Senior High School Students’ Perspectives on ClassroomChallenges and Adaptation Strategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsair.V2.I2.232Keywords:
Adaptation strategies, Classroom challenges, Descriptive-comparative design, Experiential learning theory, Learning styles model, Senior High School students, STEM ABM HUMSS strandsAbstract
This study examines the differences in classroom challenges and adaptation strategies among Senior High School (SHS) students across STEM, ABM, and HUMSS strands at Holy Cross of Mintal, Inc. (HCMI). Anchored in the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model and Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory, the research explores how strand-specific academic demands influence students’ experiences and coping mechanisms. A quantitative descriptive-comparative design was employed, involving 165 SHS students selected through stratified random sampling. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire adapted from validated instruments (Bernardo et al., 2024; Gonzales et al., 2024; Albastro et al., 2023; Costambienes, 2024), with reliability confirmed through Cronbach’s alpha above 0.85. Descriptive and inferential statistics, including mean, standard deviation, t-test, and ANOVA, were used for analysis. Findings revealed a high level of classroom challenges, particularly in emotional/cognitive and instructional domains, while environmental challenges were moderate. Students demonstrated a high level of adaptation strategies, with emotional and cognitive coping being most prominent. No significant differences in challenges were found across age, grade level, or academic strand, although female students reported higher emotional/cognitive challenges. Adaptation strategies were generally consistent across profiles, except for significant differences across strands, where STEM and HUMSS students exhibited higher adaptation levels than ABM students. The study also established a direct relationship between high challenges and high adaptation, indicating strong student resilience. The study aligns with SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) by promoting effective learning environments and student preparedness. Its sustainability impact lies in strengthening educational and institutional sustainability through improved instructional practices, student support systems, and adaptive learning strategies that enhance long-term academic success and resilience.
References
Albastro, J. R., & Datu, J. A. (2023). Linking academic motivation to academic performance: The role of self-efficacy in Filipino secondary students. Asian Journal of Science Education, 5(2), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.17509/ajse.v5i2.56781
Augusta University. (2021, March 15). Student-centered learning: Strategies for mitigating academic stress in high-pressure environments. University News & Research. https://www.augusta.edu/education/research/student-strategies-2021
Bernardo, A. B., & Lucas, M. I. (2024). The psychological toll of specialization: Academic anxiety and the Senior High School experience in Southeast Asia. Journal of Educational Stress and Resilience, 12(2), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesr.2024.03.011
Brooks, R. T. (2022). The social-environmental fit: How peer dynamics buffer academic pressure in secondary education. International Journal of Educational Development, 89, 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102553
Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.
Chen, L., & Tan, J. (2023). Pedagogical friction: Navigating the rapid curriculum pace in specialized K–12 tracks. Journal of Curriculum Studies and Research, 5(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2023.2
Costambienes, R. F. (2024). Parental support and metacognitive awareness: Determinants of student motivation in learning. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), 11(1), 133–151. https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.110112
Dela Cruz, R. M. (2023). Resource management strategies and digital knowledge-seeking among Filipino Senior High School students. Philippine Journal of Science and Technology Education, 15(4), 88–104. https://doi.org/10.53378/pjste.2023.v15i4.10
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1978). Teaching students through their individual learning styles. Reston Publishing Company.
Ginting, H. (2021). Pedagogical inconsistency and its impact on student motivation: A study of Southeast Asian secondary schools. Southeast Asian Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1163/22125868-12340912
Gomez, K., Arinto, P., & Santos, D. (2024). Specialized curricula as experiential catalysts: A Kolbian analysis of student adaptation. Journal of Experiential Education and Research, 21(3), 210–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382592412356
Gonzales, M. T., & Ramos, S. P. (2024). Development and validation of a metacognitive coping strategy scale for Senior High School learners. Philippine Journal of Educational Psychology, 26(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.53378/pjep.2024.v26i1.04
Hansen, M. E. (2023). Beyond lighting and sound: The role of the physical environment in supporting cognitive load management. Educational Architecture and Psychology, 10(2), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2023.11
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
Li, X. (2025). Cognitive load theory in the 21st century: Assessing mental fatigue in specialized high-stakes tracks. Frontiers in Educational Psychology, 16, Article 402. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.00402
Lim, S. H., & Tan, K. Y. (2024). Cognitive grit: The primary predictor of success in high-pressure Asian academic contexts. Asian Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18(1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/adp.2024.5
Lopez, F. J., & Garcia, M. S. (2025). Metacognitive training and long-term academic sustainability: Refining the student coping repertoire. Journal of Advanced Learning Strategies, 7(4), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.5539/jals.v7n4p112
Madigan, D. J., Kim, L. E., & Glandorf, H. L. (2023). Teacher burnout and student outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the international evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 35(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09756-4
Manlapig, J. M. (2018). Psychological readiness and the K–12 transition: Early insights into the Philippine Senior High School system. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 120–145. https://doi.org/10.3860/pjp.v51i2.1023
Patel, N., & Nguyen, T. (2024). Structural needs and cognitive friction: An application of the Dunn and Dunn model in modern SHS pedagogy. Scopus Journal of Educational Research, 33(1), 12–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-024-09311-x
Pondang, R. K. (2025). The mediation of strand-specific instructional strategies on the relationship between learning environment and student self-efficacy in Davao City. Davao Educational Review, 14(1), 88–105. https://doi.org/10.53378/der.2025.v14i1.12
Reyes, G., & Villanueva, E. (2024). The hybrid burden: Instructional hurdles in post-pandemic Senior High School environments. Philippine Education Quarterly, 40(2), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.40.2.01
Thompson, D. (2025). Convergent versus accommodating styles: How learning styles dictate student resilience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 117(3), 445–460. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000850
Yu, F., & Singh, K. (2025). The power of rapport: Quantifying the variance of teacher-student dynamics on global student engagement. International Journal of Educational Science and Management, 20(2), 312–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijesir.2025.01.009
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2021). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315697048
