The Teaching of Science and Technology (Biology) in the Public Secondary Schools in the Division of Isabela, School Year 2001 - 2002

==========================================================================

The study attempted to assess the teaching of Science and Technology (Biology) in the public secondary schools in the Division of Isabela, for the School Year 2001 – 2002.

More specifically, the study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the respondents’ profile in terms of sex, age, civil status, educational attainment, major subjects/field of specialization, teaching experience in the public secondary schools, teaching experience as Science Teachers, administrative and supervisory experience (for administrators only), in-service trainings attended in teaching Science and Technology II, and Scholarship grants/awards enjoyed?
   
   
2. What is the extent of implementation of Science and Technology II (Biology) instruction as perceived by the respondents in terms of objectives, contents/learning competencies, instructional materials like books, references, devices/aids, facilities and equipments, teaching methodologies/strategies, evaluation of learning outcomes, supervisory assistance extended by school administrators, and physical facilities and equipments?
   
   
3. What problems were met by the teachers in teaching Science and Technology II (Biology)? To what extent is the seriousness of the problems met?
   
   
4. Is there any significant relationship between the respondents’ responses toward the implementation of Science and Technology instruction when respondents are grouped according to age, sex, civil status, educational attainment, and teaching experience as Science Teachers?
   
   
5. Is the any significant difference between the respondents’ responses toward the implementation of Science and Technology instruction when respondents are grouped according to age, sex, civil status, educational attainment and teaching experience as Science Teacher and between responses of school administrators and teacher – respondents?

The researcher used the Descriptive Survey Method in the study. The questionnaire which was the data gathering instrument was floated to school heads and teachers teaching the subject who were the subjects of the study. They were assigned in 78 public secondary schools, 62 of which were general public secondary schools and 16 vocational and industrial high schools. Weighted mean, chi-square and t – test were used in the treatment of the data.

Summary of Findings

There were more female administrators and teachers than males who were considered young and versatile because the average age of the school administrators was 45 years old while the teacher – respondents was 36 years old. Most of them were married. All of them possessed appropriate educational qualifications to teach in the public secondary schools but only 105 were Science major (General and Biology). The rest had different major subjects but were assigned to teach Biology.

Most of the teachers had more than 10 years teaching experience in the public secondary schools, teaching Science subjects. In like manner, most of the school administrators have more than 10 years administrative and supervisory competencies. The respondents attended different levels of in-service trainings, most common of which were regional, division and school levels.

As to scholarship grants/awards enjoyed, very few had the opportunities to avail such scholarships such as DOST Scholarship, RISE and others.

As a whole, the teaching objectives in Science and Technology (Biology) were “often” carried or implemented. The objectives were not ”always” carried because of many school activities like scouting, athletics, attendance to meetings and others. Nonetheless, the different contents or learning lessons/competencies in Biology were “often” carried/taught or implemented.

Graphic materials and improvises science devices were reported as “adequate” but as a whole the different instructional materials used by the teachers were “partly adequate” as confirmed by the composite mean of 3.36 by the school administrators and 3.40 by the teacher – respondents.

In teaching methodologies/strategies, games was the most common method/strategy used by the teachers, however, as a whole, the different teaching methodologies/strategies were “often” used by the teachers. They always used evaluative instruments in assessing the students’ learning.

As to physical facilities and equipments used in teaching Biology, claimed to be “adequate” were light, water, chairs, tables, cabinets and electric fans in the Science and Laboratory rooms. However, the facilities and equipments in the library and science gardens were found “partly adequate”. Inspite of these, as a whole, the physical facilities and equipments used in teaching Biology were “adequate”.

The school administrators extended some supervisory assistance to the Biology teachers and both respondents stated that checking of lesson plans was “always” made by the school administrators while issuance of bulletin in Science was “occasionally” done. However, as a whole, all the supervisory practices performed by the school administrators were “often” extended to their teachers.

The problems under administration and physical facilities and equipments were considered “serious” while the problems met under staff development, students’ development and instructional materials were considered as “moderately serious”. In research and evaluation, “inability of teachers to conduct school or classroom action research” was considered “serious”.

There is highly significant relationship between the respondents’ responses toward the implementation of Science and Technology (Biology) instruction when respondents were grouped according to sex, age, civil status, educational attainment and teaching experience as supported by their computed Chi-square ratios, the null hypothesis of the study is rejected, because the Chi – square critical ratio of 5.99 is lower than the computed chi-square ratios.

In terms of significant differences, the t – test computed ratios confirmed that there is highly significant difference between the respondents’ responses toward the implementation of Science and Technology (Biology) instruction when respondents were grouped according to sex, age, civil status, educational attainment, teaching experience and between the responses of the school administrators and teacher – respondents of the study. The null hypothesis of the study is rejected.

Conclusions

Most of the school administrators and teachers were females, young, versatile and strong, and married and academically prepared to teach but few were major in Biology. However, they tried to upgrade their teaching competencies and pursuing additional units in Science through scholarship grants/awards.

The teachers have adequate teaching experience in teaching the subject, hence it is assumed that they are knowledgeable with the different objectives and contents of the subject.

The teachers tried their best to teach the objectives and contents of Biology through the use of different instructional materials, different teaching methodologies/strategies and evaluative instruments in assessing students’ learning outcomes.

Biology instructions were not so much supervised by the school administrators because of lack of time due to many intervening school activities attendance to meetings/conferences.

Physical facilities and equipments used in Biology instruction were adequate.

The teaching of Biology was adversely affected, including the academic achievements of the students because of some serious problems in administration, physical facilities and equipments, and curriculum and instructional materials.

The respondents’ responses toward the implementation of Biology instruction is highly significantly related to sex, age, civil status, educational attainment and teaching experience.

Their responses toward the implementation of Biology instruction is highly significantly different between males and females, below 45 years old and 46 years old and above, married and single, bachelors’ and masteral/doctoral degree holders, below 10 years and above 10 years.

The responses between the school administrators and teachers – respondents were highly significantly different from each other.

The findings manifest that the teaching of Biology in the public secondary schools is not well implemented or carried due to some factors such as teachers who are non – major in Biology teach the subject, inadequate instructional materials like computer units, and computer – aided instructional materials and some serious problems under administration and physical facilities and equipment both in the classroom and laboratory rooms and school library.

Recommendations

1. Only teachers who majored in Biology should teach the subject. In cases of non - major teachers teaching the subject, they should be encouraged to attend different levels of in – service trainings, attend summer classes and observe classes in Biology.
   
   
2. School administrators and higher school authorities should find ways and means to provide adequate instructional materials, like computer units, computer aided instructional materials, physical facilities and equipments of classroom or science room and laboratory rooms, as well as making the school libraries functional.
   
   
3. Science and Technology II (Biology) instructions should be periodically monitored and supervised/observed by the school administrators by having balance school programs/schedule of school affairs/activities so that the time allotted for the subject will not be sacrificed.
   
   
4. Teachers who are lagging behind in the implementation of Biology instructions should be closely supervised, observed and extended necessary supervisory assistance.
   
   
5. The objectives and contents of Biology should be properly budgeted by grading periods so that the teachers will be properly guided in teaching the subject.
   
   
6. The national government through the Department of Education should provide additional items for teachers so that the big enrolment and over – loading of teachers will be lessened or reduced.
   
   
7. Teachers teaching the subject should be motivated / encouraged to use the new teaching methodologies/strategies so that learning of students will be more meaningful and interesting.

-----oooOooo-----