Teachers Engagement Strategies Among

Kindergarten Learners During

COVID 19 Pandemic

2021

1
 Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, during pandemic the new school year comes with new modes

of learning, a “new normal” in education established as a precaution against the

ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. This new normal, according to Grant Thornton,

has affected—and will continue to affect—the 27 million learners and one million

teachers and non-teaching staff in the country.

As it stands, more than 16 million students will be utilizing various

learning modalities this year, such as Online learning, Modular learning and

Radio- and television-based learning

Whatever mode of flexible learning the school may implement, teachers

and administrators are undoubtedly concerned with maintaining learners’

engagement. Many challenges come to mind, but they can generally be divided

into three general categories: Administrative. Some modes of learning are

conducted without a teacher or facilitator, and students may get confused on

how they could progress through the course, especially if they are not aware of

the expected or desired outcome. At times, students might need the continuous

guidance of their teachers through virtual means. Social. Administrators can

expect their students to feel isolated, since these modes of learning are

conducted without the interaction of students and teachers as seen in the

traditional classroom. Motivation. As students are compelled to continue their

2
education from their own homes, they face an entirely different set of

distractions that may hinder them from completing the required coursework.

Each school faces a different set of challenges with student engagement,

but, for some educators who have already facilitated online classes and faced the

same problem, these following methods can come in handy in preparing for the

new normal of learning.

Create an engaging lesson plan. It all begins with having an interactive

and dynamic lesson to keep students engaged throughout the class. This works

well for classes that utilize videoconferencing tools, since instructors can easily

command the way lessons will be conducted for the day. It can also be

replicated for teachers making use of a learning management system (LMS) by

integrating instructional videos and links to interesting websites into their online

modules.

Partner with parents. Constant communication between parents and

teachers is essential in making the new normal of learning work. Since they act

as facilitators in ensuring that their children are indeed learning from the

materials provided, it is important for parents to collaborate with teachers in

meeting the learning goals of students.

Flexibility is the key. In today’s new learning environment, teachers are

also expected to provide remote assistance to their students, especially if there

are troubles with the technical aspects of online learning. Apart from this,

3
teachers are also compelled to step up and provide support to students who are

still struggling with this new normal of learning. Teachers will be handling a lot of

tasks this year, and being flexible in these tasks will be the key in making

distance learning work.

Preparations are in full swing, now that the first day of school is fast

approaching. With these methods, administrators and teachers are assured that

learning will continue, even outside the four walls of the traditional classroom.

With the outbreak of COVID-19, educational institutions had to change

their mode of Teaching. Though virtual teaching is not something new, doing it

on a daily basis has made it a new normal. Educational institutions started an

online mode of teaching to recommence the studies. Now, when teachers and

students get ready in the morning, it is to gear themselves up for the class on

the computer screen from the comforts of their home. But one cannot ignore the

fact that the experience of a classroom can never be replaced by virtual teaching

because it becomes all the more difficult to ensure student engagement,

interaction, and connectivity when teaching virtually. This is the big challenge

that teachers are facing since virtual teaching has the new norm. Pandemic has

forced everyone to shift from their status quo and accept the new change which

is inevitable.

There are different approaches in teaching, these are modular approach

and digital approach. Modular approach is an emerging trend of educational

thinking that shifts traditional method of instruction to an outcome-based

4
learning paradigm. It is in printed form of modules given in the schools while

Digital Approach is using technology to deliver learning.

Teachers have to become tech-savvy and will have to devise varied

innovative methods to make e-learning more interesting. Developing interest

among students is a priority and teachers are charged to put in their best efforts

to become tech smart. Some teachers are novice to this new mode of teaching

and are on learning spree along with being educators. It requires grit and

dedication. This is a transitional phase for teachers just like everyone else

affected by COVID-19 and the best we can do is appreciate the efforts made by

them. Teaching online becomes challenging because of Internet issues,

background disturbance during live classes, lack of facilities in rural areas,

students engaged on smart phones, and lack of responses from them. It

becomes difficult to track the student attentiveness during the online class or if

they are able to grasp the lessons or not. The excessive screen time has made

our eyes more vulnerable which is not good for health. Checking the subjective

answers on screen becomes strenuous and a time consuming task.

Challenge lies before the teachers to use diversified narrative techniques while

delivering lessons online. They have to prepare study materials in the form of

powerpoint presentations, audio and visual lectures, quizzes, to liven up the class

for the students.

5
 Students are also adapting to this huge change and are getting

accustomed to it slowly and gradually. Studying continuously for long hours

online is damaging their health. Concentration amidst background noises, lack of

suitable environment and losing internet connectivity presents a major problem

for them.

Continuous classes and the heap of assignments afterward in every

subject to be submitted online tires them which lose thei interest. Therefore,

looking for ways to capture student’s attention and to make e-learning relevant

and fun is demanding for teachers.

Innovation in teaching and student engagement can be brought through

many applications that are available online. To hold live interactive classes,

applications like zoom, Google Meet, Team Link, Microsoft Teams can be used.

Whiteboard.fi, Google Classroom can be used to upload assignments and lesson

plans. Clapboard-Story Xpress Recorder and LOOM are the software that can be

downloaded on Google Chrome and used for recording video lessons links that

can be shared with students.

Students can go through them at their own place and in the next class,

the topics can be discussed. Ed Puzzle and Kahoot are great tools that will attract

the student’s attention. They help in creating game-based learning quizzes which

can be conducted to judge how much students are grasping the topic.

6
 Besides, these tools and many others like instructables app for teaching,

Bitly.com, Symbaloo.com, Purdue writing lab, OWL Edu, Edutopia that can be

explored to suit the teaching needs. These interactive learning methods motivate

students to be attentive in online classes.

Students can get learning material online easily. To stand out, teachers

need to be a cut above the rest by incorporating uniqueness, ingenuity and by

avoiding monotonous teaching. They need to manifest pedagogical tactful

behavior, embrace continuity in learning, acknowledge possible distractions

during virtual classes and try to work on them. Smile and eye contact during live

sessions exudes confidence and helps in building a good rapport with students.

Instead of having regular classes in all the subjects, classes can be divided into

shifts which will also help in reducing the screen time. This will create less

pressure on students and teachers too. Teachers and students together will have

to build an affinity to create a positive learning environment.

The real challenge faced by all teachers in the present time is on how to

deliver lesson to their learners. Because of the pandemic teacher cannot use

face to face teaching to deliver learning, instead they use modular and digital

approaches here in DepEd, Calapan City. In public schools especially in the

Division of Calapan City, modular and digital approaches are used in distance

learning.

7
 A module is considered to be a set of learning opportunities organized

around a well-defined topic which contains elements of instruction, specific

objectives and self - assessment and evaluation using criteria – referenced

measurement.

Modular approach is an emerging trend educational thinking that shifts

traditional method of instruction to an outcome-based learning paradigm. It is in

printed form of modules given in the school while Digital Approach is using

technology to deliver learning.

This study focused on the effectiveness of Teachers Engagement

Strategies Among Kindergarten Learners During COVID 19 Pandemic.

Henceforth , the researcher is interested to conduct the study to

determine the teachers engagement amidst the pandemic.

Theoretical Framework

The theories of Model of Engagement developed by Finn (2014)is the

basis for much of the research on learner engagement at the secondary

level. Finn‘s (2014) model proposes that patterns of engagement and

disengagement may have long-term effects on behavior and academic

achievement in the later educational years. He highlighted that school

outcomes are mediated by ― learners‘ active participation in school and

classroom activities and a concomitant feeling of identification with school.

The model also asserts that identification occurs when learners internalize

8
the feelings that they ―belong in school—both that they are a conspicuous part

of the school environment and that the school is an important aspect of their

own experience (Finn, 2014). Additionally, learners who have a sense of

belonging value success in ―school-relevant goals (Finn, 2014).

