" TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE OF

TEACHERS AND PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS IN SCIENCE THROUGH

PROJECT TRIP (Teachers Reinventing and Innovating Pedagogical

knowledge): BASIS FOR TEACHING ENHANCEMENT PLAN”

Action Research Proposal

By:

CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA., SHS TII

Of:

MALAMIG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Schools Division of Oriental Mindoro
Gloria District

JANUARY 2024
I. CONTEXT AND RATIONALE

In today's dynamic educational landscape, the integration of technology

into teaching practices has emerged as a critical factor in shaping the learning

experiences of students. The amalgamation of technological tools with

pedagogical strategies and subject-specific content, known as Technological

Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), holds immense potential to enhance

educational outcomes, particularly in the realm of science education. However,

understanding the intricate interplay between teachers' proficiency in TPACK and

its impact on students' performance in science remains an underexplored area.

Despite the proliferation of technological advancements and the increasing

emphasis on innovative teaching methodologies, there exists a substantial

research gap in comprehending the precise relationship between teachers'

TPACK competencies and their influence on students' performance in science

subjects. While studies have examined the individual domains of pedagogy,

technology, and content knowledge separately, there's a dearth of

comprehensive research elucidating how the integration and mastery of TPACK

by educators directly correlate with enhanced learning outcomes in science

education. The scarcity of empirical evidence that explicitly ties proficient TPACK

application to improved student performance in science represents a significant

void in the current literature.

Presently at Malamig National High School, for the school year 2023-2024,

students from Grade 7-10 have shown a relatively poor performance during the

diagnostic tests and 1st quarter tests assessment with an average of 76.8% this is

quite alarming. The problem cannot be blamed to teachers or students alone but

this presents an action for teachers.

 Teaching science nowadays requires the use of technology tools like

videos, presentation and other platforms to help students understand better the

concepts being taught in Science. Teaching science in contemporary classrooms

has evolved significantly, integrating technology tools as essential components to

facilitate effective and engaging learning experiences. The incorporation of

technology tools such as videos, presentations, simulations, and various digital

platforms has become instrumental in enhancing science education for students.

Firstly, the use of videos in science education serves as a powerful visual

aid to illustrate complex scientific concepts. Videos offer dynamic visuals,

allowing students to witness scientific phenomena, experiments, and processes

that might otherwise be challenging to replicate within a classroom setting. These

visuals stimulate curiosity, deepen understanding, and make abstract concepts

more tangible and comprehensible. Additionally, presentations and multimedia

resources offer educators versatile platforms to deliver content in a structured

and visually appealing manner. Through presentations, teachers can organize

information effectively, employ graphics and animations, and create interactive

content to engage students actively. Such tools enable educators to tailor content

to different learning styles, fostering a more inclusive and diverse learning

environment in science classrooms.

Simulations and interactive platforms play a pivotal role in providing

hands-on experiences in science education. These tools allow students to

conduct virtual experiments, manipulate variables, and observe outcomes in real-

time. Simulations simulate scientific processes, enabling students to engage in

inquiry-based learning, hypothesis testing, and problem-solving. Such interactive

platforms encourage active participation, critical thinking, and experimentation,

contributing to a deeper understanding of scientific principles.

Moreover, online platforms and resources offer a wealth of information

beyond the confines of traditional textbooks. Websites, educational apps, and

online databases provide access to vast repositories of scientific data, research

articles, and educational materials. Students can explore current scientific

advancements, access multimedia resources, and engage in collaborative

learning opportunities that transcend classroom boundaries.

The core skills and knowledge that teachers require for integrating digital

technology into their teaching vary depending on the perceived role of technology

in education. One common categorization distinguishes three different roles:

learning about, with, and through technology (Erstad and Voogt, 2018). Learning

about technology refers to technology as part of the school curricula for students

to learn, which used to include technology-specific knowledge domains such as

programming, computer operations and information literacy. Learning with

technology refers to the use of technology as a productivity tool for learners and

teachers to enhance existing methods of teaching and learning, such as the use

of office applications, multimedia, internet, and interactive whiteboard. Learning

through technology refers to technology as an essential tool integrated into

curricula and the process of teaching and learning, without which the curriculum

and/or the intended learning experience cannot be realized. For instance,

simulations and modeling tools provide opportunities for learners to engage in a

wide range of experiences that would otherwise not be possible, such as

controlling a nuclear power plant, and exploring the consequences of different

severities of social distancing measures on the spread of a pandemic. Access to

large authentic databases and analytic tools also provides learners with different

ways to explore “what if” questions in the same way that natural and social

scientists do in their authentic investigations rather than simply receiving canned

answers from teachers.

The different roles that technology is called upon to play in educational

contexts also represent different pedagogical paradigms and visions about what

learning could be like when technology is used. The key role of teachers'

pedagogical knowledge is highlighted. The success of technology integration in

education depends on whether teachers have the competence to intentionally

use technology for pedagogical purposes. Technological Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (TPACK, Yip 2023) is a popular competence framework that

describes the knowledge teachers need to acquire for effective learning with and

through technology. This framework highlights the need for teachers to develop

knowledge and skills that situate in the interaction space among the three

knowledge domains of technology, subject matter content, and pedagogy. In a

comprehensive review of international comparative studies of digital technology

use and student learning, Law and Liang (2019) reported a shift in the focus of

these studies from assessing students' computing skills (following the learning

about technology paradigm) to a focus on the pedagogical innovations that may

accompany technology use for learning since the turn of the millennium,

reflecting a shift toward learning with and through technology. In terms of student

achievement, there is a diversification in foci to include computer-based

assessment that tests students' ability to use digital tools to arrive at an answer

