Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.

7150765, ISSN 2822-4353

Research Article

Science Spiral Progression Curriculum: The Factors Affecting

Secondary Students’ Learning Progress
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan*
For affiliations and correspondence, see the last page.

Abstract
Spiral progression is one of the key components of the K to 12 curriculums. This prevents gaps
between educational phases and enables students to pick up knowledge and abilities pertinent to their
cognitive developmental stages. The goal of the study was to examine the factors impacting students'
learning progress as well as to provide perspective into the teachers' viewpoints regarding the
implementation of the science spiral curriculum at San Luis National High School in the Division of
Agusan del Sur, Philippines, in the academic year 2021–2022. More so, this research used the
quantitative approach as it delved into numerical data relative to the subject of the investigation
procedure. The specific research methodology utilized was descriptive research design. The chosen
public junior high school science teachers at San Luis National High School in the Division of
Agusan del Sur in terms of their perspective when executing the science spiral progression
curriculum is 3.55 with a descriptive interpretation of agree. The science teachers largely "agree" on
the items offered to them in the questionnaire on the factors that affect students' learning development
as to teachers' specialization and teacher training, seminars, and workshops, with an overall weighted
mean of 3.96. a faculty mentoring program for the interdisciplinary classes they are instructing.
Furthermore, the teachers are now conscious of the significance of obtaining a higher degree, whether
it be for professional and personal growth or promotion, after observing the most recent trend in
continuing education.
Keywords: Spiral Progression, Science Curriculum, Learning, Factors, Progress, Development

Introduction today is more established and structured than the

The Philippines' Republic Act 10533, also known as
the "Act Enhancing the Philippine Basic Education
System," not only extends basic education by two
years and maintains universal kindergarten, but it also
specifies the standards and rules that the Department
of Education must adhere to when creating curricula.
This prescription includes the following as one of its
requirements: "The curriculum shall adopt the spiral
development strategy to ensure mastery of knowledge
and skills after each level."
The traditional Philippine basic education curriculum
stipulates that students must complete ten years of
formal education. 6 years of primary education and 4
years of secondary school make up this period. Grades
1 through 6 make up primary school, whereas years 1
through 4 make up secondary education. Additionally,
kindergarten is optional. Under Benigno C. Aquino,
the president at the time, the Philippine Department of
Education campaigned for changes to the basic
education curriculum. The K to 12 basic education
curriculums in the Philippines was created as a result
of the president and the department's goal for a 12-year
basic education curriculum in addition to a compulsory
kindergarten.
The Philippines' educational system has improved
greatly since its early days. The curriculum we use
casual, unstructured, and devoid of methodologies
education we used to have. By lengthening the basic
education cycle from kindergarten up to Grade 12, the
K-12 Basic Education Program was implemented last
year with the intention of decluttering and improving
the basic education curriculum for students to grasp
the various learning competencies (Seameo Innotech,
2012). Spiral progression is one of the key components
of the K–12 curriculum. This prevents gaps between
educational phases and enables students to pick up
knowledge and abilities pertinent to their cognitive
developmental stages. With increasing complexity and
depth of learning throughout the successive year
levels, the spiral progression technique has also been
shown to promote retention and mastering of the
lessons and skills (Quijano, Yolanda, and Technical
Working Group on Curriculum, 2012).
Accordingly, an instructional strategy that adheres to a
progressive curriculum is called a spiral progression.
John Dewey's theory of entire learning experiences for
a person served as the approach's foundation. Martin
(2008) described progression as a concept that
describes how students’ progress through their
education and how they acquire, use, and develop their
skills, knowledge, and understanding in progressively
more difficult contexts. Based on this strategy, a
learner-centered strategy like inquiry-based learning
pedagogy was used in the K–12 scientific spiral
progression approach. The objective of the science

Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan

2/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
curriculum, according to the K to 12 Curriculum
Guide of Science (2013), is to produce scientifically
literate citizens who are knowledgeable and active
members of society, responsible decision-makers, and
who apply scientific knowledge that will have a
significant impact on society and the environment
(Department of Education, 2020; DOST, 2011).
The study is grounded in con stru ctiv ism,
progressivism, and social reconstructionism, three
theoretical frameworks (Mauch & Tarman, 2016).
Constructivism is a learning philosophy that claims
that students build knowledge based on their prior
experiences, according to Elliot et al. (2000). Its main
argument is that learners construct knowledge by
building on the foundation of prior learning in order to
have an impact on new knowledge (Phillips, 1995;
Garcia, 2021). The constructivist educational
philosophy is embraced by the Philippine K–12
curricula. In this curriculum, students learn topics in a
spiral development, which implies that earlier lessons
are followed by later lessons that are more
sophisticated and complicated. Learners also regularly
evaluate their experiences as they acquire the
knowledge and skills required to attain learning.
On the other hand, John Dewey's progressivism
emphasizes individuality, advancement, and change as
essential components of education. According to
Labaree (2000), progressivism is education with a
focus on children (Mason, 2019). According to him,
everything done in the classroom is done to support
and encourage students' development, which is also
focused on the learners' developmental tasks, and that
learning is built on discovery and experience. The K–
12 curricula in the Philippines are designed to enhance
students who have enough proficiencies, which can be
accomplished by carefully utilizing and applying them
in the actual world. Additionally, students are required
to experience the world as part of the K–12 curriculum
in the Philippines; this makes the curriculum active
rather than inert.
Bruner's spiral curriculum model served as the
inspiration for the curriculum's spiral progression
approach. According to Bruner (Aquino, 2010; Bagni,
2012), teaching should always result in enhancing
cognitive development. The spiral progression
approach's goal is to expose students to a wide range
of disciplines, concepts, and topics so they can
repeatedly study them at varying levels of complexity
until they master them. Furthermore, Braund (2007)
outlined the four components of science as they relate
to the secondary science curriculum: Integrated
Science, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. In the
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
previous curriculum, Biology was covered in the
second year, Chemistry in the third, and Physics in the
fourth. Integrated Science was covered in the first
year. However, the idea of those four key themes is
taught simultaneously in the new secondary science
curriculum that was launched last year. Students are
exposed to a spiral progression strategy every year, in
which one of the four categories is taught throughout
each grading period. In addition, Earth Science
replaced Integrated Science (Corpuz, 2012).
According to Burila's (2012) study, there are worries
that the K–12 curricula won't be sustainable in places
with high levels of poverty due to issues including the
availability of technology, teacher preparation, and
even labor wages. The first group of graduates to cross
the stage since the program's introduction in the
academic year 2012–2013 did so in 2018.
Consequently, this is the ideal time to evaluate the
curriculum. It's time to determine what factors
influenced students' learning development and whether
science teachers are utilizing the new curriculum to its
fullest potential while instructing their students.
The goal of the study was to examine the factors
impacting students' learning progress as well as to
provide perspective into the teachers' viewpoints
regarding the implementation of the science spiral
curriculum at San Luis National High School in the
Division of Agusan del Sur, Philippines, in the
academic year 2021–2022. The research specifically
looked for answers to the following questions: (1)
What is the perception of the science teachers in San
Luis National High School when executing the new
science spiral progression curriculum? (2) What are
the factors that greatly affecting students’ learning
progress in the science spiral progression curriculum?
Methodology
Research Design
This research used the quantitative approach as it
delved into numerical data relative to the subject of the
investigation procedure. The specific research
methodology utilized was descriptive research design.
This kind of research entails either describing an
observed phenomenon's properties or looking into
3/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
potential relationships between two or more
occurrences. Descriptive research always examines a
