International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

An Evaluation of DepEd-produced Grade 7

Biology Modules by Biology Experts and
Science Teachers
Maria Lourdes G. Tana

Corresponding author: Maria Lourdes G. Tan ([email protected])

Leyte Normal University, Tacloban City, Leyte, Philippines 6500.

Keywords: biology experts, teachers, modules, evaluation

Abstract
Teachers play an essential role in the evaluation of learning materials. As facilitators of learning, they ensure that
learning materials serve their purpose of bringing about the effective teaching-learning process. This study aimed
to evaluate the Department of Education (DepEd)-produced Grade 7 Biology Modules as perceived by Biology
Experts and Science Teachers in the 16 public secondary schools in the Division of Tacloban City, Leyte,
Philippines. The modules are evaluated based on the seven dimensions: a) content, b) presentation and
organization, c) learning activities, d) evaluation activities, e) accuracy and up-to-dateness of information, f)
format and g) sufficient availability of materials. The demographic profile of 17 Biology experts showed that the
majority are female, BSED graduates in Biological Sciences with a doctoral degree in Biology and 1-15 years
teaching Biology subjects. Grade 7 Science teachers are mostly females who have a bachelor's degree in
Biological Sciences, with master's units and 1-2 years teaching Grade 7 Science in the K to 12 Curriculum.
Biology experts and science teachers assessed the five modules using descriptive survey method employing
quantitative and qualitative analysis. They both evaluated the modules satisfactory in the seven dimensions.
However, they pointed out suggestions for improvement of the modules.

Introduction
Science education is greatly affected by globalization which poses challenges on its alignment
with the current perspective on global competencies. In the Philippines, the K to 12 Basic
Education Curriculum was implemented to keep abreast with global trends. It was also
challenged to improve the low scores of Filipino students in the 2003 Trends in International
Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMMS), where the Philippines ranked 43rd among 46
countries regarding science studies (TIMMS, 2013). The low International Science
achievement results were also felt in the 2012 National Achievement Test (NAT) in which
among the five core subjects, science got the lowest mean percentile score (MPS) (Naval,
2014). The weak results were confirmed in the report of Education Secretary Armin Luistro on
March 28, 2012, on the 2011 NAT result, which stated that primary students had a failing
national average of 68%, while secondary students had a failing national average of 47%
(Ronda, 2012). To solve the challenges of science education in the Philippines and carry out
the effective implementation of the K to 12 Curriculum, the Department of Education (DepEd)
mandated the allocation, delivery, and distribution of modules used by teachers and learners
(DepEd Order No. 31, s. 2012). However, the learning modules used at the start of the K to 12
Program implementation have received much feedback, both positive and negative. As
background, there is a report of the results of some local studies like that of Sañosa (2013)
which disclosed that despite the training conducted by DepEd on the K to 12 Curriculum, some
teachers commented that the Grade 7 Biology Modules were complicated regarding required
teaching competencies. Another finding was revealed by Gutierrez (2014) in which students

27
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

experienced difficulty in understanding biological concepts in the Grade 8 Biology Module.

Furthermore, students became discouraged with the subject because of complex vocabulary
that needs to be memorized to understand the topic. On the other hand, even after the
implementation of the K to 12 Curriculum and the use of the learning modules, the National
Achievement Test (NAT) results, particularly in the Division of Tacloban City still showed a
low mean percentage score (MPS) in Science and Mathematics. This result motivated the
researcher to use the Division of Tacloban City as the locale of her study.

Given the feedback above, the researcher saw the need to evaluate the DepEd-produced Grade
7 Biology Modules utilised by teachers as learning materials. It was the ultimate goal of this
study to evaluate and enhance the five Grade 7 Science - Living things and their Environment
- Modules. Specifically, the study conducted sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the biology experts and Grade 7 Science teachers in terms of the
following?
a) sex and age
b) educational qualification
c) length of service in teaching Grade 7 Science of K to 12 Curriculum
2. What is the level of perception of biology experts and Grade 7 Science teachers of K to 12
Curriculum on the Living Things and their Environment Modules in the following dimensions?
a) content
b) presentation and organization
c) learning activities
d) evaluation activities
e) accuracy and up-to-dateness of the information
f) format
g) sufficiency on availability of modules
3. What are the suggestions of the biology experts and Grade 7 science teachers for improving
the Grade 7 Science Living Things and their Environment Modules in the following
dimensions?
a) content
b) presentation and organization
c) learning activities
d) evaluation activities
e) accuracy and up-to-dateness of the information
f) format
g) sufficiency on availability of modules

