Article

International Journal of Educational

An Investigation Into the Reform

00(0) 1–33
© The Author(s) 2021
Perceptions of Teachers Article reuse guidelines:
​sagepub.​com/​journals-­​permissions
and Students in Mexico ​DOI: ​10.​1177/​1056​7879​2110​23121
​journals.​sagepub.​com/​home/​ref
on the Implementation
of Secondary Reforms

Yee Han Peter Joong1 ‍ ‍

Abstract
This mixed methods study examines how secondary school teachers have imple-
mented educational reforms in Mexico. Major sources of data were surveys from
sample teachers and students in 12 schools on how often a teaching or evaluation
strategy was used. Results from open-­ended questions and classroom observations
were used to triangulate results from survey data. The study concluded that most
teachers were able to adopt majority of the reforms. Even though teacher-­directed
lessons still dominated, student-­centered learnings were incorporated. However,
classroom management need increased attention due to new challenges of transi-
tioning. Educators in all jurisdictions can learn from the reform efforts.

Keywords
education reform, international education, student-­
centered learning, classroom
management, special education

Introduction
In the 1990s, large-­scale education reform orchestrated by provincial, state, or national
governments emerged around the world. Fullan (2000) studied system reforms in
England, Canada, Finland, and the United States. Each country had its unique history

1
School of Education, The University of the West Indies at Mona, Mona, Jamaica

Corresponding Author:
Yee Han Peter Joong, The University of the West Indies at Mona, Kingston, Mona, Jamaica.
Email: ​pjoong@​hotmail.​com
2 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

and context, but all of the governments introduced policies that sought to reformulate
the relationship among government, schools, and parents, and attempted to develop
closer links between objectives, programs, teaching, and student evaluation. Joong
(2012), Joong et al. (2020); Joong and Ryan (2013a); Joong and Noel (2013b), Joong
et al. (2019), and Ryan & Joong (2013) have examined secondary reforms in Canada,
China, Sierra Leone, the Philippines, and the Caribbean (Guyana, Jamaica, and
Trinidad & Tobago). The studies concluded that teachers are ready to change and
respond positively if they think that the change is justified. Key hindrances to reform
implementation were contextual issues such as large classes and a lack of resources
and training.
Studies by Schweisfurth (2011), Schweisfurtha & Schweisfurtha (2013), and
Altinyelken (2011) carried out in various developing countries had similar findings.
Student-­ centered learning (SCL) was promoted internationally by UNICEF as a
response to the challenge of delivering quality education and improving student out-
comes. According to Schweisfurth (2011), “student-­centered education (SCL) has
been a recurrent theme in many national education policies in the global South” (p.
425). In our Caribbean reform study (Joong et al., 2020), a number of Caribbean schol-
ars (Jennings, 1999; MacKinnon & MacKinnon, 2010) claimed that SCL could be one
of the solutions to the problem of student underperformance. However, Schweisfurth
(2011), and Schweisfurtha & Schweisfurtha (2013) concluded that changing class-
room practices and adopting a more SCL pedagogy are particularly problematic in
developing countries. Similar challenges were found in our secondary reform study in
the Caribbean (Joong et al., 2020) and in a study by Jennings (2017), in which she
reviewed interventions in schools’ curricula including SCL to achieve quality in learn-
ing in the Caribbean. Additional challenges found in both studies were high student–
teacher ratios and inadequate professional development. The teachers also complained
that there was a “reduction in discipline” and noisy classrooms (Joong et al., 2020). It
is very difficult to conduct SCL instruction in these settings. Joong and Ryan (2013a);
Joong et al. (2019) had similar findings in their studies in Sierra Leone and the
Philippines.
Reform in education often demands changes in practice that challenge classroom
teachers (Fullan, 2000; Sowell, 2005). Teachers initially report feeling overwhelmed
and under-­supported (Helsby, 1999; Lasky & Sutherland, 2000; Taylor et al., 1997).
These feelings occur because changing the curriculum and the resultant transitioning
require teachers to alter the “specific blueprint for learning that is derived from the
desired results—that is, content and performance standards” (Wiggins & McTighe,
2006, p. 6). Educational reforms increase tension as outcomes are measured and results
are evaluated against standards. These changes can trigger resistance, debate, and pas-
sivity within teachers. Teachers play key roles in reform as the agents of change who
work directly with students (Clarke, 1997; Fullan, 2001). Fullan (1996) explained,
“We need to first focus on how teachers make sense of the mandates and policies
because there will be no educational reform until after the teachers interpret the poli-
cies and make decisions based on their beliefs about the new demands” (p. 12).
Joong 3

We must also pay attention to the impact of reforms on students (DeFur & Korinek,
2010; Earl & Sutherland, 2003). To date, little research directly sought the views of
students as compared to those which have reported the wide range of teachers’ views
on problems with educational change. We cannot deny the credibility of students as
expert witnesses of effective instruction. Recommendations from the National
Association of Secondary School Principals (National Association of Secondary
School Principals [NASSP], 2004) suggest that listening to students can be an effec-
tive strategy for school improvement. The report also encourages teachers to use a
variety of instructional strategies including SCL activities. In Mexico, Cuervo et al.
(2009), in their study of the reform for the new secondary science curriculum, con-
cluded that reform should promote the participation of students in the classroom.
Fullan & Stiegelbauer (1991) posed the question: “What would happen if we treated
the student as someone whose opinion mattered in the introduction and implementa-
tion of reform in schools?” (p. 170). This study provides a glimpse of secondary edu-
cation reform in Mexico by listening to the voices of students and teachers.

Secondary Education in Mexico

Mexico had a population of 129 million people in 2019, of which about 83% lived in
urban areas. About half of the total population are less than 25 years old. The Mexican
school system is large and complex. Basic education is organized according to three
stages: pre-­primary, primary (grades 1–6); lower secondary education (grades 7–9);
and upper secondary education (grades 10–12) (Santiago et al., 2012). According to
Santibañez et al. (2005), Mexico experienced a significant expansion in basic educa-
tion between 1970 and 2019. During this time, enrollment more than doubled from 9.7
million to 26 million students, with diverse backgrounds and an indigenous popula-
tion. It has more than 1.2 million teachers in more than 225,000 schools (OECD,
2019). The rapid growth in enrolment was primarily met through having double-­shift
schools. Most schools and their teachers operate under very difficult conditions, which
can be partly explained by the limited proportion of education spending going into
infrastructure and resources. At the same time, poverty among the population as well
as parents’ low educational levels inevitably shape the social context faced by schools.
There are indications that parents provide limited support to their children’s education.
It is common for older students to work while attending school.

Lower-Secondary Education (Educación Secundaria)

Lower-­secondary education was made compulsory in 1992. Close to 98% of pupils
who complete primary education go on to lower-­ secondary education. Lower-­
secondary programs are offered in a general academic track (secundaria general) and
a vocational-­technical track (secundaria técnica) where each student specializes in a
“technical” subject. Both tracks have a mandatory general academic core curriculum
taught by teachers specializing in subjects in secondary schools (Santiago et al., 2012).
4 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Graduates from all programs are awarded the Certificate of Secondary Education
(Certificado de Educación Secundaria). There are no graduation examinations
(Monroy & Trines, 2019).

Upper Secondary Education (Educación Média Superior)

Upper secondary education lasts 3 years (grades 10–12). It is free of charge at public
schools. Students can go through one of three streams: an academic stream, a technical
vocational stream, and a combined stream. Most students (63%) enroll in a general
academic program designed to prepare students for higher education (Monroy &
Trines, 2019). Mexico made upper secondary education compulsory in 2012. However,
inadequate funding and administrative obstacles have thus far prevented universal
implementation of this goal, particularly in marginalized rural regions. Merely 20% of
students from households in the lowest income bracket complete upper secondary
education (OECD, 2018).

Reform of Secondary Education in Mexico

Secondary reform was implemented in 1993, making attendance compulsory, fol-
lowed in 1999 by a reform of preservice teacher training. The 1999 reform was ambi-
tious and comprehensive but necessary: to provide a greater emphasis on subject-­matter
knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and pedagogical practice, all at once.

Reform of Basic Education (Reforma Integral De La Educación Básica,

RIEB)
The aim of the Reforma Integral De La Educación Básica (RIEB) is to ensure that all
students develop the knowledge, attitudes, and skills required to successfully face the
21st century. Key goals of the RIEB are to:

1. Develop a new curriculum

2. Implement the pedagogical principles of the curriculum
3. Facilitate curriculum autonomy
4. Reorganize teachers’ professional career paths
5. Ensure equity and inclusion

In practice, RIEB reform is based on a number of pedagogical principles relevant

to this study: SCL processes; group work; development of competencies; achievement
of curricular standards; use of educational materials; assessment for learning; promo-
tion of inclusion or special education to address diversity; and offering of training and
pedagogical support to the teachers. The national consultations on RIEB conducted
between 2014 and 2016 included very positive opinions on the core components of the
proposed reform, with its “humanistic traits,” for example, equity and inclusion, being
Joong 5

the most positively appraised (OECD, 2018). However, findings in a study conducted
by Levinson et al. (2013) indicate that in spite of efforts to provide more transparency
and opportunities for teacher participation, for the most part, secondary teachers in
Mexico neither felt like agents or partners in the Reforma de la Educación Secundaria
(RS), nor did they function as such in the reform process. Levinson et al. (2013) fur-
ther suggested that “such reforms may limit the role of the teacher to executor of
scripted curriculum,” and “there is little pretension to involving the teacher as an
active participant in the creation of policy or curriculum” (p. 2).

New Curriculum in RIEB Reform

The reform’s motto Place schools at the center of the system meant that the goal
should be to “shift the education system’s focus onto the learners.” Figure 1 is a model
of “Key Learnings for Educating the Whole Child” from the Secretaría de Educación
Pública (SEP, 2017). The model is organized in three curricular components. At the
national level, curricular goals are divided into seven subject areas: Language and
Communications, Mathematics, Natural and Social Sciences, the Arts, Physical
Education, and Socio-­Emotional Education.

Pedagogical Principles of the Curriculum

Traditionally, the most prevalent teaching practice in Mexican secondary schools is
teacher talk. Students are offered few opportunities to research, think, pose questions
or perform group work. Hence, they have limited opportunities to be able to develop
21st-­century skills (Bonilla-­Rius, 2020). The new curriculum is grounded in SCL or
more interactive pedagogical approaches grounded in 14 principles. Principles rele-
vant to this study include:

1. Focus the teaching process on students and their learning;

2. Weave students’ interests into the learning activities
3. Integrate group work with students’ dialog and interaction
4. Incorporate authentic activities and interdisciplinary approaches into the teach-
ing and learning processes

Teachers are expected to acquire these new skills and gradually incorporate them
into their teaching practices. As stated by Bonilla-­Rius (2020, p. 130):

The new curriculum considered the gradual but constant application of these pedagogical
principles in the classroom…It would require the pedagogical evolution of teachers, in
order to yield better student learning outcomes, and thus thoroughly attaining the twenty
first century goals, defined by the reform.

The process of implementing the national curriculum began in March 2017.

6 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 1. Model of key learnings for educating the whole child.

Source. SEP (2017): https://www.planyprogramasdestudio.sep.gob.mx/index-­english-­skills-­
keylearnings.html

Curriculum Autonomy
Curriculum autonomy is the one of the novel components of the RIEB reform, and it
has five spheres for (Figure 1):

1. Broader academic learning

2. Further personal and social development
3. Innovative learning content
4. Regional knowledge
5. Community projects
Joong 7

Schools were granted more autonomy to improve operations, through the optimal
use of classroom time and resources, the professionalization of teaching staff, the pro-
motion of collegiate work, and the involvement of parents in their children’s learning
(Bonilla-­Rius, 2020).
With curriculum autonomy, students’ interest in learning was boosted. Autonomy
provided students with diverse opportunities for meaningful and enriched learning,
improved interactions, and more importantly, strengthened students’ sense of belong-
ing, improved their attitudes and values, and reduced bullying incidents. Academically,
the consolidation of interdisciplinary teaching teams allowed for more collaboration
among teachers and students. The active participation of all stakeholders in develop-
ing curriculum autonomy has enhanced interaction among all members of the school
community, including parents. The involvement of parents has had a positive impact
on students’ learning (Bonilla-­Rius, 2020).

Didactic Teaching Strategy

The objective of a teaching strategy based on didactic sequences is to make curriculum
planning more practical and meaningful and less time consuming for teachers and also
for students when carrying out activities that they can apply in their daily lives. It
allows teachers to develop the same topic for diverse classes by planning activities
with varying degrees of difficulty. In their analysis of secondary reform on science
subjects for the new curriculum in Mexico, Cuervo et al. (2009) stated that changes
represent a challenge for teachers, because of not only new academic material but also
“different approaches” with “didactic sequences.” However, they concluded, “Teachers
are open to change and eager to find a way to enable them to achieve expected learn-
ing” (p. 166). They also promoted didactic sequences and guidelines for teachers.
Suárez (2017) presented three steps in the didactic sequence. These steps are similar to
lesson plans used by most teachers:

1. Introductory activities
2. Development actions focus on learning new knowledge
3. Wrap-­up activities allow for application and integration of concepts learned

In addition to the didactic sequence, Cuervo et al. (2009) suggested that education
reform should enable the transformation of the relationship between teachers and stu-
dents. This transformation should include the promotion of the active and collabora-
tive participation of students in challenging environments or SCL, as well as the
integration of knowledge from different subject areas.

Reorganize Teachers’ Professional Careers

With the RIEB reform, Mexico created the Professional Teaching Service (Servicio
Profesional Docente, SPD), which aims to improve teaching and learning. This is
8 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

done through the Teachers’ Professional Development Act and the SPD. SPD sets out
the basis for selection, teacher education, induction, appraisal, promotion, incentives,
and tenure possibilities for teachers. SPD also aims to improve the transparency and
quality of the teacher selection process. Teacher appraisal and teacher education are
seen as transversal processes during teaching career pathways (OECD, 2018).
According to De Hoyos and Estrada (2018), the SPD incorporated many of the best
international practices. Most of the efforts in this area of reform were focused on the
reorganization of teachers’ appraisals, which was also the most controversial of the
reform’s policies (Reimers, 2018) due to opposition by the National Union of Education
Workers (SNTE). Nevertheless, many teachers welcomed this aspect of the reform.

The Program for Inclusion and Educational Equity

Quality education with equity and inclusion means educational opportunities for all
without distinctions of any kind (Tuirán, 2018). In Mexico, the Program for Inclusion
and Educational Equity (2014) aims to strengthen the capacities of schools and educa-
tional services that serve indigenous children, migrants, and students with special edu-
cational needs. In 2016, it catered to 170,000 students (OECD, 2018).

Inclusion Model for Students With Special Needs

Since the 1990s, an inclusion model has been adopted for students with special needs.
They attend mainstream basic schools using the same curriculum and regular class-
room teachers. However, the curriculum and instruction are modified and adapted to
meet various needs. Basic schools receive assistance for special needs students from
the Unit for Support Services to Mainstream Schools (Unidad de Servicios de Apoyo
a la Escuela Regular, USAER). These units promote the use of specific methods,
techniques, and materials to support the learning of special needs students in main-
stream schools, including the provision of the necessary resources. As part of the
inclusion model, all teachers are required to take a course in special education (Santiago
et al., 2012).

High-Stakes Secondary Exams in Mexico

Mexican students are assessed by a wide range of instruments, ranging from national
standardized assessments to continuous formative assessments. There are also exter-
nally based national final examinations at the end of both primary school and lower
secondary school Instrumento de Diagnóstico para Alumnos de Nuevo Ingreso a
Secundaria (IDANIS), National Upper Secondary Education Entrance Exam Examen
Nacional de Ingreso a la Educación Media Superior (EXANI I), and National
Assessment of Academic Achievement in Schools La Evaluación Nacional de Logros
Académicos en Centros Escolares (ENLACE). In 2015, the National Plan for Learning
Assessment Plan Nacional para la Evaluación de los Aprendizajes (PLANEA) has
Joong 9

replaced ENLACE. PLANEA aims to be a formative assessment that informs how

students are progressing. Classroom-­based assessments are carried out in schools
(OECD, 2018).

Objectives of the Study and Research Questions

The stated objectives of the RIEB reform were to ensure quality education for all
Mexican students; and bolster equity and inclusion by closing gaps in access (Secretaría
de Educación Pública [SEP], 2017). This study draws attention to RIEB reform that
had a direct impact on teachers and, in turn, on students. Topics studied include curric-
ulum planning, teaching strategies, assessment and evaluation strategies, integration
of technology, classroom management, special education programs, resources, and
in-­service training. Three research questions related to the RIEB reform are:

1. What are the perceptions of students and teachers of the RIEB secondary reform
in Mexico?
2. To what extent have teachers implemented RIEB secondary reform in Mexico—
in particular, student-­centered learning (SCL)?
3. To what extent have teachers implemented the Program for Inclusion and
Educational Equity for students with special needs?

Significance of the Study

In Mexico, educational change efforts are frequent and reflective of political pressures
such as government and national teachers’ union ethos, rationalization, flexibility, and
budgetary support. The RIEB reform was implemented in Mexico in the 2017/18
school year, as well as pilots for some innovative reform initiatives, such as SCL,
curriculum autonomy, didactic teaching strategy, inclusion model for students with
special needs, and SPD. Literature reviews conducted were related to the structure of
the RIEB reform with limited empirical studies on its implementation. Hence the study
is timely. Findings and recommendations from this study will assist school administra-
tors, teachers and parents in Mexico and other jurisdictions on designing, adapting,
and implementing exemplary strategies on curriculum planning, teaching pedagogies,
and student evaluation methods.

Methodology and Data Collection

Major sources of data for this study were anonymous surveys for teachers and stu-
dents. Sample questions involved five-­point Likert scales indicating how often a
teaching and student evaluation strategy is used, and the amount of planning and sup-
port available. There were also open-­ended questions related to reform implementa-
tion. This study used a concurrent triangulation strategy (Creswell et al., 2003; Terrell,
2012). It consisted of two distinct phases: quantitative followed by qualitative. A
10 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

survey was conducted first, which collected both quantitative responses through the
use of Likert type questions and qualitative responses through open ended questions.
Surveys are commonly used to measure the implementation of large-­scale reforms and
how often certain strategies are used (Desimone et al., 2010). Students and teacher
surveys were used in previous studies by Joong (2012); Joong et al. (2020); Joong and
Ryan (2013a); Joong and Noel (2013b), Joong et al. (2019), and Ryan and Joong
(2013), and were modified and translated for the present study. All the items on the
survey were analyzed quantitatively. The qualitative data (open-­ended questions and
classroom observations) were then analyzed to help explain, or elaborate on, the quan-
titative results and corroborate the quantitative findings.

Population and Sample

Twelve sample schools from two regions of Mexico (Culiacán and Mexico City) were
selected for this study using convenient sampling. The population, from secondary
schools in two states, included 12 sample schools, which were selected representing
school types and Socio-­economic status backgrounds. There were three upper second-
ary schools and nine lower secondary schools (four secundaria general and five
secundaria técnica). At each sample school, 25 randomly selected teachers and two
representative classes (approximately seventy students) were asked to complete sepa-
rately designed surveys. Surveys are designed to provide a synthesis of what happens
in the classrooms. The return rates for the surveys were 92% (students) and 76%
(teachers). However, due to the nonprobability sampling, research findings were not
generalized to populations but are presented as findings from the captive participants
(Etikan et al., 2016).

Results of the Study

Teachers’ Voices on Curriculum, Teaching, and Student Evaluation
Strategies
Sixty-­one percent of the 154 teacher respondents were female. Mean teaching experi-
ence was 15 years. Sample teachers were well represented in different subject areas
and grade levels. Mean class size was 33. On average, respondent teachers spent 6 hr
each week preparing classes. A majority (64%) of the sample teachers claimed that the
current curriculum is good, while 3% claimed that it’s poor. In planning, almost all
(89%) sample teachers used the internet and textbooks; 58% of the sample teachers
used resource books or both. Most teachers said that they received sufficient resources
(61%) and professional development (64%). However, sample teachers would like to
receive more professional development in curriculum development (55%), technology
(43%), classroom management (39%), teaching methods (29%), and evaluation meth-
ods (28%).
Joong 11

Figure 2. Teachers’ perceptions of teaching methods (% always/often used).

Figure 2 represents the teaching strategies that sample teachers always or often
used. The data reveal that sample teachers use a variety of teaching strategies, includ-
ing teacher-­directed methods (teacher talk [79% always/often used], discussion [57%],
questioning [78%]) and student-­centered methods (activities [83%], individual work
[74%], group work [52%], and student presentations [52%]). About 44% of the sample
teachers claimed that they always/often used demonstrations, experiments, artwork,
skits, or role plays and physical exercises. It is important to note that most sample
teachers are adopting the student-­centered (Bonilla-­Rius, 2020) and didactic teaching
strategies (Cuervo et al., 2009; Suárez, 2017) in accordance with the RIEB reform.
However, less than one-­third of the sample teachers always/often used the computer/
internet and AV as a teaching tool due to lack of available computers and internet
access.
Figure 3 represents the student evaluation methods that sample teachers always or
often employed. In general, a majority of the sample teachers reported that they use a
variety of student evaluation methods. Figure 4 shows the average weighting for the
final mark, which indicates that tests and exams accounted for almost 30%. Classwork
and notebooks account for another 30%. Homework and assignments account for
20%, and projects account for one-­quarter of the marks. Except for the weightings,
similar findings were found in previous studies in the Philippines (Joong et al., 2019),
Sierra Leone (Joong & Noel, 2013b), and China (Joong & Ryan, 2013a). A majority
(61%) of the sample teachers were satisfied with their curriculum implementation.
Only 11% were dissatisfied and the rest (28%) were in between.
12 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 3. Teachers’ perceptions of student evaluation methods.