situation as it is (Leedy & Ormrod, 2014). The
descriptive investigates into scenarios or conditions
within the K–12 science spiral progression curriculum
using its normative survey design and contextual
analysis approaches.
The objective of this study's design was to gather data
on teachers' perceptions of how well they were
carrying out the science spiral progression curriculum,
how they dealt with the progression of factors that
affected or influenced students' learning progress, and
how they perceived certain aspects of their own
personal characteristics.
Participants of the Study
In this study, the sampling location in conducting this
research project was primarily from San Luis National
High School in the Agusan del Sur Division. A total of
10 science teachers were requested to respond to the
survey. Purposive sampling was used to deliberately
choose people and locations in order to study and
comprehend the main phenomenon (Creswell, 2012).
The participating science teachers provided the data
needed for the study. They were regarded as "rich in
information." Additionally, grade 10 students from the
aforementioned school were purposefully chosen in
order to gather data on the learning progress of the
students in the science spiral progression curriculum.
Their report cards and grade sheets-based average
science grades were employed in the research process.
Research Instrument
A modified instrument was used as the research
instrument in this investigation. It is alluded to as a
modified instrument since the researcher updated the
instrument in reference to the aforementioned
questionnaire to fit the local context. To strengthen the
content validity of the instrument, a dry run was
carried out on 10 chosen science teachers in San Luis
National High School in the Division of Agusan del
Sur, Philippines. The validation process includes
expert judgments and pilot testing, or "dry run." The
draft of the instrument was shown to the experts, and
their comments and suggestions were then
incorporated into the final draft of the instrument. The
modified instrument that was employed in this study is
divided into two main sections, or categories. Part I,
which consists of 5 comprehensive item questions, was
focused on how public secondary science teachers
perceived using the science spiral progression
curriculum. Part II of the instrument gathered
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
information on the factors that influence students'
learning progress and academic performance in the
spiral progression curriculum in terms of student
factor, teacher factor, and school factor.
Results and Discussion
The perceptions of the science teachers at San Luis
National High School in the Division of Agusan del
Sur, Philippines as they implemented the science spiral
progression curriculum for the academic year
2021–2022 are shown in the table below. The
weighted mean and its verbal interpretation for each
question being asked of the science teachers during the
survey process are shown in the table.
Based on the findings in table 1 (see appendix), the
overall weighted mean for all the chosen public junior
high school science teachers at San Luis National High
School in the Division of Agusan del Sur in terms of
their perspective when executing the science spiral
progression curriculum is 3.55 with a descriptive
interpretation of "agree". Thus, this means that science
teachers generally agree on the items presented to
them during the conduct of the survey. Furthermore, in
analyzing the results deeper, with an overall weighted
mean of 3.53, the science teachers agree that they have
a solid understanding of the knowledge, competencies,
and attitudes that their students should acquire as they
work through the science spiral progression
curriculum. Additionally, they have such a favorable
outlook on the use of the science spiral progression
curriculum implementation. Science teachers have
worked hard to close the gap left by the previous
crammed science curriculum by ensuring that their
students comprehend the concepts covered in the
science spiral progression curriculum. They obtained
an average mean value of 3.40, which meant that they
had the chance to pursue professional development in
order to improve their expertise in executing the
science spiral progression curriculum. More
specifically, the assurance that the curriculum's science
spiral progression materials are coherently organized
whereas the fourth statement indicator they acquired
generally has a 3.73 mean value, indicating that the
science teachers have the effort to implement the
science spiral progression curriculum since they have
the support of the administration, which includes the
Department of Education and other partners and
stakeholders. Lastly, they had an overall weighted
mean value of 3.68, indicating that some of the topics
covered in the curriculum are outside of their area of
expertise and that they would also be reluctant to apply
the new science spiral progression curriculum since
4/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
they are well-versed in teaching methods that are
