Table 1.

Technological Knowledge

Standard Verbal In terms of technological knowledge, the table shows that the respondents can operate an LMS, create presentations and audio visual videos, include multimedia platforms,
Statements Mean
Deviation Interpretation
troubleshoot technical problems, and aware of a number of technology-related terms
1. I can operate an LMS Like
Google Classroom,
Quipper, Canvas or MS 3.47 0.64 Agree the respondents “agree” on in all statements with a mean value ranges from 3.50 to 2.90.
Team.

2. I can create simple yet

informative presentations
using MS PowerPoint or 3.40 0.51 Agree
create simple but insightful presentations using MS Powerpoint or WPS Office, interact with students about the lesson through online messaging, can include multimedia
WPS office.

3. I can create and edit audio platforms like Facebook, Youtube, in some of the activities, and can troubleshoot technical problems by themselves. Furthermore, they "agreed" on being able to create and edit
visual video lecture for my
3.20 0.56 Agree audiovisual video lectures for their class, and being fully aware of technology-related terms like Firewall, cache, flash, cookies, etc. As can be seen, they "strongly agreed" on the
class.

4. I reach out to my students characteristics that a teacher possesses, but only "agreed" on the two statements that certain teachers recognize but not in a wide variety of range. The dispersion of the effect, based
regarding our lesson thru
3.40 0.51 Agree
online messaging. on the standard deviation, showed that there is low uncertainty, indicating that there is a chance that these will not change significantly over time.

5. I include multimedia
platforms like Facebook,
YouTube, in some of our 3.47 0.52 Agree
activities.

6. I troubleshoot technical It has a lower SD meaning they are close to the average for each statements.
problems by myself. 3.07 0.70 Agree

7. I am fully aware of
technology-related terms
2.93 0.70 Agree
like Firewall, cache, flash,
cookies, etc.
Table 2. Pedagogical Knowledge

Standard
Statements Mean Verbal Interpretation
Deviation

1. I know how to assess student

Standard
performance in class. 3.47 0.52 Agree Statements Mean Verbal Interpretation
Deviation
2. I use wide range of teaching
1. I have sufficient
approaches in a class. 3.13 0.35 Agree
knowledge about my
3.53 0.52 Strongly Agree
subject
3. I am familiar with common
student understandings and
3 0.52 Agree 2. I have read recent
misconceptions.
developments and
applications in my 3.40 0.51 Agree
4. I use variety of teaching
subject
strategies to relate various
3.2 0.41 Agree
concepts to students.
3. I have attended courses/
webinars that are
5. I correct students'
relevant to my field of 3.60 0.51 Strongly Agree
misconception about certain
3.33 0.49 Agree specialization.
topic.
4. I am up-to-date
6. I adjust teaching style based on
regarding the resources
students' performance or 3.33 0.49 Agree
3.47 0.52 Agree in my subject.
feedback.
5. I recognize leaders in my
7. I show fairness in dealing with
subject. 3.53 0.52 Strongly agree
students. 3.53 0.52 Strongly Agree
6. I am proficient in
8. I provide activities that can
developing class
help students cope with the 3.46 0.52 Agree 3.26 0.46 Agree
activities and projects.
subject.
7. I discuss the lessons
spontaneously without 3.20 0.62 Agree
difficulty

Table 3. Content Knowledge

In terms of the level of awareness of the respondents on mode of transmission of STIs, Table 2 shows 2 out of 5 questions tackling about mode of transmission of STIs were answered correctly by more than 50% of the

respondents. This includes the transmission of STIs from person to person through sexual contact (72.9%) followed by the question of spreading of HIV from contaminated needles (64.1%). The highest correctly answered

item is from person to person and this is possibly because nearly all students learned the basic concepts about STI in their Health-related subjects and this mode of transmission is the first thing that was taught to them.

In terms of the level of awareness of the respondents on causative agent of STIs, Table 3 shows 3 out of 5 questions tackling about causative agent of STIs were answered correctly by more than 50% of the respondents.

