Cometa research

7

CHAPTER I

PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction
Accounting is the primary language of today's businesses but its fundamentals are part of everyday life. It is used to process, integrate, and disseminate business information. Applied personally, we account for our assets – cash, receivables, land, vehicles and the like. We monitor our liabilities and check on our equity. Sometimes, we unconsciously use the principle of value received and value parted or the debit – credit principle like in managing shopping activities and/or budgeting. Wherever there is monetary value involved, accounting should take part. This could be the same logical reason why most prospectuses include accounting fundamentals or principles as part of the course requirement.
Accounting requires analytical thinking. According to Ong (2008), accounting is a systematic process of measuring and reporting relevant financial information about the activities of an economic organization or unit. The process includes recording the transactions chronologically; classifying each transaction into three categories – assets, liabilities, and equity; summarizing with the use of financial statements; and interpreting the results of operation.In accounting, the math usually isn't worse than multiplication. But accounting isn't about math — it's about concepts, and some are confusing ones particularly to those with no related background. Accounting has simple and surprisingly elegant ways to track a business (Alzad, 2009).
It is well known that people have different learning styles as well as varied level of critical thinking. While others could easily learn by keen observation and understand by mere reading, others needed more tools and different approaches to facilitate analysis. Several studies have been developed on learning style of accounting and business students like Kolb's learning style model. In an article by Chapman (2006) this interpretation is quoted:
Kolb explains that different people naturally prefer a certain single different learning style. Various factors influence a person's preferred style: notably in his experiential learning theory model (ELT) Kolb defined three stages of a person's development, and suggests that our propensity to reconcile and successfully integrate the different learning styles improves as we mature through our development stages. Whatever influences the choice of style, the learning style preference itself is actually the product of two pairs of variables, or two separate 'choices' that we make, which Kolb presented as lines of axis, each with 'conflicting' modes at either end:
Concrete Experience - CE (feeling) -----V-----Abstract Conceptualization - AC (thinking)
Active Experimentation - AE (doing)-----V----- Reflective Observation - RO (watching)

Teaching is a very challenging and rewarding profession. Some teachers have more success than other because they have developed certain teaching skills that motivate students to learn, help students to stay focused, and provide students with self-learning skills. The best approach for an instructor to take is to address a variety of learning styles with their teaching plan. It is also helpful to encourage students to understand their preferred learning style. Modern accounting teachers must strive to achieve a balance between the extensive content and the need for new emphasis on using accounting information in decision-making, developing critical thinking skills, enhancing communication skills, and working in groups.
New methodology has enhanced emphasis on critical thinking, analysis, and communication skills. With access to traditional methods in business education classes becoming increasingly rare, new teachers are often left to their own resources to plan curriculum and instruction. In an empirical research conducted by Riccio and Sakata (Teaching – Learning Methods in Accounting Education) in Brazil, it is recognized that a teaching method can influence in the development of several abilities such as: cooperation, leadership, responsibility, independence, self-confidence, and decision-making capability. Therefore, the goal of an educator should not stop in subject delivery but must extend to the improvement of personal and professional well-being of the students. The challenge that lies between choosing a method that is either teacher-focused or learner-focused will depend on whether students are traditional learners or self-organized learners.
Basically teaching must includetwo major components sending and receiving information. In teaching accounting fundamentals, information retention and analysis is always a top concern for teachers and a must for learners because each principle will be carried all throughout the process, the basics will always be the basis of foregoing transactions. A teacher-focused environment or the traditional approach is a simple "chalk to talk" scenario, where one way flow of information is obvious. The teacher controls the instructional process; content is delivered to the entire class with emphasis on factual knowledge and the students act as a passive recipient of information. This is said to be applicable to traditional learners who gain information through transmission and memorization. While a learner-focused environment encourages students to actively participate in the learning process while the teacher acts as a discussion facilitator. This teaching method is said to retain information more effectively than traditional teaching since the students are actively part of the learning process yet is applicable to self-organized learners who are more cognitive and motivated (Seifried, 2008).
Traditional educationalapproaches have resulted in a mismatch between what is taught to the students and what the industry needs (Damodharan&Rengarajan, Innovative Methods of Teaching) yet, by this approach the teacher has more control over the information that could be translated into more concise check of understanding.This study aims to evaluate a teaching strategy developed to improve the performance of Associate in Computer Technology (ACT) first year students of Sta. Teresa College, Bauan, Batangas. The alarming results of the students' midterm grade in accounting prompted the researcher to horde this action research. It was noted that 18 out of 40 students in the class acquired a failing midterm grade in their CSFE 123 (accounting principles/fundamentals) subject with a very wide spread of range from 59% - 96% not to mention the results of the midterm exam wherein 29 students failed with 53%-93% grade range. The students are less self-initiated, would come to class unprepared to constructive discussions, and are prone to forget even the most previous topics discussed. They also took a long time analyzing business transactions and could barely classify account titles and entries. The researcher believes that the students need a teaching approach that is not based on constructivism yet could also instill information retention and critical analysis for them to acquire a passing final grade. The target is to lessen the number of failed students by at least 40%, achieve a higher final grade than the midterm grade and narrow the spread of range. Thus, this action research is conducted.