The researcher recognized that said modules were the product of the collaborative efforts of
experts in the field of science from the National Institute of Science and Mathematics Education
(NISMED). But, knowing that those were the first outputs for the first year of implementation
of the K to 12 Curriculum in 2012, it is then necessary to assess the Grade 7 Biology Modules
from Biology experts and teachers. As explained by Bago (2001) the implementation of the
program without assessment is much like a dying patient who goes to a doctor to get medicine
for a fatal illness but never returns to the medical office to see if the medicine has the needed
effect.

One important question to ask is: Why is there a need to evaluate the modules? Pawson (2013)
explained that evaluation is conducted to inform the improvement of policy and practice. He
added that science could only grow if it learns lessons from investigation to investigation rather

28
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

than each inquiry emerging freshly out of the egg. Newby, Stepich, Lehman and Russell,
(2006) mentioned three criteria in evaluating instructional materials, namely: 1) usefulness
related to pedagogical effectiveness, 2) usability related to perceptual and technological
efficiency, and 3) appeal. Furthermore, Newby identified five goals in evaluating instructional
materials as follows: 1) to help assess the effectiveness of the instructional material; 2) to
improve one's skills in instructional material development; 3) to determine whether the
instructional materials comply with specified standards; 4) to contribute to the knowledge of
evaluation theories, and 5) to improve the instructional materials (IMs). Hamona (2002) also
cited criteria for evaluation of instructional materials developed by the UNICEF Curriculum
Development Project as follows: a) material should cover the required learning competencies,
b) provision for appropriate evaluation activities with indicators for the degree of attaining the
learning competencies, and c) time allotment to cover the lesson or unit.

Two evaluation theories guided this investigation: Formative Evaluation and Developmental
Evaluation Theory. Scriven (1967) coined the first theory, which includes the following steps:
1) improving, 2) enhancing, and 3) standardizing. Flagg (1990) introduced four phases of
formative evaluation as follows: Phase 1-Planning, Phase 2-Design, Phase 3-Production, and
Phase 4-Implementation. In Planning, needs assessment is conducted to include perceptions,
habits, knowledge, skills, and expectation. In Design, it contains decisions regarding specific
content, objectives, and instructional strategies. The production consists of decisions on issues
that affect concerns on appeal, comprehensibility, user-friendliness, pacing, and icons. Finally,
the Implementation phase is done to help in the enhancement of support materials like print
materials or to inform designers of the need for some changes.

Evaluating to make improvements is known as formative evaluation, which examines the

content, input, and process of the curriculum, and its learning materials (Phillips, 2013). It also
allows the evaluator to evaluate the instruments to be used. If any section of it does not yield
data useful for instruction, then it should be revised or eliminated (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2001).
The Developmental evaluation theory of Patton (2011), on the other hand, emphasized that one
of the strategies to measure the effect of a program is to generate feedback and learning. Hattie
and Timperly (2007) stressed that feedback, as a form of assessment, is one of the most
effective influences on learning and achievement. But the impact can either be positive or
negative. Feedback from teachers or experts in the field is often used to make improvements
to the learning materials. Race (2000) stated that feedback is one of the most important
considerations when assessing instructional materials. Thus in this study, input from Biology
experts and Grade 7 science teachers about the quality of the biology modules as used by them
during instruction is very vital information in evaluating the materials by actual use in the
classroom.

Within the context of the theories outlined above, the researcher developed a conceptual
paradigm illustrated in Figure 1 which helps visualise the entire study.

