UEPL_ACTION RESEARCH 2019

1. STUDENT’S PROBLEM IN CHEMISTRY SUBJECTS
LONGCOP, JAVAR B.
PO, BERNALYN JEAN C.
SALANGUSTE, JOMELYN R
A Research
Of the College of Education
University of Eastern Philippines
Laoang Campus
October 2019

2. APPROVAL SHEET
This research titled, “Students’ Problems in Chemistry Subjects’’ prepared and
submitted by Javar B. Longcop, Bernalyn Jean C. Po, and Jomelyn R. Salanguste, has
been examined and is hereby recommended for acceptance and approval.
LOUISITO P. MADRONIO, MAED
Research Adviser
Date: 10-29-2019
Recommended for Acceptance and Approval.
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
ALMA C. LUCBAN, LPT
Member
Date: 10-29-2019
SHIRLEY M. VILLARDO, LPT
Member
Date: 10-29-2019
TEODY M. CORACHEA, Ed. D.
Chairman
Date: 10-29-2019
Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
Bachelor of Secondary Education.
CHONA B. FROILAN, Ed. D.
OIC, College of Education
Date: 10-29-2019

3. Students Problems in Chemistry Subjects
By: Javar B. Longcop, Bernalyn Jean C. Po, and Jomelyn R. Salanguste
Abstract
This study sought to determine the profile of the respondents in terms or age,
sex, year level, and weekly allowance and to find out the student problems in chemistry
subjects in the University of Eastern Philippines Laoang Campus, Laoang Northern
Samar. The respondents involved in this study were the 29 biology majors and 22
science majors who were officially enrolled during the school year 2018-209.
Descriptive-correlational method or research was utilized in this study. The
questionnaire was utilized in this study and frequency counts, percentages, mean
standard deviation and Pearson Correlation tools were the statistical tools used
determined the students’ problems in chemistry subjects which revealed that the
respondents faced problems studying chemistry subjects because of lack of
experiments during the class session, lack of textbook and also, failure to explain
unfamiliar words by the teacher.
Keywords: Student problems, chemistry subjects

4. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
Page………………………………………………...……………..…………………………………… i
Approval Sheet……………………………………………………………………………………… ii
Abstract………………………………………………………...……………………………………. iii
Table of Contents………………………………..………….…....………………………………. iv
I. Introduction …………………………………………………...………………………… 1
II. Objectives of the Study…………………………………………..……………………...6
III. Review of Related Literature……………………………………..…………………….6
IV. Methodology……………………………………..…………………………………………9
V. Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data………………….….………10
VI. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations…….………….………………. 14
VII. Literature Cited…………………………………………………………………….……16
Questionnaire…………………………….………………………………………………………….19

5. I. Introduction
Chemistry is the study of matter that is the common definition
encountered by the students in their chemistry subjects since they were in elementary
until high school but in college, chemistry is not all about the matter, it has a which
includes bigger scope which includes the structure, compositions, properties,
interaction, and transformation of the chemical phenomena.
Chemistry is one of the branches of natural sciences and one of the most
important sciences to be studied and is commonly viewed as the central science.
Mastery of its concepts regarding the structure of matter is prerequisite to further
study in all sciences (Sirhan, 2007). In addition, it is important to be studied, because
it helps us to describe and explain our world (Bagley, 2017). Furthermore, filled with
interesting is phenomena, appealing experimental activity, and fruitful knowledge for
understanding the natural and manufactured world, however, it is complex (Chui,
2005).
According to Tilahum, (2006) Chemistry is a difficult subject that needs
more explanations about concepts of facts, laws, and rules. Likewise, chemistry is a
difficult subject for the students because it has a wide scope which includes the
mathematical formula and scientific names that lead the students ‘complexity.
Therefore, chemistry is indeed a tough subject that uses both memory and problem-
solving skills (Liu,2015).
In relation to this, the students interviewed cited different problems
they encountered in chemistry subjects which includes the absence of laboratory when

6. learning chemistry, lack of proper learning materials, an inappropriate flow of
instructions, inadequacies in working memory and the difficult nature of chemistry
itself.
Hence, the researchers were prompted to conduct a study so that they can
identify the students’ problem in chemistry subjects at the University of Eastern
Philippines, Laoang Campus.
II. Objectives of the Study
This study found out the students’ problems in chemistry subjects in the
University of Eastern Philippines, Laoang Campus during the school year 2018-2019.
Specifically, this study aims to:
1. Identify the profile of the respondents in terms of:
a. age,
b. sex,
c. year level and;
d. weekly allowance.
2. Determine the students’ problems in chemistry subjects.
3. Find out the significant relationship between the profile of the respondents
and their problems in chemistry subjects.
III. Related Literature
Woldeamanuel, (2014), investigated what makes the students believe
chemistry is difficult and what can be done to overcome these difficulties. The finding