(OECD, 2017), as well as students' collaborative problem-solving ability. These

reflect a priority at the policy level for digital technology use to support students in

developing 21st century skills

Thus, the importance of one fundamental challenge in the integration of

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) within science

education pertains to the varying levels of proficiency and adaptability among

teachers. Not all educators possess the necessary fluency in leveraging

technology, aligning pedagogical strategies, and integrating subject-specific

content effectively. This inconsistency in TPACK competencies across teaching

cohorts can lead to discrepancies in the quality and effectiveness of instruction

within science classrooms. Teachers may encounter hurdles in navigating the

vast array of available technological tools while aligning them seamlessly with the

intricacies of science content and pedagogical strategies. Consequently, this

disparity in TPACK proficiency among educators can impede the uniform delivery

of enhanced learning experiences, impacting students' access to innovative,

technology-rich, and content-specific educational opportunities.

In essence, the integration of technology tools like videos, presentations,

simulations, and online platforms enriches the teaching and learning experience

in science education. These tools empower educators to create dynamic,

interactive, and personalized learning environments, fostering students' curiosity,

critical thinking, and proficiency in scientific knowledge. As technology continues

to advance, its integration into science education remains pivotal in preparing

students for an increasingly technology-driven world.

This action research will be conducted in Malamig National High School

among Grades 7-10 Science Teachers to help understand the level of

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) in teaching science

subjects.

Theoretical Framework

Conceptual Framework

IV DV
Teachers level of understanding Teachers level of understanding
teaching content in terms of: teaching content in terms of:
1. technology knowledge 1. technology knowledge
2. technological content 2. technological content
knowledge knowledge
3. technological pedagogical 3. technological pedagogical
knowledge knowledge
4. technological pedagogical 4. technological pedagogical
content knowledge content knowledge
Students level of performance in
Science in terms of: Students level of performance in
1.1 written works; Science in terms of:
1.2 performance tasks and • written works;
1.3 quarterly assessment? • performance tasks and
• quarterly assessment?
BEFORE the implementation of
Project TRIP AFTER the implementation of Project
TRIP

Proposed Teaching Enhancement Plan

II. PROPOSED INNOVATION, INTERVENTION AND STRATEGY

The developed Project TRIP focuses on Technological Pedagogical

Content Knowledge (TPACK) and encourages teachers to reinvent and innovate

their pedagogical approaches in teaching science involves several key steps:

1. Assessment of TPACK Competencies: Begin by assessing teachers'

current TPACK competencies related to science education. Use surveys,

interviews, or self-assessment tools to gauge teachers' proficiency in

integrating technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge specifically

within the context of teaching science.

2. Targeted Professional Development: Design professional development

programs tailored to enhance TPACK competencies in science education.

Offer workshops, training sessions, or courses that focus on integrating

technology tools (e.g., simulations, data visualization software) to teach

scientific concepts effectively. Emphasize pedagogical strategies that

encourage inquiry-based learning and critical thinking in science

classrooms.

3. Integration of TPACK into Curriculum Design: Collaborate with educators

to redesign science curricula that integrate TPACK principles seamlessly.

Encourage the development of lesson plans or teaching modules that

incorporate technology tools to enhance content delivery, promote active

student engagement, and facilitate deeper understanding of scientific

concepts.
4. Model Lessons and Peer Learning: Facilitate model lessons or

demonstration sessions where experienced educators showcase how they

effectively integrate TPACK in teaching science. Encourage peer learning

and collaboration among teachers by organizing peer observation

sessions, allowing them to learn from each other's innovative practices.

5. Technology Tool Exploration: Provide teachers with opportunities to

explore and experiment with various technology tools relevant to science

education. Offer access to educational software, online resources, virtual

labs, or data analysis tools that align with science curriculum objectives.

Encourage teachers to evaluate and select tools that best suit their

teaching styles and students' needs.

6. Action Research Projects: Encourage teachers to engage in action

research projects focused on integrating TPACK in science instruction.

Support them in designing and implementing innovative teaching

strategies, utilizing technology tools, and assessing the impact on student

learning outcomes. Encourage reflection and documentation of successes,

challenges, and lessons learned.

7. Ongoing Support and Collaboration: Establish communities of practice or

online forums where teachers can share experiences, exchange ideas,

and seek support related to TPACK integration in science teaching. Foster

 a supportive environment that encourages continuous learning, feedback,

and collaboration among educators.

8. Evaluation and Continuous Improvement: Continuously assess the impact

of the intervention on teachers' pedagogical practices and student learning

outcomes. Use surveys, classroom observations, and student

assessments to evaluate changes in teaching methods and student

engagement. Gather feedback from teachers to refine the intervention and

ensure ongoing improvement.

By implementing this, educators can strengthen their TPACK competencies

and transform their pedagogical practices in teaching science. This approach

fosters a dynamic, technology-rich learning environment that promotes inquiry,

critical thinking, and deeper understanding of scientific concepts among students.

III. ACTION RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What is the teachers level of understanding teaching content in terms of:

1.1 technology knowledge

1.2 technological content knowledge

1.3 technological pedagogical knowledge

1.4 technological pedagogical content knowledge

2. What is the students level of performance in Science in terms of:

1.1 written works;

1.2 performance tasks and

1.3 quarterly assessment?

 3. Is there a significant difference between the indicators of teachers level of

understanding teaching content in terms of the seven indicators before

and after Project TRIP (Teachers Reinventing and Innovating Pedagogical

knowledge)

4. What teaching enhancement plan may be proposed based on the results

of the study?

IV. ACTION RESEARCH METHOD

This research is a descriptive experimental research design .