However, 19% of the sample teachers claimed that they were spending a lot of time
on classroom management (Figure 2), whereas 29% said they spent a small amount of
time on classroom management. A majority (80%) of the sample teachers claimed that
students’ on-­task time and work completion rates were between average and good. As
for future aspirations of their students, 80% of the sample teachers stated that they plan
to pursue upper- and/or post-­secondary studies. Less than half (46%) of the respondent
teachers were satisfied with their students’ achievements. Only 7% were dissatisfied,
and the rest (47%) were in between.

Students’ Voices on Courses, Homework, and Career Aspirations

Of the 662 student respondents from the 12 sample schools, most were from urban
communities. Correlation between students’ perceptions of course variables is shown
in Table 1. There were significant correlations between course achievement and course
interest (.591**), course difficulty (−.350**), and negative classroom behavior
(−.152**). This means that course performance was influenced by student behaviors,
and the interest, and level of difficulty of the courses as perceived by students. There
was a positive significant (.180**) correlation between course difficulty and negative
behaviors. More difficult courses meant worse behaviors because if students do not
Joong 13

Figure 4. Average weighting for final mark (n = 153 teachers).

understand, they tend to act out or start chatting. Similar findings were found in a study
by Joong (2012) in China.
The mean number of hours spent on homework and studying was 2 hr per day (SD
= 1.1 hr, n = 646). The mean number of absences for half-­year was 3.5 days. Regarding
educational aspirations after lower secondary education, of the 646 respondents, 74%
would like to attend upper secondary school, 12% would go to work, and 21% would
like to join an apprenticeship program. When asked to whom they would go to discuss
school marks and course difficulties, most would go to parents (58%), friends (48%),
classmates (44%), and/or teachers (44%; Figure 5).

A Comparison of Students’ and Teachers’ Voices

Teaching Strategies. A comparison of sample students’ and teachers’ perceptions of
how frequent specific teaching methods were always/often employed in six subjects is

Table 1. Correlation Between Course Variables in Student Sample (N = 644).

Course Course Negative
interest difficulty behaviors
Achievement 0.591** −0.350** −0.152**
Course interest −0.248** −0.128**
Course difficulty 0.180**
14 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 5. Whom would students go to Discuss School Work and Course Difficulties?

shown in Figures 6–11. Sample sizes for both respondents are listed. First five subjects
were selected because Math, English, Science, Spanish, and Social Studies are com-
pulsory. Technical Studies were selected because five of the sample schools are tech-
nical schools. It appears that sample teachers used a combination of teacher-­directed
methods that included teacher talk, individualized work and questioning, and activity
learning lessons where students learn by doing. Tabulating results from Figures 6–11,
the four dominant teaching strategies used by sample teachers (>50% by respondents)
for each of the six subjects are teacher talk, individual work, activity learning, and
teacher questioning. Group work is used by a majority of teachers in Science and
Spanish, student presentations in Spanish and Tech Studies, and demonstrations/
experiments in Science.
With a few exceptions, there is little discrepancy (within 10%–15%) between the
teachers’ and students’ perceptions on how often specific teaching strategies were
used. It appears that sample teachers claimed that they used more varieties of strate-
gies than sample students, specifically:

1. More sample teachers than the students claimed that they used activity learning
in all six subjects.
2. Higher percentage of sample Math teachers claimed that they used teacher talk
(Figure 6).
Joong 15

Figure 6. Comparison of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching methods in Math

(% always/often used).

3. Higher percentage of sample Spanish teachers claimed that they used group
Work and demonstrations/drama skits (Figure 9).
4. Higher percentage of sample English teachers claimed that they used discus-
sions, student presentations, and computer/internet, and drams/skits (Figure 7).
5. Higher percentage of sample Social Studies and Tech Studies teachers claimed
that they used questioning (Figures 10 and 11).

Student Evaluation Methods. A comparison of sample students’ and teachers’ percep-

tions of how frequent specific student evaluation methods were always/often employed
in six subjects is in Table 2. It appears that sample teachers used a variety of evaluation
strategies mainly due to the subject requirements. The four dominant evaluation strat-
egies used by sample teachers are tests/exams, performance assessments, homework,
and class work.
When sample teachers were asked for their opinions on the examination system,
34% said the system is satisfactory (n = 150), 17% unsatisfactory, and 49% in between.
In comparison, sample students were more positive than their teachers: 60% said the
examination system is satisfactory, 7% said it’s not, and one-­third were in between.
16 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 7. Comparison of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching methods in English

(% always/often used).

Classroom Management. One significant result in this study is that sample students
claim that discipline is a problem in Mexican secondary schools. On average, in
Figure 8, eighteen percent of both sample teachers and students claimed that classroom
management is a problem in their Science classes. However, there is 24% discrepancy
between students’ (39%) and teachers’ (15%) perceptions of discipline problems in
Math classes (Figure 6) and 14% discrepancy in English classes (Figure 7). The dis-
crepancy is lower in Social and Tech Studies classes (10%), where a quarter of the
sample students and 15% of the sample teachers claimed that classroom management
is a problem in their classes (Figures 10 and 11). No matter how large the discrepancy,
discipline problems in classes affect students’ learning. Similar results were obtained
in previous studies in the Caribbean (Joong et al., 2020), the Philippines (Joong et al.,
2019), Sierra Leone (Joong & Noel, 2013b), and China (Joong, 2012) where sample
teachers perceived it as one of the negative effects of reform.

Teachers’ Voices on Special Needs Students

Sample teachers were asked to answer specific open-­ended questions related to special
needs students; 130 sample teachers (85%) responded. Responses were translated. The
mean number of students with special needs in each class taught by respondent teach-
ers is four. Among respondents’ classes, sample students with special needs included
Joong 17

Figure 8. Comparison of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching methods in

Science (% always/often used).

behavioral, learning disabled, physically disabled, ADHD, autistic students, and a

handful of gifted and intellectually disabled students (Figure 12). Most of the special
needs students were integrated into sample teachers’ classes. Supports provided by
sample teachers include inclusion and withdrawals. There were only a handful of with-
drawals. The strategies used include accommodation, modification, alternative, and
provision of extra help (Figure 13).
Open-­ended responses provide insights into the integration strategies employed by
sample teachers. A Tech teacher with 23 years’ experience summed up the inclusion
strategy in four words, “personalized support, modified activities.” The following are
typical strategies described by sample teachers, under various categories.

Teamwork With USAER. “Teamwork” is used by about 30 respondent teachers to

describe the work by Support Services for General Education Units (USAER) in spe-
cial education delivery. A Science teacher said USAER helped with “team activities,
reporting their diagnosis, treatment, teaching activity suggestions and parent meet-
ings.” A Computer teacher added, “USAER informs us of the problems and suggests
18 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 9. Comparison of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching methods in

Spanish (% always/often used).

modification and specific instructions to move forward with each student, we apply
activities appropriate to each need.”

Modifications and Adaptations Strategies. A number of sample teachers described strat-

egies in various subjects:
“I have profiles of those students and how to work with them, modifying the activities so
that it is easier for them to do and will help them develop.” (English teacher)

“I made curricular adjustments such as planning, appropriate materials, ways of eval-

uating, group integration activities, etc. to achieve a certain percentage of learning.”
(Science and History Teacher)

Teaching Strategies for Inclusion

“Activities and strategies include diagrams and projects (Chemistry teacher), draw-
ings and oral participation (History teacher), teamwork, projects, and memory games
(Geography teacher) working in pairs, personalized attention, and special work.” (English
teacher)
Joong 19

Figure 10. Comparison of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching methods in Social
Studies (% always/often used).