29
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Conceptual framework
Evaluation of DepEd-Produced Grade 7
Biology Modules on the Perceptions of
Biology Experts and Science Teachers
based on the following dimensions:
• content
Profile of the Biology • presentation and organization
Experts and Grade 7 • learning activities
Science Teachers in • evaluation activities
the Division of • accuracy and up-to-datedness of
Tacloban City information
regarding:
• format
• sex and age • sufficiency on the availability of
• educational modules
qualification
• length of service in
teaching Grade 7
Science

Suggestions for Enhancement of DepEd-

Produced Grade 7 Biology Modules based
on the Seven Dimensions

Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework of the Study

Methodology
Research design
The study utilised a descriptive survey method using a survey questionnaire to collect
quantitative and qualitative data. It was concerned with the evaluation and suggestions for the
improvement of the module. This study was conducted in the Division of Tacloban City, Leyte,
Philippines.

The respondents
The 17 Biology experts and 35 Grade 7 science teachers of 16 public secondary schools
comprising the entire Division of Tacloban City were requested to serve as respondents with
the approval beforehand from the school's division superintendent and principals.

Sampling
In choosing the respondents, no sampling was done since all the teachers teaching Grade 7
Science were respondents of the study. The teacher respondents were public secondary school
teachers of the Division of Tacloban City, Leyte, Philippines. Both Biology experts and Grade
7 Science teachers were identified regarding their demographic profile characteristics as sex
and age, educational qualification, and length of service in teaching Grade 7 Science in the K
to 12 Curriculum. However, Biology experts were chosen regarding their length of service in
teaching Biology.
30
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Materials
Grade 7 Biology Modules
These refer to science learning modules used in teaching Grade 7 Biology. The Department of
Education provided the said material under the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum, which has
undergone series of validation and pilot testing by the Department of Education before its
implementation (K to 12 Science Curriculum Guide, December 2013). Specifically, the Grade
7 Biology Modules referred to in this study is usually recited during the Second Quarter
between August, September, and October.

Curriculum content standards reflected in the Curriculum Guide (2013) of the Grade 7 Biology
Modules include: parts and functions of compound microscope; different levels of biological
organization as to: cells, tissues, organs, organ system, and organisms; how organs work
together in plants and animals; organisms and structures other than plants and animals; process
of reproduction, both sexual and asexual; and, the interaction of these organisms with non-
living things in the ecosystem.

Assessment of Grade 7 Biology Modules

The ADDIE Model (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) by Watson, Murin,
Vashaw, Gemin, and Rapp in Tampa, 2013 was the basis in the primary procedure of the study.
The analysis phase involves the gathering of information about the modules based on the seven
(7) dimensions from the Grade 7 Science teachers who assessed the modules. The design
included areas to be evaluated, as well as the instrument and procedure to gather the data.
Development of this study made use of the perceptions and suggestions of Biology experts and
teacher-respondents in enhancing the Grade 7 Biology Modules. Implementation reflected the
incorporation of Biology experts' and teachers' feedback to improve the modules.

Dimensions in evaluating the Grade 7 Biology Modules

The content of learning materials: The content of materials refers to the lessons and learning
competencies and skills needed to be acquired by the learner in the subject (Macarandang,
2009). Teachers should take note that in selecting a material for instruction, one must be guided
by the following questions: (1) Is this material usable to the teaching curricular unit, specific
learning experience or problem-solving activity?, (2) Do the learning instructional materials
(IMs) contribute meaningful content and learning experience?, (3) What is the degree of
relationship between curricular content of the learning material and subject matter to be
learned?, and (4) Is the content of the material sufficiently rich with number of examples to
warrant sound conclusion? (Abolade, 2013).

Presentation and organisation: This implies that the sequence of topics in the curriculum guide
is consistent with the topics in the module. Salandanan (2011) defined presentation and
organisation as the logical and smooth flow of ideas, in which it followed pattern of experiences
to provide the learner with accumulative understanding and skills.

Learning activities: This refers to the activities in the module that provide opportunities and
experiences for students to develop integrated science process skills or higher-order thinking
skills.

Evaluation activities: The Grade 7 Biology Modules include assessment of activities and
concepts in the form of a pretest and posttest following principles of test construction congruent
to learning competencies and specific objectives (Macarandang, 2009).