A. PARTICIPANTS AND OTHER SOURCES OF DATA – the participants

of the action research will be the 100% JHS Science Teachers of Malamig

National High School for SY 2023-2024.

B. DATA GATHERING METHODS

Prior to the conduct of the study, the researcher will perform the

following procedures. The researcher will formally request permission to

conduct the study from the Schools Division Superintendent, endorsed by

the school head. Upon receiving approval, the researcher will personally

distribute the questionnaires to the designated participants, ensuring direct

delivery to each individual. Participants will be allotted adequate time to

comfortably complete the questionnaires at their convenience. The

researcher will personally collect all completed questionnaires after the

allotted time frame. Post-retrieval, the researcher will meticulously tally,

tabulate, process, and analyze all gathered responses from the

participants. To systematically organize and summarize the acquired data,

 the researcher will develop tables that facilitate the analysis and

interpretation of the collected information.

C. DATA ANALYSIS PLAN

This research will use a survey questionnaire that will be

administered before and after the implementation of the program. There is

a significant progress. The data that will be gathered by the researchers

will be tabulated and statistically analyzed based on the purposes of the

study.

The researcher will use the following statistical tools.

1. Weighted Mean- This will be used to measure the teachers level of

understanding teaching content in Science.

2. Frequency Percentage- This will be used to measure the students

performance before and after the project implementation.

3. T-Test – this will be used to test the difference between the

performance of students

V. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The following are the results of the conducted action research in Malamig
National High School using the likert scaling
Scale Statistical Limit Interpretation
5 4.21-5.00 Very High
4 3.41-4.20 High
3 2.61-3.40 Moderate
2 1.81-2.60 Low
1 1.00-1.80 Very Low

1. What is the teachers level of understanding teaching content in terms of:

1.1 technology knowledge

technology knowledge Mean Interpretation
1. I have the technical skills I need to use 4.28 Very High
technology.
2. I have the knowledge to learn technology 3.26 Moderate
easily.
3. I can solve the problems that I encounter 2.52 Low
when using technology.
4. I know different types of technology. 3.18 Moderate
5. I can install a new programme that I 3.92 High
would like to use.
6. I can create and edit a video clip. 4.00 High
7. I can save an image from a website to 4.16 High
the hard drive of my computer
8. I can send an email with an attachment. 4.06 High
9. I can create a basic presentation using 4.63 Very High
PowerPoint or a similar programme.
10. I can create a document with text and 3.72 High
graphics in a word processing
programme
Overall Mean 3.77 High

The highest mean of 4.63 in item 9 showed a very high level of teachers

understanding in teaching content in creating a basic presentation using

powerpoint or similar programe while the lowest mean of 2.52 in item 3

indicates low understanding of teachers in solving problems encountered

using technology. This indicates a potential gap in training or support for

teachers in effectively navigating technological challenges. The low mean

score in solving problems points to a need for targeted professional

development focused on enhancing teachers’ problem-solving skills related to

technology. This could involve workshops, peer mentoring, or access to

resources that specifically address common technological issues in

educational settings.

An overall mean of 3.77 indicates high level of teachers understanding

when it comes to technology knowledge. This suggests that teachers may

 benefit from further training that not only enhances their technical skills but

also equips them with strategies for overcoming obstacles they face in

applying technology in the classroom. The ability to effectively use technology

is crucial for modern teaching practices. Addressing the identified gaps can

improve teachers' confidence and competence, ultimately leading to better

educational outcomes for students. while teachers show strong content

knowledge in using technology for presentations, enhancing their problem-

solving abilities is essential for maximizing the effectiveness of technology in

teaching Science subject.

1.2 technological content knowledge

technological content knowledge Mean Interpretatio

n
1. I know how my subject matter can be 4.80 Very High
represented with the application of
technology.
2. I know about technologies that I can 3.76 High
use for enhancing the understanding of
specific concepts in my subject matter.
3. I know about the technologies that I 3.52 High
have to use for the research of content
of my subject matter.
4. I can use appropriate technologies (eg. 3.19 Moderate
multimedia resources, simulation) to
represent the content of my teaching
subject.
5. I know about technologies that I can 2.62 Moderate
use for enhancing the understanding of
specific concepts in my subject matter.
6. I can use technology representations 3.34 Moderate
(i.e., multimedia, visual demonstrations,
etc.) to demonstrate specific concepts
in my subject matter.
OVERALL MEAN 3.54 High
 The highest mean of 4.80 in item "I know how my subject matter can be

represented with the application of technology" shows a very high level of

understanding among teachers. This suggests that teachers are highly confident

in integrating technology to represent their subject content effectively, indicating

strong conceptual knowledge of technological applications in education.

Whereas the The item "I know about technologies that I can use for

enhancing the understanding of specific concepts in my subject matter" attained

the lowest mean of 2.62 scores moderately. This suggests that teachers feel less

confident in their ability to identify or use technologies to improve the

comprehension of specific concepts in their subjects. It highlights a potential gap

in training or exposure to subject-specific educational technologies.

The overall mean indicates a high level of understanding regarding

technological content knowledge. While there is room for improvement, especially

in areas related to using technology to enhance specific concepts, teachers

generally demonstrate a solid grasp of how technology can support teaching.

Teachers have a strong understanding of how to represent their subject

matter through technology, but they are less confident in using specific

technologies to enhance understanding of concepts. This suggests that while

teachers are familiar with the general use of technology in education, additional

training or support in more specialized technological applications may be

beneficial.

1.3 technological pedagogical knowledge

technological pedagogical knowledge Mean Interpretation

1. I can use technologies that enhance the 3.82 Very high
teaching approaches for a lesson.
2. I can use technologies that enhance 3.60 High
 students' learning of a lesson.
3. My teacher education programme has 4.00 High
stimulated me to think more deeply
about how technology could influence
the teaching approaches I use in the
classroom.
4. I can use technologies that are 4.16 High
appropriate for my teaching.
5. I can apply technologies to different 4.00 High
teaching activities.
6. I can use technologies to assess 4.00 High
students learning.
7. I can use technology to introduce my 3.18 Moderate
students to real world scenarios.
8. I can assist my students to use 2.73 Moderate
technology to plan and monitor their
learning.
9. I can assist my students to use 2.92 Moderate
technology to construct different forms of
knowledge representations.
10. I can assist my students to collaborate 3.17 Moderate
with each other using technology.
OVERALL MEAN 3.56 High
The interpretation of the data regarding teachers' technological

pedagogical knowledge (TPK) shows that teachers generally possess a strong

understanding of how to integrate technology into their teaching, although there

are some areas where improvement is needed.

The highest mean of 4.16 in item 4 "I can use technologies that are

appropriate for my teaching" has the highest mean score, indicating that teachers

feel confident in selecting and using technologies that align well with their

teaching methods. This reflects a strong understanding of how to apply

technology effectively in the classroom.

While the lowest mean of 2.73 in The item "I can assist my students to use

technology to plan and monitor their learning" scores the lowest. This indicates a

moderate, and comparatively weaker, ability to support students in using

technology for self-directed learning and tracking their progress. Teachers may

benefit from additional training in student-centered technology use.

An overall Mean of 3.56 indicates high level of understanding in

technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK). The overall mean suggests that

teachers have a generally high level of technological pedagogical knowledge.

They are capable of integrating technology to enhance teaching and learning,

though some areas such as using technology for student collaboration and

knowledge construction remain moderately developed.

Teachers exhibit a high level of competence in using technology to enhance

their teaching but are less confident in supporting students’ active use of

technology for independent learning, collaboration, and real-world application.

Strengthening these areas could further elevate the effectiveness of technology

integration in their pedagogical practices.

1.4 technological pedagogical content knowledge

technological pedagogical content Mean Interpretation

knowledge
1. I can teach lessons that appropriately 3.96 High
combine my subject matter, technologies
and teaching approaches.
2. I can select technologies to use in my 3.54 High
classroom that enhance what I teach,
how I teach and what students learn
3. I can use strategies that combine content, 2.62 Moderate
technologies, and teaching approaches in
my classroom.
4. I can find and use online materials that 2.81 Moderate
effectively demonstrate a specific
principle in my subject area.
5. I can use technology to facilitate scientific 3.19 Moderate
inquiry in the classroom.
6. I can use technology to create effective 3.52 High
 representations of content that departs
from textbooks approaches.
7. I can structure activities to help students 2.16 Low
to construct different representations of
the content using appropriate
technologies
8. I can design inquiry activities to guide 2.34 Low
students to make sense of the content
knowledge with appropriate technologies
(e.g., simulations, web-based materials)
OVERALL MEAN 3.02 Moderate

The item 1 attained the highest mean of 3.96 where teachers can teach

lessons that appropriately combine my subject matter, technologies, and teaching

approaches” has the highest score, indicating that teachers feel confident in

integrating technology with their subject matter and pedagogical methods. This

demonstrates a solid foundation in TPCK, where teachers effectively blend

content, technology, and instructional strategies.

Whereas the lowest mean of 2.16 in item 7 where teachers can structure

activities to help students construct different representations of the content using

appropriate technologies” has the lowest score. This indicates a significant

challenge for teachers in facilitating activities where students actively use

technology to engage with and represent content in creative ways. Teachers may

need more support or professional development in designing student-centered,

technology-enhanced activities.

The overall mean suggests that teachers have a moderate level of TPCK.

While they demonstrate some competence in using technology to support

teaching and learning, there are key areas where their skills can be further

developed. While teachers show a good understanding of integrating technology

into their lessons, they face challenges in using technology to create more
interactive and student-centered learning experiences. To improve their TPCK,

teachers could benefit from additional training in designing inquiry-based learning

and facilitating student engagement through technology-driven activities.

2 What is the students level of performance in Science

Level of
Grades f % Verbal Description
Performance
90 and above 15 .75 Outstanding
85 – 89 18 4.48 Very satisfactory
80 – 84 41 14.93 Satisfactory
Written Tasks 75 – 79 84 41.05 Fair
Did not meet
74 and below 2 42.54
Expectations
TOTAL 160 100%
90 and above 18 21.64 Outstanding
85 – 89 25 7.46 Very satisfactory
80 – 84 29 9.7 Satisfactory
Performance
75 – 79 73 32.09 Fair
Tasks
Did not meet
74 and below 15 28.36
Expectations
TOTAL
90 and above 21 11.94
Outstanding
85 – 89 46 7.46
Very satisfactory
Quarterly 80 – 84 39 26.87
Satisfactory
Assessment 75 – 79 45 27.61 Fair
Did not meet
74 and below 9 26.12
Expectations
A performance task is any learning activity or assessment that

asks students to perform to demonstrate their knowledge,

understanding and proficiency. Performance tasks yield a tangible

product and/or performance that serve as evidence of learning. These

build on earlier content knowledge, process skills, and work habits and

are strategically placed in the lesson or unit to enhance learning in

Science. On the other hand, 27.61% of the students attained fair

performance in the quarterly assessment. This is the periodic

assessment in Science consisting of 50-item test that covers the

competencies being taught for the quarter. Relatively, there are

students who performed outstandingly in written tasks, performance

tasks and in quarterly assessment as indicated by .75%, 21. 64% and

11.94%.

