Assessment of the Level of Achievement of Using Teaching Methods and Teaching Methods in Teaching of Math Teachers

- Collecting feedback from students about teaching activities is the basis for teachers to self-evaluate the effectiveness of teaching and make adjustments to teaching methods to suit the students. In this regard, teachers do this very often with an average score of 3.57 corresponding to 100% (RTX: 56.9%, TX: 43.1%), ranked 4th in the ranking column, showing that teachers also pay attention to students' opinions to improve their teaching methods.

- The Department of Education and Training and the Department of Education and Training of Vinh Chau town regularly organize training courses on innovative teaching methods, organize competitions for excellent teachers at all levels for teachers to learn from each other about the use of teaching methods. However, the use of teaching methods to promote the positivity in students' learning activities, the use of teaching methods fluently and effectively, teachers only implement at the intermediate level (average: 2.31). That shows that teachers are less interested in this teaching method. Conducting analysis based on the percentage at the level above TX, the rate is 43.1% for content 3 (RTX: 13.8%, TX: 29.3%) and 36.2% for content 4 (RTX: 13.8%, TX: 22.4%) shows that teachers are not yet actively innovating teaching methods.

- Changing teaching methods when students are not active in learning activities (average: 2.34) and the rate of TX or higher is 41.3% (RTX: 10.3%, TX: 31.0%). That means teachers implementing this content at the TTh level shows that teachers have not really changed.

- Teachers discuss and guide students on learning methods, exploiting knowledge content in textbooks and learning materials (Average score: 2.60). With the TX level and above, the rate is 51.7% (RTX: 27.6%, TX: 24.1%). That means teachers perform this work at the TX level according to the established scale.

- High requirements for students on self-awareness, initiative, and creativity in learning are professional skills that teachers must regularly use for students in teaching activities so that students can develop and achieve the desired results (average: 3.43), corresponding to the TX level and above, the rate is 82.7% (RTX: 58.6%, TX: 27.6%). That means teachers also perform this work at the TX level.

- There is a form of testing and evaluating students' learning outcomes right after the lesson (average: 3.45), corresponding to the TX level or higher reaching 87.9% (RTX: 63.8%, TX: 24.1%). That means teachers only perform this work at the TX level.

- Teachers regularly prepare their subjects, lesson plans, and lectures carefully before going to class (Average: 3.48), corresponding to the TX level or higher reaching 89.6% (RTX: 67.2%, TX: 22.4%). That means teachers do this RTX work. This is a must that every teacher must pay attention to doing this task before going to class. The results of GPA and high implementation level are inevitable.

From the survey results of the current implementation of the subject teaching contents of Math teachers in the direction of developing students' capacity, we see that the majority of teachers implement the subject teaching contents of Math very often. However, there is still a large number of Math teachers who do not meet the requirements of the subject teaching contents such as in contents 3, 4, 5, 6, 8...

b . On the use of teaching methods and teaching aids in teaching activities.

Table 2.6. Assessment of the level of achievement of using teaching methods and teaching methods in teaching of Math teachers

Content	Level of implementation (SL/TL%)				Average	TH
Content	RTX	TX	TTh	IK	Average	TH
1	Current status of PPDH use.
1.1	Presentation.	39/ 67.3	18/ 31.0	1/1.7		3.66	1
1.2	Presentation combined with stating problem, conversation.	34/ 58.6	24/ 41.4			3.59	2
1.3	Students role play according to the situation, discuss.	4/6.9	24/ 41.4	19/ 32.7	11/ 19	2.36	6
1.4	Teaching in groups, paying attention to each student (HS).	10/ 17.2	20/ 34.5	20/ 34.5	8/ 13.8	2.55	5
1.5	Organize for students to carry out the activities study plan	24/ 41.4	26/ 44.8	8/ 13.8		3.28	3
1.6	Some commonly used teaching methods other.	10/ 17.2	20/ 34.5	21/ 36.2	7/ 12.1	2.57	4
	General Average					3.00

Maybe you are interested!

Content

Level of implementation

(SL/TL%)

Average

RTX

TTh

Current status of using PTDH

2.1

Board, chalk, teaching aids

normally.

28/

48.3

22/

37.9

10.4

2/3.4

3.31

2.2

Visual aids, pictures, diagrams, graphs, mindmaps, etc.

16/

27.6

17/

29.3

19/

29.3

13.8

2.71

2.3

Teaching and learning materials for Mathematics,

Study sheets, side boards, group boards, etc.

