Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 3 no. 6 (2025)

Spiral Progression Approach, Digital Literacy and Competency of Teachers: Basis for Learning Activity Guides

Jeanette M. Calzado | Christine P. Abo

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The K–12 curriculum adopted spiral progression and rapid digitalization of education, which exposed essential gaps in how science teachers integrated technology into their teaching framework. The study addressed the absence of empirical evidence about spiral progression implementation, digital literacy, and teacher competence to develop Learning Activity Guides. A descriptive-correlational research design included surveys of 23 junior high school science teachers and 45 Grade 10 students at Esperanza National High School to examine spiral progression implementation, digital practices, and teaching competencies through Likert-scale questionnaires, classroom observations, and self-evaluations. The mean and standard deviation results demonstrated that teachers strongly followed vertical and horizontal curriculum articulation principles and showed high confidence in their digital tool usage. Pearson’s r analysis showed that spiral progression implementation had a significant positive relationship with teacher competence (r=.54, p=.001) and digital literacy had a significant positive relationship with competence (r=.66, p=.022). The research results directly shaped the development of Learning Activity Guides, which linked spiral progression principles to technology-enhanced teaching methods. At the same time, administrators received proof to support professional development programs that connect digital skills to curriculum implementation methods. Future research may investigate student achievement outcomes while studying the qualitative aspects of teachers' technology integration experiences.



References:

  1. Ahmad, M. (2021). The impact of teacher feedback on students’ academic performance: A mediating role of self-efficacy. Journal of Development and Social Sciences, 2(III), 464-80. https://doi.org/10.47205/jdss.2021(2-iii)39
  2. Al-Khatib, T. (2023). Netiquette rules in online learning through the lens of digital citizenship scale in the post-corona era. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 21(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1108/jices-08-2021-0089
  3. Astatike, A. (2024). Teachers’ perception and classroom practice of instructional scaffolding among a college of teacher education in Ethiopia. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 5(6), 1913-1923. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.5.0624.1457
  4. Ballano, V. O., Mallari, N. T., & Sebastian, R. R. (2022). Understanding digital literacy, digital competence, and pedagogical digital competence: Implementing online teaching for Filipino tertiary educators during COVID-19. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, 391-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1738-7_19
  5. Baron, J. V., & Cruz, J. A. (2023). The spiral progression approach in teaching Science: Its volatilities, uncertainties, complexities, and ambiguities (VUCA). Journal of Social, Humanity, and Education, 3(2), 89-103. https://doi.org/10.35912/jshe.v3i2.1194
  6. Batidor, P. G., & Casinillo, L. F. (2021). Evaluating spiral progression approach (SPA) in teaching Science and Mathematics for junior high curriculum. Philippine Social Science Journal, 4(3), 39-47. https://doi.org/10.52006/main.v4i3.362
  7. De Ramos-Samala, H. (2018). Spiral progression approach in teaching science: A case study. KnE Social Sciences, 3(6), 555. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i6.2404
  8. Deri, R. A., Janer, S. S., & Marbella, F. D. (2021). Acceptability of learning guides for teacher education field study courses. The Normal Lights, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.56278/tnl.v15i1.1736
  9. Dexter, S. (2019). Relationships between instructional leadership practices and teachers’ instructional goals, practices, and professional learning. Proceedings of the 2019 AERA Annual Meeting. https://doi.org/10.3102/1434544
  10. Earley, P. (2024). Competence frameworks and profiles for newly-qualified teachers. Developing Competent Teachers, 114-127. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003469308-12
  11. Ferrari, A., Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2012). Understanding digital competence in the 21st century: An analysis of current frameworks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33263-0_7
  12. Giray, M. B., & Kim, V. F. (2023). Spiral progression approach in teaching science in the K-12 curriculum. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 4(8), 1363-1378. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.4.823.50813
  13. Jones, P., Turney, A., Nielsen, W., & Georgiou, H. (2021). Preparing for teaching digital literacies in the curriculum disciplines. Multimodal Literacies Across Digital Learning Contexts, 187-213. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003134244-15
  14. Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2019). The centrality of element interactivity to cognitive load theory. Advances in Cognitive Load Theory, 221-222. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429283895-18
  15. Leppink, J. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of instructional methods. Instructional Design Principles for High-Stakes Problem-Solving Environments, 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2808-4_12
  16. Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2024). Diversity and inclusion in Science Education: Why? A literature review. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 14(1), 13-31. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1718
  17. Mariano, K. R., & Mina-Roguel, S. S. (2025). Association of science teaching effectiveness in spiral progression approach and science teaching efficacy belief among science teachers. IJIET (International Journal of Indonesian Education and Teaching), 9(1), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.24071/ijiet.v9i1.9322
  18. Masrukhin (2025). Structural modelling of information communication technology (ICT) facilities and blended learning mediate lecturers’ digital literacy competence on students’ digital skills. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management, 10(28s), 1106-1120. https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i28s.5005
  19. McAuliffe, A., & McGann, M. (2016). Sampling participants’ experience in laboratory experiments: Complementary challenges for more complete data collection. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00674
  20. Miksza, P., & Elpus, K. (2018). Correlational design and analysis. Oxford Scholarship Online. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199391905.003.0006
  21. Miksza, P., & Elpus, K. (2018). Descriptive analysis. Oxford Scholarship Online. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199391905.003.0004
  22. Munikwa, S. (2024). Evaluating constructive alignment: An analysis of learning outcomes, learning experiences, and assessment techniques at a public university. International Journal of Innovative Research in Education, 11(2), 53-75. https://doi.org/10.18844/ijire.v11i2.9484
  23. Roushan, G., Polkinghorne, M., & Patel, U. (2024). Innovative applications of technology to support online teaching. Teaching and Learning with Innovative Technologies in Higher Education, 52-83. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032635248-3
  24. Saeidmehr, A., Steel, P., & Samavati, F. (2023). Systematic review using a spiral approach with machine learning. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2497596/v1
  25. Schneider, R. M. (2019). Illustrating and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through learning study. Repositioning Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Teachers’ Knowledge for Teaching Science, 167-186. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5898-2_7
  26. Shamsitdinova, M. (2023). Developing listening skill by activating students’ prior knowledge. The American Journal of Interdisciplinary Innovations and Research, 05(01), 9-12. https://doi.org/10.37547/tajiir/volume05issue01-02
  27. Silvhiany, S., Huzaifah, S., & Ismet, I. (2021). Critical digital literacy: EFL students’ ability to evaluate online sources. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 6(1), 249. https://doi.org/10.21462/ijefl.v6i1.364
  28. Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology: How to choose a sampling technique for research. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035
  29. Taylor, W. (2018). Education and the economy. Universities, Education and the National Economy, 51-71. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429459269-4
  30. Tirol, S. L. (2022). Spiral progression approach in the K to 12 Science curriculum: A literature review. International Journal of Education (IJE), 10(4), 29-44. https://doi.org/10.5121/ije.2022.10403
  31. Vidergor, H. E. (2018). Teaching future thinking literacy: Curriculum design and development. Multidimensional Curriculum Enhancing Future Thinking Literacy, 18-32. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368323_002
  32. Wanyama, T., & Baetz, B. (2023). Designing a learning factory for teaching complex integration of technologies that support industry 4.0. INTED Proceedings, 1, 681-687. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2023.0228
  33. White, S., & Newby, T. (2025). Exploring the application of an instructional approach usability scale (IAUS) for improving integrated STEM instructional design. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.59668/2036.18931
  34. Yu, B., & Wang, W. (2024). Transforming English pre-service teachers through a digital adventure: Developing digital literacy and pedagogical skills. New Language Learning and Teaching Environments, 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51540-8_10
  35. Zajda, J. (2021). Motivation in the classroom: Creating effective learning environments. Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, 17-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71575-5_2
  36. Zokir qizi, A. D. (2023). Good teacher-best motivator. Eurasian Journal of Social Sciences, Philosophy and Culture, 3(2), 179-184. https://doi.org/10.37547/ejsspc-v03-i02-p1-33

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic