ASSESSMENT ON THE EXISTING INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS AND

STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE: BASIS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF

CONTEXTUALIZED AND LOCALIZED OUTCOMES-BASED INSTRUCTIONAL
MATERIALS IN TEACHING MENDELIAN GENETICS

A Thesis Proposal

Presented to the

The Faculty of the Graduate School

Caraga State University

 In Partial Fulfillment

Of the requirements for the Degree of

Master of Science in Biology Education

RUTHANN PUJADAS-TIONGSON

September 20, 2019

 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Verbal instruction, which is seen as the easiest form of instruction and teaching delivery

system apart from real experience is always very abstract. (Adenyanju, 2003). In our country, the

Department of Education issued an order implementing new curriculum K to 12 Basic Education

Curriculum for all schools nationwide last S.Y. 2012-2013 (K to 12 BEC). In this curriculum, the

students will use ready-made learning materials (LM) that are catered in a day-to-day basis in

accordance to the K to 12 Science Curriculum Guide. This new curriculum is seen as one of the

answers in improving the quality education in the country. The K to 12 Curriculum highlights

some key features which are geared at addressing students’ differences and learning styles. One

of the key features of the new curriculum is the contextualization and localization of instruction.

But, the ready-made learning materials that students are using seems to be inappropriate for

some reasons like students are unable to perform all the activities in the LM, especially its time

consuming activities and needs constant supervision coming from the field teachers and learning

materials are design not applicable to all students because there are materials were not available

in some schools especially the laboratory apparatuses in science. (Perez, 2017).

Teaching in secondary schools can only be effective through the use of any instructional

materials that guide the teacher in explaining topics to students effectively and efficiently

(Ofune, 2001). Today, contextualization and localization give importance because of the desire
of the state to promote the preservation of culture, local history, symbols, and identity. With this

premise, the concept of contextualization and localization, which is also labeled in many studies

as contextualizing teaching and learning (CTL), truly aligns with the thrusts and the mandates of

the Department of Education. According to Bete,(2018) localization is about making content

usable and adaptable to meet local needs, address a particular teaching style or learning style, to

adapt to a different grade level, to adapt for a different discipline, to adjust to a different learning

environment, to address diversity needs, to address a cultural preference, to support a specific

pedagogical need, and to address either a school or a district's standardized curriculum.

It is clear that developing countries face greater challenges in science education than

economically developed countries due to lack of teaching materials, including books, computer

and communications technologies, community-based science centers, laboratory facilities and

equipment, as well as shortage of skilled teachers (Ballesteros, 2015).

Nowadays, teachers are challenged to make instructional materials that will enhance the

students’ interest and learning performance. The purpose of instructional materials is to promote

efficiency of education by improving the quality of teaching and learning process. Incorporating

these tools and materials present, support and reinforces teaching.

Teachers have a critical role in ensuring the tools used efficiently to support students. It

has been suggested that by using authentic or localized academic texts as part of innovation and

reinforcement, low-skilled students become more active learners and inclined to use their higher

level academic tasks.

 Based on the K-12 program, teachers should embrace a different style as they perform

teaching-learning process throughout their class activity.

Some learning competencies in genetics are not fully grasped by the students. Student’s

difficulties in learning genetics have been studied by various researchers. Teaching genetics is

interesting yet challenging for students to understand. Discussions, using of textbooks, problem-

solving activities are some of the common teaching strategies most teachers use in this topic.

Experiencing difficulties in many topics negatively affect students’ motivation. Students

difficulties have stimulated researcher to investigate why students experience difficulties and

how to overcome these difficulties (Cimer, 2011). There is a need to improve the present

performance of students by supplementing instructional materials using contextualization and

localization.

Encouraging students to learn and perform at higher levels is therefore a big challenge for

many teachers.

Genetics is the subject that is interesting yet challenging for students to understand.

Traditional way of teaching genetics is very common like discussions using of textbooks,

problem-solving activities and reporting of the students. However, there are researchers have

shown that students have serious misunderstanding about genetics, like for instance, the students

that do not fully understand chromosomes, genes or alleles (Ayuso, 1999), cannot differentiate

the concept of homozygous and heterozygous (Slack and Stewart, 1990), and gets confuse on the

process of meiosis (Brown, 1990). Resulting to this the students will tend to do memorizations

on the content without fully understand the context of the lesson.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

This study will be supported by different theories that will emphasize the importance of

using contextualized and localized materials for the effectiveness and efficiency of the teaching-

learning process. Motivation theory encourages the students to reflect in their own ideas.

