1

Chapter 1
Introduction

Background of the Study

Multi-grade teaching is a form of teaching in which a single teacher teaches

children of two or more grades (UNESCO, 2015).The creation of Multi-grade education

is considered as a classroom strategy as school administrators perceived it as beneficial to

many people and to achieve the education for all (Buaraphan, Inrit, & Kochasila, 2018;

Thephavongsa, 2018). Teachers feel that there is too much work in Multi-grade

classrooms from preparing lesson plans, classroom management techniques, educational

facilities, instructional materials, and community support that contribute and improve

learning outcomes. According to Mulaudzi (2016), there are several problems

experienced by Multi-grade teachers in primary schools at Nzhelele East Circuit, Africa,

namely: Curriculum organization, work overload, classroom management, learner

performance, and lack of support. Bertrams and Rusznyak (2015) argue that the South

African teacher training programmes are failing to prepare student teachers for rural

multi-grade schooling contexts. Nkambule and Mukeredzi (2017) affirm that insufficient

teacher training in multi-grade schooling has an impact on teaching and learning in rural

schools. It was discovered that the majority of multi-grade schools had an acute shortage

of teaching personnel which resulted in high teacher workload (Luschei & Chudgar,

2017).
 2

The concept of multi-grade classes is not unfamiliar in the Philippines, as it is a

practice that is also observed in various other countries. These classes are implemented

with the aim of providing quality education to children and supporting the universal

mandate of “Education for All”. In the Philippines, teaching more than one grade has

been common since the 1920s, but the start of the official implementation of the "Multi-

grade Program in Philippine Education (MPPE)" was launched in 1993 (Cabalo and

Cabalo, 2019). Through the DECS Order No. 38, series of 1993, known as "improving

access to elementary education by providing complete grade level in all public

elementary schools through a combination of multi-grade classes."

According to Bua & Martin (2020), in their study conducted in Cordillera

Administrative Division of Ifugao's Alfonso Lista District region (CAR), specifically in

twelve multi-grade schools during the 2018–2019 academic year, revealed that multi-

grade teachers have been utilizing all the instructional practices as a planner given the

complication brought by teaching in a multi-grade classroom setting. Moreover, the result

of the study implies positive practices of the multi-grade teachers being a facilitator in

their classroom for all the instructional practices are highly considered. Furthermore, the

results imply that an affirmative practice among the multi-grade teachers is being an

evaluator. The findings of the study also highlighted that in some forms of multi-grade

teaching, especially those that utilize team teaching, teachers have to learn the skill levels

of students about assessment. The result of the study shows that the challenges faced by
 3

educators and administrators were considered minor. This suggests a high level of teacher

competency in these multi-grade schools.

In contrast, a separate study carried out in a school district located in a fourth-

class municipality of western Mindanao, Philippines, identified two significant

challenges for multi-grade teachers: a lack of support from stakeholders and insufficient

curriculum training. Additionally, the attitudes of parents towards multi-grade teaching

emerged as another challenge faced by these teachers. Particularly in the multi-grade

teachers of Guipos, Zamboanga Del Sur, Philippines. It is revealed that there are

challenges experienced by these teachers. These challenges involved unpreparedness in

teaching multi-grade, low multi-grade allowances, language barrier, classroom

management , the experience of stress, lack of resources, workload, lack of stakeholders

support and lack of training (Naparan & Catañeda 2021)

In this case, this study aimed to determine the practices and challenges of multi-

grade teachers in handling multi-grade class. The respondent of the study are the multi-

grade teachers in the identified multi-grade schools in the districts of Palauig and

Botolan.The multi-grade teachers at Belbel, Villar, Owaog-Nebloc, Buen, Moraza, and

Parel Elementary Schools in the Botolan district, as well as those at Alwa and Magalawa

Elementary Schools in the Palauig district. The study aims to determine the practices and

challenges of multigrade teachers in handling multi-grade class in the multi-grade schools

located in the district of Palauig and Botolan during the School Year 2023-2024.
 4

Significance of the Study

This study benefited the following academic groups and their teaching strategy in

handling multi-grade class. The data that was gathered and the findings of the study

revealed the teachers' practices and challenges in handling multi-grade class.

To the School Administration. The administration will become aware on

teachers practices and challenges in handling multi-grade pupils which should improve

and innovate for the quality of learning. With the result of the study, the school

administrator can give attention to the trainings that can improve the teachers’

competency.

To the Curriculum Planners. The findings will demonstrate the effectiveness

and importance of the strategies, which can be incorporated into future evaluations to

enhance the teaching strategy for multi-grade classes.

To the Teachers. Teachers will be able to assess their performance to improve

their competency in teaching multi-grade by attending training sessions. These trainings

can help teachers develop new approaches to teaching that are better suited to the needs

of multi-grade classrooms.

To the Pupils. The students’ needs will be met, and with the help of competent

teachers and effective strategies, they will perform better academically.

 5

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine the practices and challenges of multi-grade

teachers of Palauig and Botolan District in handling multi-grade.

To do this, the following questions sought to answer by the respondents:

1.What is the profile of the multi-grade teachers in terms of :

1.1 Sex;

1.2 Age;

1.3 Academic Rank/Position;

1.4 Length of Service; and

1.5 Number of training/s attended?

2. What are the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers in terms of the following
parameters:

2.1 Teacher as a planner;

2.2 Teacher as a facilitator; and

2.3 Teacher as an evaluator

3. What are the problems encountered by the multi-grade teachers?

3.1 Teacher as a planner;

3.2 Teacher as a facilitator; and

3. 3 Teacher as an evaluator

4. Is there a significant difference between the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers and the profile of the respondents?
 6

5. Is there a significant relationship between the instructional practices of multi- grade

teachers to the problems they encountered in handling multi-grade classes?

6. What proposed interventions will be used to be developed to minimize the challenges

of multi-grade teachers in handling multi-grade class?

SCOPE AND LIMITATION

This study aimed to explore the practices and challenges of multi-grade teachers

in handling multi-grade classes in multi-grade schools within the district of Palauig and

Botolan.

The scope of the study was limited to the multi-grade teachers in the identified

multi-grade schools in the districts of Palauig and Botolan. The multi-grade teachers at

Belbel, Villar, Owaog-Nebloc, Buen, Moraza, and Parel Elementary Schools in the

Botolan district, as well as those at Alwa and Magalawa Elementary Schools in the

Palauig district were included.

The respondents of the study were the teachers assigned in the combined and

multi-grade classes of the identified schools who were deployed as multi-grade teachers.

The study was facilitated by the researchers by gathering information with the use of a

survey-questionnaire directly from the respondents.

 7

Chapter 2

FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY

This chapter included the review of related literature and studies that the

researchers deemed relevant to further strengthen the importance of our study.

Review of Related Literature

Multi-Grade Classes

Although the term “multi-grade” is not new to educators worldwide, it is

sometimes referred to as non-graded, multilevel, composite classes, or multi-grade

classes (Soofi, Z., Akhtar, et al. 2015, Khan, et al. 2017).

Multi-grade (MG) courses are primarily taught in primary schools, where students

are of varying ages and teachers simultaneously instruct two or more classes at different

grade levels (Motamedi and Khajouie, 2020). In a multi-grade classroom, one teacher

gives lectures to two or more grade levels. They are common and sometimes necessary in

places with a high student population but a teacher shortage (Çıkrık, 2017).

According to Thephavongsa (2018), school administrators saw multi-grade

education’s potential to help a large number of students and guarantee that every student

received an education, so they developed it as a classroom strategy. Thanks to the

development of multi-grade education, students from far-flung places can now access
 8

education. Although teaching a multi-grade classroom can be very challenging, some

teachers continue to meet their educational needs because of the positive outcomes.

According to Checchi & Paola (2017), multi-grade classrooms offer local students

an inexpensive education. Since multi-grade classrooms are generally seen negatively in

Turkey, almost all political party leaders declare in their pre-election speeches that they

will be eliminated. Regular complaints about these classes are also made by education

unions. Additionally, the Turkish government introduced a law in 1997 that called for the

gradual elimination of multi-grade classrooms in accordance with the “Keeping up with

the Century Project” (The Law regarding the changes in Primary School Education and

Education in General, 1997), but this law was never put into effect. Although the multi-

grade classroom model is seen as a “problem” in Turkey, due to its educational benefits,

it is also considered an alternative to traditional classroom teaching in primary schools in

Western countries, despite certain limitations such as insufficient classrooms, teachers,

and students not being applicable (Çakır, 2020).

Despite the fact that multi-grade classes are widespread worldwide, most

countries seem to have trouble managing multi-grade school management,

administration, funding, curriculum provision, teacher deployment, and training

(Buaraphan et al., 2018). Many people believe that multi-grade classes are a drawback of

the Turkish educational system. They have several shortcomings that render learning and

teaching ineffectual Yurdakul (2018).

 9

According to Lopuz (2015), the existence of multi-grade schools is mandated by

economic and geographical factors, such as those present in the Philippines’ mountainous

regions. Except in isolated areas lacking formal primary schools, access to education is

not seen as a problem in the Philippines (Cabalo and Cabalo, 2019). The establishment of

multi-grade education is one of the inclusive education policies that the nation has put

into practice. Multi-grade education is a cutting-edge development in the educational

system that makes education accessible to all, particularly in isolated places. The

Department of Education (DepEd) is mandated to implement Multi-grade Education

Program (MEP) all over the country as needed in the local area. A multi-grade teaching

approach is widely adopted worldwide as a means of addressing issues related to a

shortage of teachers, schools, and students (Fargas-Malet and Bagley, 2022; Shareefa,

2021). According to Demirel and Kurt (2021) all school-age children have access to

education and complete their elementary education in the comfort of their own villages.

Moreover, MG uses a monograde version of the nationally mandated curriculum.

Whatever curriculum revisions affect monograde classes, MG schools must also adapt to

these changes. With a mandatory kindergarten year and an extra two years of secondary

school, the Department of Education (DepEd) launched the K-12 Basic Education

Program in 2012, a comprehensive basic education initiative. The K–12 curriculum’s

modifications must be embraced by MG as part of basic education. According to a

number of studies (Resurrection and Adanza, 2015; Dimaculangan, 2016; Capate and
 10

Lapinid, 2015), teachers who are teaching single classes are finding it difficult to adjust

to the new curriculum. A multi-grade teacher should adapt the national curriculum to the

context of the local community and in the multi-grade classroom, and implement it

flexibly, using a variety of classroom management and teaching strategies according to

the backgrounds, learning styles and needs of your individual students (UNESCO, 2015).

Mutli-grade Teaching

The practice of teaching students at different age, skill, and class levels is known

as multi-grade teaching. For a variety of reasons, including a lack of teachers, a lack of

school, or a low student body, they continue their education and training together in the

same class under the instruction of a single teacher (İlter, 2015). Additionally, Taole,

M.J. (2017) found that multi-grade teaching is a practice that is used worldwide in both

developed and developing nations.

There are differences in the rationale that underpins the introduction of multi-

grade teaching classes. For developed countries such as Ireland, Australia, and Canada,

multi-grade teaching was introduced by a deliberate choice of a multi-grade system based

on specific attributes rather than learner number or learner-teacher ratios (Kivunja &

Sims, 2015). According to Barbetta, Sorrenti , and Turati (2018), multi-grade teaching is

not only used in developing nations but is also common in developed nations, with the
 11

United States having 28% of its schools in this category, France having 37%, Finland

having 70%, the Netherlands having 53%, and Italy having 20%.

On the other hand, many countries in the world embrace a multi-grade teaching

approach as one of the interventions that somehow resolved issues of the lack of teachers,

lack of schools, and few learners (Kobayashi, 2022; Bennell, 2022; Fargas-Malet and

Bagley, 2022; Shareefa, 2021). According to Checchi & Paola, 2018, multi-grade

teaching is common in many European countries (Netherlands, Norway, England,

Scotland, Spain, Italy, and France), especially in less densely populated regions.

Furthermore, multi-grade teaching has been hailed by researchers as a difficult

pedagogy that presents difficulties in meeting the various needs of students as well as

teaching more than one grade (Hyry-Beihammer & Hascher, 2015; Naparan & Alinsung,

2021). Teaching multiple grade levels can be difficult because the teacher must adapt

their lesson plans and activities to meet the needs of students in various age groups and

grade levels (Quail & Smyth 2014). Additionally, the learning environment, learning

process, and learning outcome (LEPO) framework is a teaching strategy that can be used

in a multi-grade classroom (Msimanga, 2020). It is crucial for teachers to set up the

classroom appropriately when instructing multi-grade students. They need to make sure

that the students’ learning process is given the appropriate amount of time. Assessment

assignments that correspond with the students’ academic proficiency are then given to

them. An exception to this literature is the work by Leuven and Rønning (2016), which
 12

studies how classroom grade composition affects 15-year-old students’ achievements in

Norwegian junior high schools. By exploiting a national regulation determining

classroom grade composition, the authors show that a one-year exposure to a class that

combines two grades increases performance by about 4 percent of a standard deviation.

On the contrary, a work by Checchi and De Paola (2017) analyzes 10-year-old students in

Italy and finds a negative impact of multi-grading on standardized tests. However, their

work is unable to accurately identify students in multi-grade classes.

According to the Department of Basic Education’s National Annual Report

Survey (DBE, 2015), there are roughly 5153 multi-grade schools in South Africa, spread

across all nine provinces. Multi-grade teaching was implemented in South Africa to

provide access to highquality education, maximize scarce resources, foster the spirit of

ubuntu, address teacher absenteeism, mitigate a chronic teacher shortage, and address

both the lack of infrastructure and the problem of long distances to schools (DBE, 2015).

Inappropriate training, under-resourcing of schools, teachers’ inability to adapt the

curriculum to meet the needs of their learners, the high level of planning required before

lesson presentation, insufficient knowledge of available teaching methods, lack of

support, and classes with low learner enrolment and/or overcrowded classrooms are some

of the challenges identified by the DBE (2015).

In the Philippines, the Department of Education is mandated to implement MEP

all over the country as needed in the local area. All school-age children have access to
 13

education and finish their elementary level in the comfort of their villages (Demirel and

Kurt, 2021). The Philippines has adopted the multi-grade teaching approach as a cost-

effective method of raising students’ participation rates and academic achievement in

rural schools (Naparan and Alinsug, 2021). Children tend to participate more since they

are given a lot of activities together with the other grade level in a class. Teachers can

design performance tasks and activities and let the students engage in various meaningful

ways to develop students’ full potential to learn (Saraspe and Abocejo, 2020). When

successfully delivered, the teaching of a multi-grade class is similar to that of a mono-

grade class (Motamedi and Khajourie, 2020). According to Mendoza-Sintones (2019),

the diversity of learners presents an opportunity to deliver and achieve better learning

rather than a problem that needs to be solved. Performance-based learning in multi-grade

classes allows students to manage two or more courses at the same time. Every grade

level can benefit from appropriate tasks and activities that are matched to the curriculum

and serve as a catalyst for the development of knowledge and skills. Activities done may

be applicable in real-life situations when learning is collaborative in a multi-grade class.

Multi-grade education is an innovative step in the educational system, especially in

remote areas making school learning accessible to all. (Mendoza-Sintones, 2019).

Furthermore, in order to successfully implement multi-grade teaching, multi-

grade teachers must possess the necessary instructional training to meet the varied needs

of their students (Fat, 2015). Multi-grade teaching is learner-centered, according to

 14

Saqlain (2015), because it emphasizes students’ diverse learning styles and multiple

intelligences. In a multi-grade setting, cooperative learning, peer tutoring, and

observation are appropriate. In a multi-grade class, interactions between lower year and

upper year students help the former learn the latter.

Achieving multi-grade effectivity requires preparation, organization, and

instruction, among other things. But teachers of multi-grade classes have difficulty in

designing a curriculum in multi-grade teaching, so they follow the monograde curriculum

(Saqlain, 2015). In doing so, it can improve individuals attitudes, knowledge, and

abilities to help them carry out their jobs well. In the Philippines, the enrollment rate in

intermediate schools tends to decline in rural areas. This leads to a more optimistic view

of educational practice in this regard (Benson, 2016).

Educational Implication of Teaching Multi-grade Classes

In 1951, Turkey had a detailed discussion on multi-grade teaching. According to

Prof. K. V. Wofford’s analysis, first, second, and third graders were combined into one

multi-grade classroom, while fourth and fifth graders were grouped into another (Deniz,

2019). In 1968, multi-grade teaching was officially implemented with a draft. As of the

2000-2001 academic year, core courses such as life sciences, social studies, and science

were also taught in multi-grade classrooms. Until the 2012-2013 academic year, multi-

grade classrooms included first, second, third, fourth, and fifth graders. However, with

the new regulation, the duration of primary education was reduced to four years 1 (Al,
 15

2019). Multi-grade teaching is a common practice in many European countries,

particularly in less densely populated regions. Countries such as the Netherlands,

Norway, England, Scotland, Spain, Italy, and France have adopted this approach to

education (Checchi & Paola, 2018).

Multi-grade teaching has been a common practice in Turkey for a long time. After

the Republic was declared, this approach became necessary due to low numbers of

students, teachers, and classrooms (Bayar & Topal, 2020). Today, however, the most

important reason is the dramatic drop in the number of students due to the massive

migration from villages to big cities. Suppose there are not enough students for a single

class system in residential areas or there are not enough teachers or classrooms. In that

case, transporting students to schools, offering boarding schools in different regions and

implementing multi grade classes can resolve this problem (İnce & Şahin, 2016).

Multi-grade schools in South Africa are found in remote rural areas (DBE, 2015)

and are a phenomenon found in both developing and developed countries (Kivunja &

Sims, 2015; Lapuz, 2015). The multi-grade education system is used by the government

to ensure access to quality education for all school-age children in remote communities

where enrolment does not warrant the organization of mono-grade classes. The multi-

grade classes are often created out of necessity and, because of financial constraints, non-

availability of teachers, or lack of resources (Lapuz, 2015).

 16

All counties experienced a decrease in population in recent years (Hykkerud et al.,

2020), a trend that seems to continue its foothold despite political willingness to support

the north via incentives, such as lower payroll tax, lower private tax, and higher child

support (Rolland, 2019). The challenges that the already small communities face when

the population continues to decrease are many. One easy-to-imagine scenario could be:

lower income via taxes, less investment, fewer jobs, not so many families, hardly any

kids, empty houses, no pre-school facilities, tiny schools, and uncertain futures

(Fredriksen, 2020). According to statistics, Norway had a total of 2830 grade 1–10

schools in the school year 2018/19 (The Norwegian Directorate for Education and

Training,2018).

Most of the schools that have been closed down in Norway over the past 10 years

are small schools, in small municipalities with fewer than 5000 inhabitants, reducing the

number from 700 to 550 over the last 10 years (The Norwegian Directorate for Education

and Training, 2019). This is of great concern to those who lose their local schools as it

makes their village or place of home in rural areas less attractive (Solstad et al., 2016).

This is relevant when investigating teaching practices in small schools in rural

communities. Being a sparsely populated country resulted in establishing multi-grade

class in small community school. The multi-grade organization makes it practically

possible to cater to the pupils’ different age- and grade-levels with few teachers

employed.
 17

Okamoto and Potane (2020) Multi-grade teaching has been introduced in Japan in

recent years due to a decline in the number of students. According to national standards,

multi-grade classes in Japan are composed of eight students or less when including the

first grade, and sixteen students or less in other grades. Additionally, the number of

grades in one class is limited to two. In contrast, the number of learners in the Philippines

is increasing, and one teacher has to handle multiple grades due to the lack of teachers

working at RIA school. Sometimes the number of students in one class reaches one

hundred with two or more grades.

The Philippine socio-economic and political situations are critical conditions that

considerably affect the future of Filipino children (Mendoza-Sintones, 2019). Except in

remote areas without established primary schools, access to education is not considered a

problem in the Philippines (Cabalo and Cabalo, 2019). The country has implemented

inclusive education policies, one of which is the founding of a multi-grade education.

To achieve "Education for All" (EFA) and to address teachers’ shortage, multi-

grade teaching was one of the alternative means (Mortazavizadeh et al., 2017). The

organization, operation, and implementation were promulgated through policies and

guidelines in the DepEd Order No. 96, series of 1997. This is one of the strategies of the

DepEd to provide access to quality education for all school age children, especially in

remote villages where the establishment of schools for multi-grade classes was crucially

needed.
 18

Through DepEd Order No. 81, series of 2019, the MEP provided support and

training to multi-grade teachers, who handled two combined classes to ensure that quality

education is delivered and achieved through the program. Completion rate among

elementary grade level children was one of the concerns of most parents. In remote

villages, the implementation is through all six grade levels (Taole, 2020; Delgado et al.,

2019).

Recent data for SY 2017–2018 show that among 38,911 public elementary

schools, 7,234 of them (18.6%) are MG schools. Compared to SY 2014–2015 data, there

is a decline in the ratio of MG schools to total public elementary schools by 13.6% which

is attributed to fast urbanization. However, there will always be school communities with

MG classes considering that Philippines has many islands and isolated communities that

do not have enough teachers to support mono-grade classes (Seameo Innotech, 2020).

