Non-Instructional Task of Teachers: Its Effect on Learners’ Performance

Teachers are increasingly expected to perform administrative and ancillary responsibilities in addition to their instructional duties, raising concerns about how these non-instructional tasks may affect student learning. This study examined the Mathematics achievement of Grade VI learners under two teacher non-instructional task conditions: teachers performing non-instructional tasks and teachers not performing non-instructional tasks. Specifically, it compared learners’ pretest and posttest performance and examined whether the two groups differed in their learning gains. The study employed a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design involving two Grade VI classes. A researcher-developed Mathematics achievement test was administered before and after the study period. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize learners’ performance, while the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to examine within-group changes, and the Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare gain scores between the two groups. The findings revealed that both groups demonstrated significant improvement in Mathematics achievement from pretest to posttest. Learners whose teachers performed non-instructional tasks obtained a mean pretest score of 32.87 and a posttest mean of 41.07, representing a mean gain of 8.20 points. Meanwhile, learners whose teachers did not perform non-instructional tasks obtained a mean pretest score of 30.14 and a posttest mean of 36.21, representing a mean gain of 6.07 points. The within-group improvements were statistically significant based on the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p < .001). A Mann–Whitney U test also indicated a statistically significant difference in the gain scores between the two groups (U = 202.00, p < .001), with the group whose teachers performed non-instructional tasks showing the larger observed gain. However, because the study involved intact, non-randomly assigned classes, the findings should be interpreted cautiously and should not be taken as definitive evidence that non-instructional tasks alone caused the difference in learning gains. The findings did not support the expectation that the absence of non-instructional tasks would necessarily result in greater learner gains. Instead, both groups improved significantly, with the group whose teachers performed non-instructional tasks showing the larger observed gain. Given the small sample and non-random assignment of intact classes, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and warrant further investigation.