In general, most responses by sample teachers were concrete and positive. A

Spanish teacher summed it up best, “la adaptación e inclusión a los alumnos con
capacidades diferentes.” However, a handful of teacher respondents voiced their con-
cerns with the policy: “I think that it is a problem to have students with disabilities, the
truth is that I am not prepared as a teacher.”

Teachers’ Comments on Changes

Sample teachers and students were asked to express their opinions of major changes in
the past 5 years in secondary education. Below are typical comments on various
themes.

Curriculum Changes. Numerous sample teachers mentioned the “reduction of con-

tent” and “‘changes in evaluation” in their courses. For example, a History teacher
said: “Content has been reduced and evaluation has been relaxed.” She recommended,
“more training in new evaluation is important.” On the other hand, an experienced
20 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 11. Comparison of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching methods in Tech
Studies (% always/often used).

teacher said, “The English program is very ambitious and unrealistic. Very advanced
for our students.”

Curriculum Autonomy and Changes in Teaching Strategies. Curriculum autonomy is one

of the novel and key components of the Mexico RIEB reform. It is also one of the
most mentioned changes. Teachers want more autonomy to customize their curricula
to meet students’ needs. Autonomy allows for more activity-­based learning.
A few Science teachers claimed that autonomy allows them to “identify the rela-
tionship that exists between the subject and their daily lives.” A Civics teacher stated
that autonomy allows her to “focus on skill/competency development rather than
memorization. The students work on projects and activities” and they become “more
critical and creative.” A Math teacher said, “the focus is on more activities and the
participation of students, assessment has also changed.” A Geography teacher added,
“active learning, and professional development.” It appears that curricular autonomy
in the RIEB reform plays an important role in the transformation to SCL for Mexico
teachers.

Integration of Technology. Over ten sample teachers claimed that “classes should focus
on the use of technology” and “classes are more active due to the use of technology.” A
 Joong

Table 2. Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Evaluation Methods (% Always/Often Used).

Math Eng Science Spanish Social Studies Tech Studies
N = 644 N = 643 N = 620 N = 639 N = 602 N = 432
(27 teachers) (20 teachers) (28 teachers) (18 teachers) (26 teachers) (20 teachers)
Tests/exams 66% (85%) 47% (80%) 53% (70%) 51% (56%) 41% (85%) 31% (39%)
Essay/lab/ 40% (65%) 40% (95%) 55% (86%) 58% (94%) 38% (89%) 39% (68%)
performance
Class work 94% (100%) 91% to 100%) 90% (96%) 92% (90%) 90% (100%) 85% (95%)
HW/SBA/ 72% (77%) 65% (90%) 64% (71%) 71% (78%) 61% (76%) 49% (50%)
assignments
Group work 33% (46%) 35% (75%) 43% (68%) 40% (72%) 35% (54%) 41% (65%)
Student presentations 36% (39%) 43% (75%) 48% (50%) 55% (100%) 40% (77%) 44% (60%)

Note. Teachers’ perceptions are given in brackets. HW = Homework; SBA = School-­Based Assessment.
21
22 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 12. Number of special needs students (n = 130 teachers in 12 schools).

Math teacher added, “incorporating technology gives more meaning to student learn-
ing.” However, a common complaint made by a third of academic teachers is that “the
school lacks the technology and the designated classroom spaces needed to integrate
technology in my subject areas.” A third of the sample teachers complained about the

Figure 13. Special education strategies (n = 130 teachers in 12 schools).

Joong 23

“limited resources and textbooks to support the curriculum.” Both technology integra-
tion and adequate resources play important roles in RIEB reform.

Professional Development. A second-­ year Art teacher commented on the “exams

needed to enter the professional teaching service” due to the Teachers’ Professional
Development Act. An experienced PHE teacher had similar sentiments: “we have more
attention and preparation for teachers.” However, several sample teachers suggested:
“It is necessary to promote and provide adequate training, not just a set of documents.”

Students’ Attitudes and Capabilities and Parental Involvements. Among 130 teacher
respondents who replied to these open-­ended questions in the survey, about a quarter
claimed that “student attitude toward education has been on a downward spiral,” and
that the students “are lazy,” or they have “poor study habits” or “show a lack of interest
in studying, especially Math.” A few sample teachers blamed the problem on students:
“Some come with many gaps in abilities, knowledge and skills” and “they have a
challenging attitude and little respect for authority.” On a positive note, 15 sample
teachers said their “students are eager to learn” and they want “more technologies” in
their courses. A History teacher said, “they are a self-­taught generation that is up-­to-­
date with technological advances.” A Spanish teacher said, “young people are more
outgoing, analytical and investigative.” A handful of sample teachers commented on
students’ “willingness to do teamwork” and “projects.”
Over 15 sample teachers complained about “very little cooperation from parents.”
Others blamed the problem on both the students and parents: “Students take little
responsibility for their tasks and their parents are not supportive.” An English teacher
added: “Students do not finish homework; the parents of the family will not get
involved with school activities.”

Students’ Comments on Changes

About one-­third of the sample students responded. Most of the comments were related
to teachers and teaching strategies. The most frequent responses were:

1. A few comments claimed that “teachers teach very well.” Most of the comments
wished their teachers would teach “better” and use “easier methods.” For ex-
ample, Math teacher should explain steps and Science teachers should conduct
more demonstrations.
2. Numerous suggestions said that teachers should use new teaching methods and
more activities, for example, “technology and games,” “more creative and fun
ways,” and “make students see that what they learn can be applied in their lives.”
3. A few sample students would like to have more group activities and more re-
sources in their classrooms. One student said, “teachers should be more interac-
tive since everyone learns differently.”
24 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Classroom Observations
For triangulation purposes, the researchers conducted classroom observations at three
conveniently selected sample schools, focusing on curriculum, facilities, and resources.
Both schools have double shifts. On average, classrooms are large and facilities for
Tech programs appear to be adequate, for example, nutrition, CAD, and Art. Computer
labs are well equipped with hardware and software for ICT and selected technology
classes such as Graphic Design and IT. All teachers have access to computers and
internet, which they utilized while preparing their lessons. Most teachers used the
three steps in the didactic sequence in their lesson plans (Suárez, 2017). They used a
variety of teaching strategies (teacher talk, white board work, PowerPoint presenta-
tion, discussion, and questioning). This was followed by individualized and small-­
group work. On assessments, observations of randomly selected notebooks and
performance assessment products indicate that marks were given for these assess-
ments (Figure 4). In general, noise levels in the classroom and classroom behavior
appeared to be manageable by most teachers. The above classroom observations cor-
roborated most of the quantitative findings in the surveys (Terrell, 2012).

Conclusions and Discussions on Research Questions

This study draws attention to the RIEB Secondary Education Reform. Results and
conclusions of the study indicate that the reform has a direct impact on teachers and,
in turn, on students and parents in Mexico.

