See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/355498767

Printed Modular Distance Learning in Philippine Public Elementary Schools in

Time of COVID-19 Pandemic Quality, Implementation, and Challenges

Article · October 2021

DOI: 10.52006/main.v4i3.391

CITATIONS READS

24 4,949

2 authors:

Allen Jake Talimodao D.V. Madrigal

University of Negros Occidental - Recoletos University of Negros Occidental-Recoletos
1 PUBLICATION   24 CITATIONS    86 PUBLICATIONS   270 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by D.V. Madrigal on 25 October 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Printed Modular Distance
Learning in Philippine Public
Elementary Schools in Time of
COVID-19 Pandemic: Quality,
Implementation, and Challenges
Allen Jake S. Talimodao1 and Dennis V. Madrigal2
1
Asuncion L. Lizares Elementary School, Bacolod City, Philippines
2
University of Negros Occidental-Recoletos, Bacolod City, Philippines

ABSTRACT.  Coronavirus Disease 2019 forced educational sectors worldwide

Article history:
Submitted: 23 July 2021
Revised: 13 October 2021
Accepted: 25 October 2021
Keywords:
Educational management
Printed modular distance Learning PMDL were consistently excellent, indicating the adherence of the modality
Descriptive-comparative
Public elementary schools
Philippines
to implement various distance learning modalities. In the Philippines, printed
modular distance learning modality was implemented to continue delivering
quality and relevant education amid the pandemic. Thus, this study assessed
the quality and implementation of PMDL in public elementary schools.
Likewise, this study ranked the challenges encountered by the teachers in
the quality and implementation of PMDL. Using descriptive and inferential
analyses, the results revealed that both quality and implementation of
to the national standards set by the Department of Education. However,
significantly lower quality of PMDL among small and medium schools and
the encountered challenges of teachers on assessments, activities, outputs,
parents’ incapacity, inconsistent participation, and compliance established
the need for instructional supervision.

1.0. Introduction
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed significant challenges to
educational sectors worldwide (Tria, 2020). Although many countries worldwide struggle to continue
education during the pandemic, learning must continue (Dangle & Sumaoang, 2020). Various distance
learning modalities, such as modular distance learning, have been implemented in the United States
of America and Australia (Valencia, 2020). In the compilation report of World Bank (2020), Asian
countries like India and the Philippines also have implemented printed modular learning in education,
which is thought to be effective (Sejpal, 2013) and favorable (Sadiq & Zamir, 2014).
Modular learning is one of the most widespread and recognized teaching-learning techniques
in the United States, Australia, and Asia. It effectively promotes reflective learning rather than focus
on marks or grades (Sejpal, 2013). Also, Loughran and Russell (2004) and Ali et al. (2010) have proven
in their studies that modular learning in basic education is a more effective mode of instruction
than the traditional teaching method because it allows individuals to learn more at their own pace.
Similarly, Karthikeyan and Kumar (2014) found that students generally favored modular learning as
a more interesting and useful learning experience than conventional learning in their dermatology
class. Finally, Sadiq and Zamir (2014) concluded that modular learning is favorable and should be
widely used at various education levels.
In the Philippines, printed modular distance learning is extensively used by the Department
of Education (DepEd) as one of the Alternative Delivery Modes (ADM). Though printed modular
distance learning gained skepticism, Guido (2014) concluded that it is effective for the knowledge
adaptation of science and engineering students. Nardo (2017) also found that modular learning
develops a sense of responsibility among students, enhancing learner autonomy. Lastly, Valencia
(2020), in her study on modular learning in basic education, found that the academic performance of
learners improved due to modular learning.
Studies have been conducted on the nature of modular learning globally (Parlakkilic, 2015;
Dejene, 2019) and in the Philippines (Zulueta & Guimbatan, 2002; Unay et al., 2016). Other studies
also have identified the effects of modular learning on the learning process (Cornford, 1997; Matanluk
et al., 2013; Cabrera, 2014; Lim, 2016) and student performance (Chua et al., 2007; Bedaure, 2012). To
This article published by Philippine Social Science Journal (PSSJ) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-
Noncommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). You are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any
medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material). Under the following terms, you
must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner,
but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021 19

 Philippine Social Science Journal

date, however, there is a dearth of substantial literature assessing the quality and implementation of
printed modular distance learning. For such reason, Goode (2003), Guido (2014), and Nardo (2017)
recommended that teachers conduct relative researches on modular learning following the national
standards in order to achieve a caliber educational perspective.
This study aimed to describe the level of quality and extent of implementation of PMDL as
assessed by the teachers in public elementary schools at a schools division in a highly urbanized
city in Central Philippines in the school year 2020-2021. Likewise, it aimed to identify the challenges
encountered by the teachers in the quality and implementation of PMDL. The findings of the study
were used as the basis for the Development of the Instructional Supervision Monitoring Tool, which
teachers could use to comply with the established principles and standard operating procedures in
the quality and implementation of PMDL.

2.0. Framework of the Study

This paper theorized that the assessment of the quality and implementation of PMDL
varies according to the teachers’ perception as anchored on instructional theory and theory of
individualizing instruction. The instructional theory states that the instructional strategies of a
teacher such as PMDL (Nwagbara & Ezekwe, 2015) depend on whom and what they are trying
to teach and where (Wilson & Peterson, 2006). Similarly, the theory of individualizing instruction
originally assumes that no two living organisms are alike, as perceived by Wang (2013). In addition,
individualizing instruction through PMDL is the opposite of one-size-fits-all, whereby a teacher
suits the instruction based on his or her style and according to the learner’s needs, interests, and
individual characteristics (Russo, 2002).
In particular, Rivkin et al. (2005) undermine this assumption. They found that even when there is
some evidence that a master’s degree or higher improves the overall quality of PMDL, all estimates
are statistically insignificant. Similarly, French (2015) found that time and place are not a factor in
modular learning because flexibility allows learners to study according to their own pace and self-
regulation (Lim, 2016). Nevertheless, the assumption of the study is seconded by Lee and Loeb
(2020). They concluded that teachers in smaller schools are more likely to take more responsibility
for their students’ learning than in larger schools. Weiss et al. (2010) similarly stated that moderately
sized schools have the greatest engagement advantage in which engagement is necessary for any
teaching method. Thus, this study responds to Goode (2003), Guido (2014), and Nardo (2017), who
recommended that teachers conduct relative researches on modular learning.