31
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Accuracy and up-to-dateness of information: This refers to all errors in the modules such as
conceptual, grammatical, factual, computational, typographical and other minor errors (for
example: inappropriate or unclear illustrations, missing labels, wrong captions, and other) and
obsolete information (DepEd Regional HandBook in the Context Evaluation of Supplementary
Materials, IMCS, 2008).

Format: DepEd Regional HandBook (2008) identified the following criteria to evaluate the
format of the learning material which include/s: a) prints in term of size of letters and space
between letter and words, b) illustrations, c) designs and layout, d) paper and binding, and e)
size and weight of module.

Sufficiency on availability of modules: This refers to the manner of establishing the number of
copies of the said materials vis-à-vis the number of students who are using the materials and
the teachers involved in Grade 7 Science instruction.

Instrument
The research instrument, which is the researcher-made questionnaire consists of two parts:
Part 1 – Expert and Teacher Respondent Profile. This refers to the background information of
Biology experts and Grade 7 science teachers regarding sex and age, educational qualification,
and length of service in teaching Grade 7 Science in the K to 12 Curriculum.
Part 2 – Experts' and Teacher's Perceptions of Grade 7 Biology Modules. It dealt with
determining the Biology experts' and teacher's perceptions of the Grade 7 Biology Modules
regarding content, presentation, and organization learning activities, evaluation activities,
accuracy, and up-to-dateness of information, format, and sufficiency on the availability of
modules.

The five significant topics evaluated in this part of the questionnaire are as follows:
a) Module 1 - From Cell to Organism;
b) Module 2 - Plant and Animal Cells;
c) Module 3 - Living Things Other than Plants and Animals;
d) Module 4 – Reproduction: The Continuity of Life; and,
e) Module 5 - Interactions. Each component or aspect of the five modules has 5-14
conditions describing the characteristics of the existing module.

The said instrument was validated by 17 Biology experts and was pilot tested to 20 Grade 7
science teachers who were not respondents of the study. They were teachers who taught Grade
7 Science before, but not at present. In determining the reliability of the survey questionnaire
for experts and teachers, the researcher made use of Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficient as
the statistical tool. From the results, it can be gleaned that there were very high results in all of
the areas considered for assessment. The overall result of 0.95 was interpreted as Very High
Reliability. This means that the instrument has achieved consistency of responses from the
respondents across all conditions given for each category of assessment, and as such, its
reliability is established. From the results of the validation and reliability tests of the survey
questionnaire, it was determined that the instrument was ready to use for the actual respondents.

32
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Table 1: Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficient of the Experts and Teachers’ Survey
Questionnaire

Areas/Dimensions Reliability Description

Content 0.97 VH
Presentation and Organization 0.98 VH
Learning Activities 0.95 VH
Evaluation Activities 0.99 VH
Accuracy and Up-to-dateness of Information 0.95 VH
Format 0.91 H
Sufficiency on Availability of Materials 0.93 H
Overall 0.95 VH

Legend:
0.95-0.99 (VH) Very High Reliability
0.90-0.94 (H) High Reliability
0.80-0.89 (FH) Fairly High Reliability
0.70-0.79 (RL) Rather Low Reliability
Below 0.70 (L) Low Reliability

The assessment on the DepEd-produced Grade 7 Biology Modules as perceived by the Biology
experts and teacher-respondents manifested their ratings of each statement using a scale of 4-
1, where 4 is equivalent in Very Satisfactory (VS), 3 as Satisfactory (S), 2 as Poor (P), and 1
as Not Satisfactory (NS). It also includes the suggestions of the evaluator on the enhancement
of the module. It uses the range of value adapted from Rodriguez (2015). The qualitative
remark is adapted from DepEd Regional Handbook in the Content Evaluation of
Supplementary Materials, IMCS (2008).