recognized to be effective.
The views of the science teachers are consistent with
the assertion that the spiral development strategy has
benefits and drawbacks. Accordingly, they asserted
that the spiral progression strategy increases retention
and mastery of themes and skills as they are revisited
and solidified, avoids discontinuities between phases
of instruction, and allows learners to learn topics and
skills suited to their developmental and cognitive
stages. The spiral design's drawback is that it
frequently introduces new ideas either too quickly or
too slowly (Snider, 2004; Kapur, 2018). Similarly,
Cobern et al. (2014) stated that gaining pedagogical
content knowledge on how to teach science for
conceptual understanding is an important component
of teacher education. Additionally, teachers must
understand the curriculum when teaching science,
particularly in an inquiry-based classroom where
teachers act as learners as well as motivators,
diagnosticians, guides, innovators, experimenters,
researchers, modelers, mentors, and collaborators
(Crawford, 2000; De Dios, 2013).
A spiral curriculum covers a lot of material in a short
amount of time. According to the study by
Resurreccion and Adanza (2015), teachers covered
about 7 0% of the material in less than 30 minutes on
average over the course of a year, which prevented
pupils from mastering crucial learning competencies.
They assert that the spiral design also has the
drawback of not encouraging enough evaluation when
units are finished. Within a unit, there might be some
review of earlier topics. However, if the course skips
to the next unit, it might not be covered again until the
following academic year.
The average student factor as regards learning progress
and achievement across all of the selected public
junior high schools in San Luis National High School,
as shown in Table 2 (see appendix), was 3.53 with a
descriptive interpretation of agree. Accordingly, they
conducted a meta-analysis of 168 studies on students
to compare cooperative learning to competitive
learning and individualistic learning, and they
discovered that cooperative learning consistently led to
higher academic achievement than both competitive
learning and individualistic learning across the studies
(Johnson and Smith, 2014).
On the table, the statement "Teachers should inspire
students to have confidence in their ability to learn the
subject's fundamentals. Encourage student
participation as they desire to express their skills to
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
their relatives, friends, and others. The students would
thoroughly research the subject, attempting to review
their class notes and create an outline of key ideas for
meaningful reasoning that had obtained a 3.68 and
3.40 mean value. Also, this indicates that teachers
must be able to inspire students to feel that they can
still understand the lessons taught to them despite the
difficulty of the themes in the progression as it
advances. Intrinsic motivation has been shown by
Delong and Dale (2002) to be durable and self-
sustaining. In order to support student learning, efforts
to develop this form of motivation are frequently
made. Instead of emphasizing rewards or penalties,
such initiatives frequently concentrate on the subject.
This is in accordance with the Department of
Education's note urging teachers to offer students
fewer assignments. As Cooper, Robinson, and Patall
(2006) point out, while giving homework to students
may have academic benefits, doing so can also take
away from crucial personal and family time.
Accordingly, Fernandez, Suarez, and Muniz's (2015)
study found that giving students an excessive amount
of homework could have a negative impact on their
performance. On a lighter note, Darling-Hammond and
Lynch (2006) argued that the objective should be to
make homework authentic, relevant, and enjoyable
rather than to eliminate it altogether. According to De
Dios (2013), another significant problem with the K–
12 curriculum in the Philippines that uses the spiral
progression paradigm is that scientific topics split into
different disciplines in high school. It required
educators with significant understanding in each of
these fields. It is therefore impossible to expect
teachers, who are the end results of substantial
specialization in the Higher Education Curriculum, to
teach the four disciplines of science.
In relation, the K–12 curriculum was introduced by the
Philippine government in 2012 with the express
purpose of enhancing the nation's educational system
as a whole and creating graduates who are globally
competitive. The spiral development strategy, which
arranges classes in a topic like science from simple to
complicated as the academic year passes, is one
characteristic of this curriculum. Studies pertaining to
the K–12 curriculum's implementation have been
done. A study that investigates the underlying factors
connected with the adoption of the spiral progression
strategy in this curriculum does not yet exist, though
(de Ramos-Samala, 2018).
According to table 3 (see appendix), the science
