Contextualized Numeracy Task, Home Learning Support, and Performance of Grade 7 Learners in Mathematics

This study investigated the influence of contextualized numeracy tasks and home learning support on the mathematics performance of Grade 7 learners during school year 2025–2026 in a public secondary school in the Negros Island Region. A quantitative correlational research design was employed, with data collected through a structured questionnaire measuring learners’ engagement in contextualized numeracy tasks and the level of home learning support. The numeracy tasks were based on the REACT framework—Relating, Experiencing, Applying, Cooperating, and Transferring—while home support was assessed through Supportive Parental Involvement (SPI) and Intrusive Parental Involvement (IPI). Results showed that learners exhibited a high level of engagement across all REACT dimensions and received a high level of home support. Supportive Parental Homework Involvement was rated high, while the reverse-scored Intrusive Parental Homework Involvement was rated moderate. Learners’ mathematics performance was very satisfactory. Statistical analysis revealed no significant relationship between learners’ engagement in contextualized numeracy tasks and mathematics performance. However, a significant relationship was found between home support and mathematics performance.

Mathematics

1. Aggarwal, G. (2025). Studies of mathematics: A review of research trends, themes and implications. Recent Trends in Mathematics, 2(2), 19–24. https://journals.stmjournals.com/rtm/article=2025/view=230490/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2023). Just the facts: Biological sex. https://www.asrm.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Amistoso, A. C. (2024). Effectiveness of contextualized problem-based learning in improving the performance of Grade 6 learners in math. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies, 4(6). https://www.ijams-bbp.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/1.-ADELITA-C.-AMISTOSO.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Asanza, A. S. (2025). Teachers’ contextualization of Social Studies lessons. International Journal of Open-Access, Interdisciplinary & New Educational Discoveries, 4(1), 422–442. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Avila, A. E. S. (2025). K–12 curriculum implementation in the Philippines: A content analysis of trends, issues, and implications for quality education. International Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Communication and Technology, 5(2). https://www.ijarsct.co.in/A27440.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Barooah, I. (2025). Descriptive correlational research design. https://merren.io [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bercasio, J. J. O., Balce, M. A. A., & Barcoma, C. A. O. (2023). Home environment and achievement motivation and their effect on the academic performance of selected students. BU R&D Journal, 26(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.47789/burdj.mbtcbbgs.20232601.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bornea, G. D., & Bugarin, J. B. (2026). Predictive effects of core subject grades on Senior High School strand selection. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 10(1), 2851–2864. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Buan, A. T., Mustapha‑Ali, A. Z., & Gomez, R. (2021). Development and validation of contextualized lesson in mathematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1), 012100. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1835/1/012100 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Buchanan, J. (2001). Job Corps program completion study. https://core.ac.uk [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Cahyani, N. P. I., Suarsana, I. M., & Mahayukti, G. A. (2021). Improving students’ mathematical problem-solving skills. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 536, 337–344. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210312.054 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Cambaya, E. J. D., & Tan, D. A. (2022). Enhancing students’ problem-solving skills through contextualized instruction. Science International, 34(2), 101–109. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Castillo, P. A. (2026). Development of contextualized learning boosters. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 15(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Castroverde, F., & Acala, M. (2021). Modular distance learning modality. International Journal of Research Studies in Education. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2021.602 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Ceremonia‑Cerda, J. Q. (2024). Contextual analysis of curriculum development. Global Scientific Journal, 12(11). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Cruza, I., & Gadia, D. (2025). Educational impact of digital board game. International Journal of Computer Games Technology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Department of Education. (2023). MATATAG curriculum. https://www.deped.gov.ph [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Department of Education (DepEd). (2023). Basic education report 2023. https://www.deped.gov.ph [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Education Endowment Foundation. (2025). EEF website. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ebigide, S. N., Umukoro, G., & Adomi, E. E. (2024). Work environment and career advancement. Journal of Library Services and Technologies. https://doi.org/10.47524/jlst.v6i2.17 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Estipona, E. P., & Delos Santos, M. S. M. (2025). Linking well-being to success. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1540813 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Gopalakrishnan, R., et al. (2016). Visually evoked pain anticipation. Clinical Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2015.11.019 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Guballa, S. A., et al. (2025). Parental influence and academic performance. Psychology and Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Hernández-Padilla, E., et al. (2023). Parental participation effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1154470 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. İlter, İ., et al. (2025). Parental involvement and mathematics performance. BMC Psychology, 13, 1222. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Jiang, Q., et al. (2023). Parental homework involvement meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Jiang, Y., Bong, M., & Kim, S. (2023). Parental involvement and students’ mathematics achievement: The role of supportive and intrusive practices. Learning and Instruction, 84, 101673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101673 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Jin, X., et al. (2024). Parental autonomy support. Current Psychology, 43, 29189–29198. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Kretchmar, J. (2024). Social learning theory. https://www.ebsco.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. McLeod, S. (2025). Bruner’s cognitive development. https://www.simplypsychology.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. McLeod, S. (2026). Piaget’s cognitive development. https://www.simplypsychology.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Latkin, C., et al. (2021). Social norms and climate advocacy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(24), 13037.Lei, X., et al. (2026). Socioeconomic status and health. PLoS ONE, 21(3), e0345542. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Liu, B., et al. (2026). AI and math learning meta-analysis. Education Sciences, 16(1), 140. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Luzano, J. F. P. (2025). Mathematics education trends review. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 13(3), 744–760. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Mahmuti, A., et al. (2025). Contextual teaching and learning. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(3), e0833. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Mallillin, L. L. D. (2022). Home-based learning theory. International Journal of Materials, Mathematics and Sciences, 4(3), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Marcelo, E. B. (2026). Curriculum equity implications. Open Access Library Journal, 13, e14746. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Myers, J. A., et al. (2022). Math word-problem interventions meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 92(5), 695–742. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). PISA 2022 results. https://nces.ed.gov [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Nurzannah, N., et al. (2021). REACT strategy and GeoGebra. Malikussaleh Journal of Mathematics Learning, 4(2), 90–97. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Ogates, R. C., et al. (2023). teaching post-pandemic. International Journal of Social and Management Studies, 6(1), 1079–1092. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development (OECD). (2022). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. https://www.oecd.org/pisa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating student learning through contextualization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Regis, J. M. M., & Gomez, R. S. (2023). teaching in mathematics. UIJRT, 4(5), 154–164. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Rivera, J. A. C., & Mabutol, R. B. (2025). Flipped classroom materials. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 3(5), 171–180. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Rue, L. P., et al. (2025). drill cards. IJRISS, 9(6), 650–654. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Sinaga, B., et al. (2023). Problem-solving understanding. Frontiers in Education, 8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. U.S. Department of Commerce. (2025). Children’s families report. https://nces.ed.gov [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Vanbecelaere, S., et al. (2021). Home learning environment. Frontiers in Education, 6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Wang, X., & Wei, Y. (2024). Parental involvement meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Weinhandl, R., et al. (2025). Mathematics performance. Research in Mathematics, 12(1), 1–16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Wulandari, S., et al. (2024). REACT contextual approach. Indonesian Journal of Research and Educational Review, 3(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Yu-Ting, H., et al. (2025). Computational thinking and robotics. Sensors, 25(22), 7059. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study