3.0. Methods
This study employed the descriptive-comparative research design, which determined the level
of quality and extent of the implementation of printed modular distance learning in a schools division
in a highly urbanized city in Central Philippines during the school year 2020-2021 as assessed by the
teachers as a whole and when grouped according to highest educational attainment, school location,
and school category. Table 1 shows the profile of the respondents.
Selected through random sampling, the 377 public elementary school teachers answered an
electronically generated instrument with three parts: the profile of the respondents, the 57-item
questionnaire, which assessed the quality and implementation of PMDL, and the checklist on the
challenges encountered by the teachers. The indicators in the research instrument were based on the
ALS-EST Handbook for Implementers, DepEd Memorandum Order 1 series of 2021, and the Non-
negotiable Minimum Requirements for Distance Learning Modalities. In interpreting the data, both
the quality and implementation of PMDL used the scale: 1-Very Poor, 2-Poor, 3-Good, 4-Excellent.
Most importantly, the researcher addressed the general ethical principles of respect for persons,
beneficence, and justice to ensure the ethical soundness of the study.
In analyzing the data, Mean and Standard Deviation were used to determine the level of quality
and extent of implementation of PMDL. Meanwhile, Frequency Count, Percentage Distribution, and
Rank were employed to identify the challenges on the two variables. Further, Mann-Whitney U
Test and Kruskal Wallis compared the difference in the quality and implementation of PMDL when
grouped according to the highest educational attainment, school location, and school category.

20 Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021

quality and extent of implementation of PMDL. Meanwhile, Frequency Count, Percentage
Distribution, and Rank were employed to identify the challenges on the two variables. Further,
Mann-Whitney U Test and Kruskal Wallis compared the difference in the quality and
implementation of PMDL when Philippine
grouped according to theJournal
Social Science highest educational attainment, school
location, and school category.

Table 1. Profile of the Respondents

Variable f %
Highest Educational Attainment
Bachelor's Degree 277 73.5
Master's Degree 96 25.5
Doctorate Degree 4 1.1
School Location
Rural 61 16.2
Urban 316 83.8
School Category
Medium 87 23.1
Large 109 28.9
Mega 181 48.0
Total 377 100.0

4.0.
4.0. Results and Discussion
Resultsand Discussion

Level
Level ofof quality
quality ofof printed
printed modular
modular distance
distance learning
learning
Generally, the findings in Table 2 showed that the level of quality of printed modular distance
Generally, the findings in Table 2 showed that the level of quality of printed modular
learning is excellent (M=3.33, SD=0.40). This implies that the teachers perceive PMDL to excellently
distancetolearning
adhere is excellent
the principles set by (M=3.33, SD=0.40). This
DepEd. Significantly, the implies that
rest of the the teachers
population perceivealso
subgroups PMDL to
yielded
excellently
an “excellent”adhere
level toof the principles
quality. set by
Particularly, DepEd.with
teachers Significantly,
a doctoratethe rest of
degree the population
(M=3.36, SD=0.40),
subgroupsin also
teaching urban yielded
(M=3.34,an "excellent"
SD=0.41) and level large
of quality.
schoolsParticularly, teachers with
(M=3.42, SD=0.44) havea the
doctorate
highest
degree (M=3.36,
perceptions SD=0.40),
of quality of PMDL teaching
compared in urban
to their(M=3.34, SD=0.41)
counterparts. Thus,andtheylarge schools
may serve (M=3.42,
as models on
how
2015).they
SD=0.44) ensured
These theand
havefindings evaluated theestablish
significantly
highest perceptionsquality of PMDL.
that
of quality the On the
quality
of PMDL ofother
PMDL
compared hand,
to teachers
is their
adherent towith
thebachelor’s
counterparts. national
Thus,
(M=3.33,
they may SD=0.40)
standards of DepEd
serve and
and master’s
as models may
on how degrees
provide
theythe (M=3.33,
basis
ensured to
and SD=0.46),
continue
evaluatedusingteaching
the the inofrural
modality.
quality schools (M=3.30,
Nevertheless,
PMDL. On the the
other
SD=0.42)
lower and medium
hand, quality
teachers of with
PMDL schools
in some
bachelor's (M=3.18,
teacher
(M=3.33, SD=0.38) perceived
demographics
SD=0.40) lower quality
andsuggests
master's that of PMDL.
the
degrees Hence,
modality
(M=3.33, can they
still may
SD=0.46), be
be provided
further
teaching with instructional
improved
in rural through supervision
instructional
schools (M=3.30, to ensure
supervision.
SD=0.42) that theschools
and medium quality of PMDL isSD=0.38)
(M=3.18, not compromised
perceivedin
their respective contexts.
lower quality of PMDL. Hence, they may be provided with instructional supervision to ensure that
the quality ofTable
PMDL2. is Level of Quality of in
not compromised Printed Modular Distance
their respective contexts. Learning
The results indicate that DepEd successfullyM standardized
Variable SD the quality of PMDL. On
Interpretation
recommendations made by Delgado and Villaganas (2015), Camara (2016), and Ambayonand
Highest Educational Attainment
Millenes(2020) to evaluate the quality of PMDL, the findings substantiated that PMDL is aligned to
Bachelor's Degree 3.33 0.40 Excellent
the level of the learners (Lim, 2016). It is logically planned, developed, organized, and validated in
Master's Degree 3.33 0.46
terms of layout and content (Torrefranca, 2017), self-instructional (Macarandang, Excellent 2009), gender
Doctorate
and culture-sensitive Degree
(Bedaure, 3.36
2012), promoted reflective 0.21 (Nardo,
thinking Excellent
2017), and enhanced
higher-order thinking skills such as analyzing, problem-solving, and self-regulating (Paspasan,
School Location
Rural 3.30 0.42 Excellent
3
Urban 3.34 0.41 Excellent
School Category
Medium 3.18 0.38 Excellent
Large 3.42 0.44 Excellent
Mega 3.35 0.39 Excellent
As a Whole 3.33 0.41 Excellent