Statement of the Problem
This study would like to prove that the developed strategy (traditional teaching method through problem-solving approach and enhanced learning tool) in teaching accounting fundamentals will help improve the final grade of ACT I students in Sta. Teresa College, Bauan, Batangas for the 2nd semester of the academic year 2009 - 2010.
Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions:
What are the preferences of the participants in terms of:
subject;
learning style in accounting; and
learning tool in accounting?
Is there a significant relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under the developed teaching strategy?
Are there significant differences between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy?
Are there significant differences between the pre-test and post-test of ACT I students conducted in semi-final and final period?
What isthe effect of the developed teaching strategy to the class performance of ACT I students in CSFE 123?
Hypotheses
There is no significant relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy.
There is no significant difference between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy.
There is no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test of ACT I students conducted in semi-final and final period.

Subject of the Study
This study involved 34 ACT first year students enrolled in CSFE 123 during 2nd semester of academic year 2009-2010 in Sta. Teresa College in the District of Bauan. The class has a total population of 42 ACT I students, 2 of which dropped from the subject while 6 students failed to complete the evaluation process of this action research. The group is composed of 7 boys and 27 girls, ranging from 16-24 years old. Majority of the sample, which is 24 out of 34, have no accounting background or no previous accounting subjects taken in high school.
Table 1 presents the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test (OLSAT) results of the participants taken before admission to Sta. Teresa College.
Table 1
OLSAT Result of the Participants
Classification
Frequency
Percentage
High Average
1
3
Middle Average
1
3
Low Average
3
9
Below Average
12
35
Low
12
35
Very Low
5
15
Total
34
100

Based on the above table, majority of the participants of the study acquired below average (35%) and low (35%) classification based on Otis-Lennon School Ability Test (OLSAT).There are 5 out of the 34 participants or 15% who gained very low classification, 9% fall under low average, 3% each for high average and middle average classifications. Table 2 shows the score equivalent of the aforementioned classifications.
Table 2
OLSAT Score Interpretation
Score
Interpretation
97-99
Very Superior
90-96
Superior
75-89
Above Average
60-74
High Average
40-59
Middle Average
25-39
Low Average
10-24
Below Average
4-9
Low
1-3
Very Low

The OLSAT, published by Harcourt Assessment, Inc. — a subsidiary of Pearson plc —is used to measure abstract thinking and reasoning capabilities (Kiff, 2009).The five groups of material which are tested are Verbal Comprehension, Verbal Reasoning, Pictorial Reasoning, Figural Reasoning, and Quantitative Reasoning. At each level the items are ordered in regards to specific criteria.By assessing students' thinking skills, the OLSAT provides an understanding of a student's relative strengths and weaknesses in performing a variety of reasoning tasks. This information allows educators to design educational programs that will enhance students' strengths while supporting their learning needs.


Conceptual Paradigm
Students' Performance in CSFE123 Class
Students' Performance in CSFE123 Class


Information RetentionAnalytic Skills
Information Retention

Analytic Skills


Teaching Strategy
Teaching Strategy


Students' Preferences
Students' Preferences


The teaching strategy must coincide with the students' preferences to facilitate information retention and critical analysis – the two factors being considered important in providing deeper understanding of accounting fundamentals. The success of the teaching strategy may be assessed by the students, performance in the class particularly the semi-final and final period, the coverage of the action research.










