Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 3 no. 8 (2025)

Exploring Alternative Delivery Mode in Philippine Secondary Education

Jelyn Louise P. Calamaan | Amelie E. Trinidad

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Despite the increasing implementation of the Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM) in public secondary schools, there remains a limited understanding of how students experience and navigate this educational approach, especially those facing personal or socioeconomic barriers. This study addresses this gap by exploring the lived experiences of students enrolled in ADM to assess how effectively it supports their learning needs. Employing a mixed-methods design, the study gathered survey data from 300 students and conducted in-depth interviews with 15 participants across various public secondary schools. Findings reveal that students often choose ADM to accommodate responsibilities related to work, finances, or family. Among the different modes, modular learning emerged as the most preferred due to its flexibility and accessibility. In contrast, online learning was less favored due to connectivity issues and a lack of digital resources. Although students expressed general satisfaction with the clarity of instructional materials and teacher support, they reported challenges including time management, difficulty comprehending lessons, and limited direct assistance. To overcome these obstacles, learners relied on digital resources, peer and family support, and cultivated self-discipline. Notably, many participants highlighted that ADM fostered greater independence and motivation. The study concludes that while ADM serves as a valuable alternative to traditional schooling, targeted improvements are essential. These include enhancing instructional materials, increasing teacher engagement, involving families more actively, and equipping educators with ADM-specific training. Such measures are critical to ensuring ADM’s sustainability, inclusiveness, and effectiveness in addressing diverse learner needs.



References:

  1. Ahmed, A. S. (2019). Effectiveness of using worksheets on mathematics achievement and retention of secondary school students. Journal of Educational and Psychological Studies, 13(1), 325–346.
  2. Alducin-Ochoa, J. M., & Vazquez-Martinez, A. I. (2016). Hybrid learning: An effective resource in university education? International Education Studies, 9(8), 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n8p1
  3. Anoda, M. S. (2022). Experiences of teachers, parents and students in learning delivery modalities: A qualitative inquiry. International Journal of Advanced Research and Publications, 5(3), 28-41. https://tinyurl.com/ypfnk7d7
  4. Basalo, M. M. A., Forones, J. R. J., Lofranco, F. J. N., Labuca, R., & Rubite, R. C. (2020). The lived experiences of technical–vocational livelihood (TVL) working students under alternative delivery mode of education (Research paper). Sta. Cruz National High School. https://tinyurl.com/ysj6ns4c
  5. Campus Explorer. (2019). Different types of distance learning. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/3hr3dcj5
  6. Chi, C. (2023). Behind Philippines’ poor PISA performance: Worst long-term absenteeism in the world. Philstar.com. https://tinyurl.com/3j76ewym
  7. De Paepe, L., Zhu, C., & Depryck, K. (2018). Online Dutch L2 learning in adult education: Educators’ and providers’ viewpoints on needs, advantages and disadvantages. Open Learning, 33(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2017.1414586
  8. Dizon, J. B., Leoveras, M. E. C., David, E. S., & Dela Rosa, R. I. (2023). Descriptive analysis of socio-demographic profile, family structure, and parental involvement during the modular distance education on the student’s academic achievement in science. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 67(1), 185–203. https://tinyurl.com/5n6ktx6k
  9. Dobbs, R., del Carmen, A., & Waid-Lindberg, C. (2017). Students’ perceptions of online courses: The effect of online course experience. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(1), 98–109. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1152224
  10. Fongkaew, W., & Pinyaphatong, N. (2020). The effectiveness of printed modules for teaching reading and writing in English: A study of Thai students. English Language Teaching, 13(7), 172–184.
  11. Garcia, A., Abrego, J., & Calvillo, M. M. (2022). A study of hybrid instructional delivery for graduate students in an educational leadership course. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 29(1), 1–15. https://tinyurl.com/4sfsykn3
  12. Gardiner, E. (2020). Remote teaching: When and how to use synchronous vs. asynchronous. Academic Research International Journal, 2(3), 497–500.
  13. Giovannella, C. (2021). Effect induced by the COVID-19 pandemic on students’ perception about technologies and distance learning. In Ó. Mealha, M. Rehm, & T. Rebedea (Eds.), Ludic, co-design and tools supporting smart learning ecosystems and smart education (pp. 113–123). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7383-5_9
  14. Gokmen, O. F., Uysal, M., Yaşar, H., Kirksekiz, A., Guvendi, G. M., & Horzum, M. B. (2017). Türkiye’de 2005–2014 yılları arasında yayınlanan uzaktan eğitim tezlerindeki yöntemsel eğilimler: Bir içerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(189), 69–91.
  15. Goncalves, S. P., Sousa, M. J., & Pereira, F. S. (2020). Distance learning perceptions from higher education students—The case of Portugal. Education Sciences, 10(12), 374. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120374
  16. Grynyuk, S., Kovtun, O., Sultanova, L., Zheludenko, M., Zasluzhena, A., & Zaytseva, I. (2022). Distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: The experience of Ukraine’s higher education system. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 20(3), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.3.2198
  17. Imran, R., Fatima, A., Elbayoumi, E., Salem, I., & Allil, K. (2023). Teaching and learning delivery modes in higher education: Looking back to move forward post-COVID-19 era. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(2), Article 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100805
  18. Jimenez, E. C. (2021). Experiences in the application of alternative delivery mode (ADM) learning resources during the pandemic period. Studies in Humanities and Education, 2(2), 27–29. https://doi.org/10.48185/she.v2i2.377
  19. Jusas, V., Butkiene, R., Venckauskas, A., Burbaite, R., Gudoniene, D., Grigaliunas, A., & Andone, D. (2021). Models for administration to ensure the successful transition to distance learning during the pandemic. Sustainability, 13(9), 4751. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094751
  20. Kear, K., Rosewell, J., Williams, K., Ossiannilsson, E., Rodrigo, C., Paniagua, Á. S., Lancho, M., Vyt, A., & Mellar, H. (2016). Quality assessment for e-learning: A benchmarking approach (3rd ed.). European Association of Distance Teaching Universities. http://e-xcellencelabel.eadtu.eu/tools/manual
  21. Kurt, S. C., & Yildirim, B. (2018). The students’ perceptions on blended learning: A Q method analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(2), 427–446. http://dx.doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.2.0002
  22. Lucero, N. E. (2020). Alternative delivery mode (ADM) program delivery and performance of students. European Journal of Open Education and E-Learning Studies, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3388
  23. Mudau, P., Biccard, P., Van Wyk, M., Kotze, C., & Nkuna, V. R. (2022). Student access to and competence in migrating to a fully online open distance learning space. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 21, 197–215. https://doi.org/10.28945/4976
  24. National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). Student access to digital learning resources outside of the classroom – Executive summary. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017098/index.asp
  25. Navickiene, V., Dagiene, V., Jasute, E., Butkiene, R., & Gudoniene, D. (2021). Pandemic-induced qualitative changes in the process of university studies from the perspective of university authorities. Sustainability, 13(17), 9887. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179887
  26. NU Editorial Contributors. (2025). Challenges of distance learning for students. National University. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/58k5krk7
  27. Saidon, N. H., Zaini, A., Ilham, M., Sukry, A., Athif, M., Ishar, M., & Izzuan, M. (2020). Amalan kemahiran penyesuaian dalam kalangan pelajar universiti: Suatu pemerhatian awal. Malaysian Journal of Social Science dan Humanities, 5(7), 76–81. https://tinyurl.com/22jkwctm
  28. New Lens, N. (2019). NorMin teachers, parents share concerns, optimism in new normal. Philippine News Agency.
  29. Ong, S. H., Leong, L. K., Tan, W. Y., & Poh, K. L. (2020). Use of digital packets in secondary school mathematics: Effect on academic achievement. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(17), 74–85.
  30. Onyema, A. (2020). The need to balance the blend: Online versus face-to-face teaching in an introductory accounting subject. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 309-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.28945/1061
  31. Pew Research Center. (2021). Many Americans continue to experience mental health difficulties as pandemic enters second year. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/bdzdd8zb
  32. Pimentel, J. (2019). Some biases in Likert scaling usage and its correction. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 45, 183–191. https://tinyurl.com/ydx34h5z
  33. Rivera, R. A., Mission, L. C., & Serida, C. M. D. (2018). Lived experiences of alternative delivery modes students (modified off-school) (Research paper). Santisimo Rosario Integrated High School. https://tinyurl.com/2nxbf45t
  34. Sari, D. W., Wijayanti, L. M., & Sugiarti, E. (2020). The effectiveness of multimedia learning resource materials in mathematics learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1493(1), 012101.
  35. SEAMEO INNOTECH. (2023). Best practices of secondary level alternative delivery modes (ADMs) in Southeast Asia: A case study of the Open High School Program in the Philippines. https://tinyurl.com/4u6c2u6d
  36. Sharma, M., & Ankit, P. (2023). Importance of education in this challenging world. SMART MOVES Journal IJELLH, 11(3), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.24113/ijellh.v11i3.11408
  37. Sharma, R. C., Kawachi, P., & Bozkurt, A. (2019). Exploring changing perspectives in distance education. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 14(1), 1–6. https://tinyurl.com/mr2bch7z
  38. Suazo, M. R., & Almerez, Q. G. (2024). Adaptation to new learning modalities: A case study of kindergarten teachers’ practices. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10630814
  39. Tammubua, M. H., & Pattiasina, V. (2019). Quality academic services antecedent towards the level of students' satisfaction in distance learning program unit Universitas Terbuka Jayapura. The International Journal of Social Sciences World (TIJOSSW), 1(1), 21–35. https://tinyurl.com/595cp8bs
  40. Tseng, H., & Walsh Jr., E. J. (2016). Blended versus traditional course delivery: Comparing students’ motivation, learning outcomes, and preferences. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 43–52. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1142995
  41. Villanueva, J. A. R., Redmond, P., Galligan, L., & Eacersall, D. (2023). Investigating blended learning interactions in Philippine schools through the community of inquiry framework. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09826-4
  42. Villanueva, J. A. R. (2020). Investigating experiences and outcomes of K–12 blended learning classes through the community of inquiry framework (Doctoral dissertation). University of Southern Queensland. https://doi.org/10.26192/DXE0-GW51
  43. Warford, M. (2011). The zone of proximal teacher development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.008
  44. World Bank Group. (2018). The Philippines Alternative Learning System: A second chance to develop the human capital of out-of-school youth and adults. https://tinyurl.com/59vzcwk3

Tools


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