23/

39.7

26/

44.8

15.5

3.24

2.4

IT and communication applications: Computers, interactive boards, multi-function projectors, application software for teaching and learning subjects

Maths..

15/

25.9

16/

27.6

19/

32.8

13.7

2.36

General Average

2.91

The results of table 2.6 show that teachers use teaching methods at the TX level, average score: 3.00, standard deviation: 0.74.

- Presentation and explanation (Average: 3.66), corresponding to TX level and above, reached 98.3% (RTX: 67.3%, TX: 31.0%). That means teachers doing this work at RTX level shows that teachers still use traditional teaching methods a lot.

- Presentation combined with problem-posing and conversation (Average score: 3.59), corresponding to TX level and above, has a rate of 100% (RTX: 58.6%, TX: 41.4%). This shows that this method is used a lot by teachers because the level of RTX implementation is high (58.6%).

- Organizing students to carry out study plans (average: 3.28), corresponding to TX level and above, the rate is 86.2% (RTX: 41.4%, TX: 44.8%). That means teachers do this work very regularly and frequently to help students practice the habit of studying with a plan and scientifically.

- Some other commonly used teaching methods (average: 2.57), corresponding to the level from TX and above, have a rate of 51.7 (RTX: 17.2%, TX: 34.5%). This shows that teachers are also interested in using other teaching methods because the level of implementation of this work is at a regular level.

- Let students role-play situations and discuss (Average score: 2.36), corresponding to the level of occasional implementation. This result shows that Math teachers are less interested in doing this work because it is ranked last in the ranking column (6/6).

- Teaching in groups, paying attention to each student (Average: 2.55). This method is implemented by teachers regularly but is not yet taken seriously because the ranking results are at the bottom of the ranking column (5/6).

Regarding the use of PTDH, the test results in Table 2.6 also show that teachers use it at the TX level with the general average: 2.94, standard deviation: 0.84.

- Board, chalk, common teaching tools (average score: 3.31), corresponding to TX level and above, has a rate of 86.2% (RTX: 48.3%, TX: 37.9%). This shows that Math teachers like to use RTX teaching tools because they are simple and most convenient to use.

- Math teaching and learning materials, study sheets, side boards, group boards, etc. (Average score: 3.24), corresponding to the level of TX and above, the rate is 84.5% (RTX: 39.7%, TX: 44.8%). The survey results show that teachers also like to regularly use this type of teaching tool because it is highly rated (2/4) in the ranking column.

- Visual aids, pictures, diagrams, graphs, mindmaps (Average: 2.71). This shows that teachers also frequently use this type of teaching method but are ranked second to last (3/4) in the ranking column. This is also an issue that managers need to pay attention to and find out why math teachers do not rate this teaching method higher than using boards, chalk, and other common tools.

- Application of IT and communication: Computers, interactive boards, multi-function projectors, application software for teaching and learning Math (Average score: 2.36). The survey shows that teachers are less interested in applying IT and communication. For Natural Science, especially Math, the survey results show that teachers only apply it occasionally and rank last (4/4) in the ranking column, which is paradoxical compared to the development of science and technology in today's era.

Thus, teachers still use active teaching methods and teaching methods less. This is because the above methods require students' initiative, flexibility and cooperation, but for most students who are not familiar with new teaching methods, not all classes can apply them. Moreover, to be able to use these methods, teachers must have the skills to organize, coordinate and flexibly handle situations in class, and more importantly, they must be aware of the role and effect of each method to implement. Explaining this situation, many teachers answered: There is a lot of knowledge, limited time, and teachers do not have enough time to lecture. If we discuss in groups so that students can present a lot, we cannot cover all the content of the lesson. Moreover, the class is crowded, with up to 48 students in some classes, so how can we organize it effectively? Because in one lesson there is not enough time for all groups to present and teachers cannot guide the groups' responses. In addition, for the group to really work, the students themselves need to be very active, each individual must be active and work together, but in reality, weaker students only "rely" on good students.

2.3.2. Current status of students' learning activities according to the orientation of developing students' capacity.

Through a survey of 58 teachers, we obtained the data in the table.

2.7 as follows:

Table 2.7. Assessment of the level of achievement of students in implementing Math learning content

Content

Level of implementation

(SL/TL%)

Average

Good

Rather

Central

jar

Weak

Prepare research, write lesson

before going to class

6.9

22/

37.9

23/

39.7

15.5

2.36

Pay attention to the lecture and take notes.

in class

23/

39.7

22/

37.9

13/

22.4

3.17

Actively participate in classroom learning activities as required.

