Optimizing Lecture Hour Allocation Based on Perceived Topic Difficulty in an Intervention for Calculus Course
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study explores the perceived difficulty of topics in an Intervention for Calculus course among STEM and non-STEM graduates and proposes an instructional hour allocation model based on these perceptions. Grounded in Cognitive Load Theory, the study responds to observed disparities in level of difficulty of each topic in Intervention for Calculus course between student groups. A quantitative-descriptive comparative design was employed using a researcher-developed questionnaire administered to STEM and non-STEM graduates. Results revealed that non-STEM students consistently rated more topics as difficult, with statistically significant differences in overall perceived difficulty (p < 0.05). Topics involving geometry and trigonometry were found to be the most challenging for both groups. Using the average topic difficulty scores, instructional hours were computed thru exponential scaling to amplify small differences. This approach yielded a more differentiated and equitable distribution of instructional time across topics compared to linear scaling. The study highlights the importance of tailoring instruction based on learner background and perceived difficulty to avoid cognitive overload and improve educational outcomes, particularly for underprepared learners. The proposed model ensures that instructional design aligns with student needs, contributing to more effective delivery of foundational concepts in calculus.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
A. R. Fernando, J. Retumban, R. Tolentino, A. Alzona, F. Santos and M. Taguba, "Level of preparedness of STEM senior high school graduates in taking up engineering program: a Philippine setting," 2019 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Education (TALE), Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 2019, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/TALE48000.2019.9225858
Alinea, Jess Mark L.; Dapito, Raymond E.; Espinar, Zhen M.; and Raca, Mark Melvin P. (2022) "Readiness in mathematics of freshmen engineering students in a State University," U.P. Los Baños Journal: Vol. 20, Article 4. https://www.ukdr.uplb.edu.ph/uplb-journal/vol20/iss2/4
Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194059
Baker, D., Fabrega, M., Galindo, C., & Mishook, J. (2004). Class time and student learning. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Retrieved March 3, 2025 from https://sedl.org/txcc/resources/briefs/number6/
Beilock, S. L., & Maloney, E. A. (2015). Math anxiety: A factor in math achievement not to be ignored. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215601438
Bhandari, P. (2023). Quantitative research designs: Descriptive, correlational, quasi-experimental & experimental. Scribbr. Retrieved February 17, 2025, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/quantitative-research/
Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2020). Desirable difficulties in theory and practice. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(4), 475–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.09.003
Boschen, Jessica (2025). What I Have Learned Teaching . 16 ways to differentiate math instruction in the classroom. [Web Article]. Retrieved March 18, 2025 from https://whatihavelearnedteaching.com/ways-to-differentiate-math-instruction/
Chamberlin, M., & Powers, S. (2010). Differentiated instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119–145. Retrieved via Frontiers in Psychology: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02366/full
Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E., & Sturman, E. D. (2013). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. https://www.mheducation.co.uk/ebook-psychological-testing-and-assessment-9780077164027-emea
Commission on Higher Education (CHED) Memorandum Order No. 105, Series of 2017. Policy on the Admission of Senior High School Graduates to the Higher Education Institutions. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://ched.gov.ph/2017-ched-memorandum-orders/
de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought. Instr Sci 38, 105–134 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9110-0
Fang, B. (2013). Using technology to increase quality time on task. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/9/using-technology-to-increase-quality-time-on-task
Furner, J. M., & Berman, B. T. (2003). Math anxiety: Overcoming a major obstacle to the improvement of student math performance. Childhood Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED497258.pdf
Gamboa, Rey (2023). Senior high school years wasted? The Philippine Star. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from https://tinyurl.com/y73e6kjk
Gheyssens, E., Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K. (2023). Differentiated Instruction as an Approach to Establish Effective Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms. In: Maulana, R., Helms-Lorenz, M., Klassen, R.M. (eds) Effective Teaching Around the World . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31678-4_30
Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129
Lightweis, S. (2013). College success: A fresh look at differentiated instruction and other student‑centered strategies. College Quarterly, 16(3), 1–15. Retrieved March 18, 2025, from https://collegequarterly.ca/2013-vol16-num03-summer/lightweis.html
McCombes, S. (2022). Descriptive research designs: The observational method. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/descriptive-research/
McKee, A. (2025). Euler’s Number (e) Explained: Its Significance and Applications. Datacamp.com; DataCamp. [Web Article]. Retrieved March 12, 2025, from https://www.datacamp.com/tutorial/eulers-number
Molina, M. G. (2019). Comparison of the calculus 1 performance of engineering students from STEM and non-STEM SHS strands. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 3(2), 102–123. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fb0a/f44627e192dffc41ab2443360cfaee270b07.pdf
Perante, Wenceslao (2022). Mathematical Readiness of Freshmen Engineering Students (K-12 2020 Graduates) in Eastern Visayas in the Philippines. Asian Journal of University Education. 18. 191. 10.24191/ajue.v18i1.17187. https://tinyurl.com/3x2mhpe5
St Laurent, L., Bressoud, D., & Rasmussen, C. (2014). Student perceptions of pedagogy and associated persistence in calculus. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 46(4), 653–663. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11858-014-0577-z
Statsig (2025). Linear vs. exponential growth: which impacts experiments more? Statsig.com. [Web Article]. Retrieved March 2025, from https://www.statsig.com/perspectives/linear-vs-exponential-growth
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Taherdoost, H. (2016). Validity and reliability of the research instrument: How to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 5(3), 28–36. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319998004
Tan, R. G., & Dejoras, A. W. (2019). Comparing problem-solving ability of STEM and non-STEM entrants to Bachelor of Science in Mathematics Education program. Retrieved March 18, 2025, from https://www.academia.edu/83709389/
UNICEF. (2023). SDG Goal 4: Quality education. https://data.unicef.org/sdgs/goal-4-quality-education/
United Nations. (2015). Sustainable Development Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal4
Wieman, C., & Gilbert, S. (2014). The teaching practices inventory: A new tool for characterizing college and university teaching in mathematics and science. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 552–569. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-02-0023