Conceptual Framework
The involvement of the pupil’s cognitive and emotional energy to

accomplish a learning task to correlate with important educational outcomes,

including academic achievement, persistence, satisfaction, and sense of

community. As educators search for ways to increase learner engagement, some

have hoped that blended learning—the thoughtful integration of face-to-face and

online instruction—might more fully engage pupils in their learning t They may

include increased flexibility and personalization due to diversified learning

pathways expanded opportunities for interactivity (face-to-face as well as online

and synchronous as well as asynchronous; Blended learning may support

improved cognitive engagement through reflection and critical discourse

(Garrison & Kanuka, 2004; Nystrand & Gamoran, 1991); agentic engagement

via added learning pathways; and emotional engagement through the face-to-

face interactions in blended learning found a strong positive relationship between

use of information technology for educational purposes and indicators of

engagement.

9
 Research Paradigm

1. Profile of the
Respondents
1.1 age
1.2 sex
1.3 civil status
1.4 highest educational
attainment
1.5 number of years in
service
1.6 Designation
1.7 related trainings/
seminars/conferences
attended

Enhanced
Learners
Performance

2. Approaches
2.1 Modular Approach
2.2 Digital Approach

3. Strategies
3.1 Intellectual
Engagement
3.2 Emotional Engagement
3.3 Behavioral
Engagement; and Action Plan
3.4 Physical Engagement

Challenges Encountered
 equipment;
 internet10connection;
and
 materials for modules
 Figure shows the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent
variable

Statement of the Problem

Generally, this study looked into the Teachers Engagement Strategies

Among Kindergarten Learners During COVID 19 Pandemic.

Specifically, the study sought answers to the following questions:

1. How may the socio-demographic profile of the respondents be described in

terms of:

1.1 Age;

1.2 Sex;

1.3 Civil Status;

1.4 Highest Educational Attainment;

1.5 Number of years in Service;

1.6 designation; and

1.7 Related seminars/ trainings /conferences attended? Local-----

Regional----National-----

11
2. How may the teachers’ engagement approaches towards learners’

performance be described in terms of:

2.1 Modular Approach;

2.2 Digital Approach?

3. How may the teachers’ engagement strategies towards learners’

performance be described in terms of::

3.1 Intellectual Engagement;

3.2 Emotional Engagement;

3.3 Behavioral Engagement; and

3.4 Physical Engagement?

4. What are the challenges encountered affecting their teaching - learning

engagement as regards to:

4.1 equipment;

4.2 internet connection; and

4.3 Materials for Modules

5. How may the learners’ performance be described?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the profile of the respondents and:

6.1 teacher engagement approach towards learner’s performance?

6.2 Teacher engagement strategies towards learner’s performance?

12
 6.3 Challenges encountered on the used of the teacher’s engagement

approaches and strategies? and

6.4 their performance?

7. Is there significant relationship between the teacher’s engagement

approaches and:

7.1 their engagement strategies?

7.2 Challenges encountered ? and

7.3 Learner’s performance

8. Is there significant relationship between the teacher’s engagement strategies

towards learners’ performance and:

8.1 the challenges encountered? and

8.2 Learner’s performance?

9. Is there significant relationship between the challenges encountered and the

learners performance?

10.What intervention action plan can be proposed based on the findings of the

study?

Hypothesis

The hypothesis tested in this study are as follows:

1. There is no significant relationship between the profile of the

respondents and:

13
 1.1 teacher engagement approach towards learner’s performance.

1.2 teacher engagement strategies towards learner’s performance?

and

1.3 challenges encountered on the used of the teacher’s engagement

approaches and strategies.

2. There is no significant relationship between the teacher’s engagement

approaches and:

2.1 their engagement strategies?

2.2 challenges encountered ? and

2.3 learner’s performance?

3. There is no significant relationship between the teacher’s engagement

strategies towards learners’ performance and the challenges encountered?

4. There is no significant relationship between the challenges encountered

and the learners performance.

Scope and Limitations

This study entitled “Teachers Engagement Strategies Among Kindergarten

Learners During COVID 19 Pandemic” will be conducted at Division of Calapan

City , Oriental Mindoro. The respondents of the study will be the fifty six(56)

Kindergarten Teachers in the Division of Calapan City , Oriental Mindoro that will

be chosen though the use of purposive sampling techniques. This will use the

descriptive types of research and utilized questionnaire in data gathering during

the School Year 2020-2021.

14
Significance of the study

This study which analyzed student or pupil engagement in the learning

process would benefit the following:

School Administrator. It would benefit from this study especially the

elementary teachers that are experienced some factors that affect the learning

domains of pupils, for them to know and understand their pupils needs and find

solution in it.

Principal. This will give them time to formulate plan regarding the

improvement of school environment so that socialization of pupils will also be

adaptable towards the different learning domains of the children under their

care.

Teachers. It will help them determine and discover new ways of

strategies to fully encourage the pupils to actively engage in the lesson.

Definition of terms

The following terms are defined according to how they were used in this

research for clarity and better understanding of this study.

Civil status. This refers to the distinctive characteristics of the

respondents in the Division of Calapan City in terms of the age , gender ,etc. In

which the researcher believe has bearing in the problem under study.

Behavioral engagement pertains to participation in school activities.

15
 Digital Approach using technology to improve teaching

Emotional engagement. Is marked by feelings of belongingness,

frustration, boredom, interest and satisfaction as well as student or learner-

teacher relations and support.

Intellectual Engagement. Pertains to students or learners investment

in learning

Learners Performance refers to what they feel, think, motivate

themselves, and behave.

Modular Approach refers to the printed form of modules distributed to

learners.

Physical Engagement refers to the commitment and involvement of

pupils in extra curricular activities

Student or learner engagement . The activity done by the learners in

all activities in school.

16
 Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
Foreign Literature

Level of Participation and Engagement of Learners

Evidence is mounting to show many problems experienced by student or

learners in middle and secondary schools – such as disengagement,

dissatisfaction with their schooling experience, and dropping out – are

significantly linked to the learning environment (Pope, 2013). In a preliminary

research of (Willms, et. al., 2013) they found that levels of school participation

and academic engagement fall steadily from Grade 6 to Grade 12, while

cognitive/ intellectual engagement fall during the middle school years and

remains at a low level throughout secondary school. Current theory and research

offer various explanations for such findings.

Chaplain (2015) found that learners make strategic withdrawal in order

to protect their self-worth. Specifically, the author explained that the motivation

to protect one's sense of self-worth results in learners using a range of tactics to

avoid damage to their self-esteem. While such tactics are effective in the short

term, the consequence is further withdrawal, and ultimately, under-achievement

(Thompson, 2014).

Covington, (2015) highlighted the relationships between ability, the

quality highly regarded in education, and feelings of self-esteem and personal

17
worth. Covington,(2015) noted that “it is not surprising that the learner's sense

of self-esteem often becomes equated with ability, to be able is to be valued as

a human being but to do poorly is evidence of inability, and reason to despair

one's worth.” Conversely, many successful learners, however, are not so much

enthusiastic as they are bored, indifferent, unconcerned or instrumentally

focused on getting their credentials. While there are other learners who, while

physically attending school for at least some time, are disengaged or

marginalized by their school experience.

As Hargreaves, Ryan & Earl, (2015) state, "perhaps secondary schools fail

to retain student or learners because they never really engage them in the first

place".

Importance of Student Engagement

Many researchers have postulated that engagement be thought of as a

continuum (Finn, 2015, 2015; Finn and Rock, 2015; Goodenow, 2015; Voelkl,

2015, 2015, 2015; Wehlage et al., 2015). Newman (2015) stated that when

efforts to act competently are met with success, continued investment is

generated and the cycle continues. Prior psychological research has confirmed

that the desire for competence (both emotional and practical) has been

recognized as one of the most powerful bases for human interaction and

motivation. Hargreaves et al. (2015) noted that the absence of challenge is a

clear example of how secondary schools often fail to engage learner's interests

and involvement. Finn , (2015) has criticized such research for focusing on the

18
amelioration of learner deficiencies rather than the development of strategies

that will improve student or learner engagement. He proposed the participation-

identification model, which specifies learner identification with school, a

psychological condition, depends on participating in it. Identification is defined by

two primary dimensions: an internalized sense of belonging and value for

success in school-relevant goals.