Scale Description
3.51-4.00 Very Satisfactory (VS)
2.51-3.50 Satisfactory (S)
1.51-2.50 Poor (P)
1.00-1.50 Not Satisfactory (NS)

Figure 1: Method of Scoring

Source: DepEd Regional Handbook in the Content Evaluation of Supplementary Materials, IMCS (2008)

Frequency counts were used to analyse the demographic profile of the Biology experts and
Grade 7 Science teacher-respondents. The options that obtained the highest frequency were
treated as the dominant characteristics of the respondents. Results of the interpretation served
as the derived profile of the Biology Experts and Grade 7 Science Teachers. The weighted
mean was employed in determining the quality of Grade 7 Biology Modules as perceived by
Science teachers and Biology experts in the seven dimensions of evaluating the instructional
material. Weighted mean per dimension was computed by adding the total rating and divide it
to the total number of teacher respondents. Overall weighted mean was computed by adding
the total mean per dimension and divide it to the seven dimensions. Same process was done in
getting the weighted mean of biology experts. Ratings were tabulated and interpreted through
the use of computer assisted statistical tools. Specifically the weighted mean for each
dimension with corresponding qualitative description and the overall mean were used in
determining the results of the evaluation of modules. The item which had the highest mean

33
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

score was the considered as the dimension that best described how the respondents perceived
the Grade 7 Science module.

Results
Majority of the experts are female, they were master's degree holders in Biology (9, 53%), with
doctoral units in Biology (3, 58%), or with doctoral degrees in Biology (5, 29%). Age is cluster
between 31-40 years old (7, 41%), 51-75 years old (6, 35%), 41-50 years old (3, 18%), and 23-
30 years old (1, 6%). Most of them or 8,47 % have taught for 1-15 years; 6,35 %; 16-25 years,
2,12%, 26-35 years and 1,6% 36-45 years respectively.

The Grade 7 Science teachers in Tacloban City Division were dominated by females (26; 74%)
and with a less number of males (9; 26%). The age of the teacher's cluster between 23-40 years
old (25, 71%) followed by age range 41-45 (7, 20%), and last 51-60 (3, 9%). Regarding
educational attainment, the majority of the teacher respondents' have completed the
undergraduate course BSED (29; 83%), and the others have non-education degrees (6; 17%).
The BSED graduates are Biological Sciences majors (16; 46%), General Science (5; 14%),
Natural Science (4; 11%), Physical Sciences (3; 9%), and Chemistry (1; 3%). Non-education
graduates are those who are graduates in other fields such as BS Nursing (1) and BS Biology
(5). Out of the six non-education graduate respondents, four have 18 education units, and two
are Teacher Certificate Program (TCP), graduates. Out of the 35 teacher respondents, 9 or 26%
have a lower educational qualification (e.g., BSED/BS with education units); with master's
units (14, 40%); with a master's degree (11, 31%); and 1 or 3% with a doctor's degree. In terms
of years in teaching Grade 7 Science under the K to 12 Curriculum, majority of the teachers,
or 11 or 31% have taught for only one year; 10 or 29% have taught for two years; four or 11%
for three years; two or 6% have taught for four years; and eight or 23% have taught for five
years, while most experts 8 or 47% have taught biology for 15 years.

Biology experts' quantitative evaluation

The DepEd produced Grade 7 Biology Modules got satisfactory quality in all the seven
dimensions from Biology experts with an overall weighted mean of 3.47. Evaluation was based
on the seven aspects of evaluating instructional materials according to the major area of concern
that needs utmost attention and action: 1) sufficiency on availability of materials, 2)
presentation and organization, 3) format, 4) content, 5) learning activities, 6) evaluation
activities, and 7) accuracy and up-to-dateness of information.

Grade 7 science teachers' quantitative evaluation

The Grade 7 Science Teachers also evaluated the module satisfactory in all seven dimensions.
However, they differ in the major area of concern as follows: 1) sufficiency on availability of
materials, 2) content, 3) presentation and organization, 4) learning activities, 5) evaluation
activities, 6) format and 7) accuracy and up-to-dateness of the information.

Consolidated description of biology expert and Grade 7 science teachers’ quantitative

evaluation.
Content: Certain conditions in these aspects were not fully met like the provision of sufficient
discussion of concepts and glossary of terms.

Presentation and organization: The sequence of topics in the curriculum guide is not
consistent with the series of issues in the learner's material and teacher's guide. De la Cruz

34
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

(2015) pointed out that instructional materials need to have relevance for the objective of the
lesson. Ali (2010) agreed that the stated objectives of the module lead to instructional quality.