Purportedly, academic performance in Science is equated to

students motivation and interests in the academic pursuits that they

do, e.g., scientific cognition that they exposed with in school science

according to the findings of Bautista (2013). Aptly, learning is to

engage and expose students in a meaningful learning condition that

constantly make them wander in a sustained culture of practice. This

means the student has developed the fundamental knowledge and

with little guidance from teacher and/or with some assistance from

peers and can transfer those understandings through authentic

performance tasks since there are student attained a grade of 74% and

below. The finding shows that the pupils are performing satisfactorily

well. This could be attributed to the desired competencies attained in

the subject.

3 Is there a significant difference between the indicators of teachers level of

understanding teaching content in terms of the seven indicators before and

after Project TRIP (Teachers Reinventing and Innovating Pedagogical

knowledge)

Mann- Wilcoxon W Z P=value Decision

Whitney
U
 Pre -test 112.500 232.500 .000 0.00
Reject the
Post Test 102.500 222.500 -.041 .0367
hypothesis

The results presented show that there is a significant difference between

the indicators of teachers' level of understanding of teaching content before and

after the implementation of Project TRIP (Teachers Reinventing and Innovating

Pedagogical Knowledge). Since the P-value is less than 0.05, you would reject

the null hypothesis. This suggests that there is a statistically significant difference

between the teachers' level of understanding of teaching content before and after

Project TRIP. The results indicate that Project TRIP had a positive and significant

impact on improving teachers' understanding of teaching content, as evidenced

by the significant differences between pre-test and post-test scores across the

seven indicators. The project appears to have successfully enhanced teachers'

pedagogical and technological content knowledge.

4 What teaching enhancement plan may be proposed based on the results of

the study?

Based on the results of the study, which indicate areas of strength and gaps

in teachers' understanding of teaching content and the use of technology (before

and after Project TRIP), a targeted Teaching Enhancement Plan can be

developed. The plan should focus on sustaining the improvements brought by

Project TRIP while addressing areas where further support is needed.

Conclusion

The researcher concludes the following:

4.1 The teachers level of understanding teaching content in terms of

 technology knowledge, technological content knowledge, technological

pedagogical knowledge is high while moderate understanding on

technological pedagogical content knowledge

2. The students level of performance in Science in terms of written works;

performance tasks and quarterly assessment is fair during pretest and

very satisfactory during post-test.

3. There is a statistically significant difference in the teachers' level of

understanding of teaching content before and after Project TRIP. The

program successfully improved their technological and pedagogical

competencies.

4. The enhancement plan should focus on sustaining improvements brought

by Project TRIP while addressing gaps in teaching Science subject.

VI. ACTION RESEARCH WORK PLAN AND TIMELINES

April 2024

May 2024
February
January

March
2024

2024

2024

Milestones and Activities

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Milestone 1: Pre-Data

Collection Activities

Data gathering and seeking

approval from authorities

Preparation for the intervention

and research instrument

Obtaining free prior and

informed consent from teachers

Milestone 2: Data Collection

Orientation on the objectives

and features of the study

Administration of research

instrument before the proposed

intervention

Implementation of proposed

intervention

Administration of research

instrument after the proposed

intervention

Milestone 3: Data Analysis

Data processing, analysis, and

interpretation

Milestone 4: Completing the

Research Paper

Crafting an action plan on

implementing the intervention

activity

Reproduction and submission of

completed action research

manuscripts

Oral presentation of completed

action research

Plans for Dissemination and Advocacy

 The study's findings will be shared with the respondents with the school

principal's approval. The respondents will have the chance to voice their

concerns about the study and will learn how action research is being conducted

through this method.

The researchers will enhance the suggested intervention for better

implementation by using the outcomes of this action research as baseline data.

VII. References

Adunola, O. M. O. T. E. R. E. (2011). The impact of teachers’ teaching

methods on the academic performance of primary school pupils in Ijebu-Ode
local cut area of Ogun State.
Akareem, H. S., & Hossain, S. S. (2012). Perception of education quality in
private universities of Bangladesh: a study from
students' perspective. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 22(1),
11-33.
Al-Hariri, M. T., & Al-Hattami, A. A. (2017). Impact of students' use of
technology on their learning achievements in physiology courses at the University
of Dammam. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 12(1), 82-85.
Atweh, D., (2017). Foundations of Curriculum. Lecture, Philippine Normal
University.
Arnon, S., & Reichel, N. (2007). Who is the ideal teacher? Am I? Similarity
and difference in perception of students of education regarding the qualities of a
good teacher and of their own qualities as teachers. Teachers and Teaching:
theory and practice, 13(5), 441-464.
Arokoyu, A.A. & Nenalebari, N.J. (2018). Effect of collaborative and
individualized learning strategies on students’ performance and retention in
organic chemistry. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and
Development.
Ayeni, A.J., (2011). “Teachers professional development and quality
assurance in Nigerian Secondary Schools,” World Journal of Education, 1(2):143-
149.
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative learning
techniques: A handbook for college faculty. John Wiley & Sons.
Scott, T. P., Schroeder, C., Tolson, H., & Bentz, A. (2006). Effective K-12
science instruction; Elements of research-based science education. Center for
Mathematics and Science Education, Texas A&M University, College of Science:
Texas Science Initiative of the Texas Education Agency.
Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (Eds.). (1997). The challenge of problem-based
learning. Psychology Press.
 Chang, W., Jones, A., & Kunnemeyer, R. (2002, June). Interactive
teaching approach in year one university physics in Taiwan: Implementation and
evaluation. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching (Vol. 3, No.
1, pp. 1-23). The Education University of Hong Kong, Department of Science and
Environmental Studies.
Corbel, C. (1998). Instructional Technology Strategy. Adult Migrant
English.
Cotton, K. (1988). Classroom questioning. School improvement research
series, 5, 1-22.
VS &Rengarajan, D. V (1999),“Innovative Methods of Teaching,”
NationalResearchCouncil. Educational Journal Publication.
Research Proposal Application Form and Endorsement of Immediate Supervisor

VIII. COST ESTIMATES

The table below shows the action research activities to be executed and

the cost estimates for this study.