Undeniably, the traditional approach to schooling and, in particular,

engaging adolescents in schools and classrooms is inadequate. The concept of

learner engagement has attracted growing interest as a way to ameliorate low

levels of academic achievement, student or learner boredom, and increasing

dropout rates (National Research Council & Institute of Medicine, 2014). So,

what, then, do we mean by learner engagement and what are the attributes

assigned to it?

Like many other social constructs, learner engagement has no

universally accepted meaning (Smith et al., 2013). Given the complexities of the

construct, the explanatory power of learner engagement is weak. Though the

construct remains conceptually fuzzy, it has received increased attention in the

academic research literature, namely within the fields of psychology, social

psychology and sociology of education.

Three General Approach of Engagement

19
 In this literature, three general approaches to engagement can be

identified: behavioural engagement pertains to participation in school activities,

psychological/emotional engagement component pertains to learners’ sense of

belonging at school and acceptance of school values (Brady, 2014), and

cognitive/intellectual engagement pertaining to investment in learning (Milton,

2013).

Many studies of engagement include one or two of these types, but rarely

all three.

Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, (2014) suggest that to date, research has not

capitalized on the potential of engagement as a multidimensional construct that

involves behavior, emotion, and cognition. According to Fredricks et. al., 2014,

engagement has considerable potential as a multidimensional construct that

unites the three components(behavioural, emotional, & cognitive) in a

meaningful way. In this way, engagement can perhaps best be thought of as a

„meta construct. Rather than focusing on one or two of the categories, fusing

them together as a multidimensional construct, one that focuses on learners and

their interaction with the educational environment holds promise in helping to

better understand the complexity of learners’ experiences in school. In this

way, this study include research on engagement in the school and the

classroom.

Although learning involves cognitive processes that take place within each

individual, motivation to learn also depends on the learner’s involvement in a

20
web of social relationships that supports learning (Cohen & Ball, 2015). The

likelihood that learners will be motivated and engaged is increased to the extent

that their schools, teachers, family, and friends effectively support their

purposeful involvement in school (National Research Council Institute of

Medicine, 2014). Although there are numerous studies focusing on learners

family/ethnicity characteristics (see, for example, Rumberger & Palardy, (2014),

and social demographic factors , this review focused on engagement with the

school environment (school and classroom). This included a discussion of

engagement with the school as an organization, the rise in popularity of

learner’s voice, and engagement with teachers and peers. The word learner

engagement has received considerable attention in the literature since the mid-

2015s arising from the economic, social, political constraints and increasing

demands for accountability imposed on public higher education institutions

(HEIs) around the world. Trowler provides a definition of student or learner

engagement based on a literature review as follow: Learner’s engagement is

concerned with the interaction between the time, effort and other relevant

resources invested by both learners and their institutions intended to optimize

the their experience and enhance the learning outcomes and performance as

well as the reputation of the institution (Trowler, 2014). Learner engagement in

higher education varies according to the socio-political context in which

institutions operate in the UK. Thee providers have different missions and deliver

to a wide range of different populations. In the UK, learners play a significant

21
role in the process and procedures for evaluating, shaping, assuring and

enhancing the quality of their learning experience through many formal and

informal institutional processes. These processes and procedures are governance

related mechanisms to provide accountability and ensure that the learner’s

voice is listened to and acted upon (Little et al., 2013).

Learners’ engagement in HE in the UK takes many different forms, such

as: engagement in the teaching and learning process; their evaluation of

teaching; representation; participation in governance; engagement in

quality assurance and enhancement mechanisms, processes and procedures.

There are many established processes for engaging with learners in HE in the

UK.

These processes include questionnaires, surveys (including National

Student or learner Survey (NSS), Postgraduate Taught Evaluation Survey (PTES)

and Postgraduate Research Evaluation Survey (PRES), focus groups,

representation and membership in boards, committees, panels and formal quality

processes (such as periodic programme review).

According to Little at al. ,(2013), there are ‘other formal processes’ (such

as ‘regular meetings between the president/other SU officers, the institutional

head and/or senior management team’) and ‘informal processes’ (such as

‘tutors’/lecturers’ open door policies’ and ‘the use of email and online discussion

fora’) Cockburn (2014), in his research, pointed out that institutions perceive

22
informal links between learner representatives and institutional staff as more

effective in their operation.

Local Literature

Benefits in the Classroom

The research on classroom and broader school effects has identified a

number of factors relating learner engagement to academic achievement

including the climate of the school and expectations for academic success

(Santos, 2015), the benefits of smaller schools in terms of attendance and

retention , the quality of instruction and teacher/ learner relationships .

School climate refers to the values, norms, beliefs, and sentiments

associated with routine practices and social interaction in schools . Prior

psychological research has documented the distinctiveness of the stage in life

called adolescence. At this stage in life many youths seek greater autonomy and

more challenging learning materials; however, schools are often structured to

provide less of both.

Adolescents need support from non-parental adults such as teachers, they

are typically met with few opportunities to get to know and connect with these

adults (Tan 2015). Researchers and educators are clear on the fact that

schooling is not working for large number of young people (Mendoza, 2015).

One place to start is with the structure of the school itself. In addressing this

23
issue, Santos (2014) suggested that schools must build a climate of trust and

wellbeing to affirm the institutional legitimacy of the school.

Generally, there is a consensus amongst researchers that two central

variables influencing engagement in school are learners ‟participation in school

activities and their sense of belonging (De Verai, 2015). Schools are most likely

to cultivate a sense of belonging and membership in learners if they

demonstrate clarity of purpose, equity and personal support, provide frequent

occasions for them to experience educational success , and integrate all of these

factors into a climate of caring.

Student Engagement and Learning of Learners

Student’s voice refers to learners actively shaping their own learning,

and more generally about what happens in schools and classrooms (Villaluna.,

2013). Prior research on learner’s voice has separated findings into one of four

„clusters‟: the autonomy cluster ( learners being able to make choices and

decisions about their work), the pedagogy cluster (learning with clear

expectations and that is connected to daily lives), the social cluster (collaborative

work and being respected by teachers and peers), and the institutional cluster

(understanding of school-based procedures and policies) (Luna, 2015).

Specifically, in eliciting learner perspectives about meaningful

academic work, Lina., 2013 found that learners want the work they undertake to

be relevant, meaningful and authentic. This work builds on earlier research

24
findings that learners who feel that their school work is relevant, or more

connected to their 'real world', find more identification with their educational

environment. Lucas, (2016) found the best teaching strategies for engaging

student or learners were ones that made “clear links to the outside world” and

focused on “contemporary events of interest and meaning to learners.”

Linsangan (2015) stated that typically disengaged learners behave well in

school. They attend class and complete work, but with little indication of

excitement, commitment or pride in mastery of the curriculum. In contrast,

Linsangan (2015) has found that engaged learners make a psychological

investment in learning. They try hard to learn what school offers. They take pride

not simply in earning the formal indicators of success (grades), but in

understanding the material and incorporating or internalizing it in their lives.

Undeniably, teachers remain the gatekeepers of school change. Bautusta(2013)

said that only teachers could really change the world of the classroom and that

they would do so by understanding it.

Teacher discussion and collaboration with learners can help move

towards such understanding. That being said, however, providing all learners

with a chance to negotiate, plan and participate can be daunting, especially

when added to an already overstretched teaching staff (Jerome, 2013, p.9).

Thus, building a school-wide framework for learner’s voice and learner-teacher

collaboration needs to become integrated in the climate of the school (Rudduck

25
et al., 2015). When learner’s voice is successfully integrated into schools, the

benefits, particularly for teachers, can be numerous.

The Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11thed.) lists “commitment”

among the most common usages of “engagement”. As defined in the New

Oxford American Dictionary, to engage is to “attract or involve”. Considering

learner engagement and their act of commitment and involvement in schooling

is undoubtedly related to their relationships with teachers. That being said,

however, much of the prior research on learner engagement has traditionally

dealt with learners‟ (Rudduck et al., 2015) or teachers‟ perspectives

(Shargreaves, 2015) separately has not addressed the similarities and

differences between the two in simultaneous manner. More recently, a growing

number of studies have constructed theoretical interpretations based on data-

driven perceptions of learners and teachers (Cook-Sather, 2015; Earl, 2015).