Learning activities: The teacher respondents stated that the learning material presents more
activities than discussion, particularly for basic science process skills. Biology Modules lack
the integrated science process skills which allow students to learn what it means to do science
by applying experimental skills, solving problems, and developing thinking skills. They are
frustrated since most of them cannot perform the activities due to lack of learning materials
(printed textbooks), science apparatus, and specimens. Macarandang (2009) explained that
enrichment activities enhance student's learning of the concepts.

Evaluation of activities: Students can download from the DepEd website the assessment of the
lesson. It needs immediate action to ensure that teachers are evaluating the actual learning of
students.

Accuracy and up-to-dateness of information: There is a need to correct some conceptual,

grammatical, and typographical errors in the module. Chinwendu (2014) explained that lexico-
syntactic errors contained in the teaching materials if not fixed would make students merely
the conveyor belt of errors contained in the teaching materials.

Format: Regarding format, the clarity, illustrations, pictures, and appropriateness of colors still
need enhancement. As explained by Olurinola (2015), colors have a positive effect on the
attention-retention rate of students inside the classroom.

Sufficiency on the availability of modules: It needs utmost attention and action. Results were
validated by the researcher herself when she conducted her pre-survey which revealed that
most or 38% of the 16 schools included in the study have one book is to two to five students
ratio of Learner's Materials; 69% have no Teacher's Guide; and 75% have no laboratory
equipment/materials, especially the microscope since typhoon ‘Haiyan’ destroyed it.
According to Oakes and Saunders (2002) textbooks and learning materials are the primary tools
for learning. It promotes efficiency in the teaching-learning process. De la Cruz (2015) pointed
out that the inability for students to use books for reading negates the objective of teaching and
make the teaching-learning process unproductive.

35
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Table 2: Summary Evaluation of DepEd-Produced Grade 7 Biology Modules based on

the Biology Experts’ and Teacher-Respondents’ Perception

Biology
Teachers’ Combined
Experts’
INDICATORS Perception Perception
Perception
Mean Desc Mean Desc Mean Desc
1. Content 2.98 S 3.45 S 3.22 S
2. Presentation and Organization 2.98 S 3.41 S 3.20 S
3. Learning Activities 3.03 S 3.48 S 3.26 S
4. Evaluation Activities 3.06 S 3.52 VS 3.29 S
5. Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of 3.31 S 3.67 VS 3.49 S
Information 3.09 S 3.44 S 3.27 S
6. Format 2.62 S 3.29 S 2.96 S
7. Sufficiency on Availability of 3.01 S 3.47 S 3.24 S
Materials
OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN
Legend: 3.51-4.00 (VS) Very Satisfactory, 2.51-3.50 (S) Satisfactory, 1.51-2.50 (P) Poor, 1.00-1.50 (NS)
Not Satisfactory

Biology Experts' and Grade 7 Science Teachers' Consolidated Qualitative Suggestion on the
Enhancement of the Modules

Regarding content, they suggested that there should be comprehensive discussion before and
after each module, with glossary of terms, and summary. In the area of presentation and
organization, there is a need for alignment of topics to be consistent in the Curriculum Guide
(CG) with the Teacher's Guide (TG) and Learner's Material (LM). Further, regarding learning
activities, students need exposure to science inquiry activities with more emphasis on the
acquisition of integrated science process skills for them to develop their higher thinking skills
and become independent learners. In the area of evaluation activities, there is a need to have
varied objective types of pre- and post-assessment items after each module. Minor
typographical errors must be looked and corrected.

Regarding format, pictures, illustrations, and diagram must be clear and colored. Similarly, the
actual color of specimens should be used to avoid misconception on the part of the students.
Font style and size should have distinction for emphasis on essential concepts. The respondents
emphasized the need for sufficiency of resources and laboratory materials.