Teacher's request: Answer the question

12/

20.6

19/

32.8

19/

32.8

13.8

2.60

Content

Level of implementation

(SL/TL%)

Average

Good

Rather

Central

jar

Weak

ask, discuss, act

group…

Actively discover and acquire new knowledge according to the teacher's guidance, or in your own way.

individuals effectively.

11/

19.0

22/

37.9

18/

31.0

12.1

2.64

Ask questions about the knowledge content that you do not understand clearly, find ways to supplement your own missing knowledge, and try to participate in building the lesson above.

class.

10/

17.2

23/

39.7

18/

31.0

12.1

2.62

Stay at home, be proactive and study

practice and do all exercises

12.1

23/

39.7

20/

34.4

13.8

2.50

General Average

2.64

According to the results of table 2.7, most of the students performed at a fair level in the learning content with the average score: 2.64, and the standard deviation: 0.88.

- Pay attention to lectures and take notes during class (average score: 3.17), corresponding to a percentage of 77.6% at the good level or higher (good: 39.7%, fair: 37.9%). The results show that students perform this task at a good level but are ranked highest (1/6) in the ranking column. This is understandable because students have long been accustomed to passive learning. This is an issue that needs attention so that teachers can correct and change the way they guide students' learning.

- Actively discovering and absorbing new knowledge according to the teacher's instructions, or in an effective personal way (Average score: 2.64) corresponding to the level of good or higher has a rate of 56.9% (good: 19.0%, fair: 37.9%). That means students do this work at a fair level but are ranked 2/6 in the ranking column, showing that students are also interested in this learning method. Conduct analysis based on the percentage at the level of good or higher, reaching 56.9% (good: 19.0%, fair: 37.9%).

- Ask questions about the knowledge content that is not clearly understood, find ways to supplement the missing knowledge for themselves, try to participate in building lessons in class (Average: 2.62). This shows that students also show positive aspects, try to change the way they have been studying, although they do this work at a fairly good level, but are ranked 3/6 in the ranking column, proving that students have shown progress.

- At home, they are self-disciplined, proactive in studying and doing all their homework (Average: 2.50). The results show that without the control and reminders of teachers and parents, most students are often lazy and do not self-discipline, proactively study and do all their homework at home. Specifically, students only do this work at an average level and are ranked second to last (5/6) in the ranking column.

- Prepare to study and prepare lessons before coming to class (Average: 2.36). Likewise, for this task, students only performed at an average level and were given a final ranking (6/6) in the ranking column. Thus, most teachers generally commented that students' awareness of learning Math is not high. Explaining this situation, teachers said that this is the period of development of mass media. Students are attracted to audio-visual culture more than reading culture. If they have free time, students will watch movies and play video games rather than reading reference books. On the other hand, the content of the books is both difficult and not applicable in practice. For students, the test has only two forms: oral test and written test, which is boring and uninteresting. In addition, a few teachers are not dedicated to their profession, do not innovate, and still teach by reading and copying, which does not attract students. Finding this cause, managers should change the way teachers manage teaching and students' learning, then the effectiveness of teaching Math can change for the better.

Due to many limitations, the implementation of learning activities and especially the teaching methods of Mathematics by the majority of students is not really active and effective, leading to low learning results. To improve the quality of teaching and learning Mathematics, in addition to proposing professional measures for teachers and learners, innovating the form of testing, evaluating learners' results, and building a quality management process is a matter of concern for school managers.

2.4. Current status of management of teaching and learning activities of Mathematics according to the orientation of developing students' capacity in secondary schools in Vinh Chau town, Soc Trang province

2.4.1. Current status of management of goals, content, and teaching programs of Mathematics according to the orientation of developing students' capacity

Table 2.8. Assessment of teachers' achievement in implementing the content of the Math program

Content

Level of implementation

(SL/TL%)

Average

Good

Rather

Weak

Develop specific regulations on individual subject teaching planning and implementation

curriculum content

10/

32.3

22.6

25.8

19.3

2.68

Approve the plan before the professional team; Principal checks

Check and approve the plan.

10/

32.3

11/

35.5

29.0

1/3.2

2.97

Assign the Board of Directors and professional group leaders to regularly check the implementation of the plan and program content.

teacher teaching

67.7

10/

32.3

3.68

Evaluate the level of achievement compared to the plan, through checking the teaching register, class note book, and student notebooks to grasp the progress of implementing the curriculum content.

GV.

16/

51.6

10/

32.3

5/16.1

3.35

Manage the classroom discipline of teachers and

HS.

18/

58.1

13/