This study sought to build on this growing body of research and

contribute to a more multi-dimensional view of engagement by eliciting the

views of learners and teachers in a participatory method.

For learners, teacher support and caring has been correlated with various

aspects of behavioural engagement, including higher participation in learning and

on-task behaviour (Battistich, Solomon, Watson & Schaps, 2015), lower

disruptive behaviour (Ryan & Patrick, 2013), and a lower probability of dropping

out of school (Croninger & Lee, 2013). Woods (2015) noted the significance of

the learning support provided by the social relationships in the classroom. He

26
argued that learning takes place most effectively when a mutually shared

understanding between teachers and learners has been built through

'negotiative Learners can co-create assessment criteria with their teachers as a

way to jointly craft the learning experiences inside classrooms (Jardine, in press).

These types of „knowledge building environments‟ ideas must be publicly

available so that all members of the class can build on ideas, improve ,

challenge, and justify them (Gilbert, 2014;).

For teachers, learner voice has been shown to provide teachers with a

more open perception of young people’s capabilities, the capacity to see the

familiar from a different angle, and a readiness to change thinking and practice

in light of these perceptions (Rudduck, 2015).

Researchers and teachers agree about how insightful young people are

when asked about aspects of teaching and learning but the ironic thing is that

learners themselves are often surprised that anyone wants to hear what they

think (Rudduck, 2015). Cook-Sather (2014), has said, Decades of calls for

educational reform have not succeeded in making schools as places where all

young people want to and are able to learn. It is time to invite learners to join

the conversation about how we might accomplish that .

Foreign Studies

Issues associated with learner-student or learner relationships and

engagement in schooling.

27
 Traditionally, researchers have focused less on the peer group than on

teachers as factor in the socialization of engagement (Ryan, 2015). The bodies

of literature on peer acceptance and rejection have been used as theoretical

justification for studying peer acceptance and engagement.

Peer acceptance in both childhood and adolescence is associated with

satisfaction in school, which is an aspect of emotional engagement, and socially

appropriate behavior and academic effort, which are aspects of behavioral

engagement (Fredricks, et al., 2014).

Studies of peer acceptance and friendship consistently show that high

achievement is correlated with peer acceptance and/or peer interaction

(Jules,2015). Research on peer acceptance is important for a number of reasons.

First, the experience of belongingness is associated with important

psychological processes. Learners perceive themselves to be more competent

and autonomous and have higher levels of intrinsic motivation. They have a

stronger sense of identity but are also willing to conform to and adopt

established norms and values. On the other hand, feelings of rejection/alienation

are the flip side of the relatedness coin. Rejection or the sense of exclusion and

estrangement from the group is consistently associated with behavioral problems

in the classroom (either aggression or withdrawal), lower interest in school, and

dropout (Bauermeister, 2015).Osterman (2013) argued that there is little

research that provides us with a deep understanding of the nature and quality of

peer relationships within the school and classroom context. What is needed are

28
more qualitative studies that probe the nature of interpersonal connections

among learners (Osterman, 2015).

Recall from the introductory chapter the description of the two sample

schools in this study who found themselves in a conundrum. On one hand, these

schools put primacy on „increasing levels of learner engagement‟ as a goal in

their school improvement plans, but on the other hand, neither school was

conceptually clear on what engagement meant to them. Put in another way,

these schools proceeded to put in place plans to increase learner engagement

implying that they are able to somehow employ measurement practices without

having a clear understanding of the central components important in their

respective buildings. It is clear from the literature that numerous schools find

themselves in a similar predicament as the sample schools (Wilms et al. 2013).

Indeed, within the field of educational research, a great deal of emphasis is often

placed on using external measurements of school and district to hold the system

accountable for learners’ success, but these measurements do not always

provide enough information to help local decision makers focus their ideas,

practices, resources, energy and leadership to improve learning (Elmore, 2015).

Measures to Discover learner Engagement

Many quantitative attempts to „measure learner engagement are often

limited to the manipulation of several dimensions of engagement. That is, some

scholars include conceptually distinct and discrete scales for each type of

engagement (Belmont, 2015). On the flip side, other researchers combine many

29
discrete scales to create a general engagement scale (Lee & Smith, 2015). The

practice of combining the items into general scales precludes examining

distinctions among the types of engagement (Fredricks et al., 2014). Finally,

current measures often do not tap qualitative differences in the level of

engagement, making it difficult to distinguish between the degrees of behavioral,

emotional, or cognitive engagement (Fredricks et al., 2014).

Prospects for Participatory Approaches This review has accounted

for many of the key issues with regards to learner engagement in schooling,

from why studying school engagement is important, to definitional ambiguities,

and critical aspects of schooling (climate, student or learner voice, relationships

with teachers and peers) that shape our thinking about the topic . Another key

dimension that cannot be overlooked is the research itself. That is, most

research focused on learner experience (Cook-Sather, 2015). More recently,

Cook-Sather (2015) has called for an increase in qualitative work, and for

changes in the roles of both researcher and learner.

To actively participate in accountable decision making, schools need

access to fine grained data that can be collected, interpreted and acted upon in

local settings. A study by Greene(2015) employed a participatory research

method whereby learners and teachers in two urban Canadian high schools can

themselves, construct a context-specific definition of what learner engagement

means to them. This approach was facilitated by concept mapping, an approach

that creates opportunities for “conversations across methods as ways of

30
generating additional insights regarding the phenomena under study as well as

the methods that are being used”.

The literature described the use of concept mapping in two ways: one

related to learners’ learning and curriculum development; and another related to

program evaluation and planning. Concept mapping is a graphic technique for

promoting social interaction and exchange by creating the conditions for the

understanding of thoughts and how they might be linked with each other (Khattri

& Miles, 2015). In other words, concept mapping is a type of structured

conceptualization which can be used by groups to develop a conceptual

framework which can be used for program planning and development, as well as

for evaluation purposes(Trochim, 2015).

Valuing academics is an endorsement of the goals of the school and

viewed the importance and relevance of academic achievement. Social

engagement is the identification and behavioral involvement with the social

aspects of school including informal out of school activities, relationships

with members of the school, extracurricular activities, and teacher contacts

out of school. Valuing is holding beliefs that have been socially involved and

displaying an interest in the social aspects of the school (Fredricks, et. al,

2014).

Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris (2013) identified three components

of engagement in the research literature: behavioral engagement, emotional

engagement and cognitive engagement. These specific components of

31
engagement have been studied and have been evidenced by specific

measurements of the educational process. The first component of

engagement in school is behavioral; this is evidenced by the academic and

extracurricular participation of student or learners. Emotional engagement is

marked by feelings of belongingness, frustration, boredom, interest and

satisfaction as well as learner-teacher relations and support. Some

researchers refer to this as psychological engagement (Appleton,

Christenson, Kim & Reschly, 2014). The third component is cognitive

engagement; this is seen in the investment a learner makes to school and its

tasks.

The key to engaging students includes challenging curricula and

modes of instruction that are meaningful and authentic. Additionally, interest in

engagement rests on the concept‘s two distinguishing features.

Engagement differs from prior research concerning the separate yet related

fields of interest—motivation, attitudes and student or learner conduct---in

its effort to study the precursors and result of the three components

functioning together in a dynamic system (Fredricks et al, 2013).

Local Studies

One of the major pitfalls in this research study is the lack of validated

qualitative research on learner engagement. As this is a growing topic of

interest, most of the research has centered on quantitative methods using the

High School Survey of Student or learner Engagement (HSSSE), which was

32
developed as an extension of the National Survey of Student or learner

Engagement (NSSE) focused on engagement in higher education.