According to Magno (2014), some teachers in the Philippines, some teachers’

problems in elementary schools, especially in rural and remote areas are lack of training

and insufficient resources. Furthermore, during the practice teaching year of elementary

teachers, their mentors were trained to be ready in the actual world of teaching, yet this

training does not focus on multi-grade teaching (Cadosales, 2017).

 19

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

Membreve (2019) stated that “most new teachers are often assigned to handle a

multi-grade class, a situation they did not experience during their teacher training days.”

She also stated that every day teachers can discover possible schemes to make multi-

grade instruction more interesting and effective. Faced with various problems, multi-

grade instructors attempted to use coping mechanisms to deal with their situations.

Multi-grade instructors practice time management, use the internet, and self-

conditioning. Multi-grade teachers relied heavily on teacher-centered methods, shared

their resources, engaged in flexible grouping practices, initiated self-directed learning,

peer tutoring, and cooperative learning, used a variety of teaching methods such as peer

teaching, integrated teaching, and having resources in the community, nature, and

discarded materials, and used a variety of strategies such as classroom management,

collaborative learning, and differentiated instruction. Flexible grouping, learning

preferences, anchoring activities, tiered activities, changing spoken and written questions,

learning centers, and independent and shared study projects are some examples of varied

teaching and learning practices. They provide a variety of learning opportunities for kids.

Students can select the appropriate learning method for them. Peer teaching and

integrated teaching, as well as diverse groupings such as neighboring grouping, row

grouping, and sex grouping, are other Multi-grade teaching methodologies

(Mortazavizadeh, Nili, Isfahani, & Hassani, 2017; Tiernan, Casserly, & Maguire 2018).
 20

According to Hyry-Beihammer and Hascher (2015), classroom strategies are

constantly observed. One of them is minimizing or capitalizing on the variety of the

students. As a result, the teacher can use the unique skills and talents of other students, as

well as their advanced skills, to assist their peers. Some students were intellectually

superior to others. As a result, teachers empower children to serve as facilitators and

mini-experts to their peers. Following a spiral curriculum, having working plans, and

peer learning are all important ways to recognize students’ diversity.

Different types of students can be found in a multi-grade classroom. According to

Ballesteros and Ocampo (2016), the most popular classroom tactics utilized in multi-

grade classes in the Philippines for time management are on the Daily Lesson Log or

DLL. Additionally, grouping kids is an excellent means of managing multi-grade classes.

Flexible grouping strategies were used by MG teachers. Teachers might save time by

grouping pupils when presenting lessons. The pupils can also engage with one another

and share their opinions. Learning will occur in this manner (Casserly, Tiernan, &

Maguire, 2019).

Furthermore, multi-grade schools are found in outlying locations. The multi-grade

teachers then figure out how to better serve the pupils. They even donated a portion of

their pay to buy instructional materials for their students (Castigador, 2019). All materials

that contribute in the achievement of program objectives are considered learning

 21

resources. These tools are essential for both teachers and students. There are numerous

ways in which acquired abilities can be applied in the teaching-learning process if the

instructor uses them effectively to catch students’ attention and interests. Furthermore, it

is observed that when learners’ attention is captivated and learned, they are more likely to

engage and be motivated (Msimanga, 2019).

Learning activities are another component of the curriculum that differs between

multi-grade and single-grade schools and relates to learners’ involvement in learning,

which leads to learning experiences. The deeper the learning experiences, the greater the

amount of involvement and learning activities (Fathi Vajargah, 2015). Additionally,

every teacher in a multi-grade class need a variety of materials tailored to the needs of the

students, such as multimedia and even items found in the environment. The requirement

to use various learning materials and resources has led to the participation of concerned

stakeholders in the educational system in various nations throughout the years

(Mortazavizadeh et al., 2017).

Furthermore, classroom management is a necessary ability and knowledge for

teachers in order to provide a better learning experience for their students (Wolff, Van

den Bogert, Jarodzka, & Boshuizen, 2015). During the 2019-2020 academic year, a study

was done at various multi-grade schools in the Tukuran East area of Zamboanga Del Sur.

One of the instructors’ classroom tactics is to successfully manage their classrooms.

 22

A strong pre-service teacher education program with supervision of qualified

mentors and featuring a strong immersive internship through partnership with schools

and community prepares well the multi-grade teacher. Trainings of teachers on multi-

grade instruction to competently teach and execute their roles well as planners,

organizers, managers, facilitators, observers, and assessors of learning that can be

provided by the Higher Education Institutes. Explicit topics which are relevant and

with direct applications to the multi-grade context on differentiation, diversity and

grouping of students, recognizing multiple intelligences, curriculum planning, use of

appropriate materials and resources, effective time and classroom management,

assessment and community relationships should be given utmost emphasis to ensure

quality education to more ethnically and culturally diverse learning environments

(OECD, 2019).

Teachers need to be supported through in-service training workshops and

collaborations among teachers and principals to ensure that they are guided in

interpreting the curriculum, managing learning in special circumstances,

implementing teaching innovations in the classroom, improving personal

competences and boosting their confidence as teachers in rural schools. Mentoring multi-

grade teachers goes far beyond strategies. Hence, school system must work hard to

sustain them, attain success and impact the lives of diverse students in isolated and

marginalized communities (Taole, 2014).

 23

According to the study of Knaub (2016), titled Instructional planning practices of

rural, multi-grade teachers, It is revealed that the multi-grade teachers relied on previous

plans, knowledge of students, and curriculum guides as primary resources to meet their

planning goal of effective content coverage. Notable differences existed in planning

format, organization of instruction, and use of curricular integration between the least

experienced teacher and more experienced teachers. Teachers also relied on executive

planning routines to manage their planning duties. The teachers' planning strategies could

be applied to general education settings as a model for differentiating instruction for

diverse student populations.

Slavin (2014) found that well-structured methods such as cooperative learning

produce more positive effect sizes than those evaluating other instructional practices such

as the use of innovative curriculum text books or the use of technology in reading and

mathematics. Similar results were obtained in a best evidence synthesis of elementary

science programs by Slavin, Lake, Hanley, and Thurston (2014) who stated that: “science

teaching methods focused on enhancing teachers’ classroom instruction throughout the

year, such as cooperative learning and science-reading integration, as well as approaches

that give teachers technology tools to enhance instruction, have significant potential to

improve science learning”. In short, there is overwhelming evidence that cooperative

 24

learning as a pedagogical practice has had a profound effect on student learning and

socialization (Slavin, 2014).

Multi-grade classrooms require educators to adapt their teaching approaches,

instructional strategies, and classroom management techniques to accommodate the

students’ diverse learning needs at various developmental stages. As the educational

landscape continues to evolve, it is crucial to understand the experiences, perspectives,

and voices of teachers who work in multi-grade settings (Erden, 2020). A conducive

classroom environment is a physical space, safe and stimulating, with good architectural

facilities, designed for diverse teaching and learning programs, pedagogies and

technologies, which follow a well-planned curriculum, aligned with content standards

and uses instructional strategies that suit the needs of teachers and students. Ziwira

(2015) defined a conducive classroom environment as a platform devoid of both physical

intimidation and emotional frustration which allows for a free exchange of ideas. A

classroom which functions as a community where everyone plays a part, with the teacher

as the head; in control and commands respect.

Bellamy (2016) noted that motivation is a fundamental element of students

learning; teachers can assist in increasing and developing motivation for optimal

achievement in the classroom. Through the facilitation of a supportive classroom

environment, engaging learning experiences, goal setting, and teacher enthusiasm

teachers can empower students to find joy and excitement in their learning. Motivating

and engaging students daily are a challenge that most teachers face. Valerio also stated
 25

that motivation is a key element to not only keeping students engaged but in keeping

classroom behavior issues to a minimum. If students are engaged and motivated in their

work and are challenged, there is less time for distractions and behavioral issues.

Teaching Multi-grade developed teachers’ innovativeness. They need to be

innovative to cater to their unique situation. The lack of training on multi grade teaching

made the teachers device their own methods, strategies, and management of the teaching

and learning process. They devised their own strategies that fit their situations

(Ramrathan & Mzimela 2016). Teachers need to innovate and develop abilities to keep

up with the needed personal and organizational changes (Lecat, Beausaert, & Raemdonck

2017). Moreover, teachers surpassed their challenges because of being resourceful.

Teachers need to be resourceful given their circumstances. The lack of materials and

support made teachers make their teaching materials. They often bring materials

collected from home. They even bought materials from their own pocket (Taole,

2014). They collaborated with other stakeholders just to help their students with their

basic needs like food. They also visited other MG schools and tried to look for best

practices. These are some actions that showed teachers’ resourcefulness. Teachers in

isolated areas are often very resourceful making use of what is available and adapt to

the situation (Quejada, & Orale, 2018).Facilitator

According to Potane & Recla (2023), in a multi-grade classrooms, teachers

encounter a multitude of challenges as they strive to deliver effective instruction and

 26

meet the diverse learning needs of students across different grade levels. The

complexities of managing such heterogeneous groups require teachers to employ

innovative teaching strategies to ensure all students receive quality education.

Furthermore, attending to multiple grade levels in one class requires multiple

preparations in presenting lessons, as well as in designing appropriate activities to meet

different students’ needs . Furthermore, in a multi-grade class, the forms of combinations

of classes handled by the teacher have a big impact on how the lesson is relayed to

diverse learners from different grade levels. (Hyry-Beihammer 2015).

In the study of Cornish (2021), titled “Quality Practices for Multi-grade

Teaching” which emphasizes the importance of implementing quality teaching practices

and strategies by multi-grade teachers to help learners develop essential skills and

behaviors. The study suggests that efficient planning and teaching methods, such as

proper arrangement of the content of the lesson and combining grades for common

lessons to enhance efficiency and reduce waiting time for students. Furthermore, in the

study of Naparan & Alinsug (2021), titled “Classroom strategies of multigrade teachers”,

it emphasizes the practices taken by the multi-grade teachers to create effective learning

environments and facilitate student success. Key aspects such as Classroom Management,

Collaborative Learning, Differentiated Instruction, Real-life Connections in Teaching,

and Teacher Flexibility.

 27

Additionally, a study conducted by Bempechat (2019), where it emphasized the

importance of teacher training and professional development in enhancing educators’

effective time management skills. However, limited resources, time constraints, and

competing demands on teachers’ schedules can hinder their capacity to prioritize time

management education in the classroom. The study underscores the need for schools and

educational institutions to recognize the importance of supporting teachers in developing

effective time management skills.

The systematic review of Pastores (2023) titled "Teacher Assessment Literacy: A

Systematic Review” delves into the concept of assessment literacy among teachers,

emphasizing the knowledge and skills required for effectively implementing assessment

practices in the classroom. The review underscores the significance of assessment literacy

in enhancing teaching practices and improving student outcomes. It recognizes that

teachers with high assessment literacy can create meaningful assessments, interpret

results accurately, and adjust instruction based on assessment data. Additionally, a study

conducted by Knowles (2018), focused on assessing the reading, writing, and numeracy

skills of primary school students in Australia. The study revealed the importance of

assessing literacy and numeracy skills among primary school students to identify areas

for improvement and provide targeted interventions to enhance student learning

outcomes.
 28

Problems Encountered by the Multi-Grade Teachers

Excessive effort of the teacher, lack of time, language problems, and teacher

obstacles in the actual teaching and learning process are all challenges faced by multi-

grade instructors in Africa, Turkey, and the Netherlands (Engin, 2018). Furthermore,

multi-grade class teachers lacked training and expertise in teaching multi-grade courses,

complicating the process of locating and constructing relevant materials for their

classrooms (Akda & Taşkaya, 2016).

Teaching in multi-grade courses is often fraught with difficulties. These

difficulties might be classified as micro, meso, or macro. Unpreparedness to teach multi-

grade classrooms, poor multi-grade allowances, stress experience, and language obstacles

are examples of intrinsic challenges. Many pre-service multi-grade instructors were not

exposed to multi-grade teaching courses (Buarphan, Inrit, & Kochasila, 2018). In

addition, when teaching in multi-grade classrooms, teachers frequently encounter issues

with students’ skills, such as trouble writing and other academic issues (Blease, & Condy,

2015). Furthermore, unqualified teachers to teach in multi-grade settings, insufficient

resources, and insufficient financial support were all barriers to effective education (Du

Plessis & Mestry, 2019).

Furthermore, Engin (2018) research in multi-grade classes in Izmir, Turkey and

Rotterdam, Netherlands. According to the study, classroom teachers reported difficulties

 29

such as excessive teacher effort, high student expectations, a lack of time, difficulty in

meeting goals, non-teaching roles, not being supported, a lack of education, physical

conditions, and language problems. It has been observed that the solution proposals made

by teachers include openness, assistant personnel, physical improvements, enhancing the

quality and quantity of training services, and legal requirements. As a result, many

teachers dislike teaching in multi-grade classrooms. They prefer single-grade classrooms

because multi-grade class require more planning, preparation, organization, and labor.

According to Shareefa (2021), the biggest obstacles of multi-grade instructors in

Maldives’ small schools include a lack of competency, a lack of time for a heavy

workload, and assessing student learning. Furthermore, teachers find it difficult to

sharpen the skills of students from various grade levels. They must effectively manage

their time in order to assist students of various year levels. Many multi-grade classrooms

lack organization, practice peer tutoring infrequently, and provide knowledge in a logical

sequence (Sampson & Condy, 2016). However, multi-grade teachers must deal with the

various obstacles they encountered. Some of them even shared materials with their kids.

They contributed a portion of their pay to offer educational resources for their students

(Castigador, 2019; Msimanga, 2019).

According to researchers (Bashiri Haddadian, Mahmoudi, Rezapour, & Adib,

2015), multi-grade classes face issues such as a lack of sufficient time, a lack of teacher

information and experience, a wide range of teacher responsibilities, a lack of student

 30

knowledge and information, a low student population, an inappropriate age and gender

composition of students, a high diversity of courses, a lack of learning materials and

resources, an inappropriate training space, and distribution.

Some teachers’ issues in primary schools in the Philippines, particularly in rural

and isolated locations, are a lack of training and insufficient resources and findings.

Furthermore, multi-grade schools are located in outlying locations. The multi-grade

teachers then figure out how to better serve the pupils. They even donated a portion of

their pay to buy instructional materials for their students (Castigador, 2019). They are

pooling their resources for the benefit of their students. Elementary teachers’ mentors

were prepared to be ready for the real world of teaching during their practice teaching

years, but this preparation did not focus on multi-grade teaching (Cadosales, 2017).

According to Daga (2021), in his study of schools implementing the multi-grade

program in Leyte Division, it was discovered that multi-grade teachers have problems in

multi-grade teaching. When it comes to multi-grade teaching, teachers struggle with

lesson preparation because there are no ready-made lesson plans that they can pattern and

contextualize for their own classes. Furthermore, when it comes to the use of resource

materials in multi-grade teaching, the lack of ready-made lesson plans and contextualized

resource materials makes their duties more complex and challenging. As a result, multi-

grade teachers are forced to create educational resources for their own use in their own

multi-grade classrooms. Furthermore, it is discovered that students are uninterested in

 31

paying attention to lessons or actively participating in classroom activities. One specific

reason learners are disinterested is that they cannot relate to the learning experiences or

that the instructional materials offered to them are uninteresting.

One of the challenges faced by multi-grade teachers is the inadequacy in multi-

grade teaching. The feeling of incompetence stemmed from the lack of teacher

preparations and in-service training, inadequate resources, lack of support from parents,

colleagues and school heads for effective organization and planning. The absence of

such support affects the quality of multi-grade instruction (Sampson & Condy, 2016).

Another challenge in multi-grade teaching is that teachers had an overload of

work in preparation, teaching and assessment. Overlapping of tasks as full-time teachers

and carrying out administrative work were performed by the teachers (Gasa, 2016).

Such multiplicity of tasks had to compete for the attention and time of the multi-grade

teacher (SEAMEO INNOTECH, 2019). They took on a variety of roles, including

classroom teaching, sometimes across multiple grades, leading instruction and

assessment in a variety of subject areas, managing tight school budgets, meeting

increasing fundamental accountability and reporting requirements, and cultivating

strong relationships with close-knit communities. Furthermore, they struggled to keep up

school aims with the different interests of parents and the community, and they require a

knowledge of the school's significant contribution to the community in particular, and

society in general (OECD, 2019). The teaching and administrative workload required of a
 32

multi-grade teacher, results in overload and stress. Teachers' burnout, emotional fatigue,

and detachment have a negative impact on their occupational well-being (Viac and

Fraser, 2020).

Training is crucial for teachers to execute lessons in an efficient and effective

manner, as well as important to help teachers gain knowledge and skills needed to meet

relevant standards and learner needs. However, multi-grade teachers are often not

equipped with the skills and knowledge in handling students in different grade levels

simultaneously in one class (Msimanga, 2020). There is a lack of specific teacher training

or professional development opportunities specially tailored to the unique needs and

challenges of multi-grade classes. Thus, teachers are not prepared to teach and assess

student learning in multiple grade levels in one session (Bongala et al., 2020; Borja et al.,

2020; Engin, 2018; Mpahla et al., 2021; Naparan et al., 2021).

Teachers had challenges in terms of applying differentiation, controlling noise in

the classroom, and managing time in lesson preparations (Muusa-Maria &Maija, 2016).

Classroom Management situations, management of instructional time and supportive

factors are among the various roadblocks that MG teachers faced in terms of efficiently

implementing the multi-grade instruction. Learners’ different cognitive levels and

learning styles, divergent behaviour and learning attitude were the most common

challenges encountered by the teachers. Teachers struggled in addressing academic

 33

diversity, ethnicity and culture in multi-grade schools (SEAMEO INNOTECH,

2019).Teachers at rural schools identified a need for specialized training in multicultural

and multilingual education (OECD, 2019). Nonetheless, multi-grade teachers and

principals must learn how to interact with underrepresented or marginalized

populations in rural areas, such as low-income families or indigenous and ethnic minority

kids who may have less of an influence in the community. Schools in rural settings might

be difficult to handle (OECD, 2019).

In the study conducted by Naparan & Castañeda (2021), it is revealed that lesson

planning and individualisation have become a problem in preparing and conducting

assessment in multi-grade classrooms due to the need for levelled and individualised

assessment tools. Additionally, teachers in a multi-grade setting often face difficulty in

planning because there are no ready-made lesson plans available for multi-grade

teaching. Although lesson examples are often available, they neither sufficiently cover all

the competencies, nor do they fulfil curricular requirements as they have to follow

guidelines designed for monograde classes. According to De Borja Sigua, & Marasigan,

(2020), lesson planning in multi-grade classes requires more time because teachers must

create multiple lesson plans in one setup to address the different grade levels’ needs and

abilities, as well as prepare various instructional materials to cater to the students’ diverse

learning styles.
 34

According to Msimanga (2020), training is crucial for teachers to execute lessons

in an efficient and effective manner, as well as important to help teachers gain knowledge

and skills needed to meet relevant standards and learner needs. However, multi-grade

teachers are often not equipped with the skills and knowledge in handling students in

different grade levels simultaneously in one class. Furthermore, there is a lack of specific

teacher training or professional development opportunities specially tailored to the unique

needs and challenges of multi-grade classes. Thus, teachers are not prepared to teach and

assess student learning in multiple grade levels in one session (Bongala et al., 2020; Borja

et al., 2020; Engin, 2018; Mpahla et al., 2021; Naparan et al., 2021).

Furthermore, Mnyandu (2020) states that when teachers lack time to prepare their

lessons, they may fail to complete their annual submissions of teaching plans. Further,

they may encounter difficulties in allocating time effectively to address each competency

due to the need to cover multiple grade-level curricula in a single class (Engin, 2018;

Borja et al., 2020). Moreover, multi-grade teachers’ tasks do not only involve teaching in

the classroom; they must also submit reports, perform administrative duties, manage

paperwork and other responsibilities. Thus, submitting reports and other documents

becomes an additional burden to multi-grade teachers due to their lack of Internet access,

and limited technical assistance and time. This results in a heavy workload, including

teaching multiple grades and subjects across different phases simultaneously (Msimanga,

2020; Engin, 2018; Naparan et al., 2021).

 35

Theoretical Framework

This study was supported by theories to help the researchers make research findings

generalized and meaningful, and also to help the researchers identify the variables with

regards to handling multi-grade class.

Differentiated Instruction Theory

Differentiated Instruction is a prominent approach that places learners’ needs as

an essential factor in determining how learning is designed and implemented in the class.

Aldossari (2018) defined DI as a wide-ranging approach for learning and instruction

stemming from the notion that teaching strategies need to be differentiated and adapted to

cater to the various students’ needs (p.75). DI also is a systematic and flexible approach

(Tomlinson, 2017) which can be translated into various forms of instructional practices

such as flexible and ability grouping activities, tiered lesson, anchored instruction, flipped

learning, and authentic assessment (Kaur et al., 2019; Ramli & Nurahimah, 2020).

Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning theory is an educational approach that emphasizes

collaborative efforts among students to achieve common learning goals. It is based on the

idea that learning is a social process and that students can benefit from working together

in small groups to enhance their understanding of the material and develop essential
 36

skills. The prominent proponents of cooperative learning theory is Dr. Robert E. Slavin.

Dr. Slavin is a renowned educational psychologist and researcher known for his work in

cooperative learning and effective teaching strategies. Cooperative Learning improves

academic performance, motivation, social skills, and collaboration among pre-service

teachers (Gillies, 2016). According to Abramczyk and Jurkowski (2020) Cooperative

Learning benefits academic and social learning and may provide individualised learning

experiences.

Conceptual Framework

The diagram below exhibited the research paradigm of the study. The INPUT

frame contained the following information: the profile of the multi-grade teachers-

respondents in terms of their sex, age, academic rank, length of service, and number of

training attended; instructional practices of multi-grade teachers in terms of the following

parameters such as teacher as a planner, teacher as a facilitator, teacher as an evaluator;

and the problems encountered by the multi-grade teachers in terms of the following

parameters such as a planner, facilitator, and evaluator in handling multi-grade pupils.

Additionally, it was also included in the input frame if there is a significant difference

between the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers and the profile of the

respondent. Furthermore, if there is a significant relationship between the instructional

practices of the multi-grade teachers to the problems they encountered in handling multi-

grade are included in the input frame.

 37

Conceptual Framework

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

1. What is the
profile of the multi-grade
teachers in terms of :
1.1 Sex;
1.2 Age;
1.3 Academic
Rank/Position;
1.4 Length of
Service; and
1.5 Number of
training/s attended?
2. What are the Determine the practices
instructional practices of and challenges of multi-
multi-grade teachers in Survey grade teachers in
terms of the following Questionnaire handling multi-grade
parameters:
classes
2.1 Teacher as a
Data Collection
planner;
2.2 Teacher as a Intervention to be
facilitator; and Statistical Analysis developed to minimize
2.3 Teacher as an Frequency the challenges in
evaluator Likert-Scale handling multi-grade
3. What are the ANOVA
problems encountered by Pearson R
the multi-grade teachers?
3.1 Teacher as a
planner;

3.2 Teacher as a
facilitator; and

3. 3 Teacher as an
evaluator

Figure 1. Paradigm of the Study

 38

The PROCESS frame contained the data gathering procedure and the statistical

tools such as frequency, percentage, likert scale, pearson R and analysis of variance that

shall be used in the study.

The OUTPUT frame represented the final objective of the study which is to

determine the practices and challenges of multi-grade teachers in the District of Palauig

and Botolan. An intervention to minimize the challenges in handling multi-grade shall

also be developed as one of the output of the study, this is to contribute and further

support the development of the multi-grade teachers in handling multi-grade classes.

Null Hypotheses

1. There is no significant difference between the instructional practices of multi-

grade teachers and the profile of the respondents.

2. There is no significant relationship on the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers to the problems encountered by the multi-grade teachers.

Definition of Terms

Cooperative Learning- Cooperative learning (CL) is an instructional method involving

small groups of students working together to achieve a common learning goal.

 39

Differentiated Instruction- Differentiated instruction is the process of customizing

lessons to match each student's unique interests, needs, and strengths.

Mutltigrade –including or involving students from more than one grade level in one

classroom. These refers to the MG in Palauig.

Multigrade classes- A multi-grade classroom refers to a class that has two or more grade

level of children in one classroom. This refers to the mult-grade classroom in Palauig.

Multigrade teaching- Multi-grade teaching involves teaching multiple grade levels with

mix-ages, diverse backgrounds, and different grade levels and abilities placed in one

classroom. This refers to the type teaching that occurs in the multi-grade class of Palauig.
 40

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter concentrated on the discussion of the research methods and

procedures adhered by the researcher in order to answer systematically the specific

problems pose for investigations. It includes the research design, respondents, the

instruments use in gathering the data, data gathering procedure and data analysis.

Research Design

The research utilized the descriptive method of research. According to Matanda

(2020), descriptive research in quantitative studies describes individuals, events, or

conditions as they naturally occur. Moreover, this study utilized a descriptive research

method with the use of survey questionnaires as the main source in gathering the data that

is needed in the study. According to Adi Bhat (2020), descriptive research describes the

characteristics of the population of phenomenon that is being studied.

This study employed the descriptive method using quantitative approach with the

use of survey questionnaires as a main source in gathering data and information from the

Bachelor of Elementary Education students of President Ramon Magsaysay State

University at Iba Campus. The purpose of quantitative research was to generate

knowledge and create understanding about the social world. Quantitative research is used

by social scientists, including communication researchers, to observe phenomena or

occurences affecting individuals. Social scientists are connected with the study of people.
 41

Quantitative research is referred to as the process of collecting as well as analyzing

numerical data. It is generally used to find patterns, averages, predictions, as well as

cause-effect relationships between the variables being studied. It is also focuses on

gathering numerical data and generalizing it across groups of people or to explain

particular phenomenon. The final written report has a set structure consisting of

introduction, literature and theory, methods, results, and discussion.

Quantitative research is a research strategy that focuses on quantifying the

collection and analysis of data. It is formed from a deductive approach where emphasis is

placed on the testing of theory, shaped by empiricist and positivist philosophies.

Quantitative research is a way to learn about a particular group of people, known as a

sample population. Using scientific inquiry, quantitative research relies on data that are

observed or measured to examine questions about the sample population (Allen, 2017).

Respondents and location

All multi-grade schools in the districts of Palauig and Botolan are included in this

study. The Alwa and Magalawa Elementary Schools are the two identified multi-grade

schools in Palauig. Additionally, six multi-grade schools have been identified in the

Botolan District: Belbel, Owaog-Nebloc, Villar, Moraza, Buen, and Parel Elementary

School.
 42

Magalawa Elementary School

Alwa Elementary School

Buen Elementary School

Villar Elementary School

Moraza Elementary School

Parel Elementary School
Villar Elementary School
Owaog- Nebloc Elementary School

Belbel Elementary School

Figure 2

Map of Palauig and Botolan Zambales which shows the Multi-grade Elementary
Schools

Sampling Technique

The researcher purposively selected teachers who are currently teaching multi-

grade classes. Purposively sampling refers to a group of non-probability techniques in

which units are selected because they have characteristics that needed in sample.
 43

Respondents

The researchers selected the multi-grade teachers in the identified multi-grade

schools in the districts of Palauig and Botolan to be the respondents in this study. The

researchers chose the multi-grade teachers at Alwa and Magalawa Elementary Schools in

the Palauig district. Additionally, the researchers also chose the multi-grade teachers at

Belbel, Villar, Owaog-Nebloc, Buen, Moraza, and Parel Elementary Schools in the

Botolan district. The table 1 shows the distribution of respondennts according to schools.

Table 1
Distribution of respondents according to schools

School No. of Teacher

Magalawa Elementary School 4

Alwa Elementary School 5

Owaog-Neboc Elementary School 5

Belbel Elementary School 3

Villar Elementary School 5

Moraza Elementary School 3

Buen Elementary School 2

Parel Elementary School 3

Total 30
 44

Research Instrument

The questionnaire was the main instrument used by the researcher. The strategy

was employed to prove the study. The research questionnaire was adapted from the study

of Bua & Martin, (2020), entitled “Handling Multi-Grade Teaching: It’s Educational

Implication Towards Teachers’ Competence” in Ifugao State University Potia Campus,

Philippines. The questionnaire considered two parts. The first part focuses on the

instructional practices of the teachers in handling the multi-grades. On the second part, it

includes the different problems encountered by the Multi-grade teachers. On the other

hand, the five-point Likert-typed scale will be used for the interpretation of data.

Data Gathering Procedure

To legalize the conduct of the study, the researchers sent a request letter to the

principal of the given school in order to administer the questionnaires to all the multi-

grade principals and teachers of the identified multi-grade schools in Palauig and Botolan

District. When the permissions were granted, the researcher personally administered the

questionnaires and checked the data gathering procedure.

Data Analysis

In the retrieval of instruments, the data were tabulated, analyzed, and interpreted using

the appropriate statistical tool. Descriptive analysis was used to analyze the data that were
 45

gathered from the survey questionnaire related to the intervention in handling multi-

grades. The data were analyzed to generate interrelated thoughts and concepts related to

the research problems. The data gathered from the respondents and methods were

collected and subjected to statistical analysis. The mean was utilized in order to

determine the extent of practices of the multi-grade teachers. On the other hand, Analysis

of Variance was used to measure the significant difference in the instructional practices

of multi-grade teachers and the profile of the respondents. Additionally, Pearson R was

used to measure the significant relationship in the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers to the problems encountered by the multi-grade teachers.

Percentage. The statistical tool was used to determine the frequency counts and

percentage distribution of the profile of the teachers.

Weighted mean. The statistical tool was used to determine the mean of the level of

competency of the multi-grade teachers of Palauig.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA). These statistical tools was used to measure the

significant difference on the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers and the profile

of the respondents.

Decision Rule: If the computed significant value is greater than (>) 0.05 Alpha Level

Significance, accept the null hypothesis

 46

Decision Rule: If the computed significant value is less/lower than (<) 0.05 Alpha Level

Significance, reject the null hypothesis

Pearson R. These statistical tools was used to measure the significant relationship on the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers to the problem encountered by the multi-

grade teachers.

Likert-Scale Descriptive Equivalent. This statistical tool was used to interpret the

practices and challenges of the multi-grade teachers of Palauig and Botolan District. The

following variables will measure using the 5-pont Likert-Scale.

Table 2. Likert-Scale Descriptive Equivalent

SCALE RANGE VERBAL INTERPRETATION

4 3.26 - 4.0 Strongly Agree

3 2.51 - 3.25 Agree

2 1.76 - 2.5 Disagree

1 1.0 - 1.75 Strongly Disagree

 47

Chapter 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents the gathered and processed data using tabular form, analyzed

and provide interpretation so as to give a clear and better understanding of the problems

asked in Chapter 1.

1. Profile of the Respondents

Table 3
Frequency and Percentage Distribution on the Profile
Variables of the Respondents
Profile Frequency Percent
Male 7 23.33
Sex Female 23 76.67
Total 30 100.00
Age 21-30 years old 14 46.67
31-40 years old 6 20.00
41-50 years old 4 13.33
51-60 years old 6 20.00
Mean Age: 36.2 Years old Total 30 100.00
Teacher I 19 63.33
Teacher II 4 13.33
Position
Teacher III 7 23.33
Total 30 100.00
Length in Service 1-10 years 18 60.00
11-20 years 7 23.33
21-30 years 2 6.67
31-40 years 3 10.00
Average Length in Service: 12.2 Total 30 100.00
1 19 63.33
Number of Trainings
2 6 20.00
3 2 6.67
4 1 3.33
5 1 3.33
Average Number of Trainings:
6 1 3.33
1.7
Total 30 100.00
 48

Table 3 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents as to

sex, age, position, length of service, and numbers of multi-grade trainings attended.

Sex. Out of thirty (30) respondents, the majority of the respondents are female with a

total of 23 or equivalent to 76.67% while 7 or 23.33% are male. The data revealed that

the majority of the respondents are female compared to male. Historically across the

OECD, the teaching profession has been largely dominated by women. The share of

female teachers has been increasing over the past decade, reaching 68% in 2014 for all

levels of education combined.

Age. Out of thirty (30) respondents, the majority of the age respondents belongs to 21-30

years old with total number of 14 or equivalent to 46.67%, 4 or equivalent to 13.33%

from age group of 41-50, and both age group of 51-60 got the same frequency of 6 or

equivalent to 20.00%. The computed mean age of the respondents was 36.2 years old.

The data implies that the respondents were relatively in their early adulthood. The stage

of life when most people complete their education. They are also likely to have a career

or take a full-time job.Enrique (2022).

Position. Out of thirty (30) respondents, 19 or equivalent to 63.33% were Teacher I, 4 or

equivalent to 13.33% were Teacher II and 7 or equivalent to 23.33% were Teacher III.

The data clearly shows that the majority of the respondents are teacher I.

In the study of Francisco, A. R. (2020), titled "Teachers’ Personal and Professional

Demographic Characteristics as Predictors of Students’ Academic Performance in

 49

English", it is found out that in terms of academic rank, there were more teachers with an

academic rank of Teacher I. Out of 37 teachers, 25 teachers are Teacher I.

Length in service. Out of thirty (30) respondents, 18 or equivalent to 60.00% had been

in service for 1- 10 years, 7 or equivalent to 23.33% had been in service for 11-20 years,

2 or equivalent to 6.67% had been in service for 21-30 years and 3 or equivalent to

10.00% had been in service for 31-40 years. Research indicating that increasing years of

experience can lead to improved performance in this domain (Ladd & Sorensen, 2017), it

stands to reason that examining teachers’ actual classroom interactions could be useful in

attempts to understand the links between experience and performance. Additionally, The

study of Ismael (2018) also found out that teachers with more experience or who have

worked for a long time significantly impact how well higher-order thinking skills

(HOTS) are taught. They added that a teacher’s tenure was an indicator of their

effectiveness at facilitating the teaching-learning process.

Numbers of MG trainings attended. Out of thirty (30) respondents, majority had

attended 1-5 trainings with 19 or equivalent of 63.33%, 6 equivalent to 20.00% attended

6-10 trainings, 2 or equivalent to 6.67% attended 11-15, 1 or equivalent to 3.33%

attended 16-20 trainings, 1 or equivalent to 3.33 attended 21-25 trainings, and 1 or

equivalent to 3.33 attended 26-30 trainings. In the study of Khanal (2022) titled, “An

Effectiveness of Multi-Grade Teaching At The Basic Level of School”, it is revealed that

trained and qualified teachers play a crucial role in effectively implementing multi-grade

teaching methods at the basic level of schools. Teachers who have received specific
 50

training in multi-grade instruction are better equipped to address the challenges and

complexities of teaching in multi-grade classrooms.

2. Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

2.1 Teacher as a Planner
Table 4
Perception of the Respondents on the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade
Teachers as a Planner
Descriptiv
Planner Mean e Rank
Equivalent
1. Organizes the subject matter from simple to Strongly
3.57 1
complex Agree
2. Utilizes the budget of time for each work activities Strongly
3.50 3
for each grade Agree
3. Observes the prescribe lesson planning for multi- Strongly
3.47 4
grade class Agree
4. Structures the classroom bulletin to show clear Strongly
3.37 8
concept of the present lesson Agree
Strongly
5. Organizes quality multi-grade class 3.40 7
Agree
Strongly
6. Prepares board work ahead of time 3.47 4
Agree
7.Prepares appropriate instructional aides for each Strongly
3.53 2
grade level Agree
Strongly
8.Incorporates cooperative learning activities 3.43 6
Agree
Strongly
Overall Weighted Mean 3.47
Agree

Table 4 shows the perception of the respondents on the instructional practices of

the multi-grade teachers as a planner

The respondents perceived “strongly agree” in all indicators on the perception of the

respondents on the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner. Indicator

1, “as a planner, organizes the subject matter from simple to complex” got the highest
 51

mean of 3.57 (rank 1). Followed by indicator 7, “as a planner, prepares appropriate

instructional aides for each grade level” with a mean of 3.53 (rank 2), indicator 2 “as a

planner, utilizes the budget of time for each work activities for each grade” with a mean

of 3.50 (rank 3), Indicator 3 and 6 “as a planner, observe the prescribe lesson planning

for multi-grade class” and “as a planner, prepare board works ahead of time” with a

mean of 3.47 (rank 4). With a mean of 3.43 (rank 6) Indicator 8”as a planner,

incorporates cooperative learning activities”. With a mean of 3.40 (rank 7), Indicator 5

“as a planner, organizes quality multi-grade class. And indicator 4, “as a planner,

structures the classroom bulletin to show clear concept of the present lesson” with a mean

of 3.37 (rank 8).

The overall computed mean for the perception of the respondents on the instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner is 3.47, which is interpreted as strongly

agree. The respondents positive perception of planning is evident through their responses

to all indicators regarding the perception on the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers as a planner. The results suggest that the respondents highly appreciate and

recognize the effective instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as planners,

particularly in organizing the subject matter, preparing instructional materials, managing

time, following lesson planning guidelines, and fostering cooperative learning activities

in the classroom.

Understanding the individual learning requirements of students across different

grade levels allows teachers to tailor their instruction to meet the diverse needs of each
 52

pupil. By identifying these needs, educators can provide personalized learning

experiences that cater to the unique strengths, weaknesses, and learning styles of

multigrade pupils. Furthermore, identifying and accommodating the learning needs of

multigrade pupils promotes an inclusive learning environment where all students feel

valued, supported, and empowered to succeed. By catering to the diverse academic

profiles of students, educators can create a classroom culture that celebrates individual

differences and fosters a sense of belonging for every learner.

Similar to the study of Cornish (2021), titled "Quality Practices for Multi-grade

Teaching" which emphasizes the importance of implementing quality teaching practices

and strategies by multi-grade teachers to help learners develop essential skills and

behaviors. The study suggests that efficient planning and teaching methods, such as

proper arrangement of the content of the lesson and combining grades for common

lessons to enhance efficiency and reduce waiting time for students.

While in the article of Pandey A. (2022) titled, “How Teachers Can Maintain An

Effective Bulletin Board” which highlights how teachers face time constraints in their

daily workload, hindering their ability to regularly update bulletin boards to reflect new

lessons and concepts. The article emphasizes the importance of creating engaging and

educational bulletin boards in classrooms and discusses strategies for utilizing interactive

bulletin boards to enhance student learning.

 53

2.2 Teacher as a Facilitator

Table 5
Perception of the Respondents on the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade
Teachers as a Facilitator
Descriptive
Facilitator Mean Rank
Equivalent
Strongly
1. Uses varied motivation techniques 3.43 7
Agree
2. Implements teaching strategies, appropriate and Strongly
3.47 6
techniques effectively to develop critical thinking Agree
3. Ask, clear simple and evenly distributed Strongly
3.43 7
questions Agree
Strongly
4. Observed budgeted time of pupils’ activity 3.37 10
Agree
5. Keeps the classroom stress free and conducive Strongly
3.50 4
for learning Agree
Strongly
6. Identifies learning abilities and needs of pupils 3.60 1
Agree
7. Makes use of reference materials and human Strongly
3.50 4
resources Agree
8. Provides varied seat work relevant to the subject Strongly
3.43 7
matter Agree
9. Maintains art of discipline in the learning Strongly
3.53 3
activities Agree
10. Encourages leadership where the pupils act as Strongly
3.57 2
little teachers Agree

Table 5 shows the perception of the respondents on the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a facilitator.

The respondents perceived, “strongly agree” in all indicators on the perception of

the respondents on the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as facilitator.

Indicator 6, “as a facilitator, identifies learning abilities and needs of pupils” with a mean

of 3.60 (rank 1). Followed by Indicator 10, “as a facilitator, I encourages leadership

where the pupils act as little teachers” with a mean of 3.57 (rank 2), Indicator 9, “as a
 54

facilitator, I maintains art of discipline in the learning activities” with a mean of 3.53

(rank 3), Indicator 7 and 5 , “as a facilitator, I makes use of reference materials and

human resources” and “ keeps the classroom stress free and conducive for learning” with

a mean of 3.50 (rank 4). With a mean of 3.47 (rank 6), Indicator 2 “as a facilitator, I

implements teaching strategies, appropriate and techniques effectively to develop critical

thinking”. With a mean of 3.43 (rank 7), Indicator 1, 3 and 8 “as a facilitator, I uses

varied motivation techniques”, “ ask, clear simple and evenly distributed questions” and

“provides varied seat work relevant to the subject matter”. And Indicator 4, “as a

facilitator, I observed budgeted time of pupils’ activity” with a mean of 3.37 (rank 10).

The overall computed mean for the perception of the respondents on the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner is 3.48 , which is interpreted

as strongly agree. The respondents positive perception of facilitating is evident through

their responses to all indicators regarding the perception of the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a facilitator. The results suggest that the respondents highly

appreciate and recognize the effective facilitation skills of multi-grade teachers,

particularly in identifying students' learning needs, encouraging leadership, maintaining

discipline, utilizing resources effectively, creating a conducive learning environment, and

implementing teaching strategies to enhance critical thinking among students.

In the study of Naparan & Alinsug (2021), titled “Classroom strategies of multi-

grade teachers”, it emphasizes the practices taken by the multi-grade teachers to create

effective learning environments and facilitate student success. Key aspects such as
 55

Classroom Management, Collaborative Learning, Differentiated Instruction, Real-life

Connections in Teaching, and Teacher Flexibility. There are several successful

techniques that these multi-grade teachers used to enhance the abilities and skills of the

learners. There are a lot of good things that came out precisely the classroom strategies of

multi-grade teachers. Thus, Multi-grade teaching can be more beneficial to learners when

they apply strategies that promote the learning interest and needs of the learners.