CHAPTER II

RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURE
This chapter discussed the method used in conducting the study, a clear description of the procedures used in gathering the data and the tools for statistical treatment.

Research Design
Action research is a practical approach to professional inquiry in any social situation. The examples in this component relate to education and are therefore of particular relevance to teachers or lecturers engaged in their daily contact with children or students (Adams, 2006). In this study, the researcher used non-experimental quantitative research or the descriptive design and the aim is to determine the relationship between one thing (an independent variable) and another (a dependent or outcome variable) in a population.
Quantitative research is all about quantifying the relationships between variables. Variables are the things being measured on the subject(s) of the study. Variables can represent subject characteristics (e.g. weight, height, sex), the things they are really interested in (e.g. athletic performance, rate or injury, physiological, psychological or sociological variables), and variables representing the timing of measurements and nature of any treatments subjects receive (e.g. before and after a real drug or a sham drug). To quantify the relationships between these variables, we use values of effect statistics such as the correlation coefficient, the difference between means of something in two groups, or the relative frequency of something in two groups(Hopkins, 2000).
Descriptive statistics utilize data collection and analysis techniques that yield reports concerning the measures of central tendency, variation, and correlation. The combination of its characteristic summary and co relational statistics, along with its focus on specific types of research questions, methods, and outcomes is what distinguishes descriptive research from other research types.Three main purposes of research are to describe, explain, and validate findings. Description emerges following creative exploration, and serves to organize the findings in order to fit them with explanations, and then test or validate those explanations.

Data Gathering Instrument
The researcher used three methods in gathering information: interview, observation, and analysis of students' work (pre-test, series of quiz, and post-test).
Interview.Random semi-structured interviews were conducted at the course of the study. Semi-structured random interviewsare interviews which have some pre-set questions, but allow more scope for open-ended answers. (Hannan, 2007).Semi-structured interviews are conducted with a fairly open framework which allow for focused, conversational, two-way communication. They can be used both to give and receive information.
Observation. Hannan also mentioned that observational techniques are an important aspect of many action research studies and of case studies whether undertaken by insiders or outsiders.In line with the saying "what people say they believe and say that they do are often contradicted by their behavior", the researcher used participatory observation to monitor class behavior and assess students' responses to prepared lectures and exercises. Observation can be a powerful check against what people report about themselvesduring interviews
Analysis of Students' Work.A series of tests were done to analyze students' performance, monitor improvement and to further validate effectiveness of the teaching strategy. A pre-test was given to students before the strategy was implemented and post-test were done after the plan of action was completed or applied. Quizzes are given during the process: given after an hour of lecture and inquiries and an hour of problem-solving or seatwork plus home work. The purpose of the aforementioned flow of activities is familiarity that could help in information retention and critical analysis.

Data Gathering Procedure
The realization of the problem and the goal to improve teaching skills prompted the researcher to conduct this action research. Aseries of online readings associated withlearning style and teaching methods were conducted by the researcher to obtain a concrete basis for the plan of action to be implemented.
Then the researcher did random semi-structured interviews. The purpose of the interview was to know the profile and preferences of the students. Some data were gathered from the guidance through an unwritten authority given by the dean of the college department.The teaching strategy was applied for 10 hours per period (semi-final and final) and the researcher continuously observe and noted the behavior of students in times of lectures and problem-solving activities. Informal inquiries to co-faculties were also made to make sure thatconclusions were made beyond the subjective and impressionistic view as possible.
. The researcher also conducted a pre-test, 3 quizzes, and a post-test for two periods – semi-final and final. The same set of transactions was given during the pre-test and post-test (see Appendix 1 and 2) to determine if there will be improvement in the students' performance after the teaching strategy was applied. On the other hand, 3 different sets of transactions were given as quizzes per period (see Appendix 3 and 4) to monitor if there will be an increase in students' performance per subtopic. Checking is per item and scoring percentage is based on the formula:
Score x 50 + 50
Total items