Thinking about the content with real world experience is important because once the student can

see the real world relevance of what they are learning they become interested and motivated

(Fernandez, Itliong & Luzano,2019).

Social learning theory is an explanation of how students learn when they are in social

context. Students are encouraged to create and understand their own learning within a social

situations associated. (Fernandez, Itliong & Luzano,2019).

Bruner (2000) emphasizes the theory of discovery learning that individual learns from his

or her discovery on the environment. Learners are inquisitive, they can be self-motivated until

they find answers to the problem when actively involved in their own learning and construct

their own knowledge because individual is capable of learning how to learn.

This study is anchored on the ADDIE model as shown in Figure 1, the Analysis Phase,

Design Phase, Development Phase , and Evaluation phase in developing the

instructional materials on genetics.

Figure 1. The ADDIE model in developing instructional materials on Mendelian genetics

Analysis Phase

On the first phase, the students (LDC) least developed competencies in genetics of

Ampayon National High School will be determined, these will be evaluated and analyzed as

basis in designing instructional materials in teaching Mendelian genetics. The data for the

students (LDC) least developed competencies will be obtained from the existing record files in

the school.

Design Phase
 In this phase instructional materials will be crafted based on the assessment of the

previous students performance and results of the pre test. The COBIMS (Contextualized

Outcomes-Based Instructional Materials) to be constructed is in a form of worksheets

comprising the 4A’s strategies in teaching utilizing contextual and local materials with time

allocation for the junior high school students.

Development Phase

Comments and suggestions of the developed instructional materials were gathered from

the thesis adviser as first draft. The crafted COBIMS will be first evaluated and validated by the

three experts from Caraga State University, Biology department as to the content, construct,

appropriateness, readability and usability using validation instruments. Then the second

validation will be from the Department of Education Butuan City Division validators.

Implementation phase

Orientation of the respondents will be facilitated. The revise COBIMS will be used in

the experimental group in the class discussions .

Evaluation phase
 Conduction of the post test will be made then compare the results from the pre test. The

result of this will be analyzed and evaluated to determine the appropriateness, reliability and

validity of the COBIMS.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to determine the least developed competencies of the

students that will serve as basis in developing Contextualized Outcomes-Based Instructional

Materials (COBIMS) in teaching Mendelian genetics in Ampayon National High School.

Specifically, the study aims to answer the following questions:

1. What are the least developed competencies (LDC) of the students?

2. What is the quality of the designed Contextualized Outcomes-based Instructional

Materials (COBIMS) based on the following criteria:

a. Appropriateness

b. Validity and

c. Reliability

3. What is the performance of the students before and after using the Contextualized

Outcomes-Based Instructional Materials (COBIMS)?

 4. Is there a significant difference in the performance of the students before and after

using the Contextualized Outcomes-Based Instructional Materials (COBIMS)?

5. Is there a significant difference in the performance of the students when using the

Contextualized Outcomes-Based Instructional Materials (COBIMS) and by using the

existing instructional materials in teaching?

Hypotheses

There is no significant difference in the performance of the students before and after

using the Contextualized Outcomes-based Instructional Materials COBIMS)?

There is no significant difference in the performance of the students when using the

Contextualized Outcomes-Based Instructional Materials (COBIMS) and by using the existing

instructional materials in teaching?

Significance of the Study

This study will help the teachers in designing a Contextualized Outcomes-Based

Instructional Materials (COBIMS) .

Students. The COBIMS will help students to elevate the performance of the least learned

competency level . It helps them easily understand the topic because of cooperation and
collaboration of ideas from their classmates and it will engage in on hands-on activities that may

lead to realization in their real life situations.

Science Teachers. The COBIMS will help the teachers in an easier way of teaching and

lessen the effort on teacher-talk discussions to the students because this COBIMS will let the

students present their own ideas by answering series of activities.

School Administrators. It helps to encourage the teachers to use this COBIMS for

effective teaching-learning development.

Scope and Delimitation

This study will determine the significance of the constructed instructional materials to the

Grade 8 students. There will be experimental group and control group.Grade 8 section Jade with

49 students will be using the designed instructional materials while Grade 8 section Pearl with 46

students will be the control group using the existing materials in teaching and learning in

Mendelian genetics. The designed instructional materials will be used for 1 week lesson only.

This lesson is intended for use in grade 8 science on the topic Mendelian genetics.