Zamora (2015) conducted a phenomenological investigation of teacher

concept of learner engagement, citing that ―educational stakeholders are

concerned with the high levels of disengagement, evidenced by early

school leaving, poor student or learner behavior, and low levels of academic

achievement. Magsayo (2014) conducted a qualitative study using interviews

in a suburban district in North Carolina. Based on their findings, learners

identified ten effective teaching strategies that aided academic engagement.

Most of the strategies focused on creating a classroom with open dialogue

and the promotion of high -level questioning.

Parenas (2015) used classroom observation to investigate learner

engagement with special interest on behavioral engagement. The study

focused on learner’s posture, thinking, responsibility, participation and

readiness as factors in engagement levels. In addition to the classroom

observations, Parenas (2015) also used learner self-assessment to compare her

perceptions of engagement with their self-reports.

Cognitive/Intellectual/Academic Engagement

Much of the research that has been conducted on learner

engagement has been prepared through quantitative methods using the

High School Survey of Student or learner Engagement (HSSSE). This

33
annual survey utilized by high school across the United States focused on

Cognitive/Intellectual/Academic Engagement, Social/Behavioral/Participatory

Engagement and Emotional Engagement with a series of 100 closed-response

questions and one open response questions (Yasmin, 2013).

The results of the most recent administration of the HSSSE show

systemic issues across the nations with regard to learner engagement

and perceptions of academic achievement and belongingness in the school

setting. Gregorio (2014) used the quantitative data presented in the study to

suggest a relationship between self-efficacy beliefs in engagement and

learning in the classroom. In the study, they determined that learners who

identified themselves as disengaged in the learning process were less

likely to promote their own well-being in the educational setting.

The Alliance for Excellent Education (2013) used data acquired from

the 2015 HSSSE to suggest a relationship between the economic well-being of

the United States and the learner engagement.

Talisman (2014) conducted a comparative investigation of two

classrooms, one an active learning condition focused on engagement and

the other a content review condition taught in a traditional manner. Both

classes were scheduled back-to-back with a random sample of learners

with similar gender and ethnicities. The researchers hypothesized that the

learner in the active learning condition would report greater engagement and

academic achievement (as measured by retention) than their counterparts in

34
the content review condition. As predicted, learners in the active

learning group reported greater retention and engagement compared to

their counterparts.

Learner Engagement to Enhance Learning

More recently, Buhat (2013) studied the process of learner engagement

in informing and enhancing the collective learning experience and its

effectiveness within institutions in England. They found that: (1)Learner

feedback questionnaires were widely used at institution (92%) and module/unit

(87%) levels; (2) learner representation in committees was near universal, with

71% of their participating institutions having no difficulties at all in filling posts at

institution level. (3) learners, in majority of cases, were more likely to become

representatives by nomination or volunteering than by any more formal election

process. (4) In just over half of HEIs, SSLCs were operated at institution and

department levels. (5) learners were made aware of the role of learner

representatives during the induction process and also through emails, websites

and posters. (6) A third offered student representatives the opportunity to gain

recognition for their role. (7) Groups of learners less likely to engage in

representation were First year (worried about transition to university), PGT, and

Final year student or learners (concentrating on their studies). (8) Training for

learner representatives was nearly universal; in just over half of the surveyed

institutions the SU was responsible for this training, and in around one third it

was the joint responsibility of the HEI and SU. There was clear evidence that

35
institutions and their student unions were putting some effort into producing

(jointly) learner representative handbooks and codes of practice on

representation. (10) 32% of the institutions were more likely to consider SSLCs

to be very effective in raising issues relating to the quality o learning

experiences. However, it was pointed out that ‘it [was] evident from the survey

responses and fieldwork interviews that though overarching processes for

learner representation [might] be similar across the sector, there [was] much

variation between institutions and within institutions’ (Little et al, 2013: 32).

Furthermore, it was found that institutions used a range of dissemination

methods to impart information to their students, including: items within Schools’

newsletters, posting information on notice-boards and web pages.

Student s engagement in quality learning and teaching enhancement

management

In the study of QAA,(2015) the focus has been on the UK as a whole and

has studied the opportunities provided for learners to engage in quality learning

and teaching enhancement management, as well as their perceived

effectiveness. The QAA argued that ‘it is accepted that the views of student ,

individually and collectively, should inform quality systems with the purpose of

improving educational experience’ (QAA, 2015: 2). Student engagement in

Learning and Teaching Quality Management: A Study of UK Practices and

assurance processes have a positive influence on the delivery and development

of any aspect of educational experience at all levels and throughout all aspects

36
of their educational journey. It argues that all learners should have the

opportunity to be involved in these processes.

Academics Values

Cabrera (2014) research also suggests that teacher-initiated

instruction coupled with learner-initiated instruction, participation in out- of-

school activities, and participation in school governance encourages greater

engagement and is associated with better performance throughout high

school

Student Engagement and Academic Achievement

Does it matter if learners are engaged in their classroom

activities? One of an educator‘s primary roles is to facilitate learning in the

classroom. In order for meaningful learning to take place, students must pay

attention and engage on the current task. ―When learners are authentically

engaged in meaningful, quality work, the likelihood for them to learn something

new and to remember what was learned increases (Hancock & Betts, 2013).

Students do not only learn more when they are engaged, they are also more

likely to maintain the knowledge taught. Furthermore, learners who are

engaged are more motivated to learn more and to try their best and their

quality of work increases (Bogren, 2013).

Teacher-Student Relationship in Engagement

37
 The importance of teacher support and caring has been highlighted

throughout the research on learner engagement and found to have a high

predictive value for higher levels of engagement (Smerdon, 2013).

―Non-parental adults constitute one potentially important asset, and

supportive teachers with high expectations may play a critical role in school

success (Brewster & Bowen, 2013,). Caring teachers have been studied as

contributor to higher levels of learner engagement (Brewster & Bowen,

2013). Russell et al. (2014) listed how teachers matter; teachers who enjoyed

teaching and subject matter, respected and involved learners in decision

making, cared about them, explained clearly, and responded to requests for

help raised their engagement levels ..

Problems Encountered in t times of Pandemic Affecting Pupils

Engagement
When it comes to technology, Orlando and Attard (2015) stated that

“teaching with technology is not a one size fits all approach as it depends on the

types of technology in use at the time and also the curriculum content being

taught” (p. 119). This means that the incorporation of technology provides

additional factors for consideration in terms of teaching pedagogy and

construction of learning experiences. Despite this, it is “often taken for granted

that technologies can ‘enhance learning’” (Kirkwood & Price, 2014, p. 6) with the

prevailing assumption that technological incorporation, learning enhancement,

and student engagement are mutually and inextricably linked. However, in

creating individually tailored differentiated instruction for each learner within and

38
across each cohort, additional workload pressures on those seeking to engage

with the online environment can be created as teaching staff seek to respond,

often reactively, to the individual learning and engagements needs of each

cohort. The problems with a “one size fits all” approach are particularly

highlighted in collaborative learning tasks (group work) where individual

differences between and across cohorts can be highlighted.

This may be because the generalized pedagogical assumptions associated

with collaborative learning tasks are often applied to the online environment

where there may be less focus on the delivery and more attention to the

task/content (Graham & Misanchuk, 2004). Therefore, the assumption that

students will both know and be able to work in groups regardless of mode

prevails through a seemingly universal one-size-fits-all application. In addition to

the typical challenges that students can experience in group activities regardless

of mode, the online environment presents added challenges for the external or

isolated learner particularly through considerations around their engagement,

access, community, and support. In reflecting on a lecturer’s perspective for

facilitating learning online, strategies were suggested for those preparing to

teach in an online environment supporting learners through the development

and facilitation of group presentation and collaborative learning activities.

Based on several years of experience, the following insights are provided

to encourage those with uncertainty or inexperience in facilitating an online

learning environment so that they can understand and support their learners.

39
The barriers to participation that external students may experience are

particularly evident in collaborative learning tasks through group work, group

presentations and group assessments (Davidson, 2015; Graham & Misanchuk,

2004; Jaques & Salmon, 2007).