MATERIALS UNIT TOTAL

ACTIVITIES QUANTITY
NEEDED PRICE COST

Writing and Printing A4 Bond Papers 3 Ream 190.00 570.00

of Action Research Black Ink 1 Bottle 290.00 290.00

Proposal Copies Web Searching 2 Loads 200.00 400.00

Submission of Travel Expenses 2 Way

Action Research (Van) 300.00 600.00

Proposal Copies to

Schools Division

Office

Printing of A4 Bond Papers 1 Ream 210.00 210.00

Completed Action Black Ink 1 Bottle 250.00 250.00

Research Copies

Submission of Bookbinding Fee 2 Copies 60.00 120.00

Completed Action
Research Copies A4 Bond Papers 1 Ream 210.00 210.00

TOTAL 2650

XIV. Recommendation

1. Continue and expand programs like Project TRIP, with an emphasis on

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). This can be

achieved by providing ongoing workshops, advanced training, and

resources that focus on integrating technology with subject-specific

pedagogy.

2. Establish a tech support system for teachers that includes both

immediate troubleshooting assistance and long-term solutions such as

self-help guides, tutorials, and peer mentoring.

3. Incorporate more student-centered learning activities involving technology,

such as project-based learning, collaborative tools, and digital portfolios.

Train teachers on how to facilitate these activities and support student

collaboration using digital tools.

4. Develop and implement inquiry-based learning modules that use

technology to facilitate scientific and inquiry-based thinking. Provide

teachers with example lesson plans and materials that integrate

simulations, web-based resources, and multimedia content.

 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
MIMAROPA REGION
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF ORIENTAL MINDORO
MALAMIG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
MALAMIG, GLORIA, ORIENTAL MINDORO

January 10, 2024

MARIA LUISA D. SERVANDO, PhD., CESO VI

Schools Division Superintendent
Schools Division of Oriental Mindoro
Calapan City

Madam:

Greetings of Peace!

This is to ask permission from your good office to allow me to conduct the study entitled
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE OF TEACHERS
AND PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS IN SCIENCE: BASIS FOR TEACHING
ENHANCEMENT PLAN” to be implemented in Malamig National High School.

This study will assess the teachers level of understanding in teaching science contents and
how it affects the students performance in Science. Enclosed are the proposed title,
introduction, methodology and action plan of the proposed research.

I am anticipating your favorable response to this matter. Thank you and God bless.

Respectfully yours,

CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA
Researcher

Noted:

MARCIANO S. ATIENZA, JR.

Principal III

Approved:

MARIA LUISA D. SERVANDO, PhD., CESO VI

Schools Division Superintendent
 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT TOOLS
Part I. Teachers level of understanding teaching content
technology knowledge 5 4 3 2 1
11. I have the technical skills I need to use
technology.
12. I have the knowledge to learn technology
easily.
13. I can solve the problems that I encounter
when using technology.
14. I know different types of technology.
15. I can install a new programme that I would
like to use.
16. I can create and edit a video clip.
17. I can save an image from a website to the
hard drive of my computer
18. I can send an email with an attachment.
19. I can create a basic presentation using
PowerPoint or a similar programme.
20. I can create a document with text and
graphics in a word processing programme

technological content knowledge 5 4 3 2 1

7. I know how my subject matter can be
represented with the application of
technology.
8. I know about technologies that I can use for
enhancing the understanding of specific
concepts in my subject matter.
9. I know about the technologies that I have to
use for the research of content of my
subject matter.
10. I can use appropriate technologies (eg.
multimedia resources, simulation) to
represent the content of my teaching
subject.
11. I know about technologies that I can use for
enhancing the understanding of specific
concepts in my subject matter.
12. I can use technology representations (i.e.,
multimedia, visual demonstrations, etc.) to
demonstrate specific concepts in my
subject matter.
technological pedagogical knowledge 5 4 3 2 1
11. I can use technologies that enhance the
teaching approaches for a lesson. 2.50
1.45
12. I can use technologies that enhance
students' learning of a lesson.
13. My teacher education programme has
stimulated me to think more deeply about
how technology could influence the
teaching approaches I use in the
classroom.
14. I can use technologies that are appropriate
for my teaching.
15. I can apply technologies to different
teaching activities.
16. I can use technologies to assess students
learning.
17. I can use technology to introduce my
students to real world scenarios.
18. I can assist my students to use technology
to plan and monitor their learning.
19. I can assist my students to use technology
to construct different forms of knowledge
representations.
20. I can assist my students to collaborate with
each other using technology.