Definition of Terms
 Pedagogy. It refers to the principles, practice and profession of teaching. It can also be

regarded as the art or science of teaching, education and instructional methods.

Instructional Materials. Instructional materials refer to the human and non-human

materials and facilities that can be used to ease, encourage, improved and promote teaching and

learning activities. They are whatever materials used in the process of instruction. It can be used

to facilitate effective instruction. It indicates a systematic way of designing, carrying out and

employing the total process of learning, communicating and employing human and non-human

resources to bring out a more meaningful and effective instruction.

Existing Instructional Materials. These are the very common instructional materials

used by some teachers in teaching. Most likely these instructional materials were the Learners’

Module and the teachers’ guide provided by the Department of Education following the K-12

Curriculum.

Learning. It can be defined as a mental activities by means of which knowledge, skill

attitude are acquired, retained and utilized. This leads to acquisition of new skills, behaviour

tendency that is permanent.

Teaching. It is an activity aimed to bring about meaningful learning through a method

that is morally and pedagogically acceptable. It involves a teacher, a learner and a content in a

form of knowledge facts information and skills to be imparted.

Learning Outcomes. These refer to the knowledge attained or skills developed by the

students designated by test and examination scores or marks assigned by the subjects’ teachers.
 Contextualization. This refers to the application of concepts to the real life situations of

the students living in the particular locality.

Traditional Teaching. This refers to the lecture method, chalk board discussion, and

using of cartolina/manila papers as visual aids, in delivering the lessons inside the classroom.

Contextualized Outcomes-based Instructional Materials (COBIMS). These are the

teachers’ manual and students worksheets made after assessing the students LDCs. This is a

teaching material guide using the content standard of grade 8 in the the k to 12 approach

following the 4A’s Strategy of teaching. `

Least Developed Competencies. These are the competencies that are not mastered by

the students.

Usability. It refers to the COBIMS usefulness and the comfort of the students in using it.

Validation . It is a structured evaluation of the OBIMS by some experts in the fields

using some criteria

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES

 Science education aims to develop scientific literacy among students that prepares

them to make judgments and decisions regarding applications of scientific knowledge that may

have social, health or environmental impacts.

Salandanan (2000) quoted “experience is the best teacher” De Leon, Robles, San Juan,

Binaluyo and Ison, (2010). To experience an event means “live through” to actually see, feel,

and encounter an incident or a certain situation.

A challenge in any educational endeavor is finding ways to present abstract concepts to

students in a manner that makes the ideas more concrete. Biology and genetics in particular,

seems rife with abstract concepts that serve as fundamental building blocks for other topics and

are necessary for scientific literacy in today's society ( Kreiser & Hairston, 2007).

In the literature review of Osborne et al. (2003) on the attitudes of students on Science,

they have argued that although there are many factors associated on the decline of students

choosing to study science, one striking factor is quality teaching. They have insisted that science

teaching have to be engaging to the students and provide classroom environment and

activities that raise students’ interest to science.

Localization and Contextualization of Instructional Materials

Localization on the other hand by Taylor (2004) is “...Freedom for schools or local

education authorities to adopt this curriculum to local conditions,” and “relating the content of
the curriculum and the processes of teaching and learning to the local environment”. It is based

on local needs and relevance for the learners where there are flexibility and creativity of the

lessons.

Based on the Implementing Rules and Regulations for RA 10533 Sec. 10.2 (d) and (h) –

states that “The curriculum shall be contextualized and global.” and “The curriculum shall be

flexible enough to enable and allow schools to localize, indigenize, and enhance the curriculum

based on their respective educational and social contexts.” Localization is about making content

usable and adaptable to meet local needs, address a particular teaching style or learning style, to

adapt to a different grade level, to adapt for a different discipline, to adjust to a different learning

environment, to address diversity needs, to address a cultural preference, to support a specific

pedagogical need, and to address either a school or a district's standardized curriculum.

To localize, teachers maximize materials and resources that are locally available. To

contextualize, teachers use activities, interests, issues, and needs from learners’ lives to develop

skills and apply their learning (Usec. Dina Ocampo).

According to Tomlinson and Masahura (2004), the advantages of localizing and

contextualizing the curriculum are: cultural sensitivity, potential for personalization, easy

availability of resources, direct relevance of materials to learners, and ownership of the

development process.