Statistical Treatment
Tabulated responses and test results were analyzed using the following statistical tools:
Percentage. This was used to determine the magnitude of the frequency in relation to the whole or total responses.
% = F / N * 100
Weighted Mean. This was used to determine the typicality of the participants test results using a weighted mean where instead of each of the data points contributing equally to the final average, some data points contribute more than others.
Measure of central tendency. This measure that tells where the middle of a bunch of data lies. This study will use the most common measure of central tendency – the mean.
Measure of variability. Variability refers to how "spread out" a group of scores is.The terms variability, refer to how spread out a distribution is. In this study, standard deviation will measure the variability of the mid-term and final grades.
Pearson r.This formula was used to determine the level of relationship between test results (Broto, 2007).
rxy = N xy – (x) (y)
[(N x2) – (x)2] [(N (y2) – (y)2]
T-test for Correlated Samples. This is another parametric test applied to one group of samples in the evaluation of a certain program or treatment. The test is used to find out if a difference exists between the before and after means.
t = D
D2– ( D)2
n
n(n-1)

Plan of Action
The goal of this action research is to at least lessen the number of failed students by at least 40%. In doing so the researcher decided to develop a teaching strategy that will meet the participants' preferences while enhancing participants' ability to retain information and stimulate analysis skills.
The researcher used constructivist teaching approach during preliminary and mid-term periods with the objective that the students will learn by giving them the training to take initiative for their own learning experiences.After a brief lecture and giving handouts, studentsare encouraged to work primarily in groups where learning and knowledge are interactive and dynamic. They were allowed to collaborate and exchange ideas.Thus, the teacher's main focus is on guiding students by asking questions that will lead them to develop their own analysis on the subject. Yet, the midterm grades prove the inapplicability of this teaching strategy to participants. Situations showing lack of initiative on the part of the students and lack of self-organization added to problem. All of these entice the researcher's instinct to implement tentative solution – a shift in teaching strategy.
Traditional teaching method through problem-solving technique and enhancing learning tool will be employed in the semi-final and final periods. The topics for semi-final will be adjusting entries, dissected into subtopics namely: prepaid, deferrals, accruals, bad debts, and adjusting for depreciation expense while topics for final period will be worksheet from trial balance, adjustments, adjusted balance, income statement, and balance sheet. For each topic, the chalk to talk method will be applied.
Lectures will be carefully dissected and explained in layman's term to facilitate better understanding, more often Filipino translation of transactions are needed. The problem-solving technique aims to familiarize students to the common business scenarios. Participants will be givenvarious set of transactions were given to students as seat works, assignments, and problem set. The learning tool will form part of the strategy with the belief that it would be easier for students if they will be guided by limited choices.
CHAPTER III

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the data, analysis and interpretation of the data gathered based on statistical treatment.

Participants' Preferences
The preferences of the participants are presented below according to subject, learning style, learning tool.
1.1 Subject. Table 3 presents the subject preference of the participants with frequency distribution and respective percentage.
Table 3
Subject Preference of the Participants
Subject
Frequency
Percentage
Computer Programming
8
24
Social Science
9
26
Filipino
1
3
English
3
9
Discrete Math
8
24
Accounting
5
15
Total
34
100

Based on the above table, the top 3 most preferred subjects of the participants are Social Science, Computer Programming, and Discrete Math. Asked why they prefer the said subject, the common answers were: Social Science is memorization; Computer programming is application; and Discrete Math is guided by formula(s). This was one of the factors considered by the researcher in developing the teaching method for the group.


1.2Learning Style in Accounting. Table 4 presents the participants' learning style in CFSE 123 based on the initial semi-structured interview conducted.
Table 4
Preferred Learning Stylein Accounting
Learning Style
Frequency
Percentage
Self study
4
12
Group discussion
7
21
Teacher's Lecture
11
32
Problem-solving
12
35
Total
34
100

As indicated in the table, 35% or 12out of the 34 students-participants prefer problem solving when it comes to style of learning. On a follow up interview, these students prefer longer time in analyzing business transactions and they appreciate seat works and assignments to help them in transaction analysis. They also wanted the transactions to be translated in Filipino to provide better understanding.
On the other hand, 32% or 11 out of 34 prefer teacher's lecture and claim that they can easily understand if information was all provided by the teacher. They also prefer a Filipino translation of accounting terms ad principles. Group discussion placed the 3rdpreferred learning style and all 7participants said that they learn more when their classmates explain the topic to them and they want to work in groups rather than work alone when dealing with accounting. Only 12% of the students prefer self-study. These students claimed that they learn more when they read and solve on their own.