7. shows that many students from secondary schools to universities in many countries
struggle to learn chemistry and many do not succeed. Because of the abstract nature
of many chemical concepts, teaching styles applied in class, lack of teaching aids and
the difficulty of the language of chemistry causes students from primary level to the
universities, to develop poor understanding and misunderstandings.
In addition, Hassan (2005), found out the causes of poor performance in
chemistry. The views, opinions, and suggestions of teachers and the students to
improve the performance of chemistry and the descriptive survey was adopted for the
study. There were shortages of trained teachers, lack of proficiency in the language of
instruction (English) and major facilities like laboratories and books. These led to poor
delivery of subject matter and consequently resulting in poor performance.
Furthermore, Edeh, (2013), study revealed the extent at which factors like
attitude/interest, previous preparation, study style, parental involvement, and
teacher expectancy influence students ‘performance in chemistry in
Kolokuma/Opokuma local government of Bayelsa State. From the findings, it was
observed that the cited factors greatly affected students’ performance in chemistry
are into the determinants of failure or success of senior secondary school students.
Likewise, Tilahum, (2016), examined the nature and causes of common
difficulties experienced by grade twelve students in Ebinat preparatory school. The
main factors that contributed for the learning difficulties in chemistry faced by the
students include absence laboratory works, absence of teaching and learning
resources, poor teaching and learning strategies, poor English and Mathematical skills

8. and there is a need to improve these causes by using laboratory equipment,
improvement in assessment, use of proper English language by teachers.
Moreover, Musyoki (2015), intends to find out the causes of students ‘poor
performance in chemistry in public secondary schools in Mannyatta zone, Kangundo
District. Use of resources and facilities was found to impact positivity on students’
performance in chemistry is an addition, the teacher reported using various teaching,
methods with demonstration and lecture method is the most commonly used teaching
technique.
According to Sozbillir (2004), the students and the lecture perceptions of
the students’ learning difficulties are quite different. The common themes were about
the abstract nature of concepts in physical chemistry, the overloaded course content,
insufficient resources, teacher, teacher-centered and exposition-dominated teaching
practices, and the lack of student’s motivation in the physical chemistry course.
In addition, Odawa (2011) found out that the factors that can influence
the performance of the students in chemistry were the attitude of students towards
chemistry, professional qualification of chemistry teachers, staff development of
chemistry teachers, evaluation of chemistry subject, teaching and learning methods
used in teaching chemistry and teaching learning resources needed in teaching
chemistry.
According to Otieno (2009), the factors for persistent poor performance of
students in their chemistry subjects are attitude factors in their chemistry subjects’
teachers, negative perception of their learners ‘abilities; inadequate use of resources in
the teaching and learning process and negative socio-cultural factors as well as

9. inappropriate learning environment were the main cause of the students’ persistent
poor performance in chemistry. And he also stated that chemistry teachers must
enhance their teaching approaches by adopting a more practical approach to the
teaching and learning practices that would motivate the students to perform better in
the subject.
Ojukwu (2016), found out that the teachers’ poor qualifications, poor
method of teaching, lack of teaching experience, and failing to use the instructional
materials were some of the perceived causes of students’ poor performance in their
chemistry subject. Based on the findings, it was recommended that attempts should
be made by the government and private school proprietors to ensure that qualified and
experienced teachers should be recruited for the Senior Secondary Schools in the area.
In addition, teachers are implored to teach with adequate teaching aids
and instructional materials, when they are available, to improve their methods of
teaching and where they are not available, the government and private proprietors of
schools should make an endeavor to purchase instructional materials for the teachers
use in the schools.
IV. Methodology
This study sought to determine the profile of the respondents in terms or
age, sex, year level, and weekly allowance and to find out the student problems in
chemistry subjects in the University of Eastern Philippines Laoang Campus, Laoang
Northern Samar. The respondents involved in this study were the 29 biology majors