teachers largely "agree" on the items offered to them
in the questionnaire on the factors that affect students'
5/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
learning development as to teachers' specialization and
teacher training, seminars, and workshops, with an
overall weighted mean of 3.96. a faculty mentoring
program for the interdisciplinary classes they are
instructing. The statement emphasizes how
challenging it is for teachers to get their students ready
for examinations. This might be a result of the K–12
curricula's more sophisticated assessment procedures,
which are also standards-based in order to assure that
teachers will deliver lessons in accordance with the
standards. Therefore, one of the most important signs
that children are learning is when they meet
requirements for performance and material (DepEd
Order No. 31, 2012).
Based on the findings, there are strongly agreed
statements on the factors affecting students’ learning
progress and academic performance as to teachers'
specialization and relevant seminars, training, and
workshops; "teachers would prepare their students for
tests. Moreover, to have a positive viewpoint while
selecting the appropriate outside readings and study
materials, as well as when the topic of the class
discussion is concerned "(mean: 4.20)," the
accessibility of grants for continuing education
scholarships. Additionally, there is faculty mentoring
for the curriculum's elective areas and quarterly
internal professional development in the school
"(mean: 4.22). The researcher would like to know the
underlying factors in the conduct of the spiral
progression approach in order to better understand the
implementation of the K–12 curriculum and to
improve the delivery of the actual learning-teaching
process. Due to these drawbacks, the spiral
progression approach has been implemented in science
with a number of problems. Additionally, this will
give the leading agency a way to develop and improve
pedagogical techniques that are appropriate for the
needs of students and teachers right now (Alshammari
et al., 2017).
More science teachers who responded to the survey
"agreed" that the new science curriculum requires
them to create a faculty mentoring program for the
non-science subjects they are required to teach. This
might be as a result of the new curriculum's unification
of the specialized disciplines into a single level. The
four basic science disciplines, Earth Science, Biology,
Chemistry, and Physics, will therefore be studied
sequentially by pupils in each grade level. This
suggests that even though it is outside of their field of
expertise, science professors will now instruct in the
four fundamental subjects. Because the fundamental
idea of this curriculum is to stress the comprehension
and application of scientific knowledge, learning, and
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
skills, science teachers cannot avoid this new
challenge (DOST, 2011; Ali et al., 2019).
Teachers are now conscious of the significance of
obtaining a higher degree, whether it be for
professional and personal growth or promotion, after
observing the most recent trend in continuing
education. Due to the intense competition in the
academic sector, it is now a teacher-driven endeavor.
They thus attend graduate programs with or without
financial aid (Tosun et al., 2015). According to the
study Aru (2014), which points to bad pedagogy in
science instruction, a negative attitude among students
toward science courses, and a lack of resources in the
school as contributing factors, there is a secondary
school in Tanzania that has poor science achievement.
Conclusion
The Philippines' educational system has improved
greatly since its early days. The curriculum we use
today is more established and structured than the
casual, unstructured, and devoid of methodology
education we used to have. Based on the findings or
the results of the study, the overall weighted mean for
all the chosen public junior high school science
teachers at San Luis National High School in the
Division of Agusan del Sur in terms of their
perspective when executing the science spiral
progression curriculum is 3.55 with a descriptive
interpretation of "agree". Thus, this means that science
teachers generally agree on the items presented to
them during the conduct of the survey. Furthermore, in
analyzing the results deeper, with an overall weighted
mean of 3.53, the science teachers agree that they have
a solid understanding of the knowledge, competencies,
and attitudes that their students should acquire as they
work through the science spiral progression
curriculum. The science teachers largely "agree" on
the items offered to them in the questionnaire on the
factors that affect students' learning development as to
teachers' specialization and teacher training, seminars,
and workshops, with an overall weighted mean of
3.96. a faculty mentoring program for the
interdisciplinary classes they are instructing. The
statement emphasizes how challenging it is for
teachers to get their students ready for examinations.
This might be a result of the K–12 curricula's more