Meanwhile, contextualization is the process of presenting lesson in meaningful and

relevant context based on previous experiences and real-life situations. In commonality, both
adhere in making the lesson flexible, fit, creative, relevant, meaningful, and adaptive to students’

level of understanding and instructional needs (Tinong, 2018).

Instructional materials are defined as resources that organize and support instruction,

such as textbooks, task, and supplementary resources (Remillard J.T and Heck D., 2014 cited by

Seashore, K.H., 2015).

The use of Instructional Materials has a strong Relationship with Academic

Achievements/Performances at the Secondary level, (Dahar, 2011)

According to the citations of Ituma, M.G. (2015), learning involves collaboration

between instructors, students and resources but it’s a personal interpretation of the world that

builds on the students prior knowledge and experiences leading to the life-long learning.

Contextualization has been defined by Mazzeo, Rab and Alsid 2003) as a diverse family

of instructional strategies designed to more seamlessly link the learning of foundational skills

and academic or occupational content.

Beswick( 2014) stated that teachers need to know not only the content they teach but also

much more.

Challenges of Some Teachers in utilizing instructional materials

According to Staver, J. (n.d.) All teachers hold personal beliefs and dispositions about

teaching, learning, and learners. Some teachers believe their responsibility is to teach the
material, and the student’s responsibility is to learn what is taught. If student struggle or fails to

learn, the responsibility rests only with the students.

In the literature review of Osborne et al., (2003) as cited by Tabotabo, P. et. al., (2018),

on the attitudes of students on Science, they have argued that although there are many factors

associated on the decline of students choosing to study science, one striking factor is quality

teaching. They have insisted that science teaching have to be engaging to the students and

provide classroom environment and activities that raise students’ interest to science.

Resources for science teaching are not only found in the classroom, but they are also

available in the immediate school environment and community. According to Ballesteros

(2016), a science teacher should be familiar with the immediate school environment and the

community in order to be able to source out all the human and non-human materials that can

facilitate science learning.

As cited by Ballesteros, (2016) , Dease (2012) states that contextualization is a theory

which is based on the notion that learning can only occur when students are able to connect

between content and context. Gabby (2011) defines contextualization as a concept of learning

that helps teachers link between the materials taught with real-world situations of students and

encourage them to make the connections between the knowledge possessed by its application in

their lives as family members and in the community.

Johnson (2010) says that contextualization is based on the discovery that the students find

meaning in their schoolwork when they join the content of academic subjects’ lessons with the

context of daily life. It is identified as a promising strategy that actively engages students and

promotes improved learning and skills development (Baker, Hope & Karandjef, 2009).
 Research have shown that there is a positive correlation between the teacher’s content

knowledge and learners’ achievements (Channey, 1995) and that inadequate teacher training in

turn resulted in teachers relying heavily on textbooks (Muwanga-Zaka 2004).Another factor

contributing to teachers’ lack of content knowledge was that some teachers preparation programs

did not appear to be adequate in providing content knowledge to science teachers (Allen, 2003)

Research showed that a teachers’ belief system is a major influence in the

implementation of the science curriculum. (Lumpe, Haney, and Czerniak, 2000). Thus, what a

teacher believes is often translated into classroom practice (Zeichner and Liston, 1996).

Teachers’ belief are also influenced by their experiences. Teachers indicated that they were

teaching according to the ideals of the new curriculum but research showed that they tend to

teach the way they tend to teach. “Teachers talked the talk but did not walk the walk” (Keys,

2005) when it came to the implementation of the curriculum. When teachers were confronted

with why they did not implement their expressed beliefs, they blamed it on the lack of resources

and time, even though this was found not to be true.

Bedaure (2012) stated that a module should include a pre-test, to diagnose learner’s prior

knowledge; objectives, this will guide the learners on what to learn with the module; criteria for

success, this will guide them on how to learn and where should learning takes them; instructional

activities, learners will interact with the material and will consequently performed learn the

necessary concepts and skills in the process; post test, in order to assess and evaluate the degree

of proficiency and performance; and the remedial instruction, in order to enrich more the

different activities and will reinforce their learning as well as help those who find the activities

difficult.
 Appropriate genetic education is essential in school to develop citizens who can

understand various issues on applications of genetic technologies (Chattopadhyay, 2005).

Anderson (2012), cited in his study on the Study – Teaching of Quantitative Genetics

that intervention material consisted of a series of computer-based materials and concept mapping

exercises helped in improving and addressing identified difficulties and alternative conceptions

on Genetics given to third year introductory module in quantitative genetics. He also found out in

this study that the knowledge of the student group that participated in the intervention

(experimental group), indicated a highly significant difference compared to the control group in

terms of improving the understanding of the concepts of variance, heredity, and histogram in

Genetics.

