Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 43 no. 5 (2025)

Learning Outcomes and Performance-Based Assessment: Basis for Araling Panlipunan Remedial Instructional Design

Arden Askali

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Learning outcomes and performance of students is a fundamental basis for all sorts of success in professions, employment, and social life. In that view, it has been recognized that the topic of educational end outcomes is of societal relevance; hence, parents' attention to their children's educational accomplishment eventually implies attention to their fate, future, and life. The study sought to find out the learning outcomes and Performance-based assessment of students as assessed by their teachers in Araling Panlipunan. Moreover, the results will be utilized in the realization of Araling Panlipunan remedial instructional design for junior high school. The study utilized the descriptive-quantitative and correlational method. All seventy-four (74) Araling Panlipunan teachers of the seven (7) selected national high schools representing district one (1) under Quadrant 1.1 were the respondents of the study. Data gathering was accomplished by administering a survey questionnaire and asking for the numerical ratings of the students for the first two (2) quarters of the school year (Report card/E-class record) from the teacher respondents of the study. Findings revealed that the assessment strategies utilized by the teacher doesn’t have any significant relationship or affect to the learning outcomes and rating level of the respondents at 5 and 1% level of significance. This means that an improvement in the use of the assessment strategies would significantly improve their Social Studies competency level. In addition, teacher innovativeness in the delivery of social studies lessons would positively contribute to the improvement of respondents' performance in social studies and the fact-retaining assessment strategy for Senior High School. Results show that there is no improvement or changes to the performance-based assessment of the students from the first quarter and second quarter. This result concludes that an Araling Panlipunan remedial instructional design must be formulated and utilized.



References:

  1. Academic Journal for Social Studies, (2017). Basic education and cultural heritage: Prospects and challenges. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4, (9) 201-209.
  2. Adapting Curriculum (2021). Reasons for Countries to Adapt Their Curriculum https://bit.ly/3t29nUZ
  3. AERA, APA, NCME. (2016). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, Inc.
  4. Agaton, C. B., & Cueto, L. J. (2021). Learning At Home: Parents’ Lived Experiences On Distance Learning During COVID-19 Pandemic In the Philippines. https://bit.ly/3F0H6AH
  5. Airasian P. W. & Russell, M. K. (2008). Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  6. Airasian P. W. & Russell, M. K. (2017). Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  7. Al-Balloonah, F.  (2016).  The impact of the performance-based assessment strategy in the development of mathematical thinking and the ability to solve problems among secondary students.  Najah University Journal of Research (Humanities), 24(8), 2228–2270.
  8. Alfie Kohn (2000). “The Schools Our Children Deserve: Moving Beyond Traditional Classrooms and “tougher Standards””, p.198, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
  9. Aluan, B.  (2017). Increasing mathematical performance of Grade 6 pupils using game-based learning. Research Gate Publication.  San Roque Elementary School. Saraya, Quezon. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33664.84480
  10. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington DC: Author.
  11. Ancheta, R. F., & Ancheta, H. B. (2020). THE NEW NORMAL IN EDUCATION: A CHALLENGE TO THE PRIVATE BASIC EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES? https://iiari.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/The-New-Normal-in-Education-1.pdf.
  12. Anderson, R. S. (2018). Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment. New Directions
  13. Arter, J. A. & Stiggins, R. J. (2017). Performance assessment in education. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 346 157
  14. Babbie, E. (2018). The practice of social research. London: Thomson Wadsworth.
  15. Bachman, L. F. (2017). Alternative interpretations of alternate assessment: Some validity issues in educational performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 21(3), 5-18.
  16. Baker, E. L., O’Neil, H. F., & Linn, R. L. (2018). Policy and validity prospects for performance-based assessment. American Psychologist, 48(12), 1210-1218.
  17. Bay, E., Küçükoğlu, A., Kaya, H. İ., Gündoğdu, K., Köse, E., Ozan, C. ve Taşgın, A. (2019, Mayıs). Öğretim elemanı ve öğretmen adaylarının ölçme-değerlendirmeye ilişkin görüşleri (Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Örneği). II. Uluslararası Öğretmen Yetiştirme Politikaları ve Sorunları Sempozyumu’nda sunulan bildiri, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Ankara.
