the subject matter and the pedagogical

approaches that best convey that content to students. While

PCK provides the foundation for effective teaching, teaching

strategies are the tools used to implement that knowledge in

the classroom. teachers with strong pedagogical content

knowledge are better able to anticipate and respond to

students’ thinking, leading to more effective instruction.

PCK is also associated with teachers’ ability to design and

implement instructional strategies that are tailored to the

needs of their students.

 75

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that

there is no significant relationship between teaching

pedagogical content knowledge and teaching strategies is

hereby rejected.