Observing the budgeted time of pupils' activity in the classroom is indeed crucial

for maximizing learning opportunities and ensuring efficient use of instructional time.

However, teachers often have demanding workloads that encompass lesson planning,

grading, meetings, and other administrative tasks. This heavy workload can make it

difficult for teachers to prioritize time observation and management amidst their

numerous. Additionally, many teachers may not have received specific training on how to

effectively monitor and manage time in the classroom. Without the necessary skills and

strategies, they may find it challenging to track and optimize the time spent on different

activities.

In the study conducted by Bempechat (2019), emphasized the importance of

teacher training and professional development in enhancing educators' effective time

management skills. However, limited resources, time constraints, and competing

demands on teachers' schedules can hinder their capacity to prioritize time management

education in the classroom. The study underscores the need for schools and educational
 56

institutions to recognize the importance of supporting teachers in developing effective

time management skills. By providing adequate resources, creating opportunities for

professional development, and addressing time constraints, schools can empower

teachers to prioritize time management education and enhance their capacity to optimize

instructional time in the classroom.

2.2 Teacher as a Facilitator

Table 6
Perception of the Respondents on the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade
Teachers as an Evaluator
Descriptive
Evaluator Mean Equivalent
Rank
Strongly
1. Makes appropriate evaluation tool 3.40 Agree
9
2. Administer test regularly to determine Strongly
3.47 Agree
4
learning outcomes
3. Interprets test result and utilizes it for the Strongly
3.57 Agree
1
improvements of instruction
4. Evaluates learning outcomes cognitively and Strongly
3.47 Agree
4
non-cognitively
5. Assesses pupil’s reading comprehension, Strongly
3.57 Agree
1
writing and numeracy skill
6. Provides for quality time for feed backing
Strongly
with pupil’s and peer with the parents of the 3.43 Agree
7
pupil concern
7. Practices portfolio assessment of pupils’ Strongly
3.33 Agree
10
activities
8. Administer pretest to identify pupils’ level of Strongly
3.47 Agree
4
ability
Strongly
9.Assesses pupils in multiple ways 3.50 Agree
3
10.Diagnoses individual needs of pupils’ base Strongly
3.43 Agree
7
on the assessment result
Strongly
Overall Weighted Mean 3.46 Agree
 57

Table 6 shows the perception of respondents on the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as an evaluator.

The respondents perceived “strongly agree” in all indicators on the perceptions of

the respondents on the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator.

Indicator 3 "Interprets test results and utilizes it for the improvement of instructions." and

indicator 5 "Assesses pupil's reading comprehension." got the same mean of 3.57 (rank

1). Followed by indicator 9 "Assesses pupils in multiple ways." got a mean of 3.50 (rank

3). Indicator 2 "Administer test regularly to determine learning outcome.", indicator 4

"Evaluates learning outcomes cognitively and non-cognitively." and indicator 8

"Administer pre-test to identify pupils' level of ability." got the same mean of 3.47 (rank

4). Indicator 6 "Provide quality time for feedback with pupils and peers with the parents

of the pupils concern." and indicator 10 "Diagnoses individual needs of pupils' based on

assessment results." got the same of mean of 3.43 (rank 7). Indicator 1 "Make appropriate

evaluation tools got a mean of 3.40 (rank 9). And indicator 7 "Practices portfolio

assessment of pupils' activities." got a mean of 3.33 (rank 10).

The overall computed mean for the perceptions of the respondents on the instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator is 3.46, which is interpreted as strongly

agree. The results suggest that the respondents highly appreciate and recognize the

effective evaluation skills of multi-grade teachers, particularly in interpreting test results,

assessing students' comprehension, using diverse assessment methods, administering tests

 58

regularly, providing feedback, and tailoring instruction based on assessment results to

meet individual student needs.

The systematic review of Pastores (2023) titled "Teacher Assessment Literacy: A

Systematic Review" delves into the concept of assessment literacy among teachers,

emphasizing the knowledge and skills required for effectively implementing assessment

practices in the classroom.The review underscores the significance of assessment literacy

in enhancing teaching practices and improving student outcomes. It recognizes that

teachers with high assessment literacy can create meaningful assessments, interpret

results accurately, and adjust instruction based on assessment data. Additionally, a study

conducted by Knowles (2018), focused on assessing the reading, writing, and numeracy

skills of primary school students in Australia. The study revealed the importance of

assessing literacy and numeracy skills among primary school students to identify areas

for improvement and provide targeted interventions to enhance student learning

outcomes.

On the other hand, portfolio assessment is a valuable tool for evaluating students’

progress, skills, and achievements over time. However, its implementation in assessing

pupils’ activities may not be commonly practiced due to various challenges and factors.

One study by Wolf & Miller (2016) discussed the barriers to implementing portfolio

assessment in schools, highlighting issues such as lack of training for teachers, limited

resources, and concerns about standardization and consistency in assessment practices.

 59

These challenges can deter educators from incorporating portfolio assessment into their

evaluation methods for pupils’ activities

3 Problems Encountered by the Multi-Grade Teachers

3.1 Teacher as a Planner

Table 7
Perception of the Respondents on the Problems Encountered by Multi-Grade
Teachers as a Planner
Descriptive
Planner Mean Rank
Equivalent
1. Unawareness of the sequence of the subject
1.83 Disagree 7
matter
2. In adequate instructional materials 1.93 Disagree 4
3. Lack of knowledge on making multi-grade
1.87 Disagree 6
classroom program
4. No copy of the budget of work 1.90 Disagree 5
5. Multi-grade lesson plan 2.40 Disagree 1
6. No copy of K-12 multi-grade competencies 1.80 Disagree 8
7. More time in lesson planning with lesser
2.13 Disagree 3
time to make visual aids
8. Overlapping activities 2.30 Disagree 2
Overall Weighted Mean 2.02 Disagree

Table 7 shows the perception of the respondents on the problems encountered by

multi-grade teachers as a planner

The respondents perceived “disagree” in all indicators on the perceptions of the

respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as a planner. Indicator

5 "Multi-grade lesson plan." got the mean of 2.40 ( rank 1 ). Indicator 8 "Overlapping

activities." got a mean of 2.30 ( rank 2 ). Indicator 7 "More time in lesson planning with
 60

lesser time to make visual aids." got a mean of 2.13 ( rank 3 ). Indicator 2 "Inadequate

instructional materials." got a mean of 1.93 ( rank 4 ). Indicator 4 "No copy of the budget

of work." got a mean of 1.90 ( rank 5 ). Indicator 3 "Lack of knowledge on making multi-

grade classroom programs." got a mean of 1.87 ( rank 6 ). Indicator 1 "Unawareness of

the sequence of the subject matter." got a mean of 1.83 ( rank 7 ). And indicator 6 "No

copy of the K-12 multi-grade competencies." with a mean of 1.80 ( rank 8 ).

The overall computed mean for the perceptions of the respondents on the

problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as a planner is 2.02 which is interpreted as

disagree. The data indicates that the respondents identified various challenges faced by

multi-grade teachers as planners, including difficulties in creating multi-grade lesson

plans, managing overlapping activities, addressing time constraints, dealing with

inadequate instructional materials, and lacking clear guidelines or competencies for

multi-grade teaching.

In the study conducted by Naparan & Castañeda (2021), it is revealed that lesson

planning and individualisation have become a problem in preparing and conducting

assessment in multigrade classrooms due to the need for levelled and individualised

assessment tools. Additionally, teachers in a multigrade setting often face difficulty in

planning because there are no ready-made lesson plans available for multigrade teaching.

Although lesson examples are often available, they neither sufficiently cover all the

competencies, nor do they fulfil curricular requirements as they have to follow guidelines
 61

designed for monograde classes. According to De Borja Sigua, & Marasigan, (2020),

lesson planning in multigrade classes requires more time because teachers must create

multiple lesson plans in one setup to address the different grade levels’ needs and

abilities, as well as prepare various instructional materials to cater to the students’ diverse

learning styles.

3.2 Teacher as a Facilitator

Table 8
Perception of the Respondents on the Problems Encountered by Multi-Grade
Teachers as a Facilitator
Descriptive
Facilitator Mean Rank
Equivalent
1. Lack of knowledge in motivation
1.87 Disagree 6
techniques
2. Lack of knowledge/training in multi-
2.03 Disagree 1
grade instruction
3. Noisy and in orderly classroom 1.97 Disagree 3
4. Unaware of the procedure of the lesson 1.90 Disagree 5

5. Un able to response on pupil’s need 1.93 Disagree 4

6. Lack of times to carry planned activities 2.03 Disagree 1

Overall Weighted Mean 1.96 Disagree

Table 8 shows the perceptions of the respondents on the problems encountered by

multi-grade teachers as a facilitator.

The respondents perceived “disagree” in all indicators on the perceptions of the

respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as a facilitator.

 62

Indicator 2 "Lack of knowledge/training in multi-grade instructions." and indicator 6 lack

of time to carry planned activities." both got the highest mean of 2.03 ( rank 1 ).

Followed by indicator 3 "Noisy and in orderly classroom" with a mean of 1.97 ( rank 3 ).

Indicator 5 "Unable to respond on pupil's needs" got a mean of 1.93 ( rank 4 ). Indicator 4

"Unaware of the procedure of the lesson." got a mean of 1.90 ( rank 5 ). And indicator 1

"Lack of knowledge on motivation technique." got a mean of 1.87 ( rank 6 ).

The overall computed mean for the perceptions of the respondents on the

problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as a facilitator is 1.96 which is interpreted

as disagree.It suggests that the respondents identified the lack of knowledge or training in

multi-grade instructions and time constraints as the primary challenges faced by multi-

grade teachers in their role as facilitators.

According to Msimanga (2020), training is crucial for teachers to execute lessons

in an efficient and effective manner, as well as important to help teachers gain knowledge

and skills needed to meet relevant standards and learner needs. However, multi-grade

teachers are often not equipped with the skills and knowledge in handling students in

different grade levels simultaneously in one class. Furthermore, there is a lack of specific

teacher training or professional development opportunities specially tailored to the unique

needs and challenges of multi-grade classes. Thus, teachers are not prepared to teach and

assess student learning in multiple grade levels in one session (Bongala et al., 2020; Borja

et al., 2020; Engin, 2018; Mpahla et al., 2021; Naparan et al., 2021).
 63

According to Mnyandu (2020), when teachers lack time to prepare their lessons,

they may fail to complete their annual submissions of teaching plans. Further, they may

encounter difficulties in allocating time effectively to address each competency due to the

need to cover multiple grade-level curricula in a single class (Engin, 2018; Borja et al.,

2020). Moreover, multi-grade teachers’ tasks do not only involve teaching in the

classroom; they must also submit reports, perform administrative duties, manage

paperwork and other responsibilities. Thus, submitting reports and other documents

becomes an additional burden to multigrade teachers due to their lack of Internet access,

and limited technical assistance and time. This results in a heavy workload, including

teaching multiple grades and subjects across different phases simultaneously (Msimanga,

2020; Engin, 2018; Naparan et al., 2021).

3.3 Teacher as an Evaluator

Table 9
Perception of the Respondents on the Problems Encountered by Multi-Grade
Teachers as a Evaluator
Descriptive
Evaluator Mean Rank
Equivalent
1. Lack of knowledge in multiple ways of
1.77 Disagree 4
assessing pupils’ ability
2. Lack of assessment tools 1.80 Disagree 2
3. Inadequate knowledge in interpreting test Strongly
1.70 5
result Disagree
4. Lack of time for remediation to help the slow
2.03 Disagree 1
learners uplift their achievement

5. Formative test are not being carried 1.80 Disagree 2

Overall Weighted Mean 1.82 Disagree
 64

Table 9 shows the perceptions of the respondents on the problems encountered by

multi-grade teachers as an evaluator.

The respondents perceived “disagree” in the four indicators on the perceptions of

the respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as an evaluator.

Indicator 4 "Lack of time for remediation to help the slow learners uplift their

achievement." got the highest mean of 2.03 ( rank 1 ). Followed by indicator 2 "Lack of

assessment tools." and indicator 5 "Formative tests are not being carried." with the same

mean of 1.80 ( rank 2 ). Followed by indicator 1 "Lack of knowledge in multiple ways of

assessing pupils' ability." with a mean of 1.77 ( rank 4 ). And the respondents perceived

"strongly disagree" on indicator 3 "Inadequate knowledge in interpreting test results"

with a mean of 1.70 ( rank 5 ).

The overall computed mean for the perceptions of the respondents on the

problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as an evaluator is 1.82, which is

interpreted as disagree. It suggests that the respondents identified the lack of time for

remediation to support slow learners in improving their academic performance as a

significant challenge faced by multi-grade teachers in their role as evaluators.

The article of Potane & Recla (2023), titled "Teachers' Challenges and Practices

in Handling Multi-grade Classes: A Systematic Review" discusses the challenges faced

by multi-grade teachers, including insufficient time in handling classes, difficulties in

classroom management, lack of needed materials and resources, and workload. These
 65

challenges can lead to teacher burnout and may affect the quality of education provided

to the students. The article also mentions that some teachers are still not prepared in

teaching multi-grade classes, and the stressful work environment due to various factors

can also contribute to the lack of time for remediation of student.

Wa-Mbaleka (2018), emphasized the role of community and parental involvement

in addressing the lack of time for remediation in multi-grade classrooms. Collaborative

partnerships between schools, families, and community stakeholders can provide

additional support systems and resources to supplement classroom instruction and

enhance student learning outcomes.

In the study of Han (2021), titled "Interpreting testing and assessment: A state-of-

the-art review", it is revealed that teachers' adequate knowledge in interpreting test results

is essential for informed decision-making, personalized learning, progress monitoring,

gap identification, student achievement, and professional growth. By leveraging

assessment data effectively, educators can optimize their instructional practices, support

student learning, and foster a culture of continuous improvement in education. Having

adequate knowledge in interpreting test results allows teachers to make informed

decisions about their instructional practices. By analyzing assessment data, educators can

identify students' strengths and weaknesses, tailor their teaching strategies accordingly,

and provide targeted support to help students achieve academic success.

 66

4 Significant difference between the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade

Teachers and the profile of the Respondents

4.1 Significant difference between the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade

Teachers as a Planner and the profile of the Respondents

Table 10
Analysis on Variance on the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as a
Planner when grouped according to Profile Variables
Sum of Mean
Teachers as a Planner df F Sig. Interpretation
Squares Square
Between Groups 0.004 1 0.004 0.025 0.875 Accept Ho
Sex Within Groups 4.182 28 0.149 Not
Total 4.185 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.107 3 0.036 0.228 0.876 Accept Ho
Age Within Groups 4.078 26 0.157 Not
Total 4.185 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.349 2 0.174 1.228 0.309 Accept Ho
Position Within Groups 3.836 27 0.142 Not
Total 4.185 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.646 3 0.215 1.581 0.218 Accept Ho
Length of
Within Groups 3.540 26 0.136 Not
Service
Total 4.185 29 Significant
Number Between Groups 1.290 5 0.258 2.139 0.095 Accept Ho
of Within Groups 2.895 24 0.121 Not
Trainings Total 4.185 29 Significant
Table 10 shows the test of significant difference on the instructional practices of
multigrade as a planner when grouped according to profile variables.

The computed significant values for sex (0.875), age (0.876), position (0.309),
length of service (0.218), and numbers of multi-grade training (0.095) are higher than
0.05 level of significance, indicating that the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that,
there is no significant difference between the instructional practices of Multi-Grade
teachers as a planner when grouped according to profile variables.
 67

Therefore, there is no significant difference between the instructional practices of

Multi-Grade teachers as a planner when grouped according to sex, age, position, length of

service, and numbers of multi-grade training.

4.2 Significant difference between the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade

Teachers as a Facilitator and the profile of the Respondents
Table 11
Analysis on Variance on the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as a
Facilitator when grouped according to Profile Variables
Sum of Mean
Teachers as a Facilitator df F Sig. Interpretation
Squares Square
Between Groups 0.124 1 0.124 0.691 0.413 Accept Ho
Sex Within Groups 5.037 28 0.180 Not
Total 5.162 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.523 3 0.174 0.978 0.418 Accept Ho
Age Within Groups 4.638 26 0.178 Not
Total 5.162 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.103 2 0.052 0.275 0.762 Accept Ho
Position Within Groups 5.059 27 0.187 Not
Total 5.162 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.783 3 0.261 1.551 0.225 Accept Ho
Length of
Within Groups 4.378 26 0.168 Not
Service
Total 5.162 29 Significant
Number Between Groups 1.517 5 0.303 1.999 0.115 Accept Ho
of Within Groups 3.644 24 0.152 Not
Trainings Total 5.162 29 Significant

Table 11 shows the test of significant difference on the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a facilitator when grouped according to profile variables.

The computed significant values for sex (0.413), age (0.418), position (0.762),

length of service (0.225), and numbers of multi-grade training (0.115) are higher than

0.05 level of significance, indicating that the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that,
 68

there is no significant difference between the instructional practices of Multi-Grade

teachers as a facilitator when grouped according to profile variables.

Therefore, there is no significant difference between the instructional

practices of Multi-Grade teachers as a facilitator when grouped according to sex, age,

position, length of service, and numbers of multi-grade training.

4.3 Significant difference between the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade

Teachers as an Evaluator and the profile of the Respondents
Table 12
Analysis on Variance on the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as
Evaluator when grouped according to Profile Variables
Sum of Mean
Teachers as an Evaluator df F Sig. Interpretation
Squares Square
Between Groups 0.294 1 0.294 1.544 0.224 Accept Ho
Sex Within Groups 5.335 28 0.191 Not
Total 5.630 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.671 3 0.224 1.172 0.339 Accept Ho
Age Within Groups 4.959 26 0.191 Not
Total 5.630 29 Significant
Between Groups 0.037 2 0.018 0.089 0.915 Accept Ho
Position Within Groups 5.593 27 0.207 Not
Total 5.630 29 Significant
Between Groups 1.021 3 0.340 1.920 0.151 Accept Ho
Length of
Within Groups 4.609 26 0.177 Not
Service
Total 5.630 29 Significant
Number Between Groups 1.825 5 0.365 2.302 0.076 Accept Ho
of Within Groups 3.805 24 0.159 Not
Trainings Total 5.630 29 Significant

Table 12 shows the test of significant difference on the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as an evaluator when grouped according to profile variables.

 69

The computed significant values for sex (0.224), age (0.339), position (0.915),
length of service (0.151), and numbers of multi-grade training (0.076) are higher than
0.05 level of significance, indicating that the null hypothesis is accepted. It means that,
there is no significant difference between the instructional practices of Multi-Grade
teachers as an evaluator when grouped according to profile variables. Therefore, there is
no significant difference between the instructional practices of Multi-Grade teachers as an
evaluator when grouped according to sex, age, position, length of service, and numbers of
multi-grade training.

5 Significant Relationship between the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade

Teachers to the Problems they Encountered in Handling Multi-Grade

5.1 Between the Instructional Practices of Multi-grade Teachers as a Planner

to the Problems Encountered in Handling Multi-grade Class

Table 13
Pearson R on the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade Teachers as a Planner and
Problems Encountered in Handling Multi-Grade

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as a Planner Interpretation

Pearson Correlation -0.24

Very Low
Problems Encountered as a
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.20 Negative
Planner
Correlation
N 30

Pearson Correlation -0.36

Problems Encountered as a Low Negative
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.05
Facilitator Correlation
N 30

Pearson Correlation -0.52

Moderate
Problems Encountered as a
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 Negative
Evaluator
Correlation
N 30
 70

Table 13 shows the test of significant relationship between the instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner to the problems they encountered in

handling multi-grade class.

The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.24 between the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a planner and the problems encountered by multi-grade teachers

in the planner role is interpreted as a very low negative correlation. A correlation

coefficient of -0.24 suggests a weak negative linear relationship between the variables.

Additionally, pearson correlation coefficient of -0.36 between the instructional practices

of multi-grade teachers as a planner and the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers in the facilitator role is interpreted as a low negative correlation. This correlation

implies that changes in instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as planners have a

minor impact on the problems they encountered in the planner and facilitator role.

External factors, such as school culture, community expectations, and educational

policies, can also influence the challenges encountered in the planning and facilitating

role. These external factors may have a more significant impact on teachers’ planning and

facilitating experiences than their instructional practices alone. In the study of Potane &

Recla (2023), titled, “Teachers’ Challenges and Practices in Handling Multi-grade

Classes”, findings revealed the significant impact of external factors, such as

administrative tasks, school policies, curriculum requirements, and resource constraints

on the instructional practices of teachers in multi-grade classrooms. External factors,

 71

including administrative tasks, school policies, curriculum requirements, and resource

constraints may impact the effectiveness of instructional practices for multi-grade

teachers. Understanding these factors is crucial for supporting teachers in overcoming

challenges and enhancing the quality of instruction in multi-grade classroom settings.