  18. Bintz, W. P. (2015). Staying connected: Exploring new functions for assessment. Contemporary Education, 62(4), 307-312.
  19. Blazar, D. (2015).  Effective teaching in elementary mathematics:  identifying classroom practices that support student achievement.  Economics of Education Review, 48, 16–29.  doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev. 2015.05.005
  20. Bloxham, S. & Carver, M. (2014). Assessment for learning in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 123–126. doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.797652 
  21. Booher-Jennings, J. (2015). Below the bubble: “Educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42 (2), 231-268.
  22. Borreo, R. A., & Alva, G. C. (2021). Readiness And Problems Encountered By Teachers In Quezon Province Due To Covid-19: Basis for an Intervention Scheme. http://cajotas.centralasianstudies.org/index.php/CAJOTAS/article/view/265/247.
  23. Brookhart, S. M., & Durkin, D. T. (2018). Classroom Assessment, Student Motivation, and Achievement in High School Social Studies Classes. Applied Measurement in Education, 16(1), 27-54.
  24. Brualdi, A. (2015). Implementing performance assessment in the classroom. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED423312. Retrieved from http://ericae.net/pare/getvn.asp?v=6&n=2.
  25. Bullens, D. (2017). Authentic assessment: Change for the future (Master’s Thesis). Available from ERIC database. (ERIC No. ED468067)
  26. Cahapay, M. B. (2020). Rethinking Education In the New Normal Post-COVID-19 Era: A Curriculum Studies Perspective. https://www.aquademia-journal.com/download/rethinking-education-in-the-new-normal-post-covid-19-era-a-curriculum-studies-perspective-8315.pdf.
  27. CHED Handbook on Typology, OBE, DepEd and ISA, (2014). Analysis of Students’ Attitudes on Performance-Based Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com/document/520903
  28. Chun, I. (2017). Analysis of Students’ Attitudes on Performance-Based Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com/document/520903
  29. Clauser, B. E. (2019). Recurrent issues and recent advances in scoring performance assessments. Applied Psychology and Measurement, 24(4), 310-324.
  30. Cross, L. & Angelo, H.(2018). Analysis of Students’ Attitudes on Performance-Based Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com/document/520903
  31. Dalton, B., Morocco, C. C., Tivnan, T., & Rawson, M. P. (2017). Supported inquiry science: teaching for conceptual change in urban and suburban science classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(6), 670-684.
  32. Darling-Hammond, K. (1994). Analysis of Students’ Attitudes on Performance-Based Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com/document/520903
  33. Darling-Hammond, L. & Falk, B. (2017). Using standards and assessment to support student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(3), 190-199.
  34. De Baca, C. (2019). Resiliency and Academic Performance. Retrieved fromhttp://www.scholarcentric.com/wpcontent/uploads/2019/03/SC_Resiliency _Academic_Performance_WP.pdf
  35. Dicheva D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in Edcation: A Systematic Mapping   Study. Educational   Technology   &   Society, 18(3), 75-88.   Retrieved   from https://www.wssu.edu/profiles/dichevc/gamification-in-education-systematic-mapping-study.pdf
  36. Didier, C. (2015). Use of articulated thoughts during a simulated situation to change self-efficacy and outcome expectations. https://digitalcommons.stritch.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=etd
  37. Diez, M.E. & Moon, C.J. (2017). What do we want to know? and other important questions. Educational Leadership, 49, 38-41.
  38. Dole, S.  F. (2017).  Creating cultures of thinking: the 8 forces we must master to truly transform our schools. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2). doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1720
  39. Duban, N. ve Küçükyılmaz, E. A. (2018). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının alternatif ölçme-değerlendirme yöntem ve tekniklerinin uygulama okullarında kullanımına ilişkin görüşleri. İlköğretim Online, 7(3), 769-784.
  40. Earl, L. M., & LeMahieu, P. G., (2017). Rethinking assessment and accountability. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational change with heart and mind (pp.149-168). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  41. Eppink, J. A. (2017). The effect of web-based portfolio assessment strategies on the attitudes and self-perceived growth in music learning of non-music elementary general classroom educators in a basics of music course. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ball State University.
  42. Falk, B. (2017). Using standards and assessment to support student learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(3), 190-199.