Theof implementation
Extent results indicate of
that DepEd
printed successfully
modular standardized
distance learning the quality of PMDL. On
recommendations made by Delgado and Villaganas (2015), Camara (2016), and Ambayon and
Generally, the findings in Table 3 showed that the extent of implementation of printed
modular distance learning is excellent (M=3.59, SD=0.36). Consequently, the results primarily
indicate that DepEd is successful in standardizing the implementation of PMDL. The results further
Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021 21
showed that the extent of implementation of all subgroups under highest educational attainment,
school location, and school category is also "excellent." Particularly, teachers with a doctorate
degree (M=3.66, SD=0.46) and teaching in rural (M=3.64, SD=0.36) and large schools (M=3.63,
 Master's Degree 3.33 0.46 Excellent
Doctorate Degree 3.36 0.21 Excellent
School Location
Rural Philippine Social Science Journal0.42
3.30 Excellent
Urban 3.34 0.41 Excellent
Millenes (2020) to School
evaluateCategory
the quality of PMDL, the findings substantiated that PMDL is aligned
to the level of the learners
Medium (Lim, 2016). It is logically planned,
3.18 developed,
0.38 organized,
Excellentand validated
in terms of layout and content (Torrefranca, 2017), self-instructional (Macarandang, 2009), gender
Excellent
and culture-sensitiveLarge
(Bedaure, 2012), promoted reflective 3.42thinking
0.44(Nardo, 2017), and enhanced
higher-order thinkingMegaskills such as analyzing, problem-solving, 3.35 and0.39 Excellent
self-regulating (Paspasan, 2015).
These findings significantly
As a Whole establish that the quality of 3.33
PMDL is adherent
0.41 to the national standards
Excellent
of DepEd and may provide the basis to continue using the modality. Nevertheless, the lower quality
of PMDL in some teacher demographics suggests that the modality can still be further improved
through instructional
Extent supervision.of printed modular distance learning
of implementation
Generally, the findings in Table 3 showed that the extent of implementation of printed
Extent of implementation
modular distance learningof printed modular
is excellent distance
(M=3.59, learningConsequently, the results primarily
SD=0.36).
Generally, theDepEd
indicate that findings in Table 3 showed
is successful that the extent
in standardizing of implementation
the implementation of printed
of PMDL. modular
The results further
distance learning is excellent (M=3.59, SD=0.36). Consequently, the results primarily indicate that
showed that the extent of implementation of all subgroups under highest educational attainment,
DepEd is successful in standardizing the implementation of PMDL. The results further showed that
school location, and school category is also "excellent." Particularly, teachers with a doctorate
the extent of implementation of all subgroups under highest educational attainment, school location,
degreecategory
and school (M=3.66, isSD=0.46) and teaching
also “excellent.” in rural teachers
Particularly, (M=3.64,with SD=0.36) and large
a doctorate schools
degree (M=3.63,
(M=3.66,
SD=0.36)
SD=0.46) have thein highest
and teaching perceptions
rural (M=3.64, of the
SD=0.36) and implementation of PMDL
large schools (M=3.63, compared
SD=0.36) havetothetheir
counterparts.
highest perceptionsHence,
of the they may serve asofmodels
implementation PMDL on how they
compared to implemented and evaluated
their counterparts. the said
Hence, they
may serve as models on how they implemented and evaluated the said modality.
modality.

Table 3. Extent of Implementation of Printed Modular Distance Learning

Variable M SD Interpretation
Highest Educational Attainment
Bachelor's Degree 3.59 0.36 Always
Master's Degree 3.54 0.38 Always
Doctorate Degree 3.66 0.46 Always
School Location
Rural 3.64 0.36 Always
Urban 3.57 0.36 Always
School Category
Medium 3.52 0.40 Always
Large 3.63 0.36 Always
Mega 3.57 0.35 Always
As a Whole 3.58 0.36 Always

4
Likewise, teachers with master’s degrees (M=3.54, S=0.38) and teaching in urban (M=3.57,
S=0.36) and medium schools (M=3.52, SD=0.40) imply that some inconsistencies must be minimized
if not eliminated in their contexts through adequate instructional supervision.
Relatedly, as mentioned earlier that quality must be assured before implementation (Sewagegn
& Diale, 2021), findings prove that adequate planning and preparation, as success determinants of
a program (Magulod, 2017), were conducted before the actual implementation of PMDL. Likewise,
the findings reveal that teachers took active roles in implementing PMDL, stakeholders were properly
informed on their responsibility to monitor learner progress (Guido, 2014), learners received timely
and relevant feedbacks, and parents shared the responsibility in the implementation of PMDL
(Dangle & Sumaoang, 2020). Succinctly, the collaboration among stakeholders was evident, enabling
the excellent implementation of PMDL (Olamo et al., 2019). Noting on the recommendation of
Macarandang (2009) that teachers use PMDL in face-to-face instruction, the findings imply that
PMDL may both be beneficial as a distance learning modality and a supplementary modality to face-
to-face learning.

Difference in the level of quality of printed modular distance learning when grouped according
to highest educational attainment and school category
As seen in Table 4, there is no significant difference in the level of quality of printed modular