Discussion

Generally, the study looked into the strengths, weaknesses, gaps and limitations, as well as the
worth and merit of the learning materials which served as bases in the advancement of some
initiatives or measures for improvement. Rossi, Lipsey and Freeman (2004) emphasised that
evaluation is a systematic determination of a subject’s merit, worth and significance using
criteria geared towards an attempt to analyze what is ideal against what is really happening in
the actual classroom scenario. Clark (2010) explained that evaluation of materials like
formative evaluation does not only help improve the learning materials but also forms the basis
on which proper learning intervention can be given in order to help the learners master the
required skills and knowledge.

36
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

In the profile of Grade 7 science teachers, results were shown in terms of sex and age,
educational qualification and length of service in teaching Grade 7 Science of K to 12
Curriculum. The data indicate that there exists a slow upgrading of educational attainment
among teachers. This has implication on teacher’s competence in evaluating the learning
materials. As Rouse (2005) suggested, in evaluating materials for instruction, competence is
one of the guiding principles for quality evaluators. However, in terms of educational
qualification of Biology experts, majority are BSED graduate major in Biological Sciences.
Most of them have master’s degrees or Doctoral degree in Biology which indicates their
competence in evaluating the Biology content of the modules.

Moreover, in terms of length of service in teaching Grade 7 Science of the K to 12 Curriculum,

among 35 teacher respondents, majority have taught Science since the start of the K to 12
Curriculum for at least one year but had no chance to refine their teaching of the Grade 7
Science – Living Things and their Environment Modules in the succeeding years. Problems
arise when teachers cannot use the learning material appropriately since they lack mastery of
the subject matter. These findings could give insights to school heads in terms of loading of
subjects to teachers. Considering that there are few teachers, team teaching could not be
realiszed in all schools. As suggested by one of the Biology experts: “a possible solution could
be assigning a certain teacher to teach the subject for five years straight in order to gain
mastery of content”. However, on the part of the experts, most of them have been teaching
Biology from 15 to 25 years, which presumes their mastery of the content.

Level of perception and suggestions of teachers

The teachers’ overall perceptions of Grade 7 Science – Living Things and their Environment
Modules, came up with an overall rating of “satisfactory”. Satisfactory means errors are present
but very minor and must be fixed. Sufficiency and availability of modules as the major area of
concern is the weakest of all dimensions and needs utmost attention and action. According to
Oakes and Saunders (2002), “Textbooks and instructional materials are the primary tools the
teachers use to organize their lessons and make content knowledge and skills available to
students”. Therefore, sufficiency of textbooks and learner’s materials promote efficiency in the
teaching-learning process. Sarem, Hamidi & Mahmoudie (2013) shared the same perception
when they stated that learning materials in the form of textbooks are the heart of education due
to the fact that both teachers and students are, to a large extent, dependent on books.

While it is true that competence of teachers may reinforce learning amidst scarcity of learning
materials, still it cannot be denied that insufficiency and poor quality of learning materials still
greatly affect learning. In the study of de la Cruz (2015) the idea was conveyed that everything
relay a message. Schools that don’t have enough learning materials for the students, translate
into an inability for students to take home books for reading and doing homework. It negates
the objective of teaching, which means that the teaching-learning process will not become
productive and conducive. These problems were also expressed in some studies particularly in
the findings of Ranjit (2014) who stressed the insufficiency of learning materials and the need
to enhance and produce more alternative activities. The study of Koul, Fraser & Nastiti (2018)
stressed that lack of learning resources affect the quality of teaching. Teachers rely heavily on
resources provided as it give them confidence in engaging with their students.

The second area of concern is content. The results of this study reveal that the materials are
generally viewed by the respondents as acceptable in terms of objectives, giving the students a
good understanding of the biological concepts and suitability of content to the year level of

37
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

students. But, it must be noted that the entire conditions set for content was only rated as
satisfactory and it is low in terms of its adequacy in the presentation and discussion of the
content. The related studies of Mercado (2007) and Garcia (2001) revealed that when
objectives in the module are made clear, specified with time allotment, it possesses a favorable
degree of instructional quality. The results also confirmed the statement of Ali (2010) that
clearly stated objectives have an integral role in the instructional quality of the module.
Moreover, the module needs to motivate and stimulate students’ interest to study Biology. This
finding is similar to the conclusion of Jamwal (2012) that motivation plays an important role
in learning content using modules. As what was done in the study of Sari, Hassan, Güven, &
Sen (2017), in order to convert the plan of study into action and motivate the students, materials
were developed to enhance interactively students’ understanding of light concepts. Salandanan
(2011) further explained that module to be interesting should have contents which are relevant
to the lesson and self-pacing to allow every learner to progress at his own rate. As what de la
Cruz (2015) explained, the relevance of instructional materials to the objective of the lesson is
an important aspect of the lesson, and an important consideration in instructional materials
utilization.