  43. Fernandez, R. M., Fernando, E. C., & Gloriana, R. J. (2021). FLIPPED Online Classroom:
  44. Booster for the Senior High School Student’s Online Learning On CORE And Applied Subjects’ MELCs. https://gessjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/3.7-Flipped-classroom.pdf.
  45. Ferrara, J. & McTighe, G. (2017). Analysis of Students’ Attitudes on Performance-Based Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com/document/520903
  46. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Karns, K., Hamlett, C. L., & Katzaroff, M. (2019). Mathematics performance assessment in the classroom: Effects on teacher planning and student problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 609-646.
  47. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Karns, K., Hamlett, C. L., & Katzaroff, M. (2018). Mathematics performance assessment in the classroom: Effects on teacher planning and student problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 609-646.
  48. Galang, A. D. (2021). Teachers’ Critical Reflections On the New Normal Philippine Education Issues:Inputs On Curriculum And Instruction Development. http://ijsl.pubmedia.id/index.php/ijsl/article/view/43/20.
  49. Gelbal, S. ve Kelecioğlu, H. (2017). Öğretmenlerin ölçme ve değerlendirme yöntemleri hakkındaki yeterlik algıları ve karşılaştıkları sorunlar. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, 135-147.
  50. Guimba, W., Aguino, J. & Abbas, B. (2016). Attitudes related to Social Science among Grade 9 students of MSU-ILS. International Conference of Research in Social Sciences, Humanities, and Education. Cebu, Philippines. Retrieved from http://uruae.org/siteadmin/upload/4104UH0516030.pdf
  51. Hanushek, E. and L. Wößmann. (2017). Education Quality and Economic Growth. Washington D. C: The World Bank.
  52. Heckman, J., L. Lochner, and P. Todd. (2016). “Earnings Functions, Rates of Return and Treatment Effects: The Mincer Equation and Beyond.” In Handbook of the Economics of Education, by E. Hanushek and F. Welch, vol. 1, pp. 307-458. North Holland: Elsevier.
  53. Hee Kim, K. (2014).  Assessing science reasoning and conceptual understanding in the primary grades using standardized and performance-based assessments. Sage Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(1), 47–66. doi.org/10.1177/1932202X14520946
  54. Heisler, P. K. (2018). An investigation of personal investment levels among nonmusic major piano students using portfolio assessment. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of North Texas.
  55. Herman, J. L. (2018, December). The state of performance assessments. The School Administrators Web Edition. Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org/publications/sa/2018_12/herman.html
  56. Hernando-Malipot, M. (2017). Education: Notable gains, still much to improve. Manila Bulletin. December 29.
  57. Hunt, C. and T. McHale. (2015). “Education and Philippine Economic Development.” The Elementary School Journal 63-73. https://doi.org/10.1086/445110
  58. Kece, M. (2013). Problems related to the teaching of social studies and suggestions for solution: Teachers’ opinions based on a qualitative research.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 122(2014), 388-392. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1359
  59. Khattri, N. & Sweet, D. (2016). Assessment reform: Promises and challenges. In M. B. Kane & R. Mitchell (Eds.) Implementing performance assessment: Promise, Problems, and Challenges. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  60. Khattri, N., Reeve, A. L., & Kane, M. B. (2018). Principles and practices of performance assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  61. Klein, S. (2018). Characteristics of hand and machine-assigned scores to college students’ answers to open-ended tasks. Institute of Mathematical Statistics Collections, Probability and Statistics: Essays in Honor of David A. Freeman, 2, pp.76–89.
  62. Klein, S. P., Stecher, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., McCaffrey, D., Ormseth, T., Bell, R. M., Comfort, K., & Othman, A. R. (2019). Analytic versus holistic scoring of science performance task. Applied Measurement in Education, 11(2), 121-137.
  63. Linn, R. L., & Baker. E. L. (2016). Can performance-based student assessments be psychometrically sound?, In J. B. Babon & D. P. Wolf (Eds.), Performance-based student assessment: Challenges and possibilities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago press.
  64. Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2016). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
  65. Logan, C. R. (2016). The relationship between instruction and assessment, Unpublished Doctoral dissertation., The Pennsylvania State University.