1.3Learning Tool in Accounting. Table 5 presents the preferred learning tool of ACT I students who are the subject of this action research.
Table 5
Preferred Learning Toolin Accounting
Learning Tool
Frequency
Percentage
Handouts
6
18%
Pro forma entries
20
59%
Transaction analysis
8
24%
Total
34
100%

As seen in Table5, 59% of ACT I students-participants prefer pro-forma entries as their learning tool. Pro forma entries are a group of pre set entries that serves as a model in make accounting entries. One of the problems raised by the participants is with deciding how to make an entry per transaction; they have a hard time choosing the correct entry particularly when there are too many account titles to choose from.When students have varying classification of a transaction, pro forma entries provide them with structured choices. This proves that the participants needed a structured guide in analyzing business transactions; they said that it's easy for them when they are aided by index cards with pro forma entries to choose from.
Transaction Analysis is the process of reconciling the differences made to each side of the equation (Assets = Liabilities + Owner's Equity) with each financial transaction occurs. Only 24% of the participants prefer this learning tool because most of them said that it is oftentimes confusing particularly the income and expense concept much more when it is applied to adjusting entries. The preference to handouts also boils down to the confusing part.
From the findings above regarding students'-participants' preferences, the teacher-researcher developed a teaching strategy which includes using traditional teaching method through problem-solving technique, and enhancing learning tool starting from the semi-final period to the final period. The effectiveness of the strategy was determined by using Pearson r and t-test.

Relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under the developed teaching strategy
The magnitude and direction of the association between two variables are tested to prove relationship. The magnitude is the strength of the correlation. The closer the correlation is to either +1 or -1, the stronger the correlation. If the correlation is 0 or very close to zero, there is no association between the two variables. The direction of the correlation tells how the two variables are related. If the correlation is positive, the two variables have a positive relationship (as one increases, the other also increases). If the correlation is negative, the two variables have a negative relationship (as one increases, the other decreases) (Schloesser, 2000).
Table 6
Relationship between Weighted Mean of the Quizzes in
Semi-Final and Final period
Test of Relationship
df
Pearson r-value
Critical Value
Decision
Verbal Interpretation
Weighted Mean of Quizzes in Semifinal and Final Period
32
0.6172
0.3395
Reject Ho
Significant

Based on the presentation in Table 6, the Pearson-r computed value is greater than the critical value, which is 0.6171> 0.3395thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes insemifinal and final periods. It implies that as the weighted mean in semi-final increases, the weighted mean of quizzes in final exam increases too thus showing improvement in the performance of the students in CSFE 123 using the developed teaching strategy.

Differences between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy
The t-test for correlated samples is used to find out if a difference exists between the semi-final and final periods weighted means. If there is a difference then the treatment or intervention is effective. However, if there is no significant difference then the treatment is not effective.
Table 7
Differences between Weighted Mean of the Quizzes in
Semi-final and Final period
Test of Difference
df
t-value
Critical Value
Decision
Verbal Interpretation
Weighted Mean of Quizzes in Semifinal and Final Period
33
6.4100
1.9600
Reject Ho
Significant

Based on the above, the t-computed value is greater than the critical value, which is 6.4139 > 1.960thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant difference between weighted mean of the quizzes insemifinal and final periods. It implies that the weighted mean in semi-final period is significantly different from the weighted mean of quizzes in final exam.It supports the result from Table 6showing improvement in the performance of the students - participants using the traditional teaching method through problem-solving technique and enhanced learning tool.


Differences between the pre-test and post-test of ACT I students conducted in semi-final and final period
Tests are conducted before and after application or implementation of teaching strategy. The pre-test and post-test results are tested for significant difference to determine if the treatment or intervention is effective.
Table 8
Differences between Pre-test and Post-test
Test of Difference
df
t-value
Critical Value
Decision
Verbal Interpretation
Pre-test and Post-test semi-final period
33
5.8276
2.9600
Reject Ho
Significant
Pre-test and Post-test final period
33
9.4402
3.9600
Reject Ho
Significant

It can be gleaned in Table 8 that the t-computed value for pre-test and post-testin semi-final period is greater than the t-critical value 5.8276>2.9600 also the t-computed value of 9.4402 is greater than t-critical value 3.9600at .05 level of significance with 33 degrees of freedom forfinal period.The significant difference between pre-test and post-test implies improvement in the performance of students after implementation of teaching strategy.
The mean of the post-test is higher than the mean of the pre-test.The null hypothesis is rejected for both periods. It can be verified also in the standard deviation of the post-test, which is lower than the standard deviation of the pre-test 10.3604 vs. 12.1078 in semi-final and 8.3928 vs. 10.8802 in final. Lower standard deviation means better students' performance.



