ABSTRACT

This study was entitled “The Performance of the Special Science Education Program of Secondary Schools in the Division of Rizal”. This was conducted purposively at
secondary schools in the Division of Rizal in three after the implementation SSEP from 2015-2016, 2016-2017 and 2017-2018.
The researcher utilized school achievement test results using mean percentage scores from the core subjects such as Filipino, English, Science, Mathematics and Araling Panlipunan.
Using descriptive type of research, it was revealed that Teresa National High School have gave much greater attention on the special science education program implementation,
utilized effective instructional materials related to the needs of the students in order to achieve the criteria of special science education program.
It was found out that Filipino subject have higher MPS than Mathematics. It was depicted that not all subject areas met the Division target of 75.00.
It was revealed that there is no significant difference on the performance of the special science education program of secondary schools in the Division of Rizal.
It implies that all secondary schools have the same educational practices and utilized the same learning materials which were outdated on the standard criteria of the
special science education program.
The results recommended the extensive challenges of developing learning materials relative to special science education program visibly needed as much. The
performance of secondary schools in the core subjects of special science education program has been noted for students learning needs, and these students were also falling short
in Filipino, English, Science, Mathematics and Araling Panlipunan subjects. The school achievement test of secondary schools with special science education program denoted that
there is an achievement gap among students across related science education.

INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN

Science is frequently associated with the memorization of facts or complex chemical equations that are
thought to be best left in the hands of professionals. But the reality is that scientific inquiry is a process that even
an infant can and does participate in. Students are natural scientists whom always seek to understand the
world, through observation and experience, and are naturally predisposed to question and wonder. Commonly
participated in scientific inquiry by pulling up the process of finding out and a system for organizing and
reporting discoveries.
Descriptive Method.
As defined by Gays reiterated by Sevilla, et al (1976) descriptive
Special Science Education Program differs significantly from the existing movements in K-12 curriculum, in
research involves collection of data in order to test hypothesis or to
that it approaches science from a critical perspective and acknowledges that teaching science is inherently
answer questions concerning the current status of the subject of the
political. When student learning is geared toward what can be easily tested as it tends to be in high school
study. According to Travers, as cited by Sevilla, et al., (1978), the primary
science curricula, discrete, testable knowledge is privileged and there is no motivation to encourage students
aim of employing this method is to describe the nature of a situation as it
to be active, critical thinkers. Proposals have shied away from encouraging students to develop a critical
exists at the time of the study and to explore the causes of a particular
understanding in all core subject areas such as Filipino, English, Science, Mathematics and Araling Panlipunan
phenomenon.
have instead focused on discrete, testable content and understandings of what special science education is.
In this regard, the researcher, purposively conducted this study to identify the performance of the special
science education program of secondary schools in the Division of Rizal which aimed to determine the mean
percentage scores of the secondary schools for last three years and identify what possible needs could give the
Division for further improvements of the curriculum, teachers and the school itself.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Curriculum Year
Name of School
2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-20

1 Baras National High School 64.87 67.60 75.11

2. Bernardo F. San Juan National High School 49.66 53.88 54.04

3. Don Jose Ynares Sr. Memorial National High 65.62 63.46 70.13
School

RESEARCH QUESTION(S) 4. F.P. Felix Memorial National High School 39.77 42.29 40.96

5. Janosa National High School 59.95 63.01 55.46

This research entitled “The Performance of the Special Science Education 6. Morong National High School 68.88 72.97 76.71

Program of Secondary Schools in the Division of Rizal”. 7. San Mateo National High School 48.22 50.86 47.02

8. Tanay National High School 58.75 68.90 65.31

Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions; 9. JalaJala National High School 61.60 60.38 64.16

1. What is the performance of the Special Science Education Program of

10. General Licerio Geronimo Memorial National 52.61 51.07 56.05
High School

Secondary Schools in the terms of Curriculum Year; 11.

12.
Teresa National High School

Taytay National High School

81.05

45.73
71.85

63.30
78.32

60.17

1.1 2015-2016;
1.2 2016-2017; and The Significant Difference of Performance on the
Table 3 Special Science Education Program Presents the performance on the Special
1.3 2017-2018? of Secondary Schools in Terms of Subjects Areas Science Education Program of
2. What is the performance of the Special Science Education Program of Respect to Curriculum Year Secondary Schools in School
Secondary Schools in terms of different learning areas; Source
Achievement Test in terms of Subject
Verbal
2.1 Filipino; of SS Df MS F-value P-value F-Crit Ho
Interpretation
areas with respect to curriculum year.
2.2 English; Variation Performance on the Special Science Education
2.3 Science: Between Not Figure 2
Program of Secondary Schools in Terms of Subjects
32.65687 2 16.32843 1.18714 0.348685 4.256495 Accepted Areas with Respect to Curriculum Year
2.4 Mathematics; and Groups Significant

2.5 Araling Panlipunan Within

123.7898 9 13.75443
Groups
3. Is there a significant difference on the performance of the Special
Science Education Program of Secondary Schools in terms of curriculum years Total 156.4467 11
with respect to different learning areas?

Moreover, as shown in the tables, there is

REFERENCESS
Gee, J.P. and Levine, M.H.,”Welcome to our
Virtual Worlds”, Educational Leadership Vol. 66
No. 6 pp. 49 March, 2009
Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E., ”How to Design
and Evaluate Research in Education Second
Edition”,McGraw- Hill, Inc.1994
no significant difference on the
performance of the special science
education program of secondary schools in
the Division of Rizal.
CONCLUSION
It has been observed also that general and special educators carry much of the initial responsibility for
providing meaningful education to students in special science education program. However, these
educators often reported with outdated skill to provide effective programming for these students.
Currently, there was a serious shortage of qualified special science education teachers to work with
students in special science education program.