technological pedagogical content knowledge 5 4 3 2 1

1. I can teach lessons that appropriately
combine my subject matter, technologies
and teaching approaches.
2. I can select technologies to use in my
classroom that enhance what I teach, how I
teach and what
3. students learn
4. I can use strategies that combine content,
technologies, and teaching approaches in
my classroom.
5. I can use technologies that enhance the
understanding of the content for a lesson.
6. I can find and use online materials that
effectively demonstrate a specific principle
 in my subject area.
7. I can use technology to facilitate scientific
inquiry in the classroom.
8. I can use technology to create effective
representations of content that departs
from textbooks approaches.
9. I can structure activities to help students to
construct different representations of the
content using appropriate technologies
(e.g., Webspiration, Mindmaps, and Wikis).
10. I can create self-directed learning activities
of the content knowledge with appropriate
technologies (e.g., Blogs, Web quests).
11. I can design inquiry activities to guide
students to make sense of the content
knowledge with
12. appropriate technologies (e.g., simulations,
web-based materials)
RESEARCH INFORMATION
RESEARCH TITLE
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE OF TEACHERS
AND PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS IN SCIENCE: BASIS FOR TEACHING
ENHANCEMENT PLAN
SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH
This study will assess the teachers level of understanding in teaching science contents and
how it affects the students performance in Science.
RESEARCH CATEGORY (Check Only RESEARCH AGENDA CATEGORY
One) (Check only one main research theme)
o National o Teaching and Learning
o Region o Child Protection
o Schools Division o Human Resource Development
o District o Governance
o√ School (Check up to one cross – cutting theme,
(Check only One) if applicable)
o√ Action Research o DRRM
o Basic Research o Gender Development
o Inclusive Education
o Others (Please specify):

FUND SOURCE (e.g. BERF, SELF, AMOUNT

Others)
SELF 2650.00

TOTAL AMOUNT 2650.00

*Indicate also if proponent will use personal funds.

A. PROPONENT INFORMATION

LEAD PROPONENT/ INDIVIDUAL PROPONENT

LAST NAME: FIRST NAME: MIDDLE NAME:
ESPINA CLARIZZEL BARBERO

BIRTHDATE(MM/DD/YYYY) SEX: POSITION/DESIGNATION:

06/26/1992 FEMALE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
TEACHER II
REGION/DIVISION/SCHOOL (whichever is applicable)

MALAMIG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

 CONTACT NUMBER 1: CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS:
09452519960 NUMBER 2: [email protected]

EDUCATIONAL TITLE OF THESIS/ RELATED RESEARCH

ATTAINMENT (DEGREE PROJECT
TITLE)enumerate from
bachelor’s degree up to
doctorate degree
N/A

Master of Arts in Education major N/A

in Biological Science
Bachelor of Secondary Education N/A
major in Biological Science
SIGNATURE OF PROPONENT:
 IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR’S CONFORME
I hereby endorse the attached research proposal. I certify that the proponent/s
has/have the capacity to implement a research study without compromising his/her office
functions.

MARCIANO S. ATIENZA, JR.

Name and Signature of Immediate Supervisor
Position/Designation: Principal III
Date:

MARIA LUISA D. SERVANDO, PhD., CESO VI

Name and Signature of Immediate Supervisor
Position/Designation: Schools Division Superintendent
Date:
DECLARATION OF ANTI – PLAGIARISM

1. I, CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA, understand that plagiarism is the act

of taking and using another’s ideas and works and passing them off as
one’s own. This includes explicitly copying the whole work of another
person and/or using some parts of their work without proper
acknowledgement and referencing.

2. I hereby attest to the originality of this research proposal and has

cited properly all the references used. We further commit that all
deliverables and the final research study emanating from this proposal
shall be original content. We shall use appropriate citations in referencing
other works from various sources.

3. I understand that violation from this declaration and commitment

shall be subject to consequences and shall be dealt with accordingly by the
Department of Education and (insert grant mechanism).

PROPONENT: I, CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA

SIGNATURE: __________________________________
DATE: January 10, 2024
 DECLARATION OD ABSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

1. I, CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA, understand that conflict of interest refers to

situation in which financial or other personal considerations may compromise my
judgment in evaluating, conducting, or reporting research.

2. I hereby declare that I do not have any personal conflict of interest that
may arise from my application and submission of my research proposal. We
understand that my research proposal may be returned to me if found out that
there is conflict of interest during the initial is screening as per (insert RMG
provisions).

3. Further, in case of any form of conflict of interest (possible or actual)

which may inadvertently emerge during the conduct of my research, I will duly
report it to the research committee for immediate action.

4. I understand that may be held accountable by the Department of Education

and (insert grant mechanism) for any conflict of interest which we have
intentionally concealed.

PROPONENT: I, CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA

SIGNATURE: _______________________________
DATE: January 10, 2024
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
MIMAROPA Region
SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE OF ORIENTAL MINDORO
School Governance and Operations Division
Planning and Research Section

CERTIFICATE OF RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT TOOL

This is to certify that the research instrument tool to be used in the gathering
of data for the proposed research of CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA titled "
TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE OF TEACHERS
AND PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS IN SCIENCE THROUGH PROJECT TRIP
(Teachers Reinventing and Innovating Pedagogical knowledge): BASIS FOR
TEACHING ENHANCEMENT PLAN” had been carefully examined for its validity
and reliability prior to the conduct of the study.

MARCIANO S. ATIENZA Jr., PhD.

Statistician, District Research Committee OR
Statistician, Schools Division Research Management Team

JOANN G. CARANDANG, PhD

Chairperson, Gloria District Research Committee
 PARENT/GUARDIAN CONSENT FORM FOR PARTICIPATION OF CHILDREN IN
ACTION RESEARCH

Title of Research: ENHANCING LEARNING OUTCOMES IN ICT SUBJECTS:

THROUGH PROJECT CRATE (CAI with Reintegration and Adaptation in Teaching)

Researcher(s): (Insert your name and any collaborators)

Institution: MALAMIG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Purpose of the Study:

What Your Child Will Do: Your child will be asked to participate in the action research
activities during school hours. These activities will take approximately ----------------- and
will be conducted by trained researcher. All sessions will be designed to be age-
appropriate, and participation is entirely voluntary.