sophisticated assessment procedures, which are also
standards-based in order to assure that teachers will
deliver lessons in accordance with the standards.
Based on the findings, there are strongly agreed
statements on the factors affecting students’ learning
progress and academic performance as to teachers'
6/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
specialization and relevant seminars, training, and
workshops; "teachers would prepare their students for
tests." Moreover, to have a positive viewpoint while
selecting the appropriate outside readings and study
materials, as well as when the topic of the class
discussion is concerned" (mean: 4.20), "the
accessibility of grants for continuing education
scholarships. Additionally, there is faculty mentoring
for the curriculum's elective areas and quarterly
internal professional development in the school
"(mean: 4.22). As seen in the results of this research,
there are many factors that may influence students’
learning progress in the science spiral progression
curriculum.
The following recommendations are drawn based on
the findings of the study: (1) Plans to provide more
tangible programs to enhance teachers' training in
relation to the science spiral progression curriculum
may be integrated by the Philippine Department of
Education and its implementing arms. Principals of
public junior high schools may also devise
motivational strategies to inspire science teachers to
keep learning and urge graduate programs to advance
their understanding of scientific fields outside of their
areas of expertise. (2) If there are financial limitations
on sending teachers to significant training events, each
public junior high school administration may design a
school-based training or cluster-based training
program. The Department of Education's school
officials could review how the spiral progression
science curriculum has been implemented, and this
study might help them identify any current issues. (3)
Future researchers may pursue additional studies
related to this one on the following topics: the effects
of the science spiral progression curriculum's
implementation strategy whether it be disciplinary or
not on students' academic performance; the difficulties
teachers face in carrying out the curriculum; and
students' development as it relates to the various
scientific disciplines.
References
Ali, S., Haider, Z., Munir, F., Khan, H., & Ahmed, A. (2013).
Factors contributing to the students’ academic performance: A case
study of Islamia University sub- campus. American Journal of
Educational Research, 1, 283-289.
A q u i no II I, B. S. (2010). 1 0 t hi n g s I w i l l f ix i n P hi l ip p i
n e B a s ic Education. National Institute for Policy Studies, Civil
Society Network for Education Reforms: PositionPaper on the
Enhanced Kto12 Basic Education Program.
Bagni, D. (2012. Philippine Basic Education: K+12 did not change
old teaching system
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
Braund M (2007). 'Bridging work and its role in improving
progression and continuity: An example for science education.
British Educational Research Journal, 33 (6), 905-26
Burila, JM (2012). K to 12 Education in the Philippines: For Better
or for Worse?
Cobern, W. W., Schuster, D., Adams, B., Skjold, B. A.,
Muǧaloǧlu, E. Z., Bentz, A., & Sparks, K. (2014). Pedagogy of
Science Teaching Tests: Formative Assessments of Science
Teaching Orientations. International Journal of Science Education,
36(13), 2265-2288. DOI:10.1080/09500693.2014.918672.
Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does
Homework Improve Academic Achievement? A Synthesis of
Research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1-62.
Corpuz, B.B. (2012). The Spiral Progression Approach in the K to
12 Curriculum. Congressional Commission on Education
(EDCOM). 1991. Making education work: an agenda for reform.
EDCOM, House of Representatives.
Crawford, B.A. (2000). Embracing the Essence of inquiry: New
Roles for Science Teachers. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 37, 916-937.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design:
Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Qualitative inquiry and research design:
Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Dangol, Rita & Shrestha, Milan. (2019). Learning Readiness and
Educational Achievement among School Students. The International
Journal of Indian Psychology. 7. 467-476. 10.25215/0702.056.
De Dios, A. (2013). Spiral curriculum: When and How? Redundant
vs Progressive?
De Ramos-Samala, H. (2018). Spiral progression approach in
teaching sciecne: A case study. KnE Social Sciences, 3(6), 555-567.
https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i6.2404
Darling-Hammond, L., & Ifill-Lynch, O. (2006). “If They'd Only Do
Their Work!”. Educational Leadership, 63(5), 8–13.
DeLong M. and Winter D. (2002). Learning to Teach and Teaching
to Learn Mathematics: Resources for Professional Development.
USA: Mathematical Association of America.
DepEd Order No. 8 Series of 2015, “Policy Guidelines on