Questions on the causes of STIs top the list of items correctly answered with a percentage of 81.5% followed by HIV as the causative agent for AIDS (65.6%) followed by the question on Gonorrhea’s bacterium which is

Neisseria gonorrhoeae (63.2%). The highest correctly answered item is from bacteria, viruses and parasites as the causative agents for the STIs which is maybe because the school provides STI-related seminars that provide

them with the basic information including what causes these infections.

In terms of the level of awareness of the respondents on HIV/AIDS, Table 5 shows 3 out of 5 questions tackling about HIV/AIDS were answered correctly by more than 50% of the respondents. This includes the

question on the causative agent of AIDS (60.9%) followed by HIV/AIDS affecting immune system (54.4%). Nearly all students come to know about the causative agent of AIDS while (39.1%) are incorrect in terms of this

question item. This is maybe because students know that AIDS is a serious and fatal sickness that is becoming popular since it is the sickness that has cure and they might have heard of HIV also which is the one that

causes AIDS.

Table 8 represents the number of respondents grouped according to their total garnered scores and its corresponding mark under the 30 point self-made rating scale of the researchers. Regardless of their profile, less

than half (38%) of the respondents are aware to some extent on STI. A hundred seven (31%) of the respondents are aware to a minimal extent with scores 7-12 points bracket. Few (21%) of the respondents are aware to

moderate extent with scores between 19-24 points bracket. Twenty-six (9%) of the respondents are not aware at all with scores between 1-6 points bracket. Two (1%) of the respondents are aware to a great extent with scores

between 25-30 points bracket.

Table 9 reveals the combined contribution of the respondents’ demographic profile to their level of awareness. It shows that gender was affecting their level of awareness as reflected by its P-value. Only 10% of the variability

of the factors was influencing on their level of awareness, in addition, 90% of it would be coming from other unknown factors. Using Multiple Regression, it revealed that the Level of Awareness is dependent only to gender of

the respondents while it is independent on the Grade Level and Age of the respondents.

In terms of technological knowledge, it is shown on Table 1 that the level of technological knowledge of STEM teachers’ evaluation vary among group of raters. With a 3.28 mean values, equivalent to moderate proficiency. Conversely, with the rating from class observation, the value of

mean, 2.38 which is equivalent to slight proficiency is significantly lower with that of the other two groups of evaluators. is is probably because there are two specific statements regarding technological knowledge that were rated as “low proficiency”. Teachers were rated low in the statements,

“I make use of laboratory equipment with ease” with mean value of 1.40 and, “I apply certain techniques when using laboratory instruments” with mean value of 1.48.

Table 4 presents the respondents’ pedagogical knowledge or the knowledge of the SHS biology teachers to deliver, thru different strategies and approaches, the lessons in biology to their students. As shown in the table, students evaluated their teacher as moderately proficient with a

mean value of 2.99. Same trend can be seen with biology teachers’ self-evaluation as well as the result of class observations with mean values of 3.45 and 2.65, respectively. It is worthy to note that evaluation of biology teachers’ pedagogical knowledge is the same in all group of evaluators

which means they all agree that there is still aspects on the use of appropriate biology teaching methodologies that should be addressed to achieve highest proficiency. It is important also to mention, however, that the statements, “I use variety of strategies in presenting topics in biology”, “I try

another strategy when my students are having difficulty understanding the lesson” and, “I provide activities that can help students cope with the subject” were rated as slightly proficient by class observers. And, it is quite obvious that the ratings from class observations are somewhat different

with that the students’ and teachers’ self-evaluation as indicated in its mean value although it is also verbally interpreted as moderate proficiency.
 Domains Composite Mean Standard Deviation Verbal Interpretation
0.59 Moderate
3.276
Technological
0.48 Moderate
3.325
Pedagogical
0.52 Moderate
3.409
Content