Reading Instructions and Prioritizing Questions in Taking Math Test: Towards Test-Taking Tips

Authors

  • Jayson H. Hernandez Western Colleges, Inc., Naic, Cavit, Philippines Author

Keywords:

reading instructions, prioritizing questions, math test, test-taking strategies, elementary mathematics, time management

Abstract

This study examined the test-taking practices of elementary learners, specifically reading instructions carefully and prioritizing easy questions during mathematics examinations. The research was conducted at Arumahan Elementary School, Lemery, Batangas, with 36 Grade 6 learners as respondents. A descriptive-correlational research design was employed to assess the level of practice of the two strategies and to determine differences across profile variables and their interrelationship. Data were gathered through a validated researcher-made questionnaire using a 4-point Likert scale and analyzed using frequency, percentage, weighted mean, standard deviation, independent t-test, and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. Results revealed that most respondents were 12 years old (72%), female (64%), and evenly distributed across sections. For reading test instructions, the composite mean was 2.95 (SD=0.94), interpreted as Somewhat Practiced, with understanding how instructions relate to questions ranking highest (M=3.22). For prioritizing questions, the composite mean was 3.04 (SD=0.91), also Somewhat Practiced, with starting with confidently answered questions ranking highest (M=3.58). Inferential analysis showed statistically significant differences in both strategies when grouped by age, sex, and section (p<0.001), leading to rejection of the null hypotheses. However, Pearson correlation revealed no significant relationship between reading instructions and prioritizing questions (r=0.031, p=0.288), indicating that the two skills function as independent cognitive constructs. The findings suggest that while learners have basic awareness of test-taking strategies, systematic training is needed to elevate practice from somewhat practiced to highly practiced. The study proposes an evidence-based intervention program comprising the Rule of Three Selective Highlighting and the Two-Pass Pacing Protocol to improve time management, reduce anxiety, and minimize careless errors in mathematics tests.

References

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.

Greenwood, S. (2023). Strategic time management in mathematics assessments: The impact of question prioritization on student performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(2), 210-225.

Harris, R. (2020). Cognitive and emotional factors in math test-taking: How instruction reading influences outcomes. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 32(4), 445-462.

Smith, A., & Johnson, L. (2022). The role of careful instruction reading in reducing errors in high-stakes math testing. Educational Assessment, 27(1), 55-71.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.

Williams, P., & Chen, M. (2023). Reducing test anxiety through structured test-taking strategies: Evidence from college mathematics. Journal of College Teaching, 71(3), 134-148.

Department of Education. (2023). Guidelines on assessment and rating system for basic education. DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2023.

Arumahan Elementary School Records. (2024). Enrollment data for Grade 6.

Downloads

Published

2026-10-12

How to Cite

Hernandez, J. (2026). Reading Instructions and Prioritizing Questions in Taking Math Test: Towards Test-Taking Tips. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Research for Innovation, Sustainability, and Excellence (IMJRISE), 5(1), 16-27. https://risejournals.org/index.php/imjrise/article/view/1787