The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.52 between the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a planner and the problems encountered by multi-grade teachers

in the evaluator role is interpreted as a moderate negative correlation. The magnitude of -

0.52 signifies a relatively strong relationship compared to a weak correlation, indicating a

significant association between instructional practices and the challenges faced by

teachers in their evaluator responsibilities. In practical terms, this correlation implies that

changes in instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as planners have a moderate

impact on the problems encountered in the evaluator role.

In the study of Francisco and Celon (2020), titled “Teachers’ Instructional

Practices and Its Effects on Students’ Academic Goals”, highlights the crucial role of

instructional practices, which encompass planning strategies, instructional

methodologies, and assessment practices, in the overall teaching and learning process.

These practices are essential components that shape the educational experience and

impact students’ academic outcomes. The study suggests that by employing thoughtful

planning and appropriate assessment methods, teachers can create a conducive learning

environment that facilitates student success and goal attainment.

 72

Effective planning involves clearly defining the objectives and learning outcomes

that assessments aim to measure. Additionally, when teachers have a well-defined

understanding of what they want to assess, they can create evaluation tools and methods

that align with these objectives. Effective planning is essential for reducing challenges

faced by teachers as evaluators. By carefully designing assessment strategies, aligning

assessments with learning objectives, using diverse assessment methods, providing clear

criteria and feedback, and investing in professional development, teachers can enhance

the quality and effectiveness of their evaluation practices.

5.2 Between the Instructional Practices of Multi-grade Teachers as a

Facilitator to the Problems Encountered in Handling Multi-grade Classes
Table 14
Pearson R on the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade Teachers as a Facilitator
and Problems Encountered in Handling Multi-Grade

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as a Facilitator Interpretation

Pearson Correlation -0.23
Very Low
Problems Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.23 Negative
Planner
N 30 Correlation

Pearson Correlation -0.19

Very Low
Problems Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.32 Negative
Facilitator
N 30 Correlation

Pearson Correlation -0.52

Moderate
Problems Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 Negative
Evaluator
N 30 Correlation
 73

Table 14 shows the test of significant relationship between the instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator to the problems they encountered in

handling multi-grade class.

The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.23 between the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a facilitator and the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers in the planner role is interpreted as a very low negative correlation. The

magnitude of -0.24 signifies a very weak correlation, indicating minimal association

between the two variables. Similar with the pearson correlation coefficient of -0.19

between the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator and the

problems encountered by multi-grade teachers in the facilitator role is interpreted as a

very low negative correlation. This correlation implies that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator have a minor impact on the problems

they encountered in the planner and facilitator role.

The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.52 between the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as a facilitator and the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers in the evaluator role is interpreted as a moderate negative correlation. The

magnitude of -0.52 signifies a moderate strength of correlation, indicating a significant

association between instructional practices and the challenges faced by teachers in their

evaluator responsibilities. This correlation implies that changes in instructional practices

 74

of multi-grade teachers as facilitators have a moderate impact on the problems

encountered in the evaluator role.

In the study of Francisco and Celon (2020), they emphasize the importance of

providing varied and engaging teaching strategies in enhancing students’ academic

performance. Teachers who employ diverse teaching methods cater to different learning

styles and promote active student engagement, leading to improved learning outcomes.

The study also revealed that by utilizing formative and summative assessment techniques,

teachers can evaluate student learning, provide timely feedback, and adjust instructional

strategies to meet individual student needs. By incorporating a variety of teaching

strategies, teachers can assess and address the diverse learning preferences and styles of

students. This approach acknowledges that students learn in different ways and ensures

that instructional methods are tailored to meet individual needs.

External factors such as administrative tasks, community expectations, parental

involvement, stress level of teachers and educational policies can also play a role in

shaping the difficulties faced in the planning and facilitation responsibilities. These

external factors may exert a greater influence on teachers' challenges in planning and

facilitation role compared to their instructional methods alone.

 75

5.3 Between the Instructional Practices of Multi-grade Teachers as a Facilitator to

the Problems Encountered in Handling Multi-grade Classes

Table 15
Pearson R on the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade Teachers as an Evaluator
and Problems Encountered in Handling Multi-Grade
Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as an
Interpretation
Evaluator
Pearson Correlation -0.34
Problems Encountered Sig. (2-tailed) 0.06 Low Negative
as a Planner Correlation
N 30

Pearson Correlation -0.24

Very Low
Problems Encountered Sig. (2-tailed) 0.19 Negative
as a Facilitator
N 30 Correlation

Pearson Correlation -0.53

Moderate
Problems Encountered Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 Negative
as a Evaluator
N 30 Correlation

Table 15 shows the test of significant relationship between the instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator to the problems they encountered in

handling multi-grade class.

The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.34 between the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as an evaluator and the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers as a planner is interpreted as a low negative correlation. The magnitude of -0.34

signifies a relatively weak correlation, implying that there is a limited association

between the two variables. Additionally, the pearson correlation coefficient of -0.24
 76

between the instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator and the

problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as a facilitator is interpreted as a very low

negative correlation. This correlation suggests that changes in instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers in the role of an evaluator have a minor impact on the problems

encountered by teachers in the planning and facilitating phase.

The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.53 between the instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers as an evaluator and the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers in the evaluator role is interpreted as a moderate negative correlation. A

correlation coefficient of -0.53 indicates a moderate negative linear relationship between

the variables. The negative sign suggests that as instructional practices in the role of an

evaluator increase, the problems encountered by teachers in the evaluator role tend to

decrease, and vice versa. The magnitude of -0.53 signifies a relatively stronger

relationship compared to a weak correlation, indicating a more substantial association

between instructional practices and the challenges faced by teachers in their evaluator

responsibilities. In practical terms, this correlation implies that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as evaluators have a moderate impact on the problems

encountered in the evaluator role.

In the study of Herppich and Karst (2019), they emphasize the importance of

teachers’ assessment competence in developing reliable and valid assessment practices.

The study suggests that by integrating knowledge, process, and professional standards in
 77

assessment practices, teachers can enhance their assessment competence, potentially

reducing challenges in the assessment process. Teachers’ assessment competence is

essential for developing reliable and valid assessment practices that support student

learning, promote fairness and equity, and contribute to overall educational quality. By

investing in assessment competence, teachers can enhance the effectiveness of their

teaching practices and improve student outcomes.

6 Intervention Program to Minimize the Challenges of Multi-grade Teachers

The researchers developed an intervention program, titled “MG Teachers

Competency Development Program” that is aligned with the findings of the present

study. This is to increase the competency of multi-grade teachers and minimize the

challenges they encountered in handling multi-grade class. The intervention mentioned

has three specific objectives: first, the MG teachers will be able to examine the

challenges they are facing in handling multi-grade class; second, the MG teachers will be

able to reflect on their professional development; and lastly, the MG teachers will be able

to acquire knowledge and skills they can use in handling multi-grade class.

The beneficiaries of this program are the MG teachers, students, and the

school.Teachers themselves benefit significantly from competency development

interventions in multigrade teaching. These interventions equip educators with the

necessary skills, knowledge, and resources to effectively manage diverse classrooms,

 78

differentiate instruction, and create inclusive learning environments. Teachers will gain

professional growth, and increase confidence in their ability to meet the needs of all

students. Additionally, this program can minimize the challenges encountered by MG

teachers in handling multi-grade.Students are also the beneficiaries of teachers'

competency development in handling multigrade classes. Lastly, the school benefit from

teachers' competency development in multigrade teaching as it contributes to a positive

school culture, improved teaching quality, and enhanced student achievement.

 79

I.PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Title MG Teachers
Competency
Development
Program
Project Leader Proponent/s REY E. DALUSONG
BEED Program
Chair/Extension

CHRISTIAN MAPA
FLORENCE
CAMAT
CAMILLA GIRON
Members
College/Campus College of Teacher
Education, Iba
Campus
Collaboratig Agencies Department of
Education
Palauig District
Botolan District
Beneficiaries Multi-grade
Teachers/ Learners
Duration 2 Quarters
Budgeting Requirements (Not Yet Available)
II.RATIONALE
In the realm of education, teachers often encounter a variety of challenges,
necessitating the constant evolution of their skills and competencies. Teaching in multi-
grade classrooms is one such challenge. The unique nature of multi-grade classrooms,
where students of different grades learn together, requires teachers to employ versatile
teaching strategies and adapt to the varying needs of their students. To address these
challenges, an intervention program titled "Multi-Grade Teachers Competency
Development Program" has been developed, drawing from the findings of the study
"Practices and Challenges in Handling Multi-grade."

The primary purpose of this program is to bolster the teachers' capacities in

managing multi-grade classes. The program aligns with the specific challenges multi-
grade teachers encounter. These challenges include lesson planning, a lack of specialized
training in multi-grade instruction, insufficient time for executing planned activities, and
the need for remediation to assist slow learners in enhancing their achievement levels.
 80

The Multi-Grade Teachers Competency Development Program is designed with

three specific objectives: first, the teachers will be able to examine the challenges they
are facing in handling multi-grade class; second, the teachers will be able to reflect their
professional competency; and lastly, the teachers will be able to apply the acquired
knowledge and skills to their multi-grade class.

The beneficiaries of this program extend beyond the teachers to include students
and the school at large. Teachers, armed with enhanced skills and a deeper understanding
of multi-grade instruction, can create more engaging and effective learning environments.
Students, in turn, benefit from these improved teaching methodologies, leading to better
academic outcomes. The school benefits from this program as it contributes towards the
overall enhancement of the educational quality provided, bolstering its reputation as a
learning institution.

The study "Practices and Challenges in Handling Multi-grade" highlights the

areas where teachers need improvement in managing multi-grade classrooms. By
addressing these challenges through the Multi-Grade Teachers Competency Development
Program, we can foster an environment where every teacher is empowered, every student
is engaged, and every school is enriched. Thus, this program serves as a beacon of
progression, illuminating the path towards excellence in multi-grade instruction.

III.BACKGROUND
One such environment is the multi-grade classroom, where students of different grade
levels are taught together in a single instructional setting. While multi-grade teaching has
been a part of educational systems around the world for centuries, it poses unique
challenges for teachers who need to manage a wide range of student abilities and learning
needs. Multi-grade classrooms are commonly found in rural or remote areas, where
student populations are small and resources are limited. Regardless of the context, the
core principle of multi-grade instruction is the same: to provide quality education to all
students, irrespective of their grade level, within a single classroom.

Despite the potential benefits, handling multi-grade classroom poses challenges.

Among the most pressing issues is the need for effective lesson planning that caters to
multiple grade levels simultaneously. This requires a deep understanding of each grade's
curriculum and the ability to integrate different subject matters seamlessly. Lack of
training or knowledge in multi-grade instruction can exacerbate this challenge, leading to
inconsistencies in instructional delivery and student learning outcomes. Another
significant challenge is the time constraint. With a wide range of abilities and learning
 81

needs to cater to, teachers may find it difficult to allocate adequate time for each student.
This can be particularly problematic when it comes to providing remediation for slow
learners, who may require additional support to uplift their achievement.

Zambales is one of the provinces in the Philippines that has implemented multi-grade
classes, especially in Palauig and Botolan. In these areas, some schools continue to use
multi-grade classes. This method enables students from various grade levels to learn
together in a single classroom under the supervision of a single teacher. Multi-grade
classes in Zambales allow students from smaller communities to receive a quality
education despite limited resources. Teachers in these classrooms must use a variety of
instructional strategies to meet the diverse learning needs of students at all grade levels.
Zambales' implementation of multi-grade classes aims to provide accessible and inclusive
education to all students in the region.

Despite these challenges, multi-grade classrooms hold great potential. They provide
opportunities for cooperative learning, foster a sense of community, and can lead to more
personalized instruction. To harness these benefits, there is a need for comprehensive
teacher training programs that equip educators with the skills and knowledge necessary to
navigate the complexities of multi-grade instruction.

Based on the findings of the researchers in the study, it was concluded that:
1. The respondents stated that instructional practices help them as a planner,
facilitator and evaluator to promote meaningful learning and foster student
engagement. By utilizing evidence-based instructional practices, teachers can
create learning experiences that actively engage students and promote deeper
understanding.
2. The respondents clearly stated that they are challenged in lesson planning as a
result of having difficulty working on one subject matter, which has hampered
their ability to teach efficiently.
3. The respondents clearly stated that they are knowledgeable about the concept, but
they lack training in multi-grade instruction.
4. There was a significant relationship between interpreting test results and utilizing
it for the improvements of instruction and lack of time for remediation to help the
slow learners uplift their achievement. It demonstrates how teachers struggle with
multitasking and time management.
5. The intervention program (Multi-Grade Teachers Competency Development
Program) was proposed to provide them with training and workshops to improve
their skills and knowledge in handling multi-grade class.
 82

In the light of the preceding conclusions of the study, the following recommendations
were enumerated:
1. The multi-grade teachers may continue to utilize the instructional practices they
use as a planner, facilitator, and evaluator.
2. The multi-grade teachers may examine the challenges they faced in handling
multi-grade classes.
3. The schools may address the challenges faced by the multi-grade teachers in
handling multi-grade class, particularly regarding lesson planning, lack of
knowledge/training in multi-grade instructions, lack of time to carry planned
activities, and lack of time for remediation to help the slow learners uplift their
achievement.
4. The multi-grade schools may start developing school policies for managing multi-
grade classes, particularly in creating schedules.
5. Multi-grade schools may conduct training and workshops about lesson planning
and teaching strategies in handling multi-grade classes.
6. Schools may support and implement the intervention plan to minimize the
challenges faced by the teachers in handling multi-grade class.
7. Future Researchers may conduct a follow-up study with in-depth and wider scope
in order to validate the findings obtained in the study.

IV.OBJECTIVES
The general goal of this program is to increase the competency and minimize the
challenges of multi-grade teachers in handling multi-grade class.

Specific Objectives:
1. The MG teachers will be able to examine the challenges
they are facing in handling multi-grade class;
2. The MG teachers will be able to reflect to their professional
development;
3. The MG teachers will be able to acquire knowledge and
skills they can use in handling multi-grade class
V.METHODOLOGY
The project plans to:

A. Strategy of Implementation
1. Conduct Needs Assessment of the Target Schools
2. Presentation of the conduct research
3. Planning for the training
4. Planning for the material content
 83

5. Assessment and Evaluation

B. Phases of Development
1. Meeting with the partners in the multi-grade schools
2. Planning based on the results of the research
3. Implementation of the training lecture
4. Assessment and Evaluation
VI. STRATEGIES

Framework

Improved
Learning Monitoring
Need Program Program Competencies
Materials and
Assessment Planning Implementation
of MG Teachers
Development Evaluation

Initial Flow of the Program

Time Date of
Phases of the Participant
Objective Duratio Activities Implementati Lecturer/s
Program s
n on
Phase 1
Presentatio
n of the
Research MG
result. Teachers
Pre- To identify
Implementation the MG School
Techers 1st Quarter Principals/
with Head
Consolidatio
problems Aug-Oct, 2024 Teachers
n of the MG
Pre- encountere Teachers
Assessment d per school with CTE
problems
encountere
d in MG
Classes.
a. To MG
identify MG Meeting Teachers.
Conceptualizati Intervention with MG Schools
on of MG Teachers. 1st Quarter
program for Principals/
Intervention MG Schools School
Program for the teachers. Principals/ Aug.-Oct, 2024 Head
target schools. School
Head
b. To tap District
 84

possible
learning
facilitators
with the Supervisor
help of the s
Department
of Division
Education Supervisor
Botolan and
Palauig
District.
To develop Review of MG
MG Training the MG Teachers.
Modules / Training Schools
Materials Modules/ Principals/
Materials School
1st Quarter Head
Training
Development
To produce Aug.-Oct. 2024 District
the Develop Supervisor
materials for appropriate s
all the MG Training
Training Modules/ Division
Modules Materials Supervisor
Phase 2
Implementation
Proper
Seminar
To develop
and
the
Workshop
competency
on:
of MG
Multigrade MG MG
Teachers in
Budget of Teachers. Teachers.
terms of the
Work (MG Schools Schools
following:
BOW), the Principals/ Principals/
Multigrade
MG Daily School School
Budget of
Lesson Plan Head Head
Work (MG
Exemplars
BOW), the 1 day
(MG-DLPs), 2nd Quarter
MG Daily District District
and the
Lesson Plan Supervisor Supervisors
Integrated
Exemplars Oct. – Dec., s
Online Seminar Multigrade
(MG-DLPs), 2024 Division
for MG Teacher Lesson Plan
and the Division Supervis
s Exemplars
Integrated Supervisor or
(IMG-LPs)
Multigrade
for Online
Lesson Plan
Class
Exemplars
Preparation
(IMG-LPs)
s.
Digital Tools To 1 day Seminar 2nd Quarter MG MG
Introduce Workshop Teachers. Teachers.
educational of Digital Oct. – Dec., Schools Schools
technology Tools 2024 Principals/ Principals/
tools and School School
 85

resources
that can
assist in Head
Head
lesson
planning, District
District
individualize Supervisor
Supervisors
d instruction s
and
assessment Division
Division
for students Supervisor
Supervisor
at different
levels
To provide
guidance on
prioritizing
tasks and
activities to
maximize
instructional
time and
ensure that
essential MG
MG
topics are Teachers.
Teachers.
covered Schools
Schools
Principals/
Principals/
School
Time Scheduling 2nd Quarter School
Head
Management Support: Seminar Head
Assist 1 day
Strategies Workshop Oct.- Dec.
teachers in District
Prioritization 2024 District
creating Supervisor
Supervisors
flexible s
schedules
that allow Division
Division
for Supervisor
Supervisor
differentiate
d instruction
and
remediation
within the
constraints
of a multi-
grade
classroom
Peer Mentoring The 1 day Seminar 2nd Quarter MG MG
experienced Workshop Teachers. Teachers.
multi-grade Oct.-Dec. 2024 Schools Schools
teachers will Principals/ Principals/
be provided School School
with Head Head
guidance,
support and District District
practical Supervisor Supervisors
advice to s
their other
teachers Division
 86

Division
Supervisor
Supervisor
Phase 3
Assessment
Post
of the
Assessment
Training
To measure
the
Program effectivenes
1 Day
Evaluation s of the
Training
Program.

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 87

This chapter presents the summary of the findings, the conclusions arrived at and

the recommendations offered by the researcher.

Summary of Findings

Based on the respondents’ responses gathered through the questionnaire, the data

were analyzed and the following are the summary of the interpretations in the findings.

1. Profile of Respondents

Sex. Out of thirty (30) respondents, the majority of the respondents are female

with a total of 23 or equivalent to 76.67% while 7 or 23.33% are male. The data

revealed that the majority of the respondents are female compared to male.

Age. Out of thirty (30) respondents, the majority of the age respondents belongs

to 21-30 years old with total number of 14 or equivalent to 46.67%, 4 or

equivalent to 13.33% from age group of 41-50, and both age group of 51-60 got

the same frequency of 6 or equivalent to 20.00%.

Position. Out of thirty (30) respondents, 19 or equivalent to 63.33% were Teacher

I, 4 or equivalent to 13.33% were Teacher II and 7 or equivalent to 23.33% were

Teacher III. The data clearly shows that the majority of the respondents are

teacher I.

Length in service. Out of thirty (30) respondents, 18 or equivalent to 60.00%

had been in service for 1- 10 years, 7 or equivalent to 23.33% had been in service
 88

for 11-20 years, 2 or equivalent to 6.67% had been in service for 21-30 years and

3 or equivalent to 10.00% had been in service for 31-40 years.

Numbers of MG trainings attended. Out of thirty (30) respondents, majority

had attended 1-5 trainings with 19 or equivalent of 63.33%, 6 equivalent to

20.00% attended 6-10 trainings, 2 or equivalent to 6.67% attended 11-15, 1 or

equivalent to 3.33% attended 16-20 trainings, 1 or equivalent to 3.33 attended 21-

25 trainings, and 1 or equivalent to 3.33 attended 26-30 trainings.

2. Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

As a Planner. The respondents perceived “strongly agree” in all indicators on the

perception of the respondents on the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers as a planner. Indicator 1, “as a planner, organizes the subject matter from

simple to complex” got the highest mean of 3.57 (rank 1). Followed by indicator

7, “as a panner, prepares appropriate instructional aides for each grade level” with

a mean of 3.53 (rank 2), indicator 2 “as a planner, utilizes the budget of time for

each work activities for each grade” with a mean of 3.50 (rank 3), Indicator 3 and

6 “as a planner, observe the prescribe lesson planning for multi-grade class” and

“as a planner, prepare board works ahead of time” with a mean of 3.47 (rank 4).

With a mean of 3.43 (rank 6) Indicator 8 ”as a planner, incorporates cooperative

learning activities”. With a mean of 3.40 (rank 7), Indicator 5 “as a planner,

organizes quality multi-grade class. And indicator 4, “as a planner, structures the
 89

classroom bulletin to show clear concept of the present lesson” with a mean of

3.37 (rank 8).