Similarly, according to the study of Togonon (2011), on the development and evaluation

of project – based strategic intervention materials (PB-SIMs), PB-SIM is a valid instructional

material in teaching high school chemistry. Results showed a significant difference between the

achievement of the students before and after being exposed to PB – SIMs. The pretest yielded a

mean of 4.2167 and the posttest mean of 10.6500. The p value associated with the computed t –

value is less than the adopted level of significance. The students exposed to SIM performed

better in the posttest than the pretest. The results of the study were in line with the findings of

Hogan (2000) and Woodward (2004) as cited in Soberano (2010) who found out that

intervention materials contributed to better learning of the concepts among students. The PB-

SIMs significantly improved the achievement of students in Chemistry specifically in solutions

and colloids. She also mentioned that PB-SIMs improved the perceptions of students toward the

subject
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter will presents the research design, data gathering procedure, respondents and

location of the study, research instruments, scoring and quantification of data.

The researcher together with other grade 8 science teachers of Ampayon National High

School had identified the least developed competencies of Grade 8 Science and found out that

mastery level was not achieved by the students in the previous school years. Thus, the researcher

chose the least developed in all the competencies given by the Department of Education that will

be the basis in designing an instructional materials.

Pre-test will be given to the grade 8 students of section Jade and Pearl participants before

the series of activities.

Research Design
 This research study will use the descriptive comparative design using questionnaires and

the existing files of the Least Developed Competencies as needed in designing Contextualized

Outcomes-based Instructional Materials (COBIMS) in teaching Mendelian genetics.

Research Participants

The participants of the study will be the students of grade 8 Jade and grade 8 Pearl of

Ampayon National High School S.Y. 2019-2020.

SECTIONS POPULATION TOTAL

Male Female
Jade 23 26 49
Pearl 23 23 46

Research Instruments

There will be research instruments to be used in the study a.) Validated Contextualized

Outcomes-Based Instructional Materials b.) the Validation form of the Instructional Materials

by the validators. c.) Students form d.) Pre-test and post-test questionnaires of the students.

1. Students Form. This instrument will be used in assessing the usability of the designed

module. This will serve as the feedback of the students based on the performance of the

researchers in introducing the module/ instructional materials.

2. Validators Form. This instrument will be used by the validator to evaluate the content

validity of the designed module.

 3. Pre-test and post-test questionnaires of the students.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher will design an instructional materials applying the 4A’s(Activity,

Analysis, Abstraction and Application) strategy of teaching. There will be series of activities of

the specific lesson in Mendelian Genetics from the K to 12 curriculum guide basing on the least

developed competencies of the previous school years of students of Grade 8 Jade and Pearl.

For the validity of the developed instructional materials together with the developed pre-

test, the researcher will look for an experts to evaluate and validate the instructional materials.

The first validation will be done at Biology Department of Caraga State University, comments

and suggestions of the experts will help the researcher in revising the second and final draft.

In determining the activities, the researcher will insure the activities are conceptualized

and localized, written clearly, effectively, appropriately and suitable to the learning of grade 8

students.

Pre-test will be given to the grade 8 students of Jade and Pearl participants before the

series of activities and post- test will be at the last part.

Grade 8 section Jade will be the experimental group using the validated COBIMS and

grade 8 section Pearl will be using the existing instructional materials in the teaching and

learning process.
 The results will follow after conducting the instructional materials by asking the

students’ perceptions regarding the said material through answering the adopted and revised

usability form survey.

Scoring and Quantification of Data

The following scales were used to quantify the data of the study.

1. Score in Pretest/ Posttest

Score Descriptive Rating

28.00 – 35.00 Advanced

21.00 - 27.99 Proficient

14.00 - 20.99 Approaching Proficiency

7.00 - 13.99 Developing

0.00 – 6.99 Beginning

2. Effectiveness of Contextualized Instructional Material (Validators)

Score Descriptive Rating

4 Highly Valid

3 Valid

2 Less Valid

1 Not Valid

3. Students Perception survey

Scale Descriptive Rating

5 Strongly agree

4 Agree

3 Uncertain

2 Disagree
 1 Strongly disagree

REFERENCES

Adenyanju (2002). Teachers Perception on the Effects and Use of Learning Aids in Teaching.