Some of the issues experienced can be personal such as: anxiety

associated with using technology; being out of one’s comfort zone; (perception

of) inequity in assessment, particularly in “group” assignments; and, the

(perceived) inability or difficulty in peer interaction, particularly in presentations.

Despite the best intentions of teaching staff to provide equitable and beneficial

learning experiences for all students, regardless of enrolment mode, many

academic staff members feel apprehensive and not suitably equipped to teach

via wholly (or mostly) online particularly as they themselves may be still learning

to use some of the platforms (Jaques & Salmon, 2007; Little-Wiles & Naimi,

2011; Rucker & Downey, 2016; Schmidt et al., 2016; Thorsteinsson, 2013).

This can leave learners in an isolated place where they may also have

varying levels of competency and proficiency using different forms of IT and are

therefore somewhat on their own when it comes to the online learning

environment through different Learning Management Systems (LMS). This is

particularly highlighted in collaborative learning tasks where individuals may be

barely managing to navigate the system on their own, let alone needing to

traverse the complex environments of group interaction and social negotiation

(Graham & Misanchuk, 2004; Jaques & Salmon, 2007). While group work is an

40
important element within education that aids in developing numerous

interpersonal and transferable employable skills, an increasing number of

potential hurdles to achievement beyond those commonly associated with

traditional group work experiences may serve to further alienate isolated learners

causing their disengagement, withdrawal, or ultimate exclusion from engaging

with and accessing the course materials and associated learning activities. While

the online environment provides opportunities for the ways education is

delivered and accessed by learners, assessment practices are often limited in the

variety and modes in which they are allocated in the online environment

(Williams, Cameron, & Morgan, 2012). Where group presentations within the

tertiary environment have been traditionally conducted via predominantly face-

to-face mediums (Cazan & Indreica, 2014; Milman, 2014; Napier et al., 2011),

the online environment presents additional opportunities for summative

assessment with group presentations (Jaques & Salmon, 2007; Park & Bonk,

2007; Williams et al., 2012; Zapalska & Brozik, 2006) that are not limited to a

solely live option. Even so, online group presentation assessments do not appear

to be common practice which may be due to some of the difficulties experienced

by both students and academics in using an online delivery platform (Jaques &

Salmon, 2007). This is where “the sharing of ‘good practice’ and ‘lessons learned’

among members of the higher education community can help academic teachers

concentrate on effective uses of technology and to avoid the unnecessary

duplication of effort and expense” (Kirkwood & Price, 2014).

41
Technology and Internet Access

Alongside the increasing digitalisation of many workplaces, new “types” of

learners emerge who may be more digitally competent than previous generations

due to their “digital native” status (Orlando & Attard, 2015; Prensky, 2001).

However, assumptions around technological capacity and proficiency serve little

benefit when considering collaborative learning tasks. Instead, the focus should

primarily be on how the interactions and group work tasks can be supported and

facilitated, rather than the mode or means for doing so. To this end, the

importance of facilitating and supporting social interaction and relationship

development is important (Jaques & Salmon, 2007; Stoessel et al., 2015). The

assumption that growing up around technology and having greater access to

technology would make one more digitally capable is erroneous as individuals

may still have a preference for non-technological mediums, and have varying

levels of competence and capacity with digital platforms. Furthermore, external

student cohorts may also consist of mature age (non-digitally native students),

which further complicates the assumption of digital preference, digital

competency and digital ability for online learners. Therefore, regardless of the

demographic of the cohort, assumptions around technological preference and

capacities should be sidelined at least until the necessary social and peer support

mechanisms are in place. Adapting to the online environment can be a challenge

for both facilitators and students alike (Jaques & Salmon, 2007; Kirkwood &

Price, 2014).

42
 This does not necessarily mean that a facilitator with less proficiency or

confidence in navigating digital technologies will not be able to provide suitable

and beneficial learning experiences for external students. Jaques and Salmon

(2007) described the significance of recognising the importance of understanding

learners and their capabilities as comparable to choosing what technologies to

use. The importance of building relationships in the online environment both

between facilitator and student(s) and student/student is reinforced if seeking to

facilitate group activities, as relationships are central to effective group work.

43
 Chapter3
METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the methods of research used, locale of the

study, the respondents, sample/sampling technique the data gathering

procedures and instrumentation validation of instrument, data gathering

procedure and the statistical treatment of data.

Research Method

The research design used in this study is the descriptive method .

According to Tan ( 2014) Descriptive research is defined as the fact-

finding with adequate interpretation and the true meaning of data collected are

reported from the point of view of the objective and basic assumptions of the

research.

In this study, the researcher presented, analyzed, and interpreted the

teachers’ engagement strategies among kindergarten learners during COVID 19.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study will be the fifty six(56) Kindergarten

Teachers in the Division of Calapan City , Oriental Mindoro .

Sampling Technique

44
 This study used total sampling technique since this study demanded

certain criteria in choosing the respondents whereas, the respondents must be

public kindergarten teachers.

Zamora-Reyes & Ladao-Saren (2014) discussed that in total sampling,

samples are taken with a purpose in mind where usually, one or more specific

predefined groups are sought.

Instrumentation

A questionnaire checklist was used as the main tool or instrument in

gathering needed data . The instrument was adopted from the study of Hart,

Stewart & Jimerson(2012), University of California Santa Barbara, entitled “The

Student Engagement in Schools Questionnaire (SESQ) and the Teacher

Engagement Report Form-New (TERF-N): Examining the Preliminary Evidence”

adapted to local setting of Philippines environment then modified for the use of

this study.

Validation of the Instrument

For the questionnaire’ content validity it was checked by the adviser, the

statistician and the committee expert in the field.

For the reliability , the researcher distributed 20 questionnaires to public

kindergarten teachers who were not included as part of the respondents in the

Division of Calapan City The researcher consolidated the questionnaire through

the guidance of her adviser and the statistician regarding the unstructured

45
interview.

Data Gathering Procedure

A request letter was addressed to the Schools Division Superintendent of

City Schools of Cabanatuan City and their respective principals/ school heads for

permission to conduct and distribute questionnaires to the teacher respondents.

The distribution and retrieval of the questionnaires was done personally by the

researcher..

Statistical Treatment of Data The data was collected and statistically

treated using the following statistical treatment of data and was computed by

means of percentage of frequency occurrence, the weighted mean and the

ranking method, the answers were pre-arranged and presented in tabular

system.

For significant relationship between the profile of the respondents and the

effects of learner engagement towards academic performance and the problems

encountered affecting student engagement in school, Spearman Rho was used.

Verbal Description

The table of equivalent used to retract the weighted mean is as

follows:

The following limits and level was used to categorize the classification of

responses according to the table or part given below:

46
 Rank Descriptive Ratings Mean Scores

4 Strongly Agree 3.25 - 4.00

3 Agree 2.50 - 3.24

2 Disagree 1.75 - 2.49

1 Strongly Disagree 1.00 - 1.74

Based on the weighted mean, ranking was used to indicate the positional

advantage or relative placement of the different items to describe an order of

value from highest to lowest. The greater the weighted mean, the higher the

rank.

When two or more items have identical means, their ranks were

computed by getting the sum of their actual ranks and dividing the result by the

number of items with identical means (Tan-Barrientos, Cresita, 2015).

The significance of relationship between the independent and dependent

variable was determined using the Pearson-Product Moment of Correlation

Method.

The formula used for deriving the significance of relationship using the

Pearson Product Moment of Correlation Method as expostulated by (Tan-

Barrientos, Cresita, 2015)is:

47
 References

Delucchi, 2015Asking more effective questions. Rossier School of

Education.http://cet.usc.edu/resources/teaching_learning/material_docs/
Asking_Better_Questions.pdf. Accessed December 4, 2015.