  66. Mangaluz, J. (2018). K-12 and the Work Immersion Program. Philippine Daily Inquirer.
  67. McMillan, J. H. (2011). Essential assessment concepts for teachers and administrators. Corwin Press, Inc. A Sage Publication Co., Thousand Oaks, California. Retrieved from books.google.com › Education › Administration › General
  68. Messick, S. (2018). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.) Educational Measurement, (3rd ed.) (pp. 13-104) NY: Macmillan Publishing Co.
  69. Messick, S. (2019). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13-23.
  70. Miesels, S. J., Atkins-Burnett, S., Xue, Y., Bickel, D. D., & Son, S. (2018). Creating a system of accountability: The impact of instructional assessment on elementary children’s achievement test scores. Educational Policy Analysis Archieves, 11(9), 1-18.
  71. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., & Almond, R. G. (2016). On the roles of task model variables in assessment design, (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 500) Los Angeles: University of California National Center for Research on Evaluation.
  72. Moskal, B. M. (2016). Recommendations for developing classroom performance assessments and scoring rubrics. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8 (14). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=&&n=14.
  73. Mueller, J.  (2015).  Authentic assessment in the classroom and the library media center.  Library Media Connection, 23(7), 14–18.
  74. Munzur, Z. (2014). Reflections on the impact of absence of summative assessment on students’ motivation and learning. Journal of Education and Future, 6, 71–89. http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/174200
  75. National Education Goals Panel. (2011). Measuring progress toward the national education goals: Potential indicators and measurement strategies (Compendium of interim resource group reports). Washington DC: Author.
  76. Nelson, L. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. https://neurolrespract.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
  77. Nevid, J. S. (2018). Motivation: The Psychological Factors That Guide Us. Retrieved from psychology.about.com. Psychology Glossary: M Index
  78. Nitko, A. J. (2018). Educational assessment of students, 4th edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  79. Oyibe, S. and Ven, Q. (2015). Contextual Learning retrieved from https://prezi.com/3sfgrkoifh23/according-to-contextual-learning-theorylearning-occurs-onl/
  80. Palm, T. (2018). Performance Assessment and Authentic Assessment: A Conceptual Analysis of the Literature. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 13(4), 1-11. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v13n4.pdf
  81. Park, M. A. (2018). The effects of portfolio assessment on students’ reading comprehension in English and on attitude: Focused on junior high school students’ English. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Korea University, Korea.
  82. Philippines. Republic Act No. 10533: Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013. Quezon City, Philippines: Congress of the Philippines, 2013.
  83. Popham, J. W. (2008). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
  84. Psacharopoulos, G., and H.A. Patrinos. (2018). “Returns to Investment in Education: A Further.” In Education Economics, vol. 12 pp. 111-134. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.
  85. Quiter, M. (2017). Performance Assessment. Presentation based on the optional reading by Popham. An Overview of Chapter 8, Classroom Assessment: What Teachers Need to Know. 4 th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  86. Ravina, J. D., & Mendoza, J. P. (2021). TEACHING APPROACH IN SCIENCE, THEIR USE AND EFFECTIVENESS ON MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCIES (MELCS) DISTRIBUTION. https://eprajournals.com/jpanel/upload/1157pm_42.EPRA%20JOURNALS%20%20%207739.pdf.
  87. RESEARCH IN EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY STUDIES from https://drvictorlimfei.wordpress.com/2012/05/09/role-of-qualitative-research-in-educational-technology-studies/.
  88. Sağlam-Arslan, A., Devecioğlu-Kaymakçı, Y. ve Arslan, S. (2019). Alternatif ölçme-değerlendirme etkinliklerinde karşılaşılan problemler: Fen ve teknoloji öğretmenleri örneği. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28, 1‐12.
  89. Sailer, M., Hense, J., Mandl, H. & Klevers, M. (2021). Psychological Perspectives on Motivation through Gamification. Interaction Design and Architecture Journal, 28-37.  Retrieved from http://www.fml.mw.tu-muenchen.de/fml/images/Publikationen/19_2.pdf
  90. Salam-Arslan, M. L. (2019). Old and new beliefs about measurementdriven reform: “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 373). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
  91. Sandusky, S. (2019). Gamification in Education. University of Arizona. United States. Retrieved from https://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/bitstream/10150/556222/1/GamificationinEducation.pdf
  92. Sarvi, J. Munger, and H. Pillay. (2015). “K-12 Transitions: Approach and Lessons Learned,” ADB Briefs
  93. Shavelson, R. J. (2019). Guest editor’s preface, International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 235-237.