Risks and Benefits: There are minimal risks involved in this research. However, your
child’s participation will provide valuable insights that can help us design better programs
for sustainable resource management and educational. Your child’s identity and
responses will remain confidential and will not be shared with anyone outside the
research team.

Voluntary Participation: Participation in this study is entirely voluntary. You are free to
withdraw your child at any time without penalty. Your child’s participation or non-
participation will not affect their relationship with the school or the researchers.

Confidentiality: All information gathered during this research will be kept confidential.
Your child’s name and any identifying information will not be included in any reports or
publications. Only group data will be reported.

Contact Information: If you have any questions or concerns about the study, feel free to
contact:

 Researcher:----------------------------
 Institution:--------------------------------

Consent Statement: I have read the information above, and I voluntarily agree to allow
my child to participate in this research.

Child's Name:

Parent/Guardian's Name:
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
MIMAROPA Region
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF ORIENTAL MINDORO
MALAMIG NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Malamig, Gloria, Oriental Mindoro

MARCIANO S. ATIENZA JR.

Principal III

Sir;

Greetings of Peace!

This is to ask permission from your good office to allow me to distribute

questionnaire pertaining to conduct the study entitled TECHNOLOGICAL
PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE OF TEACHERS AND PERFORMANCE OF
STUDENTS IN SCIENCE THROUGH PROJECT TRIP (Teachers Reinventing and
Innovating Pedagogical knowledge): BASIS FOR TEACHING ENHANCEMENT PLAN
to be implemented in Malamig National High School.
This study will help understand the level of Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPCK) in teaching science subjects among Grades 7-10 students and
Science Teachers in Malamig National High School for SY 2023-2024. Enclosed are the
proposed title, introduction, methodology and action plan of the proposed research.
I am anticipating your favorable response to this matter. Thank you and God
bless.

Respectfully yours,

CLARIZZEL B. ESPINA
Researcher
 OUTPUT
ENHANCEMENT PLAN

Objective Action Timeline Persons

Strategies involve
Improve teachers' Provide Advanced Year Teacher
ability to Technology Training: round School Head
effectively use
 Conduct workshops that
and troubleshoot
focus on using a variety
technology in
of digital tools (e.g.,
their classrooms.
presentation software,
learning management
systems) and solving
common tech problems.
 Offer training on more
advanced tools such as
digital assessments,
video editing software,
and interactive classroom
tools.

On-Demand Technology
Support:

 Create an “on-call” or
"tech buddy" system,
where teachers can seek
help from tech-savvy
colleagues.
 Provide access to online
tutorials and
 troubleshooting guides.

Hands-on Technology
Sessions:

 Organize practical
sessions where teachers
can experiment with new
technology tools in a
supportive environment,
with a focus on
troubleshooting and
maximizing the use of
tech in the classroom.

Enable teachers Content-Specific Technology Year Teacher

to use technology Workshops: round School Head
effectively for
 Organize workshops
deeper content
focused on how to use
exploration and to
technology to teach
enhance
specific subjects (e.g.,
students’
science simulations,
understanding of
history virtual tours,
subject matter.
interactive math
software).
 Showcase best practices
for integrating technology
into lessons to make
abstract or complex
topics more
understandable.

Online Resources and Digital

 Content:

 Provide teachers with

access to high-quality
online content, such as
educational videos,
simulations, and digital
textbooks that align with
their subject matter.
 Train teachers to curate
and select the most
effective online resources
for their specific subject
areas.

Peer Sharing of Best

Practices:

 Establish a platform or
meetings where teachers
can share successful
strategies and tools for
using technology in their
specific content areas.

Strengthen Student-Centered Technology Year Teacher

teachers' ability to Training: round School Head
use technology
 Train teachers in using
for student-
technology to facilitate
centered teaching
student-led activities,
and promote
such as collaborative
independent
projects, self-paced
learning and
learning platforms, and
collaboration.
 inquiry-based learning
tasks.
 Introduce digital tools that
promote student
collaboration, such as
Google Classroom,
Microsoft Teams, and
interactive whiteboards.

Incorporate Technology into

Assessments:

 Offer training on digital

formative and summative
assessment tools (e.g.,
Kahoot, Quizizz, Google
Forms) to monitor
students' progress and
understanding in real
time.
 Help teachers design
assessments that allow
students to demonstrate
understanding through
technology-based
projects (e.g., creating
videos, infographics,
digital presentations).

Develop Collaborative
Learning Strategies:

 Encourage the use of

platforms that facilitate
 group work and
communication (e.g.,
discussion boards, online
breakout rooms) and
train teachers to guide
students in collaborative
digital tasks.

Enhance  Design Inquiry-Based Year Teacher

teachers' ability to Learning Modules: round School Head
design lessons o Provide training on
that fully integrate creating inquiry-
technology with based learning
content and experiences that
pedagogy to use technology to
improve student explore real-world
outcomes. problems and
scientific inquiry
(e.g., using
simulations, web-
based research).
o Offer ready-to-use
templates and
lesson plans that
incorporate
technology,
pedagogy, and
content,
demonstrating
how these
elements work
together.
 Inquiry-Based
 Technology Integration:
o Train teachers in
using educational
tools that
encourage higher-
order thinking,
such as creating
mind maps
(MindMeister),
data analysis
using
spreadsheets, or
using coding
platforms for
problem-solving.
 Support for
Differentiated
Instruction:
o Offer workshops
on using
technology to
differentiate
instruction, such
as using adaptive
learning software
that adjusts to
students' needs or
using multimedia
resources to cater
to different
learning styles.
 Collaborative Lesson
Design:
o Encourage
teachers to
collaborate in
designing lessons
that integrate
technology with
content and
pedagogy, sharing
ideas and
resources to
create more
engaging and
effective learning
experiences.