22 Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021

 Philippine Social Science Journal

distance learning when the teachers are grouped according to educational attainment [χ2(2)=0.117,
p=0.943]. Hence, there are insufficient data to reject the null hypothesis. Also, the working theory
that the quality of PMDL varies according to the demographics of the teacher, such as highest
educational attainment, is debunked.
This indicates that the quality of PMDL is consistently excellent regardless of the educational
attainment of teachers. Though teachers with bachelor’s and master’s degrees perceived lower
quality of PMDL, the findings proved that they were able to ensure the quality of PMDL in their
local contexts. Nevertheless, instructional supervision is needed to maintain the quality of PMDL
regardless of the highest educational attainment of teachers.
Elaborately, the results on the quality of PMDL when teachers are grouped according to their
highest educational attainment strengthen the findings of Rivkin et al. (2005), which demonstrated
that even when there is some evidence that a master’s degree or higher improves the overall quality
of teaching as in PMDL, all estimates are statistically insignificant. Also, Buddin and Zamarro (2009)
found that teachers with master’s or doctorate degrees are not better or worse than comparable
teachers without advanced degrees. Moreover, the findings discredit the findings of Zhang (2008)
and Greenberg et al. (2004) that teachers with master’s degrees or doctorate degrees provide better
instruction.
In addition,
working theory thatthe findings
the qualityof the
of study
PMDLdebunk its workingtotheory
varies according that the qualityofofthe
the demographics PMDL varies
teacher,
according to thecategory,
such as school demographics of the teacher. The assumption of the instructional theory that PMDL
is proven.
varies according to the instructional strategies (Wilson & Peterson, 2006) is no longer valid. Similarly,
This indicates the inconsistent quality of PMDL among teachers in small, medium,
the findings of Zhang (2008) regarding instructional strategy being influenced by the educational
mega, and large schools. Thus, teachers in small and medium schools perceive a lower quality of
attainment of a teacher are therefore discredited. On the other hand, this boosts the findings of
PMDL et
Rivkin than their counterparts,
al. (2005) that the quality suggesting
of PMDL as that
oneinstructional supervision
of the instructional must has
methods be no
in difference
place to
in terms of teachers’ educational attainment. Thus, the findings imply that regardless ofteachers
ensure that the quality of PMDL is not compromised in their contexts. Nevertheless, teachers’
from large and
educational mega schools
attainment, may of
the quality provide
PMDL ais benchmark
excellent. to their counterparts to showcase how
they Meanwhile,
ensured andthere evaluated the qualitydifference
is a significant of PMDL. in the level of quality of printed modular distance
learning when the the
Furthermore, teachers
resultsareon grouped
the quality according
of PMDLtowhen school category
teachers are[χ2(2)=16.653,
grouped accordingp=0.000].
to
The Postcategory
school hoc teststrengthen
revealed that the teachers
conclusion fromof small
Howley and et medium
al. (2000), schools
statingrated
that significantly lower
school category
than other
affects teachers.
teacher Hence, Leithwood
instruction. there are sufficient data(2009)
and Jantzi to reject theaffirmed
also null hypothesis. Also,size
that school the working
affects
theory
variousthat the quality
student and of PMDL varies according
organizational outcomes.to the In demographics
Weiss et al. of the teacher,
(2010) such asstudy,
longitudinal school
category, is proven.
moderately sized schools have the greatest engagement advantage in which engagement is
This indicates the inconsistent quality of PMDL among teachers in small, medium, mega, and
necessary for any teaching instruction. Noting that PMDL significantly improves academic
large schools. Thus, teachers in small and medium schools perceive a lower quality of PMDL than
performance
their (Chua suggesting
counterparts, et al., 2007)thatand instructional
academic success (Cacayan
supervision must et al.,
be 2017),
in placethetoquality
ensureofthat
PMDL the
should of
quality bePMDL
reviewed
is notin compromised
small and medium schools
in their in terms
contexts. of performance
Nevertheless, teachers standards,
from largeformat, and
and mega
contentmay
schools which shoulda address
provide benchmark what tothe learners
their truly need
counterparts (Delgadohow
to showcase &Villaganas,
they ensured2015).
and evaluated

Table 4. Difference in Level of Quality of Printed Modular Distance Learning according to

Highest Educational Attainment and School Category
2
Highest Educational Attainment χ df p
Variable Bachelor's Master's Doctorate
Degree Degree Degree
3.33 3.33 3.36 0.117 2 0.943
(0.02) (0.05) (0.10)
2
School Category χ df p
Quality Small and
Large Mega
Medium
3.18a 3.42b 3.35b 16.653* 2 0.000
(0.04) (0.04) (0.03)
Note: *the difference is significant when p<0.05

the quality ofinPMDL.

Difference the level of quality of printed modular distance learning when grouped
Furthermore,
according thelocation
to school results on the quality of PMDL when teachers are grouped according to school
As seen in Table 5, there is no significant difference in the level of quality of printed modular
distance learning when the teachers are grouped according to school location [U=8986.00,
Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021 23
p=0.402]. Hence, there are insufficient data to reject the null hypothesis. Also, the working
theory that the quality of PMDL varies according to the demographics of the teacher, such as
school location, is debunked.
 Philippine Social Science Journal

category strengthen the conclusion of Howley et al. (2000), stating that school category affects
teacher instruction. Leithwood and Jantzi (2009) also affirmed that school size affects various student
and organizational outcomes. In Weiss et al. (2010) longitudinal study, moderately sized schools have
the greatest engagement advantage in which engagement is necessary for any teaching instruction.
Noting that PMDL significantly improves academic performance (Chua et al., 2007) and academic
success (Cacayan et al., 2017), the quality of PMDL should be reviewed in small and medium schools
in terms of performance standards, format, and content which should address what the learners truly
need (Delgado & Villaganas, 2015).

Difference in the level of quality of printed modular distance learning when grouped according
to school location
As seen in Table 5, there is no significant difference in the level of quality of printed modular
distance learning when the teachers are grouped according to school location [U=8986.00, p=0.402].
Hence, there are insufficient data to reject the null hypothesis. Also, the working theory that the
quality of PMDL varies according to the demographics of the teacher, such as school location, is
debunked.
This indicates that the quality of PMDL is excellent regardless of the school location. This
generally implies that the quality of PMDL across urban and rural schools is excellent primarily
because of flexibility in learning. This also assures that regardless of the school location, the same
quality of learning through PMDL is received by the learners.
Relatedly, flexibility and self-regulation are the major qualities of the PMDL (Lim, 2016). French
(2015) also added that time and place are not a factor in modular learning because of flexibility in
learning through PMDL. The findings are in congruence with the study of Nnamani and Oyibe (2016),
whichlearning depends
states that on theoflocation
the quality of the school.
an instructional method Moreover, the findings
such as modular of the
learning study debunk
depends on the the
instructional
location theory
of the school. whereby the
Moreover, the findings
quality of
ofPMDL is not
the study differed
debunk thebyinstructional
the school location.
theory whereby
the qualityNotably,
of PMDL both
is notrural
differed
andby the school
urban location.
schools provide a quality flexible learning environment to
Notably, both rural and urban schools
learners (Ambayon&Millenes, provide
2020). This a quality
proves flexible
that the learning
quality of PMDLenvironment to in
is excellent learners
providing
(Ambayon
mass & Millenes, and
education 2020). This proves instruction
individualized that the quality of PMDL
(Aquino et al.,is2011).
excellent in providing
Succinctly, the mass
findings
education and individualized instruction (Aquino et al., 2011). Succinctly, the findings hereby fulfill
hereby fulfill the recommendation of Nwagbara and Ezekwe (2015) that modular learning is
the recommendation of Nwagbara and Ezekwe (2015) that modular learning is applied and evaluated
applied and evaluated in terms of quality (Macarandang, 2009; Ambayon&Millenes, 2020) in rural
in terms of quality (Macarandang, 2009; Ambayon & Millenes, 2020) in rural areas to determine
areas
whether to determine
a school locationwhether a school
is a factor location
in modular is a factor in modular learning.
learning.