  94. Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (2017). Sampling variability of performance assessments, Journal of Educational Measurement, 30(3), 215-232.
  95. Slater, T. F. (2016). The effectiveness of portfolio assessments in science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 26(5), 315-318.
  96. Solano-Flores, G., Jovanovic, J., Shavelson, R. J., & Bachman, M. (2017). On the development and evaluation of a shell for generating science performance assessments. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (3), p. 293.
  97. Son, K. and Kim, M. S. (2015). The effects of portfolio assessment on the scientific investigation ability and science-related attitude of students in elementary school. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 15(1), 87-113.
  98. Spector, J. M. (2016). A methodology for assessing learning in complex and ill-structured task domains. Innovations in Education and Technology International, 43 (2), pp. 109-120
  99. Stavros, A.  & Anastasios, A.  (2016).  The impact of paper-based, computer-based and mobile-based self-assessment on students’ science motivation and achievement. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1241–1248. doi.10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.025
  100. Stecher, B. (2017). Performance assessment in an era of standards-based educational accountability. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
  101. Stiggins, R. J. (2016). Design and development of performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 6(3), 33-42.
  102. Stiggins, R. J. (2018). An introduction to student involved assessment for learning. (5thed.). Upper Saddle River, Nj: Prentice-Hall/Merrill. Retrieved from www.prenhall.com/stiggins/
  103. Suryadi, B.  & Santoso, T.  (2017). Self-efficacy, adversity quotient, and students’ achievement in mathematics. International Education Studies, 10(10), 12–19. doi: 10.5539/iesv10n10p12
  104. Tadeo, C. S. (2021). ONLINE DISTANCE LEARNING: A TEACHING STRATEGY ON IMPROVING STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE IN SOCIAL STUDIES IN THE NEW NORMAL. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carl-Patrick-Tadeo/publication/351596868_Online_Distance_Learning_A_Teaching_Strategy_on_Improving_Students'_Performance_in_Social_Studies_in_the_New_Normal/links/609f262092851cfdf332e1c0/Online-Distance-Learning-A-Teaching-Strategy-on-Improving-Students-Performance-in-Social-Studies-in-the-New-Normal.pdf
  105. Tezci, E. ve Demirli, C. (2019, Temmuz). Bir performans değerlendirme modeli: Bireysel gelişim dosyası. XIII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayı’nda sunulan bildiri, İnönü Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Malatya.
  106. Topol, B., Olson, J., &Roeber, E. (2016). The cost of new higher quality assessments: A comprehensive analysis of the potential costs for future state assessments. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
  107. Turgut, M. F. ve Baykul, Y. (2017). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme (4. bs.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  108. Underwood, T. (2018). The Consequences of Portfolio Assessment: A Case Study. Educational Assessment, 5(3), 147-194.
  109. Ussein, A. & Tawfik, F. (2016).  The degree of use of alternative assessment strategies by home economics teachers and the relationship with their female students’ self- efficacy in Najran region. Arts and Design Studies, 39, 38–52.
  110. Webb, N. M., Schlackman, J., & Sugrue, B. (2016). The dependability and interchangeability of assessment methods in science. Applied Measurement in Education, 13 (3), 277-301.
  111. Wiggins, G. (2016-2017). Measuring what matters: The case for assessment reform. Princeton, NJ: The Center on Learning, Assessment, and School Structure.
  112. Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2015). Understanding by Design (2nded). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved from www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/.../UbD_White Paper0312.pdf
  113. Woodward, J., Monroe, K., & Baxter, J. (2019). Enhancing Student Achievement on Performance Assessments in Mathematics. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24(1), 33- 46.
  114. Yasemin, A. & Cavus, S.  (2018), The effects of alternative assessment and evaluation methods on academic achievement, persistence of learning, self-efficacy perception and attitudes.  Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 10(4), 1022–1046
  115. Yusuf L. (2016). “Examining Gender Responsiveness of the Philippine Basic Education Reform: An Analysis of the K-12 Araling Panlipunan or Social Studies Curriculum” in MIMBAR PENDIDIKAN: Jurnal Indonesia untuk Kajian Pendidikan, Vol.1(1) Maret, pp.37-54. Bandung, Indonesia: UPI Press.

Tools


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