Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 40 no. 3 (2025)

Out-of-Field Teaching Experiences of Science Teachers in Non-Specialized Subjects: A Phenomenological Study

Cherry Mae Candelario | Christine P. Abo

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

A teacher must have immense knowledge of the subject they are going to teach. However, teachers in the field experiences teaching on the subject that they do not master. The study aimed to explore science teachers' experiences in teaching non-specialized subjects. The study utilized Moustakas’ Transcendental Phenomenological (TPh) design and employed in-depth interviews (IDI) as the data collection method. Ten participants were purposively selected for this study, consisting of junior and senior high school teachers from Mlang National High School under the Cotabato Division for the School Year 2023–2024. Thematic analysis was applied to generate the data from various sources to gain a fuller perception of the study. Coding was done, and themes were categorized accordingly. Seven (7) essential themes were generated on the teachers' lifeworld in teaching non-specialized subjects. The contexts of the teacher’s lived experiences in teaching non-specialized subjects revealed three (3) significant themes. Additionally, it is shown that six out of ten participants see themselves teaching specialized subjects in the future and four of them learned to love handling non-specialized subjects. As a result, the study recommends realignment of subjects taught, applicant selection, and conducting school visitation among the Department of Education (DepEd) Key Personnel to ensure the exact number of teachers needed in the specific field. Furthermore, the researcher recommends conducting further studies to determine the root cause of the unresolved problem of mismatch among teachers in the education system. Also, future studies could use quantitative methods to provide a more structured and statistically backed analysis and examine how various motivational factors affect teachers who teach subjects outside their specialization, despite facing challenges such as a lack of expertise or resources.



References:

  1. Aparecio, M.B. (2018). Mentoring, self-efficacy, and performance in conducting investigatory projects: a mixed-method analysis. https://apiar.org.au
  2. Arendain, I., & Limpot, M. (2022). Phenomenological approach of out-of-field teaching: challenges and opportunities. EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 168.
  3. Asian Development Bank (2014). Republic of the Philippines: Teach for the 2. Philippines. Retrieved April 8, 2020, from the Asian Development Bank website: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/projectdocument/81738/47261-001-tar.pdf
  4. Asy’ari, M., & Fitriani, H., (2017) Literature review of science process skills as a basis for developing higher order thinking skills. Prisma Sains: Journal of the Study of Science and Mathematics and Science Learning at IKIP Mataram, 5(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v5i1.1114
  5. Attia, N. (2017, April). tspace. library. utoronto Website: https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/76925/1/Attia_Nada_E_A_201706_MT_MTRP.pdf
  6. Azores, A.D. (2020). Mainstreaming critical thinking and science process skills through science investigatory project. https://www.academia.edu. Assessment. (2015). The Glossary of Education Reform. https://www.edglossary.org/assessment
  7. Basalan, Jaymar P. et al. (2024). Coping With the Challenges in Teaching MAPEH Subjects among Non-specialized Teachers of Division of Davao Del Sur. International Journal of Innovative Research in Multidisciplinary Education, 632-633.
  8. Bayani, R. T., & Guhao Jr, E. S. (2017). Out-offield teaching: Experiences of non-Filipino majors. International Journal of Education, 5(11), 91-127.
  9. Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33.
  10. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2). pp. 77-101. ISSN 1478-0887 http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  11. Buenacosa, Ma. S. A., & Petalla, M. B. (2022). Embracing the unknown: adaptability and resiliency of out-offield secondary teachers teaching english in public schools.
  12. Bugwak, E. R. (2020). Travails of out-of-field teachers: a qualitative inquiry. Journal of World Englishes and Educational Practices, 36-57.
  13. Byrne, D. A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Quant 56, 1391–1412 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
  14. Caldis, S, (2022) Transitioning into the profession with an out-of-field teaching load. In: Hobbs, L, Porsch, R, (eds) Out-of-field teaching across teaching disciplines and contexts. Springer, Singapore. doi.org/10.1007/978–981–16–9328–1_13
  15. Childs, A. & McNicholl, J. (2007) Investigating the relationship between subject content knowledge and pedagogical practice through the analysis of classroom discourse. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1629-1653. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601180817
  16. Cinkir, S., & Kurum, G. (2015). Discrepancy in teacher employment: the problem of out-of field teacher employment. Educational Planning, 22(1), 29-47
  17. Co, A. G., Abella, C. R., & De Jesus, F. (2021). Teaching outside specialization from the perspective of science teachers. Open Access Journal Library, 2-5.
  18. Comia, C. (2022). Participation of grade 8 students in performing science investigatory project of Maabud National High School. https://independent.academia.edu
  19. Dawadi, S. (2020). Thematic analysis approach: a step-by-step guide. Nepal English Language Teacher’s Association Journal, 64-70.
  20. de Crom, Nellie, & Rothmann, S. (Ian). (2018). Demands-abilities fit, work beliefs, meaningful work and engagement in nature-based jobs. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 44(1), 1-12. https://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v44i0.1496
  21. De La Cruz, R.J.D. (2022). Science Education in the Philippines. In: Huang, R., et al. Science Education in Countries Along the Belt & Road. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6955-2_20
  22. de Souza J.M., Pinto R.Z., Tebar W.R., Gil F.C.S., Delfino L.D., Morelhão P.K., da Silva C.C.M., Oliveira C.B.S., Christofaro D.G.D. Association of musculoskeletal pain with poor sleep quality in public school teachers. Work. 2020; 65:599–606. doi: 10.3233/WOR-
  23. Dela Cruz, JP C. (2014). Experiencing science in a 21st-century middle school classroom. Sekolah Tiara Bangsa-ACS (International), Jakarta Timur, Indonesia.
  24. Du Plessis, A. E. (2013). Understanding the out-of-field teaching experiences. N/A: N/A.
  25. Du Plessis, A. E. (2015). Effective education: Conceptualizing the meaning of out-of-field teaching practices for teachers, teacher quality and school leaders. International Journal of Educational Research, 72, 89-102.
  26. Du Plessis, A., Caroll, A. and Gilles, R. (2013) Understanding the lived experiences of novice out-of-field teachers about school leadership practices. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43, 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2014.937393
  27. Du Plessis, A., et al. (2023). The out-of-field phenomenon: Perceptive consequences and Support. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Process, 1-2.
  28. Gagnon, L., & Corrow, C. (2023, November 10). Aurora Institute.  Aurora Institute.Org: https://aurora-institute.org/cw_post/school-site-visits-a-powerful-lever-in-school-transformation/
  29. Gargarita, J.R. (2021). Learners’ engagement in the conduct of science investigatory projects and its influence on science process skills. www.allsubjectjournal.com
  30. Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Different fits satisfy different needs: Linking person-environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014068
  31. Gunduz, M. (2016). What are the teaching responsibilities of being a. Educational Research and Reviews, 623-624.
  32. Handayani, G., Adisyahputra, & Indrayanti, R. (2018). The relationship between integrated science process skills and reading comprehension ability on science literacy in biology teacher candidate students. biosphere: Journal of Biology Education (BIOSFERJPB), 11(1), 21-31.
  33. Harley, C., (2013). A win for science: The benefits of mentoring high school students in the lab. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 12(1), 1–5.
  34. Hernono B. Lopez Jr., D. B. (2022). Challenges and adaptive strategies of out-of-field mathematics teachers in the Province of Misamis Oriental, Philippines. American Journal of Educational Research, 111-115.
  35. Hobbs, L. (2012). Teaching “out-of-field” as a boundary-crossing event: factors shaping teacher identity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, pp. 11, 271–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9333-4
  36. Instasingh, S. (2019). Non-science teacher’s teaching science: Problems, adaptation, and anxiety. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331592216_Non- science_teacher’s_teaching_science_Problems_adaptation_and_anxiety
  37. Jarvis, I., Murphy, A.M. & Gale, A.S. (2001). Geochemistry of pelagic and Hemipelagic sediments: criteria for identifying systems tracts and sea-level change. Journal of the Geological Society, 158(4), 685–696. ISSN (print) 0016-7649
  38. Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2011). Improving the science process skills ability of science student teachers using I Diagrams. Eurasian J. Phys. Chem. Educ. 3(1), 26-38
  39. Kola, A.J., & Sunday, O.S., (2015). A Review of teacher self-efficacy, Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Out-of-Field Teaching: Focussing on Nigerian Teachers. International Journal of Elementary Education, 83-84.
  40. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  41. Lopez-Garrido, G. (2023, July 10). Simply Psychology.org.  SimplyPsychology Website: https://www.simplypsychology.org/