Effect of the developed teaching strategy to the final grade of ACT I students
The target of developing a teaching strategy for ACT I students taking CSFE 123 is to at least lessen the number of failed students by at least 40%, achieve a higher final grade than the midterm grade and narrow the spread of range.
Table 9
Comparison of Mid-term and Final Grade
Measures of Central Tendency and Variability
Mid-term Grade
Final Grade
Mean
75.50
79.82
Variance
72.3788
61.4225
Standard Deviation
8.5076
7.8372

The mean of a data set is simply the arithmetic average of the values in the set, obtained by summing the values and dividing by the number of values.The variance of a data set is the arithmetic average of the squared differences between the values and the mean while standard deviation is the square root of the variance. The mean of the mid-term grades(75.50) is lower than the mean of the final grades (79.82).The variance of the mid-term gradesis 72.3788, while only 61.4225 in the final. The standard deviation of the mid-term grades is higher than the standard deviation of the final grades8.5076 vs. 7.8372. Lower standard deviation means that there is improvement in the students' final grade.
More specifically, the 18 out of 40 failed grades in the mid-term were brought down to 10 or 45% less in the final.The spread of range didn't narrow that much from 59%-96% to 63%-97% (see Appendix 5) for those who completed the program yet the goal was still achieved by 3 notch narrower.By assessment, 27 students out of the 34 participants acquired a higher final grade than the mid-term from 1point-15points grade increase.
Furthermore, development is the main point of this study. Here, the teacher develops the subject matter in a manner that helps the students achieve the desired learning outcomes. The teachers' teaching strategy plays a very important role in the learning of the students.Participants were observed to be more appreciative of the traditional teaching method than the constructivist method. They can analyze faster if they are given detailed explanation and are fed up by the same the information. Students also noted that repetition helps them in information retention thus stimulating recall.






























CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions ans recommendations of the study.

Summary
This study was conducted to prove that developing traditional teaching method through problem-solving approach and enhanced learning tool in teaching accounting fundamentals will help improve the final grade of ACT I students in Sta. Teresa College, Bauan, Batangas for the 2nd semester of the academic year 2009 - 2010.
Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions:
What are the preferences of the participants in terms of:
subject;
learning style in accounting; and
learning tool in accounting?
Is there a significant relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under the developed teaching strategy?
Are there significant differences between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy?
Are there significant differences between the pre-test and post-test of ACT I students conducted in semi-final and final period?
What is the effect of the developed teaching strategy to the class performance of ACT I students in CSFE 123?
For an in-depth analysis of data, the study tested the following null hypotheses.
There is no significant relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy.
There is no significant difference between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy.
There is no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test of ACT I students conducted in semi-final and final period.

Findings of the Study
Participants' Preferences
The preferences of the participants are classified according to subject, learning style, learning tool.
1.1 Subject. The top 3 most preferred subjects of the participants are Social Science, Computer Programming, and Discrete Math. Asked why they prefer the said subject, the common answers were: Social Science is memorization; Computer programming is application; and Discrete Math is guided by formula(s).
1.2 Learning Style in Accounting. 35% or 12 out of the 34 students-participants prefer problem solving when it comes to style of learning, 32% or 11 out of 34 prefer teacher's lecture and claim that they can easily understand if information is provided by the teacher. Only 12% of the students prefer self-study.
1.3 Learning Tool in Accounting. 59% of ACT I students-participants prefer pro-forma entries as their learning tool. Only 24% of the participants prefer problem-solving. Preference to handouts (18%) boils down to the confusing part.

Relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under the developed teaching strategy
The Pearson-r computed value is greater than the critical value, which is 0.6171> 0.3395 thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant relationship between weighted mean of the quizzes in semifinal and final periods.