Research Question 1: Perceptions of Students and Teachers of RIEB

Secondary Reform
In general, a majority of the teacher respondents were satisfied with the reforms. Some
sample teachers are still struggling with transitioning. Teachers indicated that there
was adequate support in terms of resources and professional development, especially
in the key areas of the current reforms: new curriculum and teaching methods.
Regarding teaching practices, both participant teachers and students said that their
teachers were using both teacher-­directed and student-­centered strategies. Dominant
strategies used are teacher talk, individualized learning, discussions, activities, and
questioning (Figures 2 and 7–12). Other strategies used include group work, demon-
strations/experiments/skits, and student presentations. However, there were conflict-
ing perceptions of how often student-­centered strategies were used in the study,
especially in Mathematics (Figures 3 and 7). Except for Technology and IT classes,
integration of technology is limited (10%–20%) by sample teachers. Classroom man-
agement needs improving as new modes of teaching and transitioning create new sit-
uations for students to deviate from expected behaviors. As for student evaluation,
both sample teachers and students claimed that traditional tests, class work, home-
work, performance assessment tasks, projects and examinations were always/often
Joong 25

used in the sample schools (Figure 3). These strategies are used to determine the final
mark (Figure 4). Similar findings were found in reform studies in the Philippines
(Joong et al., 2019), where examination grades do not carry large weightings as in
China (Joong, 2012) and three Caribbean countries (Joong et al., 2020). Automatic
promotion appears to be a contentious issue affecting sample teachers in lower second-
ary schools. A few sample teachers claimed that automatic promotion may have had
effects on student motivation, attendance, and classroom management. Similar find-
ings were found in Guyana (Joong et al., 2020).
In open-­ended comments in the surveys on changes in the past 5 years, quite a few
teachers talked about the “reduced curriculum,” “changed curriculum,” “didactic
sequence,” and “relaxed evaluation.” However, most of the discussions centered on
“implementación de modelos de enseñanza nuevos respecto a pedagogía.” These
include “curriculum autonomy” and “activity-­based learning.” One Spanish teacher
summed it up best: “Curriculum autonomy modify the way you teach your class” to
meet students’ needs and more importantly “makes them see that what they learn in
life can be applied in their lives.” Sample students wished their teachers could teach
“better” and make learning “easier” and “relevant.” There were suggestions for more
activities, group work, and technology. Most of these suggestions are in accordance
with policies from the Reforma de la Educación Secundaria. A majority (61%) of the
sample teachers were satisfied with their curriculum implementation. Only 11% were
dissatisfied, and the rest (28%) were in between.
In conclusion, as in any reform efforts, some sample teachers had difficulty chang-
ing former curriculum and teaching praxes. Even though most sample teachers claimed
that they received sufficient resources and professional development, more resources
and in-­service training, in particular, classroom management, activity-­based teaching
strategies, and strategies to integrate technology are needed for both academic and
classroom management success. Based on our findings and conclusions, we can con-
clude that the secondary RIEB reform, as outlined by Bonilla-­Rius (2020), is success-
ful in Mexico.

Research Question 2: Implementation of Secondary Reform, in Particular,

SCL
Mexico RIEB reform’s goal is to “shift the education system’s focus onto the learn-
ers” (Figure 1). This goal could be achieved by “focusing the attention of local edu-
cation authorities, supervisors and school communities on pupils’ achievement”
(Bonilla-­Rius, 2020, p. 115). As indicated above in answers to Research Question 1,
sample teachers have dedicated themselves to the education of students and made the
necessary changes to adopt most of the RIEB reforms, as outlined by Bonilla-­Rius
(2020). We also concluded that most sample teachers are adopting the student-­
centered and didactic teaching strategies (Bonilla-­Rius, 2020; Cuervo et al., 2009;
Suárez, 2017). In general, a majority (70%) of the teacher respondents were satisfied
with the reform. They claimed that they received sufficient resources and professional
26 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

development, which is an important criterion for SCL policies to succeed

(Schweisfurth, 2011, Schweisfurth, 2015). With respect to teaching practices, both
participant teachers and students said that their teachers were using both teacher-­
directed and student-­centered (SCL) strategies. Dominant teaching strategies used by
sample teachers in all six subjects are teacher talk, individual work, activity learning,
and questioning (Table 3 and Figures 2, 4–7). Group work is used by a majority of
teachers in Science and Spanish (Figures 6 and 7), student presentations in Spanish
and Tech Studies (Figures 1 and 9), and demonstrations/experiments in Science
(Figure 6). In open-­ended responses, a few sample teachers indicated that technology
integration can be a motivating strategy. In our classroom observations, computer
labs for Tech and IT subjects are well equipped with internet access. Facilities and
resources are important for SCL activities and integration of technology. More labs
for technology integration are needed in traditional academic classes. In student eval-
uation, a majority of the sample teachers reported that they use a variety of methods
(Figures 4 and 5). Classroom observations indicate that, in general, most sample stu-
dents perform well in performance assessments. These results indicate that most sam-
ple teachers assess SCL activities.
In their large-­scale study of education reforms in numerous countries, Livingstone
et al. (2017, p. 18) concluded that SCL strategies are confusing and frustrating for
some teachers. Results in this study indicate the opposite. A lower teacher-­student
ratio and more resources would help. As mentioned above, in-­service training would
enhance teachers’ understanding of the theory and strategies of SCL in their respective
subject areas, for example, the use of manipulatives in Mathematics, skits in English,
and internet research in Social Studies; performing experiments in Science; and group
work in most subjects. According to De Hoyos and Estrada (2018), the SPD incorpo-
rated many of the best international practices: appraisals for enrolling and promoting
teachers, induction period, continuous in-­service training, and incentives for good per-
formance. Fullan and Stiegelbauer (1991, p. 85) suggest that in-­service training would
provide an “on-­going, interactive, cumulative learning necessary to develop new con-
ceptions, skills and behavior” as teachers implement the RIEB reform initiatives.
Nevertheless, many sample teachers would welcome this dimension of the reform. In
conclusion, SCL was effectively implemented in Mexico.
On the high-­stakes examination system, results of this study indicate that a majority
(60%) of the sample teachers found the EXAN I I and ENLACE, both Upper Secondary
Examinations satisfactory, 7% unsatisfactory, and one-­third in between. There are no
high-­stakes examinations for lower secondary students.
In the Caribbean countries, Livingstone et al. (2017, p. 18) pointed out the effects
of the examination system on SCL reform implementation:

Lack of change to examination systems alongside policy calls in some countries to im-
plement more learner-­centred pedagogical approaches is confusing and frustrating for
teachers. This holds many teachers back from introducing new pedagogical approaches
because they are concerned about the implications for their students’ results.
Joong 27

Schweisfurth (2015) claimed that SCL has potential as a framework for quality
education, but implementation is problematic in low-­income countries.
In our previous studies, high-­stakes examination system was found to be a per-
sistent problem with secondary reforms involving SCL in China, Sierra Leone, and the
Caribbean countries (Joong, 2012; Joong et al., 2020; Joong & Ryan, 2013a; Joong &
Noel, 2013b; Ryan & Joong, 2013), as “teacher respondents claimed that there was
little room for introducing activity-­based learning and other experimentation” (Joong,
2012, p. 280).
Findings of this study clearly show that SCL can be effectively implemented in
Mexico.
Altinyelken (2011) had a similar finding in his study for Turkey. However, SCL
reform initiatives must be planned with full knowledge of the reform process and its
complexity. In Mexico, this planning was well done by SEP (2017), and the creation
of the Professional Teaching Service for Professional Development. In-­service train-
ing is key to enhance teachers’ understanding of SCL as indicated in our previous SCL
reform studies in China, the Philippines, and the Caribbean countries (Joong, 2012;
Joong et al., 2020; Joong et al., 2019).