10. and 22 science majors who were officially enrolled during the school year 2018-209.
The descriptive-correlational research design was employed in this study. This
described the profile of the respondents in terms of age, sex, year level, and weekly
allowance and the students ‘problems in chemistry subjects.
A questionnaire patterned from the Poldo (2014) was the instrument used
and there were some modifications made to fit in this study. Frequently count,
percentages, mean, standard deviation, and Pearson correlation were the statistical
tools used.
V. Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data
Profile of the Respondents
Age. Table 1 shows that, out of 51 respondents, 33 or 64.71 percent
belongs to 18-20 years old; and 9 or 17.65 both belongs to 21-23 years old; 24 years
old and above. The mean is 21.45 with the standard deviation of 4.46. This means
that majority of the respondents were young adults.
Sex. In terms of sex, 28 or 54.90 percent were female and 23 or 45.10
percent were male. It is inferred that chemistry subjects are dominated by female.
Year Level. In terms of year level, out of 51 respondents 22 or 43.14
percent belongs to first-year level. Therefore, it implies that there are more first-year
BSED Science Majors enrolled in the Chemistry Subjects.

11. Weekly Allowance. The table 1 shows that 30 or 58.82 percent of the
respondents had weekly allowance that ranges from 251-500 pesos, and only 1 or
1.96 percent had 751-1000 pesos. This implies that the respondents are financially
stable.
Table 1. Profile of the Respondents
Frequency Percentages
Age
18-20 years old 33 64.71
21-23 years old 9 17.65
24 years old above 9 17.65
Total 51 100.00
Mean 21.45
Standard Deviation 4.46
Sex
Male 23 45.10
Female 28 54.90
Total 51 100.00
Year Level
First Year 22 43.14
Second Year 6 11.76
Third year 10 19.61
Fourth Year 13 25.49
Total 51 100.00
Weekly Allowance
250 – below 16 31.37
251 - 500 30 58.82
501 - 750 4 7.84
751 - 1000 1 1.96
Total 51 100.00
Mean 361.37
Standard Deviation 174.46
Students’ Problem in Chemistry Subjects
Table 2 presents the data on the students’ problem in chemistry subjects. Th
table revealed that the item 10, ‘’Lack of exercises or experiments in Chemistry
Subjects’’ got the highest mean of 3.88 with a standard deviation of 1.16 interpreted
as often; item 2. “Lack of textbook” got a weighted mean 3.61 with a standard deviation

12. of 1.06 interpreted as often; item 12, “Failure to explain unfamiliar words during
discussions” got a weighted mean of 3.59 with a standard deviation of 1.12 interpreted
as often. On the other hand, the three items which got the lowest weighted mean were:
item 1, “Not interested with the subject” with a weighted mean of 2.53 with a standard
deviation of 1.27; item 3, “Absenteeism” with a weighted mean of 2.63 with
a standard deviation of 1.25; item 5, “Being sleepy during chemistry class”
with a weighted mean of 2.86 with a standard deviation of 1.20 all
interpreted a sometimes. This means that the respondents had difficulty
in studying chemistry subjects because of lack of exercises or experiments,
lack of textbook, teacher’s failure to explain unfamiliar words during
discussions.
Furthermore, the computed grand mean was 3.25 with a standard
deviation of 1.16, interpreted as sometimes. This means that the
respondents were not satisfied in the instructional materials and the
teaching, and the learning process used by the teachers.
Table 2. Students’ Problems in Chemistry Subjects
Items Mean Interpretation SD
1. Not interested with the subject. 2.53 Sometimes 1.27
2. Lack of textbook. 3.61 Often 1.06
3. Absenteeism 2.63 Sometimes 1.25
4. Failure to ask further explanation. 3.27 Sometimes 1.12
5. Being sleepy during chemistry
class.
2.86 Sometimes 1.20
6. Having insufficient knowledge in
chemistry.
3.04 Sometimes 1.13