As a Facilitator. The respondents perceived, “strongly agree” in all indicators on

the perception of the respondents on the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers as facilitator. Indicator 6, “as a facilitator, identifies learning abilities and

needs of pupils” with a mean of 3.60 (rank 1). Followed by Indicator 10, “as a

facilitator, I encourages leadership where the pupils act as little teachers” with a

mean of 3.57 (rank 2), Indicator 9, “as a facilitator, I maintains art of discipline in

the learning activities” with a mean of 3.53 (rank 3), Indicator 7 and 5 , “as a

facilitator, I makes use of reference materials and human resources” and “ keeps

the classroom stress free and conducive for learning” with a mean of 3.50 (rank

4). With a mean of 3.47 (rank 6), Indicator 2 “as a facilitator, I implements

teaching strategies, appropriate and techniques effectively to develop critical

thinking”. With a mean of 3.43 (rank 7), Indicator 1, 3 and 8 “as a facilitator, I

uses varied motivation techniques”, “ ask, clear simple and evenly distributed

questions” and “provides varied seat work relevant to the subject matter”. And

Indicator 4, “as a facilitator, I observed budgeted time of pupils’ activity” with a

mean of 3.37 (rank 10).

As an Evaluator. The respondents perceived “strongly agree” in all indicators on

the perceptions of the respondents on the instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers as an evaluator. Indicator 3 “Interprets test results and utilizes it for the
 90

improvement of instructions.” And indicator 5 “Assesses pupil’s reading

comprehension.” Got the same mean of 3.57 (rank 1). Followed by indicator 9

“Assesses pupils in multiple ways.” Got a mean of 3.50 (rank 3). Indicator 2

“Administer test regularly to determine learning outcome.”, indicator 4

“Evaluates learning outcomes cognitively and non-cognitively.” And indicator 8

“Administer pre-test to identify pupils’ level of ability.” Got the same mean of

3.47 (rank 4). Indicator 6 “Provide quality time for feedback with pupils and peers

with the parents of the pupils concern.” And indicator 10 “Diagnoses individual

needs of pupils’ based on assessment results.” Got the same of mean of 3.43 (rank

7). Indicator 1 “Make appropriate evaluation tools got a mean of 3.40 (rank 9).

And indicator 7 “Practices portfolio assessment of pupils’ activities.” Got a mean

of 3.33 (rank 10).

3. Problems Encountered by the Multi-Grade Teachers

As a Planner. The respondents perceived “disagree” in all indicators on the

perceptions of the respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers as a planner. Indicator 5 “Multi-grade lesson plan.” Got the mean of 2.40

( rank 1 ). Indicator 8 “Overlapping activities.” Got a mean of 2.30 ( rank 2 ).

Indicator 7 “More time in lesson planning with lesser time to make visual aids.”

Got a mean of 2.13 ( rank 3 ). Indicator 2 “Inadequate instructional materials.”

Got a mean of 1.93 ( rank 4 ). Indicator 4 “No copy of the budget of work.” Got a
 91

mean of 1.90 ( rank 5 ). Indicator 3 “Lack of knowledge on making multi-grade

classroom programs.” Got a mean of 1.87 ( rank 6 ). Indicator 1 “Unawareness of

the sequence of the subject matter.” Got a mean of 1.83 ( rank 7 ). And indicator 6

“No copy of the K-12 multi-grade competencies.” With a mean of 1.80 ( rank 8 ).

As a Facilitator. The respondents perceived “disagree” in all indicators on the

perceptions of the respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers as a facilitator. Indicator 2 “Lack of knowledge/training in multi-grade

instructions.” And indicator 6 lack of time to carry planned activities.” Both got

the highest mean of 2.03 ( rank 1 ). Followed by indicator 3 “Noisy and in orderly

classroom” with a mean of 1.97 ( rank 3 ). Indicator 5 “Unable to respond on

pupil’s needs” got a mean of 1.93 ( rank 4 ). Indicator 4 “Unaware of the

procedure of the lesson.” Got a mean of 1.90 ( rank 5 ). And indicator 1 “Lack of

knowledge on motivation technique.” Got a mean of 1.87 ( rank 6 ).

As an Evaluator. The respondents perceived “disagree” in the four indicators on

the perceptions of the respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade

teachers as an evaluator. Indicator 4 “Lack of time for remediation to help the

slow learners uplift their achievement.” Got the highest mean of 2.03 ( rank 1 ).

Followed by indicator 2 “Lack of assessment tools.” And indicator 5 “Formative

tests are not being carried.” With the same mean of 1.80 ( rank 2 ). Followed by

indicator 1 “Lack of knowledge in multiple ways of assessing pupils’ ability.”

With a mean of 1.77 ( rank 4 ). And the respondents perceived “strongly disagree”
 92

on indicator 3 “Inadequate knowledge in interpreting test results” with a mean of

1.70 ( rank 5 ).

4. Significant difference between the Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade

Teachers and the profile of the Respondents.

As a Planner. The computed significant values for sex (0.875), age (0.876),

position (0.309), length of service (0.218), and numbers of multi-grade training

(0.095) are higher than 0.05 level of significance, indicating that the null

hypothesis is accepted. It means that, there is no significant difference between

the instructional practices of Multi-Grade teachers as a planner when grouped

according to profile variables.

As a Facilitator. The computed significant values for sex (0.413), age (0.418),

position (0.762), length of service (0.225), and numbers of multi-grade training

(0.115) are higher than 0.05 level of significance, indicating that the null

hypothesis is accepted. It means that, there is no significant difference between

the instructional practices of Multi-Grade teachers as a facilitator when grouped

according to profile variables.

As an Evaluator. The computed significant values for sex (0.224), age (0.339),

position (0.915), length of service (0.151), and numbers of multi-grade training

(0.076) are higher than 0.05 level of significance, indicating that the null

hypothesis is accepted. It means that, there is no significant difference between

 93

the instructional practices of Multi-Grade teachers as an evaluator when grouped

according to profile variables.

5. Significant Relationship between the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade

Teachers as a Planner to the Problems they Encountered in Handling Multi-

Grade

As a Planner. The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.24 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the planner role is interpreted as a very

low negative correlation. This correlation implies that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as planners have a minor impact on the problems

they encountered in the planner role.

As a Facilitator. The pearson correlation coefficient of -0.36 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the facilitator role is interpreted as a low

negative correlation. This correlation implies that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as planners have a minor impact on the problems

they encountered in the facilitator role.

As an Evaluator. The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.52 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the evaluator role is interpreted as a

 94

moderate negative correlation. The magnitude of -0.52 signifies a relatively strong

relationship compared to a weak correlation, indicating a significant association

between instructional practices and the challenges faced by teachers in their

evaluator responsibilities. In practical terms, this correlation implies that changes

in instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as planners have a moderate

impact on the problems encountered in the evaluator role.

Significant Relationship between the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade

Teachers as a Facilitator to the Problems they Encountered in Handling

Multi-Grade

As a Planner. The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.23 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the planner role is interpreted as a very

low negative correlation. This correlation implies that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator have a minor impact on the

problems they encountered in the planner role.

As a Facilitator. The pearson correlation coefficient of -0.19 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the facilitator role is interpreted as a very

low negative correlation. This correlation implies that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator have a minor impact on the

problems they encountered in the facilitator role.

 95

As an Evaluator. The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.52 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a facilitator and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the evaluator role is interpreted as a

moderate negative correlation. The magnitude of -0.52 signifies a moderate

strength of correlation, indicating a significant association between instructional

practices and the challenges faced by teachers in their evaluator responsibilities.

This correlation implies that changes in instructional practices of multi-grade

teachers as facilitators have a moderate impact on the problems encountered in the

evaluator role.

Significant Relationship between the Instructional Practices of Multi- Grade

Teachers as an Evaluator to the Problems they Encountered in Handling

Multi-Grade

As a Planner. The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.34 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers as a planner is interpreted as a low negative

correlation. This correlation suggests that changes in instructional practices of

multi-grade teachers in the role of an evaluator have a minor impact on the

problems encountered by teachers in the planning phase.

As a Facilitator. The pearson correlation coefficient of -0.24 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers as a facilitator is interpreted as a very low

 96

negative correlation. This correlation suggests that changes in instructional

practices of multi-grade teachers in the role of an evaluator have a minor impact

on the problems encountered by teachers in the facilitating phase.

As an Evaluator. The Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.53 between the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as an evaluator and the problems

encountered by multi-grade teachers in the evaluator role is interpreted as a

moderate negative correlation. In practical terms, this correlation implies that

changes in instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as evaluators have a

moderate impact on the problems encountered in the evaluator role.

6. The researchers developed an intervention program, titled “MG Teachers

Competency Development Program” that is aligned with the findings of the

present study. This is to increase the competency of multi-grade teachers and

minimize the challenges they encountered in handling multi-grade class.

Conclusions

Based on the summary of the investigations conducted, the researchers

have arrived to conclude that:

 97

1. The majority of the respondents are female., in their early adulthood. The

majority of the respondents are Teacher I and had been in service for 1- 10

years. And lastly, the majority of the respondents had attended 1-5 Multi-

grade trainings.

2. The respondents perceived “strongly agree” in all variables on the

instructional practices of multi-grade teachers as a planner, facilitator, and

evaluator.

3. The respondents perceived “disagree” in all indicators on the perceptions

of the respondents on the problems encountered by multi-grade teachers as

a planner, facilitator, and evaluator.

4. There was no significant difference between the instructional practices of

Multi-Grade teachers as a planner, facilitator, and evaluator when grouped

according to sex, age, position, length of service, and numbers of multi-

grade training.

5. In instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as a planner and

problems encountered. There was a very low negative correlation between

instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as a planner and problems

encountered as a planner. In terms of the relationship between the

instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as a planner and problems

encountered as a facilitator, there was a low negative correlation. Lastly,

there was a moderate negative correlation between instructional practices

 98

of multi- grade teachers as a planner and problems encountered as an

evaluator.

In instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as a facilitator and

problems encountered. There was a very low negative correlation between

instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as a facilitator and

problems encountered as a planner. Furthermore, there was a very low

negative correlation between instructional practices of multi- grade

teachers as a facilitator and problems encountered as a facilitator. Lastly,

there was a moderate negative correlation between instructional practices

of multi- grade teachers as a facilitator and problems encountered as an

evaluator.

In instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as an evaluator and

problems encountered. There was a low negative correlation between

instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as an evaluator and

problems encountered as a planner. There was a very low negative

correlation between instructional practices of multi- grade teachers as an

evaluator and problems encountered as a facilitator. Lastly, there was a

moderate negative correlation between instructional practices of multi-

grade teachers as an evaluator and problems encountered as an evaluator.

6. The intervention program, Multi-grade Teachers Competency

Development Program was proposed to enhance the competency of multi-

 99

grade teachers and minimize the challenges they faced in handling multi-

grade class.

Recommendations

Based on the summary of the investigations and the conclusions arrived at,

the researcher offers the following recommendations:

1. The multi-grade teachers may continue to utilize the instructional

practices they use as a planner, facilitator, and evaluator.

2. The multi-grade teachers may examine the challenges they faced in

handling multi-grade class.

3. The schools may address the challenges faced by the multi-grade

teachers in handling multi-grade class, particularly regarding lesson

planning, lack of knowledge/training in multi-grade instructions, lack

of time to carry planned activities, and lack of time for remediation to

help the slow learners uplift their achievement.

4. The multi-grade schools may start to review their school policies for

managing multi-grade classes, particularly in creating schedules.

5. The multi-grade schools may conduct training and workshops about

lesson planning and teaching strategies in handling multi-grade

classes.
 100

6. Schools may support and implement the intervention plan to minimize

the challenges faced by the teachers in handling multi-grade class.

7. Conduct a follow-up study with in-depth and wider in scope in order to

validate the findings obtained in the study.

 101

REFERENCES

Abocejo, F. T. (2020). Effectiveness of descriptive praise on the English composition skill of

bridging students. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(4), 18-38.
 102

Abocejo, F. T., Pañares, Z. A., Dotillos, L. T., Diones, L.L., & Belciña, S. A. (2012).
Microfinance program on cooperatives: Realities, benefits and women’s
participation.CNU Journal of Higher Education. Special Issue on Poverty
Alleviation. 6(1), 25-39.

Abramczyk, A., & Jurkowski, S. (2020). Cooperative learning as an evidence-based

teaching strategy: what teachers know, believe, and how they use it. Journal of
Education for Teaching.

Abril, J. G., Acerbo, C. T., & Abocejo, F. T. (2022). The Philippine informal reading
inventor (Phil-IRI) program: A critical analysis. Budapest International Research
in Linguistics and Education-Journal (BirLE), 5(4), 432-441.

Akdağ, H., & Taşkaya, S. M. (2016). Birleştirilmiş sınıflarda hayat bilgisi öğretimi.
Hayat bilgisi öğretimi (pp. 347-372). Ankara: Pegem Akademi

Aldossari, A. T. (2018). The Challenges of Using the Differentiated Instruction Strategy:

A Case Study in the General Education Stages in Saudi Arabia International
EducationStudies, 11(4), 74.

Allen, M. (2017), The Sage Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, SAGE

Publications,Vols 1-4, p. 243, doi: 10.4135/9781483381411.

Ann Marie Casserly, Bairbre Tiernan & Gabrielle Maguire (2019) Primary
teachers’perceptions of multi-grade classroom grouping practices to support
inclusive education, European Journal of Special Needs Education

Arriola B., & Sali M., (2019). REPARATIONS AND PRACTICES OF MULTI-GRADE
TEACHERS IN ISABELA CITY SCHOOLS DIVISION, BASILAN.
International Journal of Novel Research in Education and Learning .Vol. 6, Issue
3, pp: (18-25)

Ballesteros, M., & Ocampo, R. O. (2016). Best practices of multigrade teaching in luna,
Apayao, Philippines. International Journal of Novel Research in Education and
Learning, 3(6), 61-73.

Barbetta, G. P., Sorrenti, G., & Turati, G. (2018). Multigrading and child
achievement.University of Zurich, Department of Economics, Working Paper
No. 275.
 103

Basic Education Data Statistics. (2018). Planning and Research Annual

Report.Department of Education Division of Cagayan de Oro City, Upper

Baht, A.(2020). Descriptive Research:Definition, Characteristics, Methods, Examples,

and Advantages.

Bashiri Haddadan, K., Mahmoudi, F., Rezapour, Y., & Adib, Y. (2015). Describing
Teachers and experts’ perception and experiences of education in primary
schools Multi-grade classrooms in Kaliber Villages. Shahed Biannual Peer
Review Training and Learning Researches, 22(7), 107-120.

Bayar, A., & Topal, M. (2020). Müdür yetkili öğretmen olarak görev yapan
öğretmenlerin buuygulamaya yönelik görüşleri [The Opinions of Teachers Who
Work As The Principal Authorized Teachers On This Application]. Journal of
Social, Humanities and Administrative Sciences, 6 (31), 1472-1489.Benson.
EO. J. (2016). Public Education in the Philippines: Social Inclusion and
Education Access. The University of Arizona

Erden, H. (2020 Teaching and learning in multi-graded classrooms: Is it sustainable?

International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 12,
359–378.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1245296.pdf

Bellamy, L. (2016). Classroom environment: Content analysis examining characteristics

of classroom environments that affect students' academic achievement (Order
No. 10290005).Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (1844393348). Retrieved February 25, 2019 from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1844393348?accountid=173015

Bempechat, J. (2019). I Haven’t had That Conversation Yet”: How Homework is

Addressed in Teacher Preparation. Journal of Education

Bennell, P. (2022). Missing in action? The World Bank’s surveys of teacher absenteeism
in sub-Saharan Africa. Comparative Education, 58(4), 489-508.

Blease, B., & Condy, J. (2015). Teaching of writing in two rural multigrade classes in the
western cape. Reading & Writing, 6(1), 1- 9.

Bua, J. D. & Martin, M. D. M. (2020). Handling multi-grade teaching: It’s educational

implication towards teachers’ competence. Management Research Journal, 9(2),
1-12.
 104

Buaraphan, K., Inrit, B., & Kochasila, W. (2018).Current policy & practice
concerningmultigrade teaching in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social
Sciences, 39 (1), 496-501

Cabalo, J. P., & Cabalo, M. M. (2019). Factors affecting pupils’ reading proficiency in
multi-grade classes among rural elementary schools. International Journal of
Science and Management Studies, 2(2), 108-124.
Cadosales, M. N. (2017). Teaching Efficacy of Elementary Students Teachers. Journal of
Research in Administrative Sciences (ISSN: 2664-2433), 6(1), 7-12.

Castigador, D. L. (2019). Lived experiences of Multigrade teachers. The PASCHR

Journal,1(1).

Chalkiadaki, A. (2018). A Systematic Literature Review of 21st Century Skills and

Competencies in Primary Education. International Journal of Instruction,
11(3),1-16.

Charalambous and Praetorius, 2018C.Y. Charalambous, A.-K. PraetoriusStudying

mathematics instruction through different lenses: Setting the ground for
understandin instructional quality more comprehensivelyZDM Mathematics
Education, 50 (3) (2018), pp. 355-366

Checchi, D. & De Paula, M. (2017). The effect of multigrade classes on cognitive and
noncognitive skills: Causal evidence exploiting minimum class size rules in
Italy: IZA Discussion Paper

Checchi, D., & Paola, M. D. (2018). The effect of multigrade classes on cognitive and
non- cognitive skills. Causal evidence exploiting minimum class size rules in
Italy Economics of Education Review, 67,235–253

Churchward, P., & Willis, J. (2019). The pursuit of teacher quality: identifying some of
the multiple discourses of quality that impact the work of teacher educators.
AsiaPacific Journal of Teacher Education.

Çıkrık, M. (2017). The problems of teachers who work in multigrade classes (examples
in denizli and Erzurum) (Publication No. 481787) [Master Thesis,
PamukkaleUniversity]. Yüksekö gretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
 105

Condy, J., & Blease, B. (2014). What challenges do foundation phase teachers
experiencewhen teaching writing in rural multigrade classes? South African
Journal of ChemicalEngineering, 4(2), 36–56.

Corbett, M. (2020). Place-based education: A critical appraisal from a rural perspective.

Cornish, L. (2021). Quality Practices for Multigrade Teaching. In: Cornish, L., Taole,
M.J. (eds) Perspectives on Multigrade Teaching. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84803-3_9

Datnow, A., & Hubbard, L. (2016). Teacher capacity for and beliefs about data-
drivendecision making: A literature review of international research. Journal of
Educational Change, 17(1), 7–28. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9264-2

De Borja, J. M. A, Sigua, E. M. S, & Marasigan, A. C. (2020). Pedagogical practices of

multigrade teachers in conducting science learning activities. IOER International
Multidisciplinary Research Journal. 2(3), 219-228.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4097987

DBE,2015,Workbooks,viewed19March2015,fromhp://www.educaon.gov.za/
Curriculum/Workbooks/tabid/574/Default.aspx

Dimaculangan, K. (2016), “Mathematical proficiency in algebra of grade 10 students and

The implementation of spiral curriculum”, A Thesis Presented to the Philippine
Normal University.

Demirel, T., & Kurt, T. (2021). Evaluation of boarding secondary schools in terms of
educational equity. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 26, 53-87.

Deniz, O. (2019). Investigation on opinions of new classroom teachers on their first

teaching of literacy in multi-grade classes (Publication No.565632) [Master
Thesis, Trabzon University]. Yüksekögretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.

Delgado, N. B., Alaban, M. A. C., Ariz, D. G. S., & Emboltura, F. S. (2019). Multigrade
Up Deviated from Monograde Teaching to Implement Its Age-Appropriate
Inclusive School Program.In 3rd International Conference on Special
Education(ICSE 2019) (pp. 176-180). Atlantis Press.
 106

Department of Basic Education (DBE). (2015). Rural schooling / multigrade

schools/farms Schools/nonviable schools; Inclusive Education implementation;
Special Needs schools: Department briefing. Government Printers.

Deped.gov.ph. (2019). July 24, 2009 DO 81, s. 2009 – Strengthening the Implementation
of implementation-of-multigrade-program-in-philippineeducation-amended-by/
[Accessed 18 Jun. 2019].

Department of Education [DepEd]. 1997. DepEd Order No. 96, s. 1997; Policies and
guidelines in the organization and operation of multigrade (MG) classes.

Department of Education, Culture and Sports [DECS].(1993). DECS Order No. 38.
Seried of 1993l Improving access to elementary education by providing in all
public elementary schools through combination class and/or multigrade classes

Division Memorandum No. 748, s.2018. Division Continuous Improvement Training

with Special Focus on Direct and Indirect Teaching with Zurashi and Watari
Processes. Carmen National High School. Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines .

Dogan, F.S¸ ., Çapan, S. A., & Cigerci, F. M. (2020). Dilemmas in teaching English in
multigrade classrooms: Classroom teachers’ perceptions on English as a foreign
language course. Novitas-Research on Youth and Language, 14(1), 52–68.

Du Plessis, P., & Mestry, R. (2019). Teachers for rural schools–a challenge for South
Africa. South African Journal of Education, 39(1), S1-S8.

Engin, G. (2018). The opinions of the multigrade classroom teachers on multigrade class
teaching practices (Multiple case analysis: Netherlands-Turkey example).
International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(1), 177-200 .

Enrique, E.,2022-Preparedness and Challenges on Modular Teaching of Social Studies

Teachers in Public Secondary Schools in Zambales, Philippines,International
Journal of Thesis Projects and Dissertations (IJTPD)Vol. 10, Issue 3, pp: (127-
142), Month: July - September 2022, Available at:www.researchpublish.com

Francisco C.D.C., & Celon L.C. (2020). Teachers’ Instructional Practices and Its Effects
on Students’ Academic Performance. International Journal of Scientific
Research in Multidisciplinary Studies, Vol.6, Issue.7, pp.64-71, July (2020)
 107

Fargas-Malet, M., & Bagley, C. (2022). Is small beautiful? A scoping review of 21st-
century research on small rural schools in Europe. European Educational
Research Journal, 21(5), 822-844.

Fat. S. (2015). Curriculum design for a training program in multigrade

instruction.,Research Journal 21Journal. Pages 51-61. Retrieved from
http://educatia21.reviste .ubbcluj.ro/ index

Fathi, K. et al. (2015). Concepts and principles of curriculum. Tehran: Elm Ostadan.

Fredriksen, B. (2020). Det virker ikke som noen vil at vi skal bo her ute. NRK – The
NorwegianBroadcasting Corporation.

Francisco, A. R. (2020). Teachers’ Personal and Professional Demographic

Characteristics as Predictors of Students’ Academic Performance in
English. International Journal of Management, Technology, and Social Sciences
(IJMTS), ISSN: 2581-6012, Vol. 5, No. 2, August 2020

Gasa, A. N. (2016). Exploring Instructional Leadership Practices within the Context of

Multi-Grade Teaching: Experiences of Principals and Teachers. University of
Kwazulu-Natal, Africa.

Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian

Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3),39–54.

Gross, D., Bettencourt, A. F., Taylor, K., Francis, L., Bower, K., & Singleton, D. L.
(Journal 2020). What is parent engagement in early learning? Depends who you
ask. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29(3), 747-760.

Herppich S. & Karst K. (2019). Teachers’ assessment competence: Integrating

knowledge-, process-, and product-oriented approaches into a competence-
oriented conceptual model. Teaching and Teacher Education. Volume 76, pages
191-193

Harju, V., & Niemi, H. (2020). Newly qualified teachers’ support needs in developing
professional competences: the principal’s viewpoint, Teacher Development,
24(1), 52-70. DOI: 10.1080/13664530.2019.1685588

Hykkerud, E., Kalinina, K., Rømo, F. R., & Andreassen, E. (2020). Folketallet krymper i
hele NordNorge, men vokser på Østlandet. NRK – The Norwegian Broadcasting
Corporation.
 108

Hyry-Beihammer. EK. (2015). Multi-grade teaching practices in Austrian and Finnish

primary schools. International Journal of Educational Research 74. Vol.
74.Pages 104-113

Hyry-Beihammer, E.K., & Hascher, T. (2015). Multi-grade teaching practices in Austrian

and Finnish primary schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 74:
104-113.

Hyry-Beihammer, E. K., & Hascher, T. (2015). Multigrade teaching in primary education

as promising pedagogy for teacher education in Austria and Finland. In C.
J.Craig & L. OrlandBarak (Eds.), International Teacher Education: Promising
Pedagogies (Part C, pp. 89–113). Emerald.

İlter, İ. (2015). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının birleştirilmiş sınıf kavramına ilişkin

metaforları. Elementary Education Online, 14(4), 1450-1468.

Ince, N. B., & Sahin, A. E. (2016). A Comparison of Combination Classroom

Teachers’ and Single-Grade Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Burnou
Levels. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi-Hacettepe University
Journal of Education, 31(2), 391–409.

Jentsch et al., 2021A. Jentsch, L. Schlesinger, H. Heinrichs, G. Kaiser, J. König, S.

BlömekeErfassung der fachspezifischen Qualität von Mathematikunterricht
Faktorenstruktur und Zusammenhänge zur professionellen Kompetenz von
MathematiklehrpersonenJournal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 42 (2021), pp. 97-
121

Kalender, B., & Erdem, E. (2021). Challenges faced by classroom teachers in multigrade
classrooms: A case study. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(4), 76–91.
https://doi.org/10.33902/jpr.2021473490

Karim, A., Shahed, F.H., Mohamed, A.R., Rahman, M.M., & Ismail, S.A.M.M. (2019).
Evaluation of the Teacher Education Programs in EFL Context: A Testimony of
Student Teachers’ Perspective. International Journal Instruction, 12(1), 127-
146.
Kaur, A., Noman, M., & Awang-Hashim, R. (2019). Exploring and evaluating
differentiated. assessment practices of in-service teachers for components of
differentiation. Teaching Education, 30(2),160–176
Khan, S., Farooq, R. A., Irshadullah, H. M. (2017). Investigating the Status of Multi-
Grade Teaching(Pakistan). Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities (1994-
 109

7046), 25(1).hing at Elementary Level in the Province of Khyber

Pukhtoonkhwa

Khanal, U. (2022). An Effectiveness of Multi-Grade Teaching At The Basic Level of

School. SSRN Electronic Journal DOI:10.2139/ssrn.4091952

Khazaei, L. (2016), “Challenges and disadvantages of multigrade teaching”, Science and

Education,Vol. 24 No. 12, pp. 135-142, doi: 10.24195/2414-4665-2016-12-24.

Kivunja, C., & Sims, M. (2015). Perceptions of multigrade teaching: A narrative inquiry
into the voices of stakeholders in multigrade contexts in rural Zambia. Higher
Education Studies,5(2), 10-20.

Knaub K. L.(2016) Instructional planning practices of rural, multi-grade

teachers,Montana State University - Bozeman, College of Education, Health &
Human Development.

Knowles S. (2018). Assessing reading: How assessment can be used to target teaching
and enhance understanding of reading comprehension. ACER Research
Conference

Kobayashi, C. (2022). Understanding Head Teachers’ Responsibility towards Children’s

Foundational Learning in Rural India: Focusing on their Perceptions, Barriers
and Actions. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge).

Lapuz, M. C. 2015. Delights and difficulties multi-grade teachers in rural schools.

International Journal of Engineering and Technical Research 3(7), 144–151

Lecat, A., Beausaert, S., &Raemdonck, I. (2017). On the Relation Between Teachers'
Informal Learning and Innovative Working Behavior: The Mediating Role of
Employability

Leuven, Edwin & Rønning, Marte. (2016). Classroom Grade Composition and Pupil
Achievement. The Economic Journal. 126. 10.1111/ecoj.12177.

Luschei, T. F. and Chudgar, A. 2017. Supply-side Explanations for Inequitable Teacher

Distribution. Teacher Distribution in Developing Countries.Springer, pp.87107.

Magno, J. M. (2014). Teaching practices of mathematics teachers in selected public and

private elementary schools. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 17(1)
 110

Malunes, R. E., & Dioso, D. P. D. (2020). Teaching Competence of Public School

Teachers in the Light of the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers.
Philippine Social Science Journal, 3(2), 43-44.

Matanda, E. (2022). Research Methods and Statistics for Cross-Cutting Research:

Handbook for Multidisciplinary Research. Langaa RPCI

Msimanga, M. R. (2019). Managing the use of resources in multi-grade classrooms.

South African Journal of Education, 39(3), 1-9.

Msimanga, M. (2020). Teaching and learning in multi-grade classrooms: The

LEPOframework. Africa Education Review, 17(3).

Membreve, Daria C. (2019). The life of teachers in multigrade class.

Mendoza-Sintones, C. (2019) Public Elementary Schools in Batangas Province,

International Journal of Research in Engineering, Science,and Management, 2(1),
217.

Moorhouse, B. L., & Beaumont, A. M. (2020). Involving parents in their children’s

school-based English language writing using digital learning. RELC Journal,
51(2), 259-267.

Mortazavizadeh, S. H., Nili, M. R., Isfahani, A. R. N., &Hassani, M. (2017). Teachers'

Lived Experiences about Teaching-Learning Process in Multi-Grade Classes.
Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4), 354-363.

Motamedi, V., & Khajouie, F. (2020). Comparative analysis of the results of multigrade
and singlegrade classes based on indicators of educational productivity and
efficiency: A case study of Bandar Abbas city primary and secondary schools.
Journal of Education and Learning, 14(2), 227-233

Monawal Norfa A. (2019). Multigrade Teachers Competencies of Datal Basak Ip

Integrated School: Basis for Professional Development Plan, Msimanga, M. R.
(2019). Managing the use of resources in multi-grade classrooms. South African
Journal of Education, 39(3), 1-9.Mulaudzi, Muofhe Sandra (2016) Challenges
experienced by teachers of multi-grade classes in primary schools at Nzhelele
East Circuit, University of South Africa, Pretoria
 111

Muusa-Maria, J., &Maija, L. (2016). Discovering Multigrade Classes and Their

Challenges and Benefits through Teachers' Experiences (Thesis). University of
Oulo, Finland.

Nkambule T 2017. Student teachers’ perceptions of a Wits rural teaching experience

project: What to learn and improve. South African Journal of Higher Education,
31(1):191‒206.

Naparan, G. B., & Alinsug, V. G. (2021). Classroom strategies of multigrade teachers.

Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3(1), 100-109.

Naparan, G. & Castañeda, I. L. (2021). Challenges and Coping Strategies of Multi-grade

Teachers. International Journal of theory and application in Elementary and
Secondary school education, 3(1), 25-34.

Novianti, V. (2022). The Implementation of Multigrade Policy in Probolinggo Regency:

Challenges and Program Sustainability. Journal of Humanities and Social
Sciences Studies, 4(4), 160-172.

OECD (2017), "Gender imbalances in the teaching profession", Education Indicators in

Focus, No. 49, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/54f0ef95-en.

OECD. (2019). LEARNING IN RURAL SCHOOLS: INSIGHTS FROM PISA,

TALIS AND THE LITERATURE. Paris: OECD Publishing

Okamoto, Y., & Potane, J. D. (2020). Opportunities and challenges inmulti-grade

teaching using direct and indirect teaching methods with zurashi and watari
approaches in the philippines: Kagay-anon ria schools experiences.

Pandey, A. (2022). How Teachers Can Maintain An Effective Bulletin Board. Classplus
Growth

Permendikbud 37. (2017). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik

Indonesia Nomor 37 Tahun 2017 Tahun 2017 Tentang Sertifikasi Bagi Guru
Dalam Jabatan Yang Diangkat Sampai Dengan Akhir Tahun 2015 [Regulation
Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia Number 37 Year 2017 of the
Minister of Regarding Certification for Teachers in Positions Appointed
Republik Indonesia

Petalla, M.B. & Madrigal, D.V. (2017). Teaching Standards Competence and
Efficiency Performance of the Basic Education Teachers. University of
 112

Negros Occidental-Recoletos, Bacolod City, Philippines. Journal of

Institutional Research in South East Asia – Vol. 15 No. 3 Dec 2017

Pastore S. (2023) Teacher assessment literacy: asystematic review. Front.

Educ.8:1217167.doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1217167

Potane J., & Recla L., (2023) Teachers’ Challenges and Practices in Handling Multigrade
Classes: A Systematic Review. ASEAN Journal of Open and Distance Learning
(AJODL) https://ajodl.oum.edu.my/ Vol. 15, No. 1, 2023, pp. 73 – 87

Quail, A., & Smyth, E. (2014). Multigrade teaching and age composition of the class:
Theinfluence on academic and social outcomes among students. Teaching
andTeacher Education, 43, 80–90.

Quejada, A. B., &Orale, R. L. (2018). Lived Experiences of Elementary Teachers in a

Remote School in Samar, Philippines. Journal of Academic Research, 3(3), 1-
13. Retrieved from https://jar.ssu.edu.ph/index.php/JAR/article/view/7

Rafiq, M., & Sultana, N. (2020). Gender Comparison on Teaching Practices of One
Teacher Schools. Global Educational Studies Review, V(IV), 32-41.

Ramrathan, L., &Mzimela, J. (2016). Teaching reading in a multi-grade class: Teachers'

adaptive skills and teacher agency in teaching across grade R and grade 1. South
African Journal of Childhood Education, 6(2).

Resurrection, J.A. and Adanza, J. (2015), “Spiral progression approach in teaching

science in selectedprivate and public schools in Cavite”, A Paper Presented at the
DLSU Research Congress 2015,Philippines. March 2-4, 2015

Roberto, J. & Madrigal, D. V. (2018). Teacher Quality in the Light of the Philippine
Professional Standards for Teachers. University of Negros Occidental Recoletos,
Bacolod City, Philippines. Philippine Social Science Journal – Vol. 1 No. 1 July-
December 20181 No. 1 July-December 2018

Rolland, T. (2019, November 😎. Slår hull på myten om fortreffeligheten til norsk

distriktspolitikk.UiT The Arctic University of Norway.

Rusznyak, L., & Bertram, C. (2015). Knowledge and judgement for assessing student
teaching: A cross-institutional analysis of teaching practicum assessment
instruments. Journal of Education, 60, 31–61.
 113

SEAMEO INNOTECH (2019). A Review of Current Situation and Practices of

Multi-grade Schools in the Philippines. Quezon City: SEAMEO INNOTECH

Sampson, C., & Condy, J. (2016). One teacher's experiences of teaching reading in an
urban multigrade foundation phase class. Perspectives in Education, 34(2), 8396.

Saraspe, L. D., & Abocejo, F. T. (2020). Effectiveness of descriptive praise on the

English composition skill of bridging students. European Journal of English
Language Teaching, 5(4), 18-38.

Saqlain. N. (2015). Comprehensive Look at Multiage Education. Vol 5. No. 2. Pages.

285.Journal of Educational and Social Reserch;MCSER Publishing, Rome, Italy.

Situmorang, M., Gultomb, S., Hamid, A., Panjaitan, A. M., & Ritonga, W. (2018).
University-government collaboration model to improve school teacher
competence in North Sumatra, Indonesia. International Journal of Training
Research, 1-18. doi.10.1080/14480220.2018.1576324 .

Seameo Innotech (2020), A Review of the Current Situation and Practices of Multigrade
Schools in thePhilippines, Pasig City

Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starrat, R. J. (2015). Supervision: A Redefinition (8 ed.). the

University of Michigan: McGraw-Hill, 19

Sevimli-Celik, S., & Johnson, J.E. (2016). Teacher preparation for movement education:
increasing pre-service teachers’ competence for working with young children.
AsiaPacific Journal of Teacher Education,44(3), 274-288. DOI:
10.1080/1359866X.2015.1079303

Shareefa, M. (2021). Using differentiated instruction in multigrade classes: A case of a

small school. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(1), 167-181 .

Slavin, R. (2014). Cooperative learning and academic achievement: Why does

groupwork work? Anales De Psicologia, 30, 785-791.

Soofi, Z.,Akhtar, R. N. (2015). Teachers' Perceptions: Multigrade Classrooms in Primary

Schools of Pakistan. Kashmir Journal of Language Research, 18(3).

Solstad, K. J., Andrews, T., & Løvland, J. (2016). Spredt eller samla? Utredning
avungdomsskolestruktur i Vågan kommune. (NF rapport no. 3/2016).
Nordlandsforskning.
 114

Taole and Mncube (2012). Training in Time Management for Teachers who Teach in
Multi-Grade Classes.

Taole, M. J. (2014). Multi-grade Teaching: A Daunting Challenge for Rural Teachers.

Studies of Tribes and Tribals, 12(1), 95-102. Retrieved April 10, 2021

Taole, M. J. (2017). Identifying the professional knowledge base for multi-grade

teaching. Gender and Behaviour, 15(4), 10419-10434.

Taole, M. (2022). Challenges encountered by teaching principals in rural multigrade

primary schools: A South African perspective. International Journal of Whole
Schooling, 18(2), 1-27.
The Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2018). Statistikk om
grunnskolen 2018/19.

Thephavongsa, S. (2018). Enhancing the teaching skills of the multi-grade teachers

Thorsnæs, G. (2021, May 18). Nord-Norge. Store norske leksikon.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). Differentiate Instruction in Academically Diverse Classrooms

(3rd Editio).through lesson study. International Journal of Learning, Teaching
and EducationalResearch, 17(4), 71–87.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization-UNESCO (2015)
Vasquez-Martinez, C. R., Flores, F., Gonzalez-Gonzalez, F., Zúñiga, L. M., Guerra,
M., Espino, P., ... & Torres-Mata, J. (2021). A sketch of reality: The
multigrade classroom in context of the reform of basic education. BCE
Conference Books 2021, Volume 19. Bulgarian Comparative Education
Society.

Viac, C. A.. (2020),). Teacher’s well-being: A framework for data collection and
analysis OECD Education Working Papers, No. 213. Paris: OECD Publishing.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/c36fc9d3-en.

Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2018). Publish or Perish: Fear no more (2nd ed). Cavite, Philippines:
Oikos Biblios Publishing House.

Wolf, E. W., & Miller, L. (2016). Barriers to the Implementation of Portfolio Assessment
in Secondary Schools. Applied Measurement in Education Volume 10, 1997 –
Issue 3
 115

Wolff, C. E., Jarodzka, H., van den Bogert, N., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2016). Teacher
vision: Expert and novice teachers’ perception of problematic classroom
management scenes. Instructional Science, 44(3), 243–265.
Yurdakul, İ. H. (2018). Examination of the changed program of undergraduate primary.
Aschool teaching. Ulakbilge, 6(29), 1483-14
 116

APPENDICES

Appendix A

Letters
117
118
 119

Appendix B

Questionnaire

PRACTICES AND CHALLENGES IN HANDLING MULTI-GRADE

Direction: Kindly put a check mark (/) and write the information that best describes you

on the space provided for.

PART I: Profile of the Teachers

1.1 Sex: ( ) Male ( ) Female

1.2 Age: ( ) 21-30 years old

( ) 31-40 years old

( ) 41-50 years old

( ) 51-60 years old

1.3 Academic Rank/Position; ( ) Teacher I

( ) Teacher II

( ) Teacher III

( ) Master I

( ) Master II

( ) Master III

1.4 Length of Service; ( ) 1-10 years

( ) 11-20 years
 120

( ) 21-30 years

( ) 31-40 years

( ) 41-50 years

1.5 Number of training attended?

PART II: Questionnaire

The Extent of Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

Direction: Please assess by checking the appropriate column using the following rating
scale as your guide.

4-Strongly Agree

3- Agree

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

As a Planner

Practices 4 3 2 1

1. Organizes the subject matter from

simple to complex

2. Utilizes the budget of time for each

work activities for each grade
 121

3. Observes the prescribe lesson planning

for multi-grade class

4. Structures the classroom bulletin to

show clear concept of the present lesson

5. Organizes quality multi-grade class

6. Prepares board work ahead of time

7.Prepares appropriate instructional aides

for each grade level

8.Incorporates cooperative learning

activities

As a Facilitator

Practices 4 3 2 1

1. Uses varied motivation techniques

2. Implements teaching strategies,

appropriate and techniques effectively to
develop critical thinking

3. Ask, clear simple and evenly distributed

questions

4. Observed budgeted time of pupils’ activity

5. Keeps the classroom stress free and

conducive for learning

6. Identifies learning abilities and needs of

pupils
 122

7. Makes use of reference materials and

human resources

8. Provides varied seat work relevant to the

subject matter

9. Maintains art of discipline in the learning

activities

10. Encourages leadership where the pupils

act as little teachers

As an Evaluator

Practices 4 3 2 1

1. Makes appropriate evaluation tool

2. Administer test regularly to determine

learning outcomes

3. Interprets test result and utilizes it for the

improvements of instruction

4. Evaluates learning outcomes cognitively

and non-cognitively

5. Assesses pupil’s reading comprehension,

writing and numeracy skill

6. Provides for quality time for feed backing

with pupil’s and peer with the parents of the
pupil concern

7. Practices portfolio assessment of pupils’

activities

8. Administer pretest to identify pupils’ level

of ability
 123

9.Assesses pupils in multiple ways

10.Diagnoses individual needs of pupils’

base on the assessment result

The problems encountered by the multi-grade teachers

Direction: Please assess by checking the appropriate column using the following

rating scale as your guide.