  42. Luft, J. A., Hanuscin, D., Hobbs, L., & Törner, G. (2020). Out-of-field teaching in science: an overlooked problem. In Journal of Science Teacher Education (Vol. 31, Issue 7, pp. 719–724). Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1814052
  43. Maguire, Moira and Delahunt, Brid. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 3354-33512.
  44. Malhi, R. K. (2017). Skill development is key to economic progress – role of higher education in India. International Journal of Innovative Research and Advanced Studies (IJIRAS), 4(3), 174–177.
  45. Maranan, V. M. (2017). Basic process skills and attitude toward science: Inputs to an enhanced student cognitive performance.  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED579181.pdf
  46. Markawi, N. (2013). The influence of science process skills, reasoning, and problem solving on physics learning outcomes. Formative Journal, 3(1), 11-25. https://doi.org/10.30998/formative.v3i1.109
  47. Mihas, P. (2023). Qualitative research methods: approaches to qualitative data analysis. International Encyclopedia of Education (Fourth Edition), 302-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.11029-2
  48. Nixon, R., Luft, J., & Ross, R. (2017). Prevalence and predictors of out-of-field teaching in the first five years. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.21402
  49. Nugraha, A.J., Suyitno, H., & Susilaningsih, E. (2017). Analysis of critical thinking ability in view of science process skills and learning motivation through the PBL model. Journal of Primary Education, 6(1), 35- 43.
  50. OECD. (2016). Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2016. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_in_outlook-2016-en
  51. Ozgelen, S. (2012). Students’ science process skills within a cognitive domain framework. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(4), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.846a
  52. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and policy in mental health, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
  53. Palmer, B. L., “Teacher Passion as a Teaching Tool” (2017). Electronic theses and dissertations. Paper 3269. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3269
  54. Pandey, S. (2021, August 26). Timesofindia.com.  Timesofindia Website: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/readersblog/thelibrarylaboratory/lack-of-knowledge-in-the-modern-world-a-descriptive-analysis-36832/
  55. Panoy, B.R.P. (2013). Differentiated strategy in teaching and skills development of pupils in elementary science. Master’s Thesis. Laguna State Polytechnic University, San Pablo City Laguna
  56. Pantoja, M. L. & De Castro, C. A., (2023). Implementation of the recruitment, selection, and promotion processes in the Provincial Government of Sorsogon. United International Journal for Research & Technology, 119
  57. Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Strengths of character and well-being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(5), 603–619. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.5.603.50748
  58. Pottinger, E. (2024, April 16). GCU.Edu.  GCU.Edu Website: https://www.gcu.edu/blog/teaching-school-administration/why-passion-teaching-ignites-joy
  59. Prudente, M. (2011). Where to, science and math education. an interview for Manila. Bulletin
  60. Rampa, S. H. (2012). Passion for teaching: A qualitative study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1282
  61. Ramsook, L. (2018). A methodical approach to hermeneutic phenomenology. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, p. 14.
  62. Rauf, R., Rasul, M., Mansor, A., Othman, Z., & Lyndon, N. (2013). Inculcation of science process skills in a science classroom. Asian Social Science, 9(8).
  63. Raymundo, M. S. (2021). Teaching Non-Major Subjects: A Challenged to Senior High School Teachers. The URSP Research Journal Volume VII, No. 1, 34-35.
  64. Rebucas, E. (2022). Experiences of science teachers teaching non–science subjects: a phenomenology study. https://www.ijonse.net/index.php/ijonse/article/viewFile/73/pdf
  65. Richard M. Ingersoll, Kerry J. Gruber. (1996). Out-of-field teaching and educational equality. in G. K. Ingersoll Richard, out-of-field teaching and educational equality (p. 2). Washington DC: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
  66. Ridenour, E. (2023, October 9). Amerisleep.  Amerisleep Website: https://amerisleep.com/blog/sleep-deprivation-in-teachers/
  67. Rioa, I.V., De la Penab, R., Gumbanc, G., Catolind, A., and Otayde, E. (2021). Lived experiences of senior high school teachers teaching qualitative research without training.
  68. Sánchez-Narváez et al. (2023). Burnout syndrome and sleep quality in basic education teachers in Mexico. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health doi: 10.3390/ijerph20136276, 2-3.
  69. Serin, H. (2017). The role of passion in learning and teaching. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 61-62.
  70. Sihem, B. (2013). Social responsibility of educators. International Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 47.
  71. Singh, A. (2021). Importance of science education in schools. https://www.theasianschool.net/blog
  72. Soken-Huberty, E. (2021). 10 Reasons why science is important. https://theimportantsite.com
  73. Stephenson, H., Giles, D., & Bissaker, k. (2018). The power of hermeneutic phenomenology in restoring the centrality of experiences in work-integrated learning. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 265.
  74. Tan, M & Temiz, B.K. (2003). The place and importance of scientific process skills in science teaching. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 13(13), 89-101
  75. Timonen, J. (2020). Why is science education important? https://jyunity.fi/en/thinkers
  76. Tope, M. A. (2023). Challenges, coping mechanism of nonspecialized teachers and organizational resiliency of secondary schools in the division of laguna. International Journal of Research Publications, 545-546.
  77. Toropoya, A., Myrberg, V., & Johansson, S. (2020). Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. https://www.tandfonline.com
  78. UNESCO. (2021). UNESCO Science Report: The Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
  79. Ungar, S. J. (2010). Seven major misperceptions about the liberal arts. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
  80. Uugwanga, T. T. (2010, November 5). An investigation of the coping mechanisms of novice teachers: a study of selected high schools in the Oshikto region of Namibia.  core.ac. UK: https://core.ac.uk
  81. Villano-ac, A. R. (2024). Non-specialized teachers handling major subjects. International Journal Of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies, 203-207.
  82. Winarti, A., Yuanita, L., & Nur, M. (2019). The effectiveness of multiple intelligences-based teaching strategy in enhancing the multiple intelligence and Science Process skills of junior high school students. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(2), 122-135. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.404
  83. Yumang, J. R. (2021). Bittersweet moments in teaching non-specialized subjects among senior high school teachers. European Journal of Humanities and Educational Advancements (EJHEA), 7-8.
  84. Zhou, Y. (2013) The relationship between school organizational characteristics and reliance on out-of-field teachers in mathematics and science: cross-national evidence from TALIS 2018. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23, 483-497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-012

Tools


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