Question 3: Program for Inclusion and Educational Equity

According to the OECD (2018), the national consultations on RIEB conducted
between 2014 and 2016 included very positive opinions on the core components of the
proposed reform, with its “humanistic traits,” for example, equity and inclusion, being
the most positively appraised. The Program for Inclusion and Educational Equity in
RIEB Reform aims to strengthen the capacities of schools and educational services
that serve students with special needs (OECD, 2018).
Since the 1990s, an inclusion model was adopted for students with special needs.
Students attend mainstream basic schools using the same curriculum and are taught by
regular classroom teachers. However, curriculum and instruction are modified and
adapted to meet various needs. Basic schools receive assistance for special needs stu-
dents from USAER. This department promotes the use of specific methods, tech-
niques, and materials to support the learning of special needs students in mainstream
schools, including the provision of the necessary resources (Santiago et al., 2012). In
this study, 130 sample teachers (85%) responded to open-­ended questions in the sur-
vey on the inclusion program. The mean number of students with special needs in each
class taught by respondent teachers is four. The composition of students with special
needs was mostly behavioral, learning disabled, and physically disabled (Figure 14).
Strategies used include accommodation, modification, and provision of extra help
(Figure 15). A sample Spanish teacher summed up the inclusion policy, “la adaptación
e inclusion a los alumnos con capacidades diferentes.” The model is similar to the
integration of students with special needs in our China, the Philippines, and Caribbean
Reform studies (Joong, 2012; Joong et al., 2020, Joong & Noel, 2013b; Joong et al.,
2019). What stood out in the Mexican model is “teamwork” with USAER. One teacher
28 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Figure 14. Number of special needs students (n = 130 teachers in 12 schools).

said, “Through the USAER department and parent support, we are informed of the
problems for each student and the modifications (or activities) that are needed.”

Figure 15. Special education strategies (n = 130 teachers in 12 schools).

Joong 29

Conclusions
The RIEB reform implemented in Mexico is ambitious in that it includes numerous
initiatives such as SCL, curriculum autonomy, didactic teaching strategy, an inclusion
model for students with special needs, and SPD. There are real challenges posed by
increasing student enrolment, the exploding growth of knowledge and technology, the
increasing forms of distraction facing students’ learning, and the differences in stu-
dents’ interests and approaches to learning. Comparison and analysis of the percep-
tions of the teachers and students in the implementation of reforms in Mexico provided
insight into ways of improving teaching and learning, in particular, SCL and the inclu-
sion of students with special needs. Due to limited empirical studies on Mexico’s
reform implementation, findings and recommendation from the study will assist school
administrators, teachers, and parents in Mexico and other jurisdictions in designing,
adapting, and implementing secondary reforms, in particular, curriculum planning,
teaching pedagogies, student evaluation methods, integration of technology, and spe-
cial education. Even though the RIEB reform was imposed (Bonilla-­Rius, 2020;
Cuervo et al., 2009; Levinson et al., 2013), Mexico SEP (2017) was able to put in place
policies and strategies such as curriculum autonomy and didactic teaching strategy to
support reform goals. However, implementing education reforms require even more
government support and resources. This includes additional teachers, schools and
classrooms, textbooks, computers and internet access, equipment and supplies for
Science and Technical courses, and resources. In-­service training and resources are the
keys to reform success (Schweisfurth, 2011, Schweisfurth, 2015, p. 2011). The suc-
cess of the reform was also due to the SPD for teachers training and Teachers’
Professional Development Act.

Recommendations

[R]eform efforts (should) portray the ideal teacher as one who constructs content knowl-
edge in concert with students’ interests and prior understandings, who encourages dia-
logue and critical questioning from students, and who concerns herself more with the
integral formation of the student across disciplines than with the transmission of subject
matter per se (Levinson et al., 2013, p. 1).

Reform initiatives must always be planned with full knowledge of the reform pro-
cess and its complexity. The RIEB reform in Mexico is no different. Fullan (2001)
stated that the success of educational reforms depends on what teachers do and think.
Teachers’ beliefs about students’ and their own roles and lack of skills hinder reform
implementation when coupled with contextual barriers—namely large classes, lack of
resources, and in-­service training, all of which must be addressed. Findings in this
study clearly show that SCL can be effectively implemented in developing countries.
Achieving SCL policy goals requires even more government support. Varied and
30 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

appropriate instructional materials are needed to make instruction and studying more
appealing to students. This includes computer technology, textbooks, science equip-
ments, and supplies. It is also essential that teachers undergo continuous in-­service
training, including reflection, observation and action research, which has the potential
to change their beliefs about teaching and learning (Lin et al., 2014; de Vries et al.,
2014). A by-­product of this study is that students’ and teachers’ perceptions can be
used to determine whether reform initiatives have been achieved. Finally, the govern-
ment must continue to disseminate information on SCL reform initiatives and suc-
cesses and build support among parents, communities, and all other key stakeholders.
It is also hoped that the findings and recommendations from this study will assist
stakeholders in designing curricula, in adapting exemplary SCL teaching strategies
and in implementing quality assessment and integration of students with special needs
strategies. Educational leaders and educators in all jurisdictions will benefit from
reviewing the education reform efforts in Mexico.

Acknowledgment
The author acknowledges the significant contributions of his colleague, Dr. Rose Gibbs, who
assisted with the translation from Spanish to English of open-­ended replies from surveys by
the Mexican teachers and students. Dr. Gibbs edited the manuscript at various stages and was
always available for oral consultations including this final submission. Acknowledgements also
go to Juan Ramón Brillanti R. for his assistance with distribution of surveys and data collection
in the technical school and to Colegio Jean Piaget in Mexico for assistance with data collection,
especially Rosario González and Lupita Turner.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the esearch, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

ORCID ID
Yee Han Peter Joong ‍ ‍https://​orcid.​org/​0000-​0002-​9194-​9275

References
Altinyelken, H. K. (2011). Student‐centred pedagogy in turkey: Conceptualisations, interpreta-
tions and practices. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), 137–160. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​
02680939.​2010.​504886
Bonilla-­Rius, E. (2020). Education Truly Matters: Key Lessons from Mexico’s Educational
Reform for Educating the Whole Child, in F. In M. Reimers (Ed.), Audacious education
purposes: How governments transform the goals of education systems (pp. 105–151).
Joong 31

Clarke, D. M. (1997). The changing role of the mathematics teacher. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 28(3), 278–308. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​749782
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed
methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed meth-
ods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Sage.
Cuervo, A., Mora, C., & Garcia-­Salcedo, R. (2009). Analysis of the Educative reform for sec-
ondary school in Mexico and its implications on science II subject for the new curriculum.
Latin-­American Journal of Physics Education, 3(1), 1–9.
De Hoyos, R., & Estrada, R. (2018). ¿Los docentes mejoraron? ¡Sí!. In Nexos 480, (January).
https://www.​nexos.​com.​mx/?​p=​39531
de Vries, S., van de Grift, W. J. C. M., & Jansen, E. P. W. A. (2014). How teachers’ beliefs about
learning and teaching relate to their continuing professional development. Teachers and
Teaching, 20(3), 338–357. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13540602.​2013.​848521
DeFur, S. H., & Korinek, L. (2010). Listening to student voices. The Clearing House: A Jour-
nal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(1), 15–19. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​
00098650903267677
Desimone, L. M., Smith, T. M., & Frisvold, D. E. (2010). Survey measures of classroom instruc-
tion. Educational Policy, 24(2), 267–329. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​0895904808330173
Earl, L., & Sutherland, S. (2003). Student engagement in times of turbulent change. McGill
journal of education, 38(2), 329–343.
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and
purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​11648/​j.​ajtas.​20160501.​11
Fullan, M. (1996). Turning systemic thinking on its head. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(6), 420–423.
Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-­scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1(1), 5–27.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1023/​A:​1010068703786
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed). Teachers’ College Press.
Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed).
Teachers College Press.
Helsby, G. (1999). Changing teachers’ work. Open University Press.
Jennings, Z. (1999). Educational Reform in Guyana in the Post-­War Period. In E. Miller (Ed.),
Educational Reform in the Commonwealth Caribbean CIDI; OAS. http://www.​educoas.​
org/​Portal/​bdigital/​contenido/​interamer/​BkIACD/​Interamer/​Interamerhtml/​Millerhtml/​
mil_​jen.​htm.
Jennings, Z. (2017). Interventions in schools’ curricula to achieve quality in learning: expe-
riences from the Commonwealth Caribbean. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and
International Education, 47(6), 818–834. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​03057925.​2017.​
1331120
Joong, P., & Noel, K. (2013b). The Perceptions of Teachers in Sierra Leone's Secondary Edu-
cation Reform. In RobertA. DeVillar, Binbin. Jiang, & Jim. Cummins (Eds.), Transforming
education: Global perspectives, experiences and implications. Peter Lang Publishing.
Joong, Y. H. P., Mangali, G., Reganit, A. R., & Swan, B. (2019). Understanding the Ecologies
of education reforms: Comparing the perceptions of secondary teachers and students in the
32 International Journal of Educational Reform 00(0)

Philippines. International Journal of Educational Reform, 28(3), 278–302. https://​doi.​org/​

10.​1177/​1056787919857257
Joong, Y. P. (2012). Perceptions of parents, teachers, and students on secondary education
reforms in China. Peabody Journal of Education, 87(2), 267–282.
Joong, Y. P., Gibbs, R., Ramsawak-­Jodha, N., Anderson, S., & Wintz, P. (2020). Understanding
the Ecologies of education reforms: Comparing the perceptions of secondary teachers and
students in Jamaica, Guyana, and Trinidad and Tobago. Caribbean Journal of Mixed Meth-
ods Research, 1(1).
Joong, Y. P., & Ryan, T. (2013a). Teachers' and Students' Perceptions of Secondary Reform and
Implementation: A China and Canada Comparison. In Yvonne. Hébert & AliA. Abdi (Eds.),
Critical perspectives on international education (pp. 263–278). Sense Publishers.
Lasky, S., & Sutherland, S. (2000). Policy evaluation: A preliminary analysis of mandated sec-
ondary reform from teachers’ perspectives [Conference session]. Paper presented at the
Annual Edward F. Kelly Evaluation Conference, Albany, NY.
Levinson, B. A., Blackwood, J., & Cross, V. (2013). Recipients, agents, or partners?: The con-
tradictions of teacher participation in Mexican secondary education reform. Journal of Edu-
cational Change, 14(1), 1–27. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10833-​012-​9193-2
Lin, M. -H., Chuang, T. -F., & Hsu, H. -P. (2014). The relationship among teaching beliefs,
Student-­Centred teaching concept and the instructional innovation. Journal of Service Sci-
ence and Management, 07(03), 201–210. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4236/​jssm.​2014.​73017
Livingstone, K., Schweisfurth, M., Brace, G., & Nash, M. (2017). Why pedagogy matters: the
role of pedagogy in education 2030. https://www.​unesco.​org.​uk/​wp-​content/​uploads/​2017/​
06/​pedagogy.​pdf
MacKinnon, G., & MacKinnon, P. (2010). Technology integration in the schools of Guyana: A
case study. Computers in the Schools, 27(3-4), 221–246. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​07380569.​
2010.​523884
Monroy, C., & Trines, S. (2019). Education in Mexico. WENR report. https://​wenr.​wes.​org/​
2019/​05/​education-​in-​mexico-2
National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). (2004). Breaking ranks II:
Strategies for leading high school reform. The Education Alliance.
OECD. (2018). Education policy outlook Mexico. OECD.
OECD. (2019). Strong foundations for quality and equity in Mexican schools, implementing
education policies. OECD.
Reimers, F. (2018). Reformar la escuela pública para el siglo XXI. Los desafíos para México. In
O. Granados, X. P. de la Mora, & E. Betanzos (Eds.), Fortalecimiento de derechos, ampli-
ación de libertades. Reforma Educativa. Reforma en Materia de Transparencia. Reforma
en Materia de Combate a la Corrupción (pp. 125–166). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Ryan, T. G., & Joong, Y. H. P. (2013). Revisiting Ontario teachers’ and students’ perceptions of
large-­scale reform. International Journal of Educational Reform, 22(1), 2–23. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1177/​105678791302200101
Santiago, P., McGregor, I., Nusche, D., Ravela, P., & Toledo, D.OECD Reviews of Evaluation
and Assessment in Education (2012). School education in Mexico. OECD. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1787/​9789264172647-​4-​en
Joong 33

Santibañez, L., Vernez, G., & Razquin, P. (2005). Education in Mexico: Challenges and oppor-
tunities. RAND Education.
Schweisfurth, M. (2011). Learner-­centred education in developing country contexts: From
solution to problem? International Journal of Educational Development, 31(5), 425–432.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​ijedudev.​2011.​03.​005
Schweisfurth, M. (2015). Learner-­centred pedagogy: Towards a post-2015 agenda for teaching
and learning. International Journal of Educational Development, 40(2), 259–266. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​ijedudev.​2014.​10.​011
Schweisfurtha, M., & Schweisfurtha, M. (2013). Learner-­centred education in international per-
spective. Journal of International and Comparative Education, 2(1), 1–8. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​14425/​00.​45.​70
Secretaría de Educación Pública (SEP). (2017). Aprendizajes clave para La educación integral.
Secretaría de Educación Pública.
Sowell, E. J. (2005). Curriculum: An integrative introduction (3rd ed). Prentice Hall.
Suárez, J. (2017). La enseñanza Y aprendizaje de reacciones orgánicas de óxido-­reducción,
basado en mapas conceptuales como Una alternativa metodológica a nivel bachillerato.
UNAM.
Taylor, S., Rizvi, F., Lingard, B., & Henry, M. (1997). Globalization, the state and educational
policymaking. In Educational policy and the politics of change (pp. 54–77). Routledge.
Terrell, S. R. (2012). Mixed-­ methods research methodologies. Qualitative Report, 17(1),
254–280.
Tuirán, R. (2018). Equidad e inclusión en el ámbito educativo. In SEP, Educación en México
2013–2018: Balance Y perspectiva (pp. 238–263). Secretaría de Educación Pública.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design (2nd ed). Association for Super-
vision and Curriculum Development.

Author Biography
Yee Han Peter Joong has spent 13 years as a senior lecturer and assistant professor at
the University of the West Indies and Nipissing University. He also taught in Jamaican
and Ontario secondary schools for 30 years. Peter's current research centres on com-
parative studies on secondary reforms and integration of mathematics in environmen-
tal and peace education in fifteen countries.