4-Strongly Agree

3- Agree

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

As a Planner

Practices 4 3 2 1

1. Unawareness of the sequence of the

subject matter

2. In adequate instructional materials

3. Lack of knowledge on making multi-

grade classroom program

4. No copy of the budget of work

5. Multi-grade lesson plan

 124

6. No copy of K-12 multi-grade

competencies

7. More time in lesson planning with

lesser time to make visual aids

8. Overlapping activities

As a Facilitator

Practices 5 4 3 2 1

1. Lack of knowledge in motivation

techniques

2. Lack of knowledge/training in multi-

grade instruction

3. Noisy and in orderly classroom

4. Unaware of the procedure of the lesson

5. Un able to response on pupil’s need

6. Lack of times to carry planned activities

As an Evaluator
 125

Practices 4 3 2 1

1. Lack of knowledge in multiple ways of

assessing pupils’ ability

2. Lack of assessment tools

3. Inadequate knowledge in interpreting

test result

4. Lack of time for remediation to help the

slow learners uplift their achievement

5. Formative test are not being carried

Appendic C

Data Matrix
 126

Sex Frequency Percent

Male 7 23.3
Female 23 76.7
Total 30 100.0

Age Frequency Percent

21-30 years old 14 46.7
31-40 years old 6 20.0
41-50 years old 4 13.3
51-60 years old 6 20.0
Total 30 100.0

Position Frequency Percent

Teacher I 19 63.3
Teacher II 4 13.3
Teacher III 7 23.3
Total 30 100.0

Length of Service Frequency Percent

1-10 years 18 60.0
11-20 years 7 23.3
21-30 years 2 6.7
31-40 years 3 10.0

Total 30 100.0

Number of Trainings Frequency Percent

1-5 19 63.3
6-10 6 20.0
11-15 2 6.7
 127

16-20 1 3.3
21-25 1 3.3
26-30 1 3.3
Total 30 100.0

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

as a Planner 4 3 2 1
1. Organizes the subject matter from simple to
17 13 0 0
complex
2. Utilizes the budget of time for each work activities
15 15 0 0
for each grade
3. Observes the prescribe lesson planning for multi-
14 16 0 0
grade class
4. Structures the classroom bulletin to show clear
12 17 1 0
concept of the present lesson
5. Organizes quality multi-grade class 12 18 0 0
6. Prepares board work ahead of time 14 16 0 0
7.Prepares appropriate instructional aides for each
16 14 0 0
grade level
8.Incorporates cooperative learning activities 13 17 0 0

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

as a Facilitator 4 3 2 1
1. Uses varied motivation techniques 15 13 2 0
2. Implements teaching strategies, appropriate and
15 14 1 0
techniques effectively to develop critical thinking
3. Ask, clear simple and evenly distributed questions 14 15 1 0
4. Observed budgeted time of pupils’ activity 14 13 3 0
5. Keeps the classroom stress free and conducive for
16 13 1 0
learning
6. Identifies learning abilities and needs of pupils 18 12 0 0
 128

7. Makes use of reference materials and human

15 15 0 0
resources
8. Provides varied seat work relevant to the subject
17 13 0 0
matter
9. Maintains art of discipline in the learning activities 16 14 0 0
10. Encourages leadership where the pupils act as
0
little teachers 18 11 1

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers

as an Evaluator 4 3 2 1
1. Makes appropriate evaluation tool 12 18 0 0
2. Administer test regularly to determine learning
14 16 0 0
outcomes
3. Interprets test result and utilizes it for the
17 13 0 0
improvements of instruction
4. Evaluates learning outcomes cognitively and non-
14 16 0 0
cognitively
5. Assesses pupil’s reading comprehension, writing
17 13 0 0
and numeracy skill

6. Provides for quality time for feed backing with

14 15 1 0
pupil’s and peer with the parents of the pupil concern

7. Practices portfolio assessment of pupils’ activities 13 14 3 0

8. Administer pretest to identify pupils’ level of

15 14 1 0
ability
9.Assesses pupils in multiple ways 15 15 0 0
10.Diagnoses individual needs of pupils’ base on the
0 0
assessment result 13 17

Problems Encountered as a Planner

4 3 2 1
 129

1. Unawareness of the sequence of the subject matter 4 17 9 0

2. In adequate instructional materials 1 4 17 8
3. Lack of knowledge on making multi-grade
6 14 10 0
classroom program
4. No copy of the budget of work 8 11 11 0
5. Multi-grade lesson plan 6 5 14 5
6. No copy of K-12 multi-grade competencies 4 16 10 0
7. More time in lesson planning with lesser time to
9 16 5 0
make visual aids
8. Overlapping activities 1 11 14 4

Problems Encountered as a Facilitator

4 3 2 1
1. Lack of knowledge in motivation techniques 5 16 9 0
2. Lack of knowledge/training in multi-grade
1 9 10 10
instruction
3. Noisy and in orderly classroom 1 6 14 9
4. Unaware of the procedure of the lesson 7 3 10 0
5. Un able to response on pupil’s need 6 16 8 0
6. Lack of times to carry planned activities 10 11 9 0

Problems Encountered as an Evaluator

4 3 2 1
1. Lack of knowledge in multiple ways of assessing
3 17 10 0
pupils’ ability
2. Lack of assessment tools 4 16 10 0

3. Inadequate knowledge in interpreting test result 1 19 10 0

 130

4. Lack of time for remediation to help the slow

1 7 14 8
learners uplift their achievement
5. Formative test are not being carried 2 20 8 0

Instructional Practices of
Sum of Mean
Multi-Grade Teachers as df F Sig.
Squares Square
a Planner
Between Groups 0.004 1 0.004 0.025 0.875
Sex Within Groups 4.182 28 0.149
Total 4.185 29
Between Groups 0.107 3 0.036 0.228 0.876
Age Within Groups 4.078 26 0.157
Total 4.185 29
Between Groups 0.349 2 0.174 1.228 0.309
Position Within Groups 3.836 27 0.142
Total 4.185 29
Between Groups 0.646 3 0.215 1.581 0.218
Length of
Within Groups 3.540 26 0.136
Service
Total 4.185 29
Number Between Groups 1.290 5 0.258 2.139 0.095
of Within Groups 2.895 24 0.121
Trainings Total 4.185 29

Instructional Practices
Sum of Mean
Multi-Grade Teachers as df F Sig.
Squares Square
a Facilitator
Between Groups 0.124 1 0.124 0.691 0.413
Sex Within Groups 5.037 28 0.180
Total 5.162 29
Age Between Groups 0.523 3 0.174 0.978 0.418
 131

Within Groups 4.638 26 0.178

Total 5.162 29
Between Groups 0.103 2 0.052 0.275 0.762
Position Within Groups 5.059 27 0.187
Total 5.162 29
Between Groups 0.783 3 0.261 1.551 0.225
Length of
Within Groups 4.378 26 0.168
Service
Total 5.162 29
Number Between Groups 1.517 5 0.303 1.999 0.115
of Within Groups 3.644 24 0.152
Trainings Total 5.162 29

Instructional Practices
Sum of Mean
of Multi-Grade Teachers df F Sig.
Squares Square
as Evaluator
Between Groups 0.294 1 0.294 1.544 0.224
Sex Within Groups 5.335 28 0.191
Total 5.630 29
Between Groups 0.671 3 0.224 1.172 0.339
Age Within Groups 4.959 26 0.191
Total 5.630 29
Between Groups 0.037 2 0.018 0.089 0.915
Position Within Groups 5.593 27 0.207
Total 5.630 29
Between Groups 1.021 3 0.340 1.920 0.151
Length of
Within Groups 4.609 26 0.177
Service
Total 5.630 29
Number Between Groups 1.825 5 0.365 2.302 0.076
of Within Groups 3.805 24 0.159
Trainings Total 5.630 29

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as

a Planner
Problems Pearson Correlation -0.24
Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.20
Planner N 30
 132

Problems Pearson Correlation -0.36

Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.05
Facilitator N 30

Problems Pearson Correlation -0.52

Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00
Evaluator N 30

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as

a Facilitator
Pearson Correlation -0.23
Problems
Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.23
Planner N 30
Pearson Correlation -0.19
Problems
Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.32
Facilitator N 30
Pearson Correlation -0.52
Problems
Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00
Evaluator N 30

Instructional Practices of Multi-Grade Teachers as

Interpretation
an Evaluator
Pearson Correlation -0.34
Problems
Low Negative
Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.06
Correlation
Planner N 30

Problems Pearson Correlation -0.24 Very Low

Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.19 Negative
 133

N 30
Facilitator Correlation
Pearson Correlation -0.53
Problems Moderate
Encountered as a Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 Negative
Evaluator N 30 Correlation

Appendix D

Intervention
I.PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Title MG Teachers
Competency
Development
Program
Project Leader Proponent/s REY E. DALUSONG
 134

BEED Program
Chair/Extension

CHRISTIAN MAPA
FLORENCE
CAMAT
CAMILLA GIRON
Members
College/Campus College of Teacher
Education, Iba
Campus
Collaboratig Agencies Department of
Education
Palauig District
Botolan District
Beneficiaries Multi-grade Teachers/
Learners
Duration 2 Quarters
Budgeting Requirements (Not Yet Available)
II.RATIONALE
In the realm of education, teachers often encounter a variety of challenges,
necessitating the constant evolution of their skills and competencies. Teaching in multi-
grade classrooms is one such challenge. The unique nature of multi-grade classrooms,
where students of different grades learn together, requires teachers to employ versatile
teaching strategies and adapt to the varying needs of their students. To address these
challenges, an intervention program titled "Multi-Grade Teachers Competency
Development Program" has been developed, drawing from the findings of the study
"Practices and Challenges in Handling Multi-grade."

The primary purpose of this program is to bolster the teachers' capacities in

managing multi-grade classes. The program aligns with the specific challenges multi-
grade teachers encounter. These challenges include lesson planning, a lack of specialized
training in multi-grade instruction, insufficient time for executing planned activities, and
the need for remediation to assist slow learners in enhancing their achievement levels.

The Multi-Grade Teachers Competency Development Program is designed with

three specific objectives: first, the teachers will be able to examine the challenges they
are facing in handling multi-grade class; second, the teachers will be able to reflect their
professional competency; and lastly, the teachers will be able to apply the acquired
knowledge and skills to their multi-grade class.
 135

The beneficiaries of this program extend beyond the teachers to include students
and the school at large. Teachers, armed with enhanced skills and a deeper understanding
of multi-grade instruction, can create more engaging and effective learning environments.
Students, in turn, benefit from these improved teaching methodologies, leading to better
academic outcomes. The school benefits from this program as it contributes towards the
overall enhancement of the educational quality provided, bolstering its reputation as a
learning institution.

The study "Practices and Challenges in Handling Multi-grade" highlights the

areas where teachers need improvement in managing multi-grade classrooms. By
addressing these challenges through the Multi-Grade Teachers Competency Development
Program, we can foster an environment where every teacher is empowered, every student
is engaged, and every school is enriched. Thus, this program serves as a beacon of
progression, illuminating the path towards excellence in multi-grade instruction.

III.BACKGROUND
One such environment is the multi-grade classroom, where students of different grade
levels are taught together in a single instructional setting. While multi-grade teaching has
been a part of educational systems around the world for centuries, it poses unique
challenges for teachers who need to manage a wide range of student abilities and learning
needs. Multi-grade classrooms are commonly found in rural or remote areas, where
student populations are small and resources are limited. Regardless of the context, the
core principle of multi-grade instruction is the same: to provide quality education to all
students, irrespective of their grade level, within a single classroom.

Despite the potential benefits, handling multi-grade classroom poses challenges.

Among the most pressing issues is the need for effective lesson planning that caters to
multiple grade levels simultaneously. This requires a deep understanding of each grade's
curriculum and the ability to integrate different subject matters seamlessly. Lack of
training or knowledge in multi-grade instruction can exacerbate this challenge, leading to
inconsistencies in instructional delivery and student learning outcomes. Another
significant challenge is the time constraint. With a wide range of abilities and learning
needs to cater to, teachers may find it difficult to allocate adequate time for each student.
This can be particularly problematic when it comes to providing remediation for slow
learners, who may require additional support to uplift their achievement.

Zambales is one of the provinces in the Philippines that has implemented multi-grade
classes, especially in Palauig and Botolan. In these areas, some schools continue to use
 136

multi-grade classes. This method enables students from various grade levels to learn
together in a single classroom under the supervision of a single teacher. Multi-grade
classes in Zambales allow students from smaller communities to receive a quality
education despite limited resources. Teachers in these classrooms must use a variety of
instructional strategies to meet the diverse learning needs of students at all grade levels.
Zambales' implementation of multi-grade classes aims to provide accessible and inclusive
education to all students in the region.

Despite these challenges, multi-grade classrooms hold great potential. They provide
opportunities for cooperative learning, foster a sense of community, and can lead to more
personalized instruction. To harness these benefits, there is a need for comprehensive
teacher training programs that equip educators with the skills and knowledge necessary to
navigate the complexities of multi-grade instruction.

Based on the findings of the researchers in the study, it was concluded that:
6. The respondents stated that instructional practices help them as a planner,
facilitator and evaluator to promote meaningful learning and foster student
engagement. By utilizing evidence-based instructional practices, teachers can
create learning experiences that actively engage students and promote deeper
understanding.
7. The respondents clearly stated that they are challenged in lesson planning as a
result of having difficulty working on one subject matter, which has hampered
their ability to teach efficiently.
8. The respondents clearly stated that they are knowledgeable about the concept, but
they lack training in multi-grade instruction.
9. There was a significant relationship between interpreting test results and utilizing
it for the improvements of instruction and lack of time for remediation to help the
slow learners uplift their achievement. It demonstrates how teachers struggle with
multitasking and time management.
10. The intervention program (Multi-Grade Teachers Competency Development
Program) was proposed to provide them with training and workshops to improve
their skills and knowledge in handling multi-grade class.

In the light of the preceding conclusions of the study, the following recommendations
were enumerated:
8. The multi-grade teachers may continue to utilize the instructional practices they
use as a planner, facilitator, and evaluator.
9. The multi-grade teachers may examine the challenges they faced in handling
multi-grade classes.
 137

10. The schools may address the challenges faced by the multi-grade teachers in
handling multi-grade class, particularly regarding lesson planning, lack of
knowledge/training in multi-grade instructions, lack of time to carry planned
activities, and lack of time for remediation to help the slow learners uplift their
achievement.
11. The multi-grade schools may start developing school policies for managing multi-
grade classes, particularly in creating schedules.
12. Multi-grade schools may conduct training and workshops about lesson planning
and teaching strategies in handling multi-grade classes.
13. Schools may support and implement the intervention plan to minimize the
challenges faced by the teachers in handling multi-grade class.
14. Future Researchers may conduct a follow-up study with in-depth and wider scope
in order to validate the findings obtained in the study.
IV.OBJECTIVES
The general goal of this program is to increase the competency and minimize the
challenges of multi-grade teachers in handling multi-grade class.

Specific Objectives:
4. The MG teachers will be able to examine the challenges
they are facing in handling multi-grade class;
5. The MG teachers will be able to reflect to their professional
development;
6. The MG teachers will be able to acquire knowledge and
skills they can use in handling multi-grade class

V.METHODOLOGY
The project plans to:

A. Strategy of Implementation
6. Conduct Needs Assessment of the Target Schools
7. Presentation of the conduct research
8. Planning for the training
9. Planning for the material content
10. Assessment and Evaluation

B. Phases of Development
5. Meeting with the partners in the multi-grade schools
6. Planning based on the results of the research
7. Implementation of the training lecture
8. Assessment and Evaluation
 138

VI. STRATEGIES

Framework

Improved
Learning Monitoring
Need Program
Materials
Program and Competencies
Assessment Planning Implementation
Evaluation of MG Teachers
Development

Initial Flow of the Program

Time Date of
Phases of the Participant
Objective Duratio Activities Implementati Lecturer/s
Program s
n on
Phase 1
Presentatio
n of the
Research MG
result. Teachers
Pre- To identify
Implementation the MG School
Techers 1st Quarter Principals/
with Head
Consolidatio
problems Aug-Oct, 2024 Teachers
n of the MG
Pre- encountere Teachers
Assessment d per school with CTE
problems
encountere
d in MG
Classes.
Conceptualizati a. To Meeting 1st Quarter MG
on of MG identify MG with MG Teachers.
Intervention Intervention Teachers. Aug.-Oct, 2024 Schools
Program for the program for Schools Principals/
target schools. MG Principals/ School
teachers. School Head
Head
b. To tap District
possible Supervisor
learning s
facilitators
with the Division
help of the Supervisor
Department
of
Education
 139

Botolan and
Palauig
District.

To develop Review of MG
MG Training the MG Teachers.
Modules / Training Schools
Materials Modules/ Principals/
Materials School
1st Quarter Head
Training
Development
To produce Aug.-Oct. 2024 District
the Develop Supervisor
materials for appropriate s
all the MG Training
Training Modules/ Division
Modules Materials Supervisor
Phase 2
Implementation
Proper
Seminar
To develop
and
the
Workshop
competency
on:
of MG
Multigrade MG MG
Teachers in
Budget of Teachers. Teachers.
terms of the
Work (MG Schools Schools
following:
BOW), the Principals/ Principals/
Multigrade
MG Daily School School
Budget of
Lesson Plan Head Head
Work (MG
Exemplars
BOW), the 1 day
(MG-DLPs), 2nd Quarter
MG Daily District District
and the
Lesson Plan Supervisor Supervisors
Integrated
Exemplars Oct. – Dec., s
Online Seminar Multigrade
(MG-DLPs), 2024 Division
for MG Teacher Lesson Plan
and the Division Supervis
s Exemplars
Integrated Supervisor or
(IMG-LPs)
Multigrade
for Online
Lesson Plan
Class
Exemplars
Preparation
(IMG-LPs)
s.
Digital Tools To 1 day Seminar 2nd Quarter MG MG
Introduce Workshop Teachers. Teachers.
educational of Digital Oct. – Dec., Schools Schools
technology Tools 2024 Principals/ Principals/
tools and School School
resources Head Head
that can
assist in District District
lesson Supervisor Supervisors
planning,
individualize
 140

d instruction
and s
assessment Division
for students Division Supervisor
at different Supervisor
levels
To provide
guidance on
prioritizing
tasks and
activities to
maximize
instructional
time and
ensure that
essential MG
MG
topics are Teachers.
Teachers.
covered Schools
Schools
Principals/
Principals/
School
Time Scheduling 2nd Quarter School
Head
Management Support: Seminar Head
Assist 1 day
Strategies Workshop Oct.- Dec.
teachers in District
Prioritization 2024 District
creating Supervisor
Supervisors
flexible s
schedules
that allow Division
Division
for Supervisor
Supervisor
differentiate
d instruction
and
remediation
within the
constraints
of a multi-
grade
classroom
MG
The MG
Teachers.
experienced Teachers.
Schools
multi-grade Schools
Principals/
teachers will Principals/
School
be provided School
2nd Quarter Head
with Seminar Head
Peer Mentoring 1 day
guidance, Workshop
Oct.-Dec. 2024 District
support and District
Supervisor
practical Supervisors
s
advice to
their other Division
teachers Division
Supervisor
Supervisor
Phase 3
Assessment
Post
of the
Assessment
Training
 141

To measure
the
Program effectivenes
1 Day
Evaluation s of the
Training
Program.
 142

CURRICULUM VITAE

FLORENCE CAMAT
Liozon, Palauig, Zambales
Contact No. 09513188072
Email Address:camatflorence143@gmail.com

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Age : 20 years old

 143

Date of Birth : November 27, 2002

Place of Birth : Liozon, Palauig, zambales
Civil Status : Single
Nationality : Filipino
Gender : Female
Religion : Aglipayan
Height : 155 cm.
Weight : 50 kg
Father’s Name : Robert A. Camat
Mother’s Name : Maricor Q. Camat

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINEMENT

Elementary : Liozon Elementary School

Liozon, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2014-2015

Secondary : Locloc National High School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2018-2019

Locloc National High School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2020-2021

Tertiary : President Ramon Magsaysay State University

 144

Zone 6 Baytan, Iba, Zambales

(2023-Present)

CAMILLA GIRON
Bato, Palauig, Zambales
Contact No. 09318594357
Email Address: camillagiron89@gmail.com

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Age : 20 years old

Date of Birth : April 20, 2023
 145

Place of Birth : RMMH-Iba, Zambales

Civil Status : Single
Nationality : Filipino
Gender : Female
Religion : Iglesia Ni Cristo
Height : 150 cm.
Weight : 39 kg
Father’s Name : Melvin A. Giron
Mother’s Name : Carolyn P. Giron

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINEMENT

Elementary : Bato Elementary School

Bato, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2014-2015

Secondary : Locloc National High School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2018-2019

Locloc National High School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2020-2021

Tertiary : President Ramon Magsaysay State University

Zone 6 Baytan, Iba, Zambales
 146

(2023-Present)

CHRISTIAN ROY MAPA

Alwa, Palauig, Zambales
Contact No. 09102141669
Email Address: christianroymapa08@gmail.com

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Age : 20 years old

Date of Birth : October 8, 2003
 147

Place of Birth : RMMH-Iba, Zambales

Civil Status : Single
Nationality : Filipino
Gender : Male
Religion : Catholoic
Height : 1.64 cm
Weight : 57 kg
Father’s Name : Lanelyn A. Mapa
Mother’s Name : Christophe A. Mapa

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINEMENT

Elementary : Locloc Elementary School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2014-2015

Secondary : Locloc National High School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2018-2019

Locloc National High School

Locloc, Palauig, Zambales
S.Y. 2020-2021

Tertiary : President Ramon Magsaysay State University

Zone 6 Baytan, Iba, Zambales
 148

(2023-Present)