13. 7. Difficulty in memorizing different
terminologies and chemical
formula in chemistry subjects.
3.53 Often 0.99
8. Poor study habits. 3.10 Sometimes 1.10
9. Difficulty in understanding the
chemical bonding.
3.33 Sometimes 0.99
10. Lack of exercises or experiments
in chemistry subjects.
3.88 Often 1.16
11. Instructional is not well-explained
before the start of evaluation.
3.29 Sometimes 1.22
12. Failure to explain unfamiliar
words during discussions.
3.59 Often 1.12
13. Insufficient explanation about the
topic.
3.41 Sometimes 1.19
14. The teacher uses chemicals to
show the reaction of two
substances and to see the
outputs.
3.04 Sometimes 1.37
15. Gives more examples during class
discussion.
3.43 Sometimes 1.19
16. The strategy used by the teacher
is not appropriate.
3.14 Sometimes 1.17
17. Failure to use more references
related to the subject.
3.20 Sometimes 1.22
18. The teacher provides all the
necessary materials used in the
discussion.
3.49 Sometimes 1.10
19. Failure to use different strategies
to facilitate learning.
3.29 Sometimes 1.17
20. Hesitation to approach the
teacher regarding the lesson
3.33 Sometimes 1.16
Grand Mean 3.25 Sometimes 1.16
Test of Relationship Between the Profile of the Respondents and the Problems
in Chemistry Sub jects
Table 3 shows the test of the relationship between the profile of the respondents
and the problems in chemistry subjects. As to age, the Pearson chi-square is 0.096
and the p-value is 0.502 which is greater than 0.05 level of significance. As to their
sex, the Pearson chi-square is 0.003 and the p-value is 0.982 greater than 0.05 level

14. of significance. As to their year level, the Pearson chi-square is 0.234 and the p-value
is 0.098 which is greater than 0.05 level of significance. While on the respondent’s
weekly allowance, the Pearson chi-square is 0.102 and the p-value is 0.476 greater
than 0.05level of significance. Thus, the findings failed to reject the null hypothesis
which states that there is no significance relationship between the profile of the
respondents and the problems in chemistry subjects.
Table 3. Test of Relationships Between the Profile of the Respondents and the
Problems in Chemistry Subjects.
N
Pearson
chi-
square
p-value Decision Interpretation
Age 51 0.096 0.502
Failed to reject
Reject Ho
Not
Significance
Sex 51 0.003 0.982
Failed to reject
Reject Ho
Not
Significance
Year Level 51 0.234 0.098
Failed to reject
Reject Ho
Not
Significance
Weekly
Allowance 51 0.102 0.476
Failed to reject
Reject Ho
Not
Significance
VI. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations
Summary
This study sought to determine the profile of the respondents in terms or age,
sex, year level, and weekly allowance and to find out the student problems in chemistry
subjects in the University of Eastern Philippines Laoang Campus, Laoang Northern

15. Samar. The respondents involved in this study were the 29 biology majors and 22
science majors who were officially enrolled during the school year 2018-209.
Descriptive-correlational method or research was utilized in this study. The
questionnaire was utilized in this study and frequency counts, percentages, mean
standard deviation and Pearson Correlation tools were the statistical tools used
determined the students’ problems in chemistry subjects which revealed that the
respondents faced problems studying chemistry subjects because of lack of
experiments during the class session, lack of textbook and also, failure to explain
unfamiliar words by the teacher.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the study, the problems encountered by the BSED
Biology majors and BSED Science Majors in studying chemistry class were lack of
experiments/exercises, lack of textbook, and failure to explain unfamiliar words by the
teacher during discussions. It was also revealed that there was no significant
relationship between the profile of the respondents and the student’s problems in
chemistry subjects. Therefore, the profile of the respondents has nothing to do with
the problems they had faced in chemistry subjects.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, the following
recommendations were proposed:
It was revealed that the respondents lack exercises/experiments during
chemistry class. The respondents did not experience some laboratory experiments

16. during their chemistry class. It is suggested that the teacher must conduct laboratory
works/experiment twice a week to help the respondents develop their skills in terms
of laboratory works.
It was also revealed that the respondents lack of textbooks in chemistry subjects.
It is recommended students should have chemistry handbooks as their source of
learning.
Moreover, the respondents had difficulties in terms of unfamiliar words used
during the discussion by the teacher. It is recommended to have a chemistry teacher
that is inclined with his/her specializations. They should have enough knowledge
about chemistry in order for them to have a further explanation and give an appropriate
definition of the words.
Finally, it is recommended that a similar study is conducted using other
variables.
VII. Literature Cited
MM Woldeamanuel, H Atagana, and T Engida (2014), ‘‘What makes Chemistry
Difficult” Retrieve from:
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajce/article/view/104070 on February 26,
2019
Chui, M. H. (2005). “A National Survey of Students’ Conceptions of Chemistry in
Taiwan. Retrieve from:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500690601072964 on
February 26, 2019
Emendu, N.B, and Okoye, C.M. (2015), “ Identifying Problems Associated with Studying
of Chemistry in Anambra State, Nigeria” Retrieve from:

17. https://www.academia.edu/13264778/Identifying_Problems_Associated_with_
Studying_of_Chemistry_in_Anambra_State_Nigeria on February 26, 2019
Edeh, I. (2013), “Some Factors Affecting the Performance of Secondary School Students
in Chemistry, A Kolokuma/Opokuma Study.” Retrieve from:
https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/5262 on
February 26, 2019
Hassan, A. (2015), “Factors affecting students’ performance in Chemistry:
case study
in Zanzibar secondary schools” Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312147240_Factors-affecting-
students-performance-in-chemistry-case-study-in-zanzibar-secondary-schools
on February 26, 2019
Johnstone, A. (2006), “Chemical education research in Glasgow in perspective”
Retrieve from:
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2006/rp/b5rp90021b on
February 26, 2019
Liu, J. (2015). “Five Reasons Why Chemistry Is so Tough” Retrieve from:
http://www.bright-cuture.com/exam-tips-for-students/5-reasons-why-
chemistry-is-so-tough/ on February 26, 2019
Musyoki, J. (2015), “Causes of students poor performance in Chemistry in public
Secondary schools in Manyatta zone, Kangundo district, Machakos county,
Kenya” Retrieve from:
http://197.243.10.178/bitstream/handle/123456789/2327/MUSYOKI%20JO
EL%20MASIKA%20.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y on March 07, 2019
Ojukwu, M.O. (2016), “Perception of Students on Causes of Poor Performance in
Chemistry in External Examinations in Umuahia North Local Government of
Abia State” Retrieve from:
http://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJELS/article/view/2267 on
March 07, 2019
Odawa O. (2011), “Factors influencing performance of students in Chemistry in public
secondary schools in Kajiado North District, Kenya” Retrieve from:
http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/handle/11295/4101#:~:text=Findings%20of%2
0the%20study%2C%20indicated,evaluation%20of%20Chemistry%20subject%2
C%20teaching on March 07, 2019
Otieno, O.J. (2012), “Determinants Of Students Poor Performance In Chemistry In
Public Secondary Schools Of Kwale County, Kenya” Retrieve from:
https://www.academia.edu/35063952/DETERMINANTS_OF_STUDENTS_POO

18. R_PERFORMANCE_IN_CHEMISTRY_IN_PUBLIC_SECONDARY_SCHOOLS_OF_
KWALE_COUNTY_KENYA on March 07, 2019
Sirhan, G. (2007), “Learning Difficulties in Chemistry” Retrieve from:
https://dspace.alquds.edu/items/0d5216fd-147d-4d0d-a286-36dc7289ebaa
on March 07, 2019
Sozbilir, M. (2004), “What Makes Physical Chemistry Difficult? Perceptions of Turkish
Chemistry Undergraduates and Lecturers” Retrieve from:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed081p573 on March 07, 2019
Tilahun, K (2016), “Common difficulties experienced by grade 12 students in learning
chemistry in Ebinat Preparatory School” Retrieve from:
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajce/article/view/140984 on March 07, 2019

19. A QUESTIONNAIRE ON STUDENTS’ PROBLEMS IN CHEMISTRY SUBJECTS
Part I. Profile of the Respondents
Name:_____________________________________________________________________________
(Optional)
Age:_______________
Sex:________________
Year Level:____________________
Weekly Allowance:_____________
Part II. Students’ Problems in Chemistry Subjects
Directions: Read carefully and check the column that corresponds to your answers:
SA – Strongly Agree
A – Agree DA - Disagree
U – Undecided SD – Strongly Disagree
Items SA A U DA SD
1. Not interested with the subject.
2. Lack of textbook.
3. Absenteeism
4. Failure to ask further explanation.
5. Being sleepy during chemistry class.
6. Having insufficient knowledge in
chemistry.
7. Difficulty in memorizing different
terminologies and chemical formula in
chemistry subjects.
8. Poor study habits.
9. Difficulty in understanding the
chemical bonding.
10. Lack of exercises or experiments in
chemistry subjects.
11. Instructional is not well-explained
before the start of evaluation.
12. Failure to explain unfamiliar words
during discussions.

20. 13. Insufficient explanation about the
topic.
14. The teacher uses chemicals to show
the reaction of two substances and to
see the outputs.
15. Gives more examples during class
discussion.
16. The strategy used by the teacher is
not appropriate.
17. Failure to use more references
related to the subject.
18. The teacher provides all the
necessary materials used in the
discussion.
19. Failure to use different strategies to
facilitate learning.
20. Hesitation to approach the teacher
regarding the lesson