Table 5. Difference in Level of Quality of Printed Modular Distance Learning

according to School Location
School Location
Variable U z p
Rural Urban
3.30 3.34
Quality 8986.000 -0.837 0.402
(0.42) (0.41)
Note: *the difference is significant when p<0.05

Difference in the extent of implementation of printed modular distance learning when

Difference in the extent of implementation of printed modular distance learning when
grouped according to highest educational attainment and school category
grouped
The according
findings in Tableto highest educational
6 indicate that thereattainment and school
is no significant category
difference in the extent of
The findings in Table 6 indicate that there is no significant
implementation of printed modular distance learning when the teachers are grouped difference in the extent of
according
implementation
to educational of printed
attainment modular distance
[χ2(2)=1.146, p=0.564]learning
and schoolwhencategory
the teachers are grouped
[χ2(2)=3.959, according
p=0.138].
Hence,to there
educational attainment
are insufficient data[χ2(2)=1.146,
to reject the p=0.564] and school
null hypothesis. Also,category [χ2(2)=3.959,
the working theory that p=0.138].
the
implementation
Hence, there ofare
PMDL varies according
insufficient to the
data to reject the demographics
null hypothesis.of Also,
the teacher, such theory
the working as highest
that the
educational attainmentofand
implementation PMDLschool category,
varies is debunked.
according to the demographics of the teacher, such as highest
The findings attainment
educational show that teachers,
and school regardless
category,ofistheir educational attainment, took active roles in
debunked.
the planning,Theimplementing,
findings show thatand monitoring of learner
teachers, regardless ofperformance.
their educationalThe attainment,
findings likewise denoteroles
took active
that regardless of the highest educational attainment of teachers, they are all equally committed to
in the planning, implementing, and monitoring of learner performance. The findings likewise
standardizing the implementation of PMDL in their contexts. Meanwhile, in terms of school category,
denote mean
the findings that regardless
that PMDL of wasthe highest educational
standardized regardless attainment
of the number of teachers, they
of teachers. areindicates
This all equally
committed to standardizing the implementation of PMDL
that teachers share equal duties and responsibilities in implementing PMDL. in their contexts. Meanwhile, in terms of
school category, the findings mean that PMDL was standardized regardless of the number of
teachers. This indicates that teachers share equal duties and responsibilities in implementing
24 PMDL. Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021

Table 6. Difference in Extent of Implementationof Printed Modular Distance Learning

according to Highest Educational Attainment and School Category
denote that regardless of the highest educational attainment of teachers, they are all equally
committed to standardizing the implementation of PMDL in their contexts. Meanwhile, in terms of
school category, the findings mean that PMDL was standardized regardless of the number of
teachers. This indicates that teachers share
Philippine equal
Social duties
Science and responsibilities in implementing
Journal
PMDL.

Table 6. Difference in Extent of Implementationof Printed Modular Distance Learning

according to Highest Educational Attainment and School Category
2
Highest Educational Attainment χ df p
TheVariable
findings support Buddin and Master's
Bachelor's Zamarro (2009), noting that teachers with master's or
Doctorate
doctorate degrees are notDegree
better or worse in their instruction
Degree Degree than comparable teachers without
advanced degrees. However, the findings rebuke the conclusion that a larger school size means
3.59 3.54 3.66 1.146 2 0.564
more economic efficiency, especially in producing learning materials, but it becomes a deterrent
(0.02) (0.04) (0.23)
in academic outcomes (Ready et al., 2004). Another conclusion debunked by the findings is that
2
teachers in smaller schools are more School
likely Category
to take more responsibility χfor their df
students'p learning
Extent
than in larger schools (Lee & Loeb,
Small and 2020). Their notion that elementary schools must be limited in
Large Mega
size so that the benefits Medium
that individual pupil receives in policies implemented are maximized is
not evident based on the findings
3.52 of the study.
3.63 3.57 3.959 2 0.138
(0.04) (0.03) (0.03)
Difference in the extent of implementation of printed modular distance learning when
Note: *the difference is significant when p<0.05
grouped according to school location
The findings insupport
The findings Table 7Buddin
indicateand Zamarro (2009),
no significant differencenoting that
in the teachers
extent with master’sofor
of implementation
doctorate degreesdistance
printed modular are notlearning
better orwhen worse theinteachers
their instruction
are grouped than according
comparable to teachers without
school location 7
advanced degrees. However, the findings rebuke the conclusion that a larger school size means
[U=8404.50, p=0.112]. Hence, there are insufficient data to reject the null hypothesis. Also, the
more economic efficiency, especially in producing learning materials, but it becomes a deterrent
working theory that the implementation of PMDL varies according to the demographics of the
in academic outcomes (Ready et al., 2004). Another conclusion debunked by the findings is that
teacher, in
teachers such as school
smaller schools location, is debunked.
are more likely to take more This indicates that
responsibility the students’
for their quality of PMDLthan
learning is
consistently
in excellent
larger schools (Lee & among
Loeb, rural and
2020). urban
Their schools.
notion that elementary schools must be limited in size so
Generally,
that the benefitsthe thatfindings
individual denote that theinexcellent
pupil receives adherence toare
policies implemented national
maximizedstandards
is not in the
evident
implementation
based on the findingsof PMDLof theis study.
consistent with all rural and urban schools. Since rural and urban
schools use the same quality evaluated PMDL, its consistent implementation strengthens the total
Difference in the extent
quality of education learnersofreceive
implementation
regardless ofoftheir printed
schoolmodular
location. distance
This implies learning when
that PMDL
grouped
transcends according
geographic to school
distancelocation
whereby the standard of implementation by rural schools is the
The findings in Table 7 indicate no significant difference in the extent of implementation of
same as that of urban schools and vice versa. The teachers also, regardless of their school
printed modular distance learning when the teachers are grouped according to school location
location, are properly informed and take active roles in the learning process of their learners. This
[U=8404.50, p=0.112]. Hence, there are insufficient data to reject the null hypothesis. Also, the
goes to theory
working show the that commitment
the implementation among ofteachers in adhering
PMDL varies accordingto tothethenational standards
demographics in
of the
implementing
teacher, such asPDML.
school location, is debunked. This indicates that the quality of PMDL is consistently
The findings
excellent among rural and eliminate the disparity of quality of learning among rural and urban
urban schools.
schools, disproving
Generally, the conclusion
the findings denoteofthatSewagegn and Diale
the excellent (2021), to
adherence noting that standards
national even wheninthe the
implementation of PMDL is at
curriculum is harmonized consistent
a nationalwith all rural
level, thereandareurban schools.
variations in Since rural and the
implementing urban schools
modular
use the same
approach. Also,quality
PMDLevaluated
made learningPMDL, more
its consistent
accessible implementation strengthens
to learners debunking the total quality
the conclusion that
of education
school locationlearners
has alsoreceive
led toregardless of their
mass failure andschool
dropout location. This implies
of students because that
of PMDL transcends
long walks with
geographic
empty stomachsdistance whereby the
abandoning standard
their of implementation
educational and life goals by (Mhiliwa,
rural schools is theThe
2015). same as that
findings
of urban schools and vice versa. The teachers also, regardless of their school location, are properly
respond to the recommendation of Nwagbara and Ezekwe (2015) that modular learning is
informed and take active roles in the learning process of their learners. This goes to show the
implementedamong
commitment in ruralteachers
areas to in determine
adheringwhether a schoolstandards
to the national location is
in aimplementing
factor in modular PDML. learning.