Differences between weighted mean of the quizzes in semi-final and final period under a developed teaching strategy
The t-computed value is greater than the critical value, which is 6.4139 > 1.960 thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant difference between weighted mean of the quizzes in semifinal and final periods. It implies that the weighted mean in semi-final period is significantly different from the weighted mean of quizzes in final exam. It supports the result showing improvement in the performance of the students - participants using the traditional teaching method through problem-solving technique, and enhancing learning tool.

Differences between the pre-test and post-test of ACT I students conducted in semi-final and final period
Tests are conducted before and after application or implementation of teaching strategy. The t-computed value for pre-test and post-test in semi-final period is greater than the t-critical value 5.8276 > 2.9600 also the t-computed value of 9.4402 is greater than t-critical value 3.9600 at .05 level of significance with 33 degrees of freedom for final period. The significant difference between pre-test and post-test implies improvement in the performance of students after implementation of traditional teaching strategy.

Effect of the developed teaching strategy to the final grade of ACT I students
There is improvement in the final grade of participants compared the students mid-term grade.The 18 out of 40 failed grades in the mid-term were brought down to 10 or 45% less in the final. The spread of range didn't narrow that much from 59% - 96% to 63% - 97% for those who completed the program yet the goal was still achieved because the results narrowed by 3 notch. By assessment, 27 students out of the 34 participants acquired a higher final grade than the mid-term from 1point - 15points grade increase.
The mean of the mid-term grades (75.50) is lower than the mean of the final grades (79.82). The variance of the mid-term grades is 72.3788, while only 61.4225 in the final. The standard deviation of the mid-term grades is higher than the standard deviation of the final grades 8.5076 vs. 7.8372. Lower standard deviation means that there is improvement in the students' final grade.

Conclusions
Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were made:
The participants of this study prefer subjects that are either memorization, application, and/or guided by formula(s).
Majority of the students' prefer problem solving in learning accounting fundamentals.
Pro-forma entries is the most preferred learning tool by ACT I students.
Under the traditional teaching method, quiz results shows significant improvement both in semi-final and final periods.
There is improvement in the performance of students after implementation of traditional teaching strategy as implied by thepre-test and post-test results.
Traditional teaching method through problem-solving approach with enhanced learning tool is an effective strategy in teaching CSFE 123 to ACT I students for the covered period.

Recommendations
From the findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations are given:
Teaching method must be adjusted based on students' learning style and preferences.
Teachers should design a motivation program that should appeal to each student personally and stimulate their desire to learn the subject and be attentive in class discussions.
Lectures may be combined with other teaching methods to give added meaning and direction.
Either in giving lectures, facilitating discussions, and problem-solving activities, simple rather than complex words should be used whenever possible.
Teachers' efforts need to be undertaken to stimulate analysis and promote information retention to improve the academic performance in accounting subjects but students also need to exert effort in studying. The teacher-student relationship should be a two-way street.
This study may be replicated using a different sample or applied to different subject.




















BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books

Broto, A. S. (2007). Simplified Approach to Inferential Statistics. Mandaluyong City: National Book Store.

Ong, F. L. (2008). Fundamentals of Accounting Textbook for Beginners. Quezon City: C&E Publishing, Inc.

Electronic References

Adams, S. W., (2006). Action Research in Education.http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/actionresearch/arhome.htm

Alzad, K., (2009). Understanding Accounting Basics (ALOE and Balance Sheets). http://betterexplained.com/articles/understand-accounting-basics-aloe-and-balance-sheets/

Chapman, A., (2006). Kolb Learning Style. http://www.businessballs.com/kolblearningstyles.htm

Hannan, A., (2007). Interviews in Education Research and Observation Techniques. http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/interviews/inthome.htm

Hopkins, W. G., (2000). Quantitative Research Design. http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0001/wghdesign.html

Kiff, J., (2009). Otis-Lennon School Ability Test.http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Otis-Lennon_School_Ability_Test

Riccio, A. L. & Sakata, M. C. Teaching – Learning Methods in Accounting Education – An Empirical Research in the Brazilian Scenario.http://www.tecsi.fea.usp.br/riccio/tac/pdf/IAAER45.pdf

Schloesser, N., (2000). Pearson R. http://www.wellesley.edu/Psychology/Psych205/pearson.html

Seifried, J., (2008). Teachers' beliefs and teaching patterns in VET.http://www.uni-konstanz.de/FuF/wiwi/fb/admin/paper/2008-12-09_Seifried_Brown_Bag_2008_handout.pdf