Classroom Assessment for the K to 12 Basic Education Program.”
Pasig City, Philippines: Department of Education.
DepEd Order 31 s. 2012 “Policy Guidelines on the Implementation
of the Grade 1 to 10 of the K to12 Basic Education Curriculum
(BEC) Effective School Year 2012-2013.” Pasig City, Philippines:
Department of Education
Fernández-Alonso, R., Suárez-Álvarez, J., & Muñiz, J. (2015).
Adolescents’ Homework Performance in Mathematics and Science:
Personal Factors and Teaching Practices. Journal of Educational
Psychology. Advance Online Publication.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2014). Cooperative
Learning: Improving University Instruction by Basing Practice on
Validated Theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 25,
85-118.
7/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
K to 12 Curriculum Guide (2013). Pasig City, Philippines:
Department of Education.
Kapur, R. (2018). Factors influencing the students’ academic
performance in secondary schools in India. University of Delhi \
Kumar, R., Gheen, M. H., and Kaplan, A. (2002). Goal Structures in
the Learning Environment and Students’ Disaffection from Learning
and Schooling. NJ: Erlbaum.
Merza L.L, Orge N.B, Agatep J.L & Edaño D. (2018). Factors
affecting the implementation of spiral progression approach in
relation to students’ academic performance in mathematics.
International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 6,
4, 490-495.
Lacanilao, D. (2010). A critique of some commentaries on the
Philippine K to 12.
Labaree, D. F. (2000). On the Nature of Teaching and Teacher
Education: Difficult Practices that Look Easy. Journal of Teacher
Education, 51, 228-233.
Leedy, Paul D., and Ormrod, Jeanne E. (2014). Practical Research
and Design. Pearson Publishing.
Mason, L. (2019). Dewey and Political Communication in the Age
of Mediation. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 2(3), 94-
102.
Ombra A. Imam. (2016). Effects of Reading Skills on Students’
Performance in Science and Mathematics in Public and Private
Secondary Schools. Journal of Education and Learning, Vol. 10 (2)
pp. 177-186.
Orbe, J. R., Espinosa, A. A., & Datukan, J. T. (2018). Teaching
Chemistry in a Spiral Progression Approach: Lessons from Science
Teachers in the Philippines. Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, 43(4).
Ochieng’, W. (2015). Self-efficacy and academic achievement
among secondary schools in kenya: mathematics perspective.
Unpublished Thesis, University of Nairobi.
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
Putnam, J. (1997). Cooperative learning in diverse classroom. Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Printice-Hall, Inc.
Phillips, D. C. (1995). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Many
Faces of Constructivism. Educational researcher, 24(7), 5-12.
Quijano, Y. S. & Technical Working Group on Curriculum (2012).
Orientation for K to 12 division coordinators. DepED Complex
Resurreccion, J.A., & Adanza, J.R. (2015). Spiral progression
approach in teaching science in selected private and public schools
in Cavite. International Conference on Research in Social Sciences,
Humanities and Education (SSHE-2016) May 20-21, Cebu
(Philippines).
Science Framework for Philippine Basic Education: Department of
Sc i e nc e and T e c h n o l o g y (2 01 1 ). R e t rie ve d from
http://www.sei.dost.gov.ph/images/downloads/publ/sei_scibasic.pdf
Snider, M. (2004). Do School Facilities Affect Academic
Outcomes? Washington DC: National Clearinghouse for
Educational Facilities
Tan, M. (2012). Science education in the Philippines: Where To?
National Institute for Science and Mathematics Education
Development, University of the Philippine.
Tosun, C, Ilhan, N, Tatar, E, Hairless, C. & Karakuyu, Y. (2015).
Science success of secondary, high school and university students.
Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty of Education Journal, 1 (35),
29-45.
Vainionpää, J.E. (2006). Different learners and learning materials in
e-learning. Tampere University.
Affiliations and Corresponding Information
Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan
San Luis National High School
San Luis District-I
Division of Agusan Del Sur - Philippines
8/8
Psych Educ, Document ID: 2022PEMJ0, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7150765, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Table 1. The Mean Value and Descriptive Interpretation of the Perception of Science Teachers in
Executing the Science Spiral Curriculum at San Luis National High School
Mean Descriptive
Statement Indicators
Value Interpretations
1. I have a solid understanding of the knowledge, competencies, and attitudes that my
students should acquire as they work through the science spiral progression curriculum.
3.53 Agree
Additionally, I have such a favorable outlook on the use of the science spiral progression
curriculum implementation.
2. I am really driven to fill the gap established by the previous crammed science
curriculum by making sure that my students understand the concepts covered in the science 3.42 Agree
spiral progression curriculum.