Gates Foundation (2014) Classroom questions. Practical Assessment, Research

& Evaluation.1998;6(6) http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=6&n=6..
Cruz,2014. Teacher questioning in science classrooms: what approaches
stimulate productive thinking? J Res Sci Teach. 2014;44(6):815–843.
 Schlechty, 2013Teaching Tips for TA’s. Effective Questioning Enhances Pupil
Learning, Instructional Development . Santa Barbara, CA: Office of
Instructional Consultation, University of California, Santa Barbara;

 Sanchez,2013. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of

Educational Goals: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain . New York: David
McKay Co Inc;
Thomas,2015. Engaging pupils through effective questions. Educ
Can. 2015;52(4)www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/engaging-
pupils-through-effective-questions. Accessed October 16, 2015.

Eccles 2015. Questioning Skills for Teachers, 3rd ed. Washington DC: NEA
Professional Library, National Education Association; 1991: 5-32.

Diaz,2013Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D.

Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Pupil perceptions in the classroom (pp. 327-
348). Hillsdale, N.J: L. Erlbaum.
Leithwood & Aitken, 2015Achievement goal theory, conceptualization of
ability/intelligence, and classroom climate. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, &
C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Pupil Engagement (pp. 173-
191). New York, NY: Springer.
Crilmn,2015Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and
suppressing teacher behaviours predicting pupils' engagement in
schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 261-278.

Finn, 2015). The teacher-pupil relationship as a developmental context for

children with internalizing or externalizing behavior problems. School
Psychology Quarterly, 23(1), 3-15.

48
Willms, et. al., 2013Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest
through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 41(3), 586-598.

Belland, B. R., Kim, C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2013). A framework for designing
scaffolds that improve motivation and cognition. Educational Psychologist,
48(4), 243-270
Anderman, L. H., & Midgley, C. (1998). Motivation and middle school pupils.
ERIC Digest, ED421281. Retrieved June 26, 2001 from the ERIC digest on
GALILEO on the World Wide Web:
http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed421281.html
Atkinson, E. S. (2000). An investigation into the relationship between teacher
motivation and learner motivation.
Angus, M., McDonald, T., Ormond, C., Olney, H., Rybarcyk, R., Taylor, A. and
Winterton, A. (2015) The Pipeline Project: Executive summary, accessed
16 April 2013,
fromhttp://www.ecu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/423240/Pipeline
_Project_ExecSummary.pdf

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015) Year Book Australia, 2015, catalogue

number 1301.0,

Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (2009) National

Report on Schooling in Australia 2009: Additional Statistics, accessed 17
April 2013,
fromhttp://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Report_on_Scho
oling_2009_Part_9_Additional_Statistics.pdf
Australian Education Union (2009) New Educators Survey 2008 Results and
Report, accessed 17 April 2013,
fromhttp://www.aeufederal.org.au/Publications/2009/Nesurvey08res.pdf

Bryce, J. and Withers, G. (2003) Engaging secondary school pupils in lifelong

learning, accessed 17 April 2013,
fromhttp://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1014&context=indigenous_education

Newman (2015) Effective Schools are Engaging Schools: Pupil Engagement

Policy Guidelines, accessed 17 April 2013,
fromhttp://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/stuman/wellbeing/
segpolicy.pdf

49
Steinhouse (2013)'Identifying Pupils at Risk', accessed 15 April 2013,
fromhttp://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/principals/participation/
pages/disengagedrisk.aspx

Jerome, 2013,School is for me: Pathways to pupil engagement, accessed 16 April

2013,
fromhttp://www.sydneyr.det.nsw.edu.au/Equity/documents/PSP/PSPPage-
RESAERCHSchoolIsForMe.pdf

Rudduck et al., 2015) What's Mainstream?, accessed 15 April 2013,

fromhttp://www.dsf.org.au/resources-and-research/184-whats-
mainstream-conventional-andunconventional-learning-in-logan
Hargreaves et al., 2015School Reform from the Inside Out: Policy, Practice, and
Performance, Harvard Education Press

Willms et. al., 2013 'Pupil Engagement: What Is It? Why Does It Matter?', in
Handbook of research on pupil engagement S. Christenson, A. L. Reschly
and C. Wylie, Eds., Springer, p 97-131
Cook-Sather, 2015; Earl, 2015How Young People are Faring 2009, accessed 12
April 2013, ‘fromhttp://www.dsf.org.au/resources-and-research/221-how-
young-people-are-faring-2009

McIntyre, 2015'School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the

Evidence', Review of Educational Research, 74(1), p 59-109

Willms et al., 2013) 'The Measurement of Pupil Engagement: A Comparative

Analysis of Various Methods and Pupil Self‐report Instruments', in
Handbook of research on pupil engagement S. Christenson, A. L. Reschly
and C. Wylie, Eds.,
Milton, 2013Teachers’ attitudes toward information technology. from the
Institute for Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning website
at the University of North Texas:
http://iittl.unt.edu/pt3II/toc.htm#_Toc498406723
Brady, 2014Something for everyone? An evaluation of the use of audio -visual
resources in geographical learning in the UK. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, 23(1), 9 - 20. Retrieved June 18, 2001 from Academic
Search Elite onGALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Smith et al., 2013Justifying imagery: multimedia support for learning through
exploration. National Research Council & Institute of Medicine, 2014.

50
 Retrieved June 20, 2001 from Academic Search Elite on GAL ILEO:
http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Chaplain (2015)Theories underlying perceived changes in teaching and learning
after installing a computer network in a secondary school. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 30(1), 25 - 42. Retrieved June 21, 2001 from
Academic Search Elite on GALILEO: http://www.galileo.peachnet.edu
Thompson, 2014The Best Schools: How human development research should
inform educational practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Covington, (2015) Learners Identify Key Aspects and Outcomes of a

Technological Learning Environment. The Journal of Technology Studies.
28(1/2),22-28. Retrieved December 2014 from ProQuest Education
Journals # EJ670883

Battistich, Solomon, Watson & Schaps, 2015Majoring in technology studies at

high school and fostering learning. Learning Environment Research, 3,
135–158.
Finn , (2015) Teaching and Learning with the Net Generation. Innovate Journal
of Online Education, 3(4). Reprinted in The Fischler School of Education
and Human Services at Nova Southeastern University;
Pennsylvania.Retrieved December 2014 from:
http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol3_issue4/Teaching_and_Learning_
with_the_Net_Generation.pdf

Hargreaves, Ryan & Earl, (2015Learning Independence: New Approaches for

Educating the Net Generation. Retrieved September 2014 from
http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2014/05/04/learning_independenc
e_new_approaches_for.htm

Finn, 2015, 2015; Finn and Rock, 2015; Goodenow, 2015; Voelkl, 2015, 2015,
2015; Wehlage et al., 2015)White Paper: Researching Electronic Portfolios
and Learner Engagement.Retrieved September 2014 from
http://www.taskstream.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdfhttp://www.taskstream
.com/reflect/whitepaper.pdf Current Issues in Education Vol. 14 No. 1 28
Bauermeister, 2015).Osterman (2013The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review
of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–
786.

51
Osterman, 2015Growing up digital: How the Web changes work, education, and
the ways people learn. Change, March/April, 10–20. Also accessible at
USDLA Journal, 6 (2) February 2002.
http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/FEB02_Issue/article01.html
Wilms et al. 2013The Net Generation goes to college. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, Section: Information Technology, 52(7), A34. Retrieved
October 30, 2014 from
http://www.msmc.la.edu/include/learning_resources/todays_learner/The_
Net_Generation.pdf

Belmont, 2015The challenges and benefits of requiring pupils to buy laptops. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, May 26. Accessed from
http://chronicle.com/article/The-ChallengesBenefits/2829/
Cook-Sather, 2015 Expanding young people’s capacity to learn. British Journal of
Educational Studies. 55(2), 1-20.
Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, (2014) Building bridges to pupil engagement:
Communicating respect and care for pupils in urban high schools. Journal
of Research and Development in Education, 33(4), 106-117.

Cohen & Ball, 2015What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of
Pupil Engagement and its implications for Teaching and Learning in
Canada.Toronto: Canadian Education Association (CEA), 1-22.
Rumberger & Palardy, (2014), The Search for Competence in the
21stCentury.Quest Journal 2014. Leading Edge Learning.ca (Abstract) p. 2
Retrieved October 2014 from
http://www.leadingedgelearning.ca/q2014/Docs/QuestJournal2014/Article
12.pdf

Trowler, 2014Effective teaching practices –A framework. Toronto: Canadian

Education Association.