Table 7. Difference in Extent of Implementationof Printed Modular Distance Learning

according to School Location
School Location
Variable U z p
Rural Urban
3.64 3.57
Extent 8404.500 -1.588 0.112
(0.36) (0.36)
Note: *the difference is significant when p<0.05

Challenges in the eliminate

The findings quality and
theimplementation of printed
disparity of quality modular
of learning distance
among rural learning
and urban schools,
As shown
disproving in Table 8, teachers
the conclusion encountered
of Sewagegn major
and Diale challenges
(2021), in theeven
noting that quality
when of the
PMDL on the
curriculum
provision of summative assessment 50.9% (f=192), appropriateness of activities/required outputs
47.7% (f=180), and availability of post-test provided in every module/lesson 47.2% (178).
Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021 25
8
 Philippine Social Science Journal

is harmonized at a national level, there are variations in implementing the modular approach.
Also, PMDL made learning more accessible to learners debunking the conclusion that school
Moreover, the teachers encountered major challenges in the implementation of PMDL on parents'
location has also led to mass failure and dropout of students because of long walks with empty
capacity of facilitating learning to children 72.4% (f=273), parent's participation in following up
stomachs abandoning their educational and life goals (Mhiliwa, 2015). The findings respond to the
their children's
recommendation of progress
Nwagbara 71.4%
and (269),
Ezekwe and compliance
(2015) by parents
that modular in getting
learning and returning
is implemented the self-
in rural
areas learning
to determinemodules whether70.8% (267).location
a school However, teachers
is a factor encountered
in modular learning.no challenge in clarifying
instructions of activities in the self-learning modules for quality and assignment of personnel to
Challenges
print ininimplementation
the quality and ofimplementation
PMDL. of printed modular distance learning
As shown
Overall,in Table 8, teachers
the major encountered
challenges majorofchallenges
in the quality PMDL imply in thethatquality
teachersof PMDL on the the
encountered
provision of summative
inadequacy and lackassessment 50.9% (f=192),
in the appropriateness appropriateness
of summative tests, of activities/required
activities, outputs, andoutputs
post-tests
47.7%given
(f=180), andlearners.
to the availability of may
This post-test
haveprovided in every
a detrimental effectmodule/lesson
on the quality 47.2%
of the(178). Moreover,
modality, knowing
the teachers
that theseencountered
factors must major challenges
sufficiently in the
provide implementation
learners of PMDLpractice
with independent on parents’ capacity of
and self-regulation.
facilitating learning to children 72.4% (f=273), parent’s participation in following up their children’s
Lastly, this also poses a challenge for module writers and the quality assurance team to redefine
progress 71.4% (269), and compliance by parents in getting and returning the self-learning modules
70.8%standards in publishing
(267). However, teachers SLMs with adequate
encountered summative
no challenge tests, activities,
in clarifying instructions outputs, and post-tests.
of activities in the
Nevertheless, teachers having no challenge in the clarity of
self-learning modules for quality and assignment of personnel to print in implementation of instructions in SLMs indicates
PMDL. that
simple language
Overall, the major and easy-to-follow
challenges in theinstructions
quality of are provided
PMDL imply forthat theteachers
learners.encountered the
inadequacyMeanwhile,
and lack in teachers encountered
the appropriateness parents' incapacity,
of summative inconsistent
tests, activities, outputs, participation,
and post-testsand
givencompliance
to the learners. as theThis maychallenges
major have a detrimental effect on PMDL.
in implementing the qualityThisofimplies
the modality, knowing
that teachers that
recognize
thesethefactors must sufficiently
significance provide
of parental learners with
involvement independent
to the academic practice
success and self-regulation.
of learners. Lastly, this
In addition,
this also poses
greatly a challenge
affects for module
the academic writers
progress of and the quality
the learners, assurance
knowing thatteam
parentsto redefine standards
or guardians serve as
in publishing
learning SLMs with adequate
facilitators who not summative tests, activities,
only co-supervise outputs,pupils
and co-monitor and post-tests. Nevertheless,
but also receive and return
teachers having no challenge in the clarity of instructions in SLMs indicates that simple language and
SLMs to schools. Such inconsistent participation and compliance delay the learners'
easy-to-follow instructions are provided for the learners.
accomplishment,
Meanwhile, teachers which may haveparents’
encountered an adverse effect on
incapacity, the flexibility
inconsistent of learningand
participation, through PMDL.
compliance
On the other hand, teachers perceive no challenge in the personnel
as the major challenges in implementing PMDL. This implies that teachers recognize the significance assigned to print, which
means involvement
of parental persons responsible for printing
to the academic are in of
success place. Relatedly,
learners. the challenges
In addition, aboveaffects
this greatly validated
the the
challenges
academic progress in ofimplementing
the learners, PMDLknowing identified
that parentsby Dangle
or guardians and Sumaoang (2020). facilitators
serve as learning The need to
who not only co-supervise
address the challengeand in co-monitor
the quality pupils
of PMDL,but also
notingreceive
that and return SLMs
self-learning to schools.
activities and Such
relevant
inconsistent participation
assessments must beand compliance
adequately delayfor
provided thepupils
learners’ accomplishment,
to reflect on their ownwhich mayprogress.
learning have an
adverse effect on the flexibility of learning through PMDL.
Table 8. Challenges in the Quality and Implementation of Printed Modular Distance
Challenges f %
Quality of PMDL
Provision of a summative test by learning area 192 50.9
Appropriateness of activity/required output 180 47.7
Availability of post-test in every module/lesson 178 47.2
Accuracy to the approved MELC 156 41.4
Accuracy of content/lesson 150 39.8
Implementation of PMDL
Parents’ capacity of facilitating learning to children 273 72.4
Parent's participation in following up their children's progress 269 71.4
Compliance by parents in getting and returning the SLMs 267 70.8
Availability of printing supplies/materials 248 65.8
Accessibility of learning materials on the Website/Portals 221 58.6
Availability of functional facility/equipment 220 58.4
Completeness of SLMs distributed/retrieved 190 50.4
Quality of printing outputs 189 50.1
Participation of parents/LGU, etc. 175 46.4
Availability of schedule for distribution/retrieval 172 45.6
Reporting of learners’ progress to parents 153 40.6
Feedback mechanism 143 37.9
Organization/System for distribution/retrieval 128 34.0
9