3. I have always had the chance to pursue professional development in order to improve
my expertise of executing the science spiral progression curriculum. More specifically, the
3.40 Agree
assurance that the curriculum's science spiral progression materials are coherently
organized.
4. In the efforts to implement the science spiral progression curriculum, I have the support
of the administration, which includes the Department of Education and other partners and 3.73 Agree
stakeholders.

5. Despite the fact that some of the topics covered in the curriculum are outside of my area
of expertise, I am reluctant to apply the new science spiral progression curriculum since I 3.68 Agree
am well-versed in teaching methods that are recognized to be effective.

AVERAGE 3.55 Agree

Table 2. The Mean Value and Descriptive Interpretations of the Factors Affecting Students’ Learning Progress as
to Learning Motivation
Statement Indicators Mean Descriptive
Value Interpretations
1. The students are required to develop and memorize lists of key phrases for the class.
Additionally, learn key terms to use in class or during discussions to remind students of 3.42 Agree
important ideas.
2. To organize their course materials, the students would create simple charts, diagrams, or
tables. And participate more actively and creatively in the teacher-initiated activities. 3.53 Agree
3. The students gather knowledge from a variety of sources, including lectures, readings,
and class discussions. Writing summaries of the key concepts from the lectures and the 3.66 Agree
readings.
4. In other classroom activities like lectures and discussions, the students would 3.62 Agree
incorporate concepts from the readings for the class.
5. The students would thoroughly study the subject in such a way that they would attempt 3.40 Agree
to review their class notes and create an outline of key ideas to meaningful reasoning.
6. The students believe that the instructional materials on the subject are helpful for them 3.43
to study and that they are capable of comprehending even the most difficult content that
the subject teacher presents. Agree
7. Teachers should inspire students to have confidence in their ability to learn the subject's
fundamentals. Encourage student participation as they desire to express their skills to their 3.68 Agree
relatives, friends, and others.
AVERAGE 3.53 Agree

Table 3. The Mean Value and Descriptive Interpretations of the Factors Affecting Students’ Learning Progress as to Teachers'
Specialization and Relevant Seminars, Training, and Workshops
Mean Descriptive
Statement Indicators
Value Interpretations
1. Teachers would prepare their students for tests. Moreover, to have a positive viewpoint
while selecting the appropriate outside readings and study materials, as well as when the 4.20 Strongly Agree
topic of the class discussion is concerned.
2. Adjusting the learners' perspective to move on to the next topic based on the nature of 4.15 Agree
the notion of the current topic and fresh scientific discoveries or advancements.
3. In order for students to better grasp science, teachers must control the time provided to a 3.79 Agree
certain topic by customizing lesson plans, exercises, and scientific terminology.
4.Sufficient and essential in-service training components are included in the program. 3.46 Agree
Equal possibilities for professional advancement are offered.
5. The accessibility of grants for continuing education scholarships. Additionally, there is 4.22 Strongly Agree
faculty mentoring for the curriculum's elective areas and quarterly internal professional
development in the school.
AVERAGE 3.96 Agree

Joy Mark Y. Dagasaan

9/8