Evaluating the Pedagogical Implementation of Mathematics 3 Curriculum in the District of Ambaguio, SDO Nueva Vizcaya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsair.V2.I2.293Keywords:
Classroom Teaching Practices, Curriculum Implementation, Instructional Materials, Instructional Support, Learner Engagement, Mathematics 3 Curriculum, Pedagogical ImplementationAbstract
This study evaluated the pedagogical implementation of the Mathematics 3 curriculum in the District of Ambaguio, Schools Division Office of Nueva Vizcaya. Specifically, it examined classroom teaching practices, use of instructional materials, learner engagement, and instructional support in the implementation of the curriculum. The study employed a descriptive quantitative research design and involved teachers handling Mathematics 3 in the public elementary schools of the district, selected through purposive sampling. Data were gathered using a researcher-made questionnaire and analyzed through frequency, percentage, and weighted mean. The findings revealed that the pedagogical implementation of the Mathematics 3 curriculum was generally high, with a composite weighted mean of 3.33. Among the four dimensions assessed, classroom teaching practices obtained the highest mean of 3.58, followed by learner engagement with 3.34, use of instructional materials with 3.21, and instructional support with 3.17 as the lowest-rated area. These results indicate that teachers were generally effective in delivering Mathematics 3 instruction and engaging learners in classroom activities. However, the comparatively lower ratings in instructional materials and instructional support suggest the need to strengthen the broader conditions that support pedagogy. The study concluded that successful pedagogical implementation depends not only on teacher classroom practices but also on the adequacy of resources and support mechanisms available in the school setting. It is recommended that schools and district leaders enhance access to mathematics teaching materials and provide sustained instructional support to further improve the implementation of the Mathematics 3 curriculum.
References
Almerino, P. M., Ocampo, L. A., Abellana, D. P. M., Almerino, J. G. F., Mamites, I. O., Pinili, L. C., Sugano, S. G. C., & Pentang, J. T. (2020). Evaluating the academic performance of K-12 students in the Philippines: A standardized evaluation approach. Education Research International, 2020, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8877712
Bungao-Abarquez, E. (2020). The use of manipulative in teaching elementary mathematics. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 3(11), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2020.3.11.3
Patalinghug, J. S., & Arnado, A. A. (2021). Mathematics teachers’ technological pedagogical and content knowledge and their capacity for differentiated instruction. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Applied Business and Education Research, 2(7), 574–586. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.02.07.05
Valle, L. (2024). Reimagining mathematics education: Identifying training needs and challenges among public elementary school teachers post-pandemic. International Journal of Education and Practice, 12(3), 527–539. https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v12i3.3723
