Project MASK (Math Ay Sikaping Kompyutin): A Numeracy Intervention for Grade 7 Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67903/ijroms0480Keywords:
Adaptive instruction, Grade 7 learners, numeracy intervention, Project MASK, supportive learningAbstract
Numeracy is a fundamental competency for academic learning and everyday decision-making, yet difficulties in foundational numeracy remain a concern among learners entering secondary education. This study addressed the need for localized evidence on school-based numeracy interventions for Grade 7 learners identified as non-numerate. It evaluated changes in the numeracy performance of Grade 7 learners following the implementation of Project MASK (Math Ay Sikaping Kompyutin) at Santiago Integrated National High School during School Year 2024–2025. The study employed a pre-experimental action research evaluation using a one-group pretest-posttest design involving 195 Grade 7 learners identified as non-numerate through the Division Numeracy Assessment (DNA). Project MASK was implemented over 12 weeks through 36 sessions organized into four phases: Monitoring and Assessment, Adaptive Instruction, Supportive Learning, and Knowledge Application. Pre-test and post-test scores were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test because the paired difference scores were not normally distributed. The mean score increased from 1.98 (SD = 0.894) in the pre-test to 7.62 (SD = 1.140) in the post-test, representing an observed mean increase of 5.64 points. The difference between the paired assessments was statistically significant (W = 0.00, p < .001), with a rank-biserial correlation of −1.00, indicating that all observed paired differences favored the post-test. The findings demonstrate statistically significant improvement in numeracy performance following implementation. However, because the study used a one-group design without a comparison group, the observed improvement cannot be attributed solely to Project MASK. Controlled or quasi-experimental research is therefore needed to determine the intervention’s causal contribution.
References
Besser, M., Hagena, M., & Kleickmann, T. (2024). On the added value of considering effects of generic and subject-specific instructional quality on students’ achievements—An exploratory study on the example of implementing formative assessment in mathematics education. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56, 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01562-2
Department of Education. (2022). Adoption of the Basic Education Development Plan 2030 (DepEd Order No. 024, s. 2022). https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/DO_s2022_024.pdf
Department of Education. (2023). Adoption of the National Learning Recovery Program in the Department of Education (DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2023). https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/DO_s2023_013.pdf
Department of Education. (2024). Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 12028, otherwise known as the Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program Act. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/IRR-of-ARAL-Program-Act.pdf
Insorio, A. O., & Librada, A. R. P. (2025). Enhancing students’ academic performance by making the mathematics learning experience meaningful through differentiated instruction. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 6(2), ep25008. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/16332
Lenz, K., Obersteiner, A., & Wittmann, G. (2024). Who benefits most from language-responsive learning materials in mathematics? Investigating differential effects in heterogeneous classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 116(2), 185–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10321-9
Muñez, D., Lee, K., Bull, R., Khng, K. H., Cheam, F., & Rahim, R. A. (2022). Working memory and numeracy training for children with math learning difficulties: Evidence from a large-scale implementation in the classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(8), 1866–1880. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000732
Nelson, G., Kong, E., Quinn, S., Kosty, D., Wilke, E. J., & Clarke, B. (2025). A scoping review of mathematics interventions: Moderation analyses of initial mathematics skills. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 40(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/09388982241292316
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Rojo, M., King, S., Gersib, J., & Bryant, D. P. (2023). Rational number interventions for students with mathematics difficulties: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 44(3), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325221105520
Susanti, D., Anand, G., Arifin, F. A., & Pratama, P. (2025). Leveraging school principals to address learning loss in Indonesia through group and individual targeting. International Journal of Educational Development, 112, 103153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2024.103153
Töllner, F., Kuhl, P., & Besser, M. (2025). Formative assessment in inclusive mathematics education in secondary schools: A systematic review. Education Sciences, 15(5), 577. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050577
UNICEF & SEAMEO. (2020). SEA-PLM 2019 main regional report: Children’s learning in 6 Southeast Asian countries. Bangkok, Thailand: United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) & Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) – SEA-PLM Secretariat. https://www.unicef.org/eap/media/7356/file/SEA-PLM%202019%20Main%20Regional%20Report.pdf
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Research on Multidisciplinary Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