26 Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021

 Philippine Social Science Journal

On the other hand, teachers perceive no challenge in the personnel assigned to print, which
means persons responsible for printing are in place. Relatedly, the challenges above validated the
challenges in implementing PMDL identified by Dangle and Sumaoang (2020). The need to address
the challenge in the quality of PMDL, noting that self-learning activities and relevant assessments
must be adequately provided for pupils to reflect on their own learning progress.

5.0. Conclusion
The Printed Modular Distance Learning Modality provides learners with equitable access to
quality and relevant education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, significantly lower quality
of PMDL in small and medium schools than their big and mega school counterparts signifies the need
for instructional supervision to maintain excellent quality and address the current shortcomings.
Nevertheless, the teachers affirm that in their demographics, such as highest educational attainment
and local contexts, such as school category and school location, the department successfully
standardizes the quality and implementation of PMDL.
Similarly, the challenges encountered by the teachers in the quality and implementation of
PMDL suggest that teachers need support in the said modality. This is best addressed through
instructional supervision. They can also receive adequate professional assistance so that challenges
are addressed, and standardized quality and implementation of PMDL are sustained. Therefore,
PMDL is advantageous to be re-implemented in the succeeding school years as a distance learning
modality and even as a supplementary modality to face-to-face learning as in Modified In-School
Off-School Approach (MISOSA).
It is recommended, therefore, that school administrators should employ adequate instructional
supervision to maintain the excellent quality and implementation of PMDL and address the
challenges encountered by the teachers. In the same manner, teachers may undergo training in
writing thematic assessments to address better the challenges they encountered in the quality of
PMDL. They may likewise conduct intervention programs to encourage parent participation and
compliance, addressing their challenge in implementing PMDL. Lastly, they may undergo intensive
training on utilizing modules in classroom teaching so that PMDL may be used as a supplementary
learning modality to face-to-face instruction as the need requires. Future researchers are encouraged
to conduct more studies on the quality and implementation of PMDL and explore other variables to
validate the claims of this study.

REFERENCES

Ali, R., Ghazi, S. R., Khan, M. S., Hussain, S., & Faitma, Z. T. (2010). Effectiveness of modular teaching in biology at
the secondary level. Asian Social Science, 6(9). https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v6n9p49
Ambayon, E. E., & Millenes, C. (2020). Modular-based approach and students’ achievement in literature. Available
at SSRN 3723644. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3723644
Aquino, R., Hagos, L., Evangelista, Y., Lim, U., & Reyes, F. (2011). Effectiveness of the modular instructional material
in the basic integration formulas in integral calculus. 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning
(ICTL 2011), Malaysia.
Bedaure, A. (2012). Modular instruction in biology: Its effect on students’ performance. JPAIR Multidisciplinary
Research, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.7719/jpair.v9i1.2
Buddin, R., & Zamarro, G. (2009). Teacher qualifications and student achievement in urban elementary schools.
Journal of Urban Economics, 66(2), 103-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2009.05.001
Cabrera, F. (2014). Modular cooperative learning: A designed mathematics instruction for 21st-century education.
UNP Research Journal, 23(1). https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=11646
Cacayan, R., Tenorio, J., Romiro G. Bautista, R. (2017). Students’ awareness of m-learning in the classroom
pedagogical environment. QSU-CTE Journal of Education Practices and Standards, 2(1). http://ejournals.ph/
form/cite.php?id=11820
Camara, J. (2016). View of a validated module in biological science for college students in the Philippines.
Southeast Asian Journal of Science and Technology. https://sajst.org/online/index.php/sajst/article/
view/49/45
Chua, O., Jacinto, E., & Santos, V. (2007). Effectiveness of a module in the teaching of selected topics in
engineering physics I, 4(1). https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=9037
Cornford, I. (1997). Ensuring effective learning from modular courses: A Cognitive. Journal of Vocational Education
& Training, 49(2), pp.237-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636829700200014

Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021 27

 Philippine Social Science Journal

Dangle, Y. R. P., & Sumaoang, J. D. (2020). The implementation of modular distance learning in the Philippine
secondary public schools. In 3rd International Conference on Advanced Research in Teaching and Education
(November 27-29), Dublin, Ireland. https://www. dpublication. com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/27-427.
pdf.
Dejene, W. (2019). The practice of modularized curriculum in higher education institution: Active learning and
continuous assessment in focus. Cogent Education, 6(1), Research-Article. https://doi.org/10.1080/233118
6X.2019.1611052
Delgado, J. V. A., & Villaganas, V. D. (2015). The effects of eclectic teaching approach in mathematics for
grade IX students. Journal of Agriculture and Technology Management, 10-10. https://doi.org/10.29121/
granthaalayah.v5.i5.2017.1861
French, S. (2015). The benefits and challenges of modular higher education curricula. Issues and Ideas Paper.
Melbourne: Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education.
Goode, C. (2003). Evaluating the quality, usability, and potential effectiveness of online learning modules: A case
study of teaching with technology grant recipients at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. https://trace.
tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5983&context=utk_graddiss
Greenberg, E., Rhodes, D., Ye, X., & Stancavage, F. (2004, April). Prepared to teach: Teacher preparation and student
achievement in eighth-grade mathematics. American Institute for Research, 2004 Annual Meeting, San
Diego, CA.
Guido, R. M. D. (2014). Evaluation of a modular teaching approach in materials science and engineering. American
Journal of Educational Research, 2(11), 1126-1130. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-11-20
Howley, C., Strange, M., & Bickel, R. (2000). Research about school size and school performance in impoverished
communities. Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools, Appalachia Educational Laboratory.
Kapfer, P., & Swenson, G. (2015) Individualizing Instruction for Self-Paced Learning, The Clearing House: A Journal
of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 42:7, 405-410, DOI: 10.1080/00098655.1968.1147752
Karthikeyan, K., & Kumar, A. (2014). Integrated modular teaching in dermatology for undergraduate students: a
novel approach. Indian Dermatology Online Journal, 5(3), 266. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5178.137774
Lee, V. E., & Loeb, S. (2000). School size in Chicago elementary schools: effects on teachers’ attitudes
and students’ achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 3–31. https://doi.
org/10.3102/00028312037001003
Leithwood, K. & Jantzi, D. (2009). A review of empirical evidence about school size effects: A policy perspective.
Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 464-490. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326158
Lim, E. J. (2016). Effectiveness of modular instruction in word problem solving of BEED students. IOSR Journal of
Mathematics (IOSR-JM), 12(5), 59-65.
Loughran, J., & Russell, T. (2004). Improving teacher education practice through self-study. Routledge.
Macarandang, M. (2009). Evaluation of a Proposed Set of Modules in Principles and Methods of Teaching.
E-International Scientific Research Journal.
Magulod Jr, G. C. (2017). Factors of school effectiveness and performance of selected public and private
elementary schools: implications on educational planning in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of
Multidisciplinary Research, 5(1), 73-83.
Matanluk, O., Mohammad, B., Kiflee, D. N. A., & Imbug, M. (2013). The effectiveness of using teaching modules
based on radical constructivism toward students learning process. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,
90, 607-615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.132
Mhiliwa, J. A. (2015). The effects of school distance on students’ academic performance: A case of community
secondary schools in Makambako Town Council (Doctoral dissertation, The Open University of Tanzania).
Nardo, M. T. B. (2017). Modular instruction enhances learner autonomy. American Journal of Educational Research,
5(10), 1024-1034.
Nnamani, S. C., & Oyibe, O. A. (2016). Effects of individualized instructional method on secondary school students’
achievement in social studies. British Journal of Education, 4(3), 110-120.
Nwagbara, A., & Ezekwe, E. (2015) Creativity and innovation in modular instruction of college mathematics: A key
to the 21st-century transformation of the global economy. ASPROAEDU, Volume 1 No. 1.
Olamo, T. G., Mengistu, Y. B., & Dory, Y. A. (2019). Challenges hindering the effective implementation of the
harmonized modular curriculum: The case of three public universities in Ethiopia. Creative Education, 10(7),
1365-1382. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.107102
Parlakkilic, A. (2015). Modular Rapid E-Learning Framework (MORELF) in desktop virtualization environment: An
effective hybrid implementation in nurse education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(1).
https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.21716
Paspasan, R. (2015). Structured approach vs. self-paced modular approach in teaching trigonometry. Asia Pacific
Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(5), 51-58.
Ready, D., Lee, V., & Welner, K. G. (2004). Educational equity and school structure: School size, overcrowding, and
schools-within-schools.
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica,
73(2), 417-458. https://doi.org/10.3386/w6691

28 Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021

 Philippine Social Science Journal

Russo, K. A. (2002). Effect (s) of traditional versus learning-style instructional strategies on the achievement and
attitudes of first-year law students enrolled in legal research and writing course. St. John’s University (New
York), School of Education and Human Services.
Sadiq, S., & Zamir, S. (2014). Effectiveness of modular approach in teaching at the university level. Journal of
Education and Practice, 5, 103-109.
Sejpal, K. (2013). Modular method of teaching. International Journal for Research in Education Vol. 2,(2), Feb. 2013
(IJRE) ISSN: 2320-091X.
Sewagegn, A. A., & Diale, B. M. (2021). Modular/block teaching: Practices and challenges at higher education
institutions of Ethiopia. Teaching in Higher Education, 26(6), 776-789. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.201
9.1681391
Torrefranca, E. C. (2017). Development and validation of instructional modules on rational expressions and
variations. The Normal Lights, 11(1).
Tria, J. Z. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of education in the Philippines: The new normal.
International Journal of Pedagogical Development and Lifelong Learning, 1(1), 2-4. https://doi.org/10.30935/
ijpdll/8311
Unay, Olga & Esquierdo, Ida & Calpa, May & Basista, Danilo & Pinca, Emilia & Jr, Fel. (2016). Difficulties in College
Algebra of Freshmen Students at the University of Eastern Philippines: Basis for Modular Construction.
OALib. 03. 1-4. 10.4236/oalib.1102597.
Valencia, M. R. (2020, April). Modular approach in teaching science 10. International Journal of Trend in Scientific
Research and Development (IJTSRD).
Wang, H. (2013). Academic Libraries in the US and China. Comparative Studies of Instruction, Government
Documents, and Outreach Chandos Information Professional Series.
Weiss, C. C., Carolan, B. V., & Baker-Smith, E. C. (2010). Big school, small school:(Re) testing assumptions about
high school size, school engagement, and mathematics achievement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
39(2), 163-176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9402-3
Wilson, S. M., & Peterson, P. L. (2006). Theories of learning and teaching: What do they mean for educators? (p. 2).
Washington, DC: National Education Association.
World Bank (2020). How countries are using edtech (including online learning, radio, television, texting) to
support access to remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/
edutech/brief/how-countries-are-using-edtech-to-support-remote-learning-during-the-covid-19-pandemic
Zhang, D. (2008). The effect of teacher education level, teaching experience, and teaching behaviors on student
science achievement. Utah State University.
Zulueta, F., & Guimbatan, K. (2002). Teaching Strategies and Educational Alternatives. Academic Publishing
Corporation, Manila.

Correspondence:

ALLEN JAKE S. TALIMODAO*

allenjake.talimodao.ajt@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4183-1233

DENNIS V. MADRIGAL
dennis_madrigal@yahoo.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5548-2682

*Principal Correspondent

Volume 4 Number 3 July-September 2021 29

View publication stats