Nigeria Obafemi: University Press.

Allen, M.B., (2003).Eighty questions on teachers preparation. Whatdoesthe research

say?.Denver, CO:Education Commission of the States.

Anderson D. L, Fisher K. M. & Norman G. J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the

conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.

Ballesteros, J.O. (2015). Localizaton and Contextualization of Science Activitis in Enhancing

Learners’ Performance. Capas Integrated Secondary School.

Banet, E., and Ayuso, E., (1999). Teaching genetics at secondary school: A strategy for teaching

about the location of inheritance information. http://www.resear

chgate.net/publication/230094772_Teaching_genetics_at_secondary_school:_A_strategy
for_teaching_about_the_location of_inheritance_information.

Bedaure, A. A. (2012). Modular Instruction in Biology: It’s Effect on Students’ Performance.

 JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research. Vol. 9, pp. 284-304.

Beswick, K.2014) What teachers want:Identifying mathematics teachers professional learning

needs. The Mathematics Enhusiast, 111),83.

Bete, (2018). Impact of contextualizing and localizing teaching-learning processes to students’

academic performance in social studies. Davao city national High School.Davao City.

Chaney, B. (1995). Students outcome and the professional preparation of eight grade teachers of

science and mathematics. Rockville,MD:Westat.

Chattopadhyay A., (2005). Understanding of Genetic Information in Higher Secondary Students

in Northeast India and the Implications for Genetics Education. Cell Biology Education,
Vol. 4, pp. 97–104.

Cimer, A. (2012). What makes biology learning difficult and effective: Students’ views.

Educational Research and Reviews, 7(3), pp. 61-77.

Dahar, (2011). Effect of the availability and the Use of Instructional Materials While

Implementing A New Curriculum.

Ituma, MG. November 2015. Developing Instructional Materials that Address Challenges Facing

Teachers In Secondary School Chemistry Investigative Practical work; A case of Kajiado

County, Kenya . November 2015.
Kreiser, B. & Hairston, R. (2007). Dance of the Chromosomes: A Kinetic Learning Approach to

Mitosis and Meiosis. Department of Biological Sciences, Box 5018,

University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS 39406.

Keys, P.M.(2005).Are teachers walking the walk or just talkingthetalk in science education.

Teachers and teaching. Theory and practice, 11(5):499-516.

Lumpe,A.T. , Haney J.J., Czerniak, C.M. (2000). Assessing teachers’beliefs about their science

teaching context. Journal of research in science teaching 37 (3):27-292.

Mazzeo, C., Rab, S. Y., & Alssid, J.L. (2003). Building the bridges to college and careers :

Contextualized basic skills program at community colleges. Brooklyn, NY:Wkfore

Stategy Center.

Muwanga-Zaka, J.W.F.( 2004). Is science education is in crisis?Some of the problems in South

Africa.,Available from : http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/scrisis.htm.retrieved on 27

April 2010.

Ofune (2001). Teaching Practice Guide for Students and Teacher Ibadan: Board Publication

Limited.

Orji, A.B. (2000). Comparability of two problem solving models in facilitating students learning

outcomes in physics. Journal of the Science Teachers of Nigeria, 35 (1 &22), 25-30.

Osborne J, Simon S and Collins S, (2003). Attitudes towards Science: A Review of the Literature

and Its Implications. International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 25, No. 9, pp.
1049–1079.

Perez, (2017).Effectiveness on the Utilization of Contextualized and Computer Simulated

Learning Materials in Teaching Projectile Motion amongst Grade 9 Student of Dacon

National High School.

Seashore, K.H., 2015. Learning Through the Use of Instructional Materials: Secondary

Mathematics Teachers’ Enactment of Formative Assessment Lessons.

Slack, S.J., and Stewart, J.H., (1990). High School students Problem-Solving performance on

realistic genetic problems. Journal of research in science teaching, 27, 55-57.

Taylor, E.W. (2004). The theory and practice of transformative learning: a critical review.
Journal of Education. (374), Retrieved on August 14, 2014 from ERIC Database
database.

Tinong, R. (2018).An Insight to Curriculum Contextualization. Herald Express Contributor

https://www.baguioheraldexpressonline.com/an-insight-to-curriculum-contextualization/

Togonon, I. (2011), Development and Evaluation of Project – Based SIM (PB – SIM) in
Teaching High School Chemistry.Unpublished Masters Thesis.Technological University
of the Philippines.