Gee, J.P. & Hayes, E.R. (2014) Language and Learning in the Digital Age.
London: Taylor & Francis.

Little et al., 2013). Catching the Knowledge Wave: Redefiningknowledge for the
post-industrial age. Education Canada, 47(3), 4-8. Canadian Education
Association. www.cea-ace.ca
Cockburn (2014), Teaching the Net Generation. Business Education Forum 54(3),
6-14.

52
Scheerens, 2015. Learning for Life: the Foundations for Lifelong Learning.Bristol:
Policy Press.
Battistich, 2014A Phenomenographic Investigation of Teacher Conceptions of
Pupil Engagement in Learning. The Australian Educational Researcher,
5(1), 57-79.

Jantzi, 2013Educating the Net Generation. The Social Administrator 57(54), 6-10.
Bryk & Schneider, 2014ECAR study of pupils and information technology 2004:
convenience, connection, and control. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE
Greene, 2015 Breakthrough, Corwin Press

Khattri & Miles, 2015The influence of teaching strategies on pupil achievement in

higher order skills, accessed 15 April 2013,
fromhttp://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1149&context=research_conference

Harris (2015) Interactive Whiteboards in Victorian Schools: Enhancing Teacher

and Learner Engagement in Learning. Excerpts from the Report to the
Victorian Department of Education and Training
Caram and Davis (2014) Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta‐analyses
relating to achievement,

Parn (2015)) Successful Schooling: Techniques & Tools for Running a School to
Help Pupils from Disadvantaged and Low Socio-economics Backgrounds
Succeed, Effective Philanthropy, accessed 17 April 2013,
fromhttp://www.effectivephilanthropy.com.au/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=13&Itemid=135
Yazzie-Mintz, 2013'Training and Research for Teachers: Classroom Observation,
based on education fairness'
Linnebrink & Pintrick (2014)) The Engaging School: A Handbook for school
leaders, accessed 16 April 2013,
fromhttp://www.innovationunit.org/sites/default/files/Engaging%20School
%20Handbook_0.pdf
Smith and Cardaciotto (2014) 'Teacher conceptions of pupil engagement in
learning: a phenomenographic investigation', Central Queensland
University

Appleton, Christenson, Kim & Reschly, 2014). Catching up: learning from the
best school systems in East Asia, accessed 22 April 2013,

53
 fromhttp://grattan.edu.au/publications/reports/post/catching-up-learning-
from-the-best-schoolsystems-in-east-asia/
Bogren, 2013Better teacher appraisal and feedback: Improving performance,
Grattan Institute, accessed 15 April 2013,
fromhttp://grattan.edu.au/publications/reports/post/better-teacher-
appraisal-and-feedbackimproving-performance/
KPMG (2009) Re-engaging our kids, accessed 17 April 2013,
fromhttps://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/stuman/wellbeing/
Reengaging_Our_Kids_KPMG_Apr2014.pdf

Smerdon, 2013'Creative Teaching and Learning Environments: first results from

TALIS', Office of Communities Commission for Children and Young People
(NSW) (2014) 'Engagement in school', accessed 15 April 2013,
fromhttp://picture.kids.nsw.gov.au/5/11/6/

Questionnaire for the Teacher Respondents

This questionnaire is designed to gather information about the Teachers
Engagement Strategies Among Kindergarten Learners During COVID 19
Pandemic: Basis for Action Plan. The results may be beneficial not only to the
school administrators, principals, teachers, researcher but also to the future
researcher. Try to make this judgment to the best of your ability.
Part I. Please put a check ( / ) mark on the blank that correspond to your
answer. All information gathered will be for research study purposes only and
rest assured that all answers will be treated highly confidential.
Profile of the Respondents
1. Age
_____20-25 ______41 - 45

54
 _____ 26-30 ______46 - 50
_____31-35 ______51 - 55
_____36-40 ______56 - Above
2. Sex ______Female ______Male
3. Civil Status ______Single ______Married ______Widow
4. Highest educational attainment
_______BEED
_______BSED
_______with units in Masteral Degree
_______Master Degree
_______with units Doctoral Degree
_______Ph.D. / Ed.D.
_______others (please specify)
5. Number of years in service
_______0 - 5 years
_______6 - 10 years
_______11 - 15 years
_______16 – 20 years
_______21 and above
6. Rank
_____Teacher I _____Teacher II _____Teacher III
_____Master Teacher I
______Master Teacher II ______Master Teacher III
______Master Teacher IV
7. Related seminars/ trainings/conferences attended:
Local _____0-5 _____6-10 ____11-15 ____16-20 ____21
and above
Regional _____0-5 _____6-10 ____11-15 ____16-20 ____21
and above

55
 National _____0-5 _____ 6-10 ____11-15 ____16-20 ____21
and above
Part II. Read the following statements carefully. Your honest opinion is needed
in answering. Please put a check ( / ) mark that corresponds to what
engagement strategies you used in class during COVID 19 pandemic.
Use the scale below where:
Rank Descriptive Rating

4 - Strongly Agree

3 - Agree

2 - Disagree

1 - Strongly Disagree

Teachers’ Engagement Strategies

Intellectual Engagement Strategies

4 3 2 1
Items:

The teacher….

1. creates lessons, assignments, or projects that inculcate interests.

2. gives learners situational problems during class discussion.

3. calls pupils to explain the process showing how he/she got the
product or correct answer to questions raised.

4. uses spontaneous questioning when pupils are naturally curious

about the topic or when an ongoing discussion slows.

5. requires learners to create their own questions in relation to the

lesson.

Emotional Engagement
4 3 2 1
Items:

The teacher….

1. shows respect to his/her pupils during classes via google meet

through his/her gestures.

56
2. displays self-control when talking to the learners during and after
the class.

3. motivates learners who are quiet and sleepy in their moods during
class hour.

4. shows positive – image to the learners through his/her facial

expression and other gestures during the class time.

5. welcome learner opinions and ideas into the flow of the activity by
appreciating or acknowledging them that they are part of the class.

Behavioral Engagement
4 3 2 1
Items

The teacher …

1. makes the e learning environment attractive by posting interesting

instructional materials.

2. uses cues or gestures that will help pupils focus on a lesson they
get distracted.

3. shows positive attitude, facial expressions, encouraging statements,

respectful, and fair treatment of learners.

4. involves the learners to participate in doing their group activities.

5. asks the learners to demonstrate their assigned group activities

Physical Engagement 4 3 2 1
Items

The teacher…

1. uses physical activities or routines to stimulate learning or interest.

2. encourages learners to demonstrate or act out their answers in

front of the class. (google classroom)

57
 3. conducts a physical activity or quick exercises before the start of
the class.

4. is allowing learners to have breaks.

5. allows learners to act out the given physical exercises or other

physical activities in front of the class. (via google meet)

Part III Problems encountered affecting their teaching engagement.

Direction: Read the following statements carefully. Your honest opinions is

needed in answering. Put a check ( / ) mark that corresponds to performed in
class. Use the scale below where:
Rank Descriptive Rating

4 - Strongly Agree

3 - Agree

2 - Disagree

1 - Strongly Disagree

Equipment 4 3 2 1

1. lack of computer and other hardware to support the learning

environment

2. usual crash of computer

3. the use of printer and scanner during this pandemic time is not
available at home.

4. computer data storage, graphic card, sound card and speakers are
out of date.

5. router or modem are out of date.

Internet Connection 4 3 2 1

1. slow connections making the class stop at the middle of the lesson

2. unstable connections of internet.

3. out of range of a Wi-Fi network

58
4. sudden power interruption

5. faulty Ethernet cable

Materials for Modules

1. making activity sheets

2. reproduction costs (bond paper, ink for printer, etc.)

3. maximizing teacher’s short time in the preparation of modules.

4. using personal printer just to reproduce the modules.

5. collecting, organizing and checking the learning modules of the

learners.

59