The third area of concern in the assessment of the learning materials is in terms of presentation
and organization wherein ratings were all satisfactory. This imply that the materials still need
improvement and enhancement most particularly in terms of students’ level of understanding
of the new vocabulary words. Salandanan (2011) stated that modules should be written in clear
and correct language suitable to the level of the target learners so as to achieve efficient
communication between the learner and the module.

The learning activity aspect of the module was the fourth area of concern. One significant factor
that may have contributed to the satisfactory rating was the claim by both teacher respondents
and Biology experts that ninety-five percent (95%) of the learning material are all activities for
experiments. Such finding supports the lowest weighted mean which for the criterion, “the
number of activities in the module is just enough for the given time allotment”. However,
although not the main concern, this gives insight on one of the domains of the Science
Curriculum which is the acquisition of integrated science process skills through laboratory
activities in the module. Villarino (2019) pointed out that, laboratory experiences likely help
to achieve the conceptual understanding of the students. As revealed also by de la Cruz (2015)
in Jakarta, the use of experimental science modules emphasizing integrated science process
skills activities significantly improved the scores of Grade 7 and Grade 8 students on the
integrated science process skills test. He added that students exposed in the experimental
science module were able to identify variables, state hypotheses, define variables operationally,
graph and interpret data, and design experiments, thus, developing their thinking skills to
become independent learners. Therefore, module should include integrated science process
skills if we want to develop or level-up the thinking process skills of students.

The fifth area of concern is in terms of evaluation activities. The material was rated satisfactory
in all conditions, which signifies the usability of the items in the evaluation exercises as
assessment of content learned. In assessing the materials in terms of evaluation activities, the
pre-assessment and post-assessment part of the module were really utilized by most teachers
as their reference for formative and summative assessment. However, an important finding
came out during the interviews and focus group discussion that the Teacher’s Guide can be
downloaded by students so the reliability of pre- and post-assessments is weakened. This
alarming observation needs immediate action to ensure that teachers are evaluating the actual
learning or knowledge of students. As explained by Reardon, Scott and Verre (1994), results

38
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

of evaluation of learning materials play a pivotal role in deciding what the students learned,
what instructors teach in schools, and what teachers do as facilitators of learning.

The sixth area of concern is format. Results showed that quality of the said materials was
observed to have not met the standards in terms of clarity of illustrations, attractiveness, and
appropriateness of colors. In a related study conducted by Olurinola (2015) colors have positive
effect on the attention-retention rate of students inside the classroom. He added that students
exposed to congruent colors have better performance than those groups who are not exposed
to colored teaching materials. Peacock (2007) stressed that quality of materials is important if
they are to achieve the learning objectives.

The last area of concern is accuracy and up-to-dateness of information. It got the highest
weighted mean among all the dimensions in the evaluation of the modules, which indicates it
as the strongest among the seven dimensions. Still, the ratings provided great help in improving
the learning material in this aspect. Although the result signifies that teacher respondents did
not really consider it a priority to improve the module in this aspect, it is still a must to correct
typographical errors and scientific concepts and information, since the material serves as the
bible of the daily classroom quest for knowledge. Teachers found out some conceptual,
grammatical, and typographical errors in the module. Chinwendu (2014) has stated lexico-
syntactic errors contained in the teaching materials if not corrected will make students the
conveyor belt of the errors contained in the teaching material. This means errors in the teaching
material should be corrected so as not to multiply the commission of mistakes since most
teachers and students are dependent on these materials for teaching and learning.

Along this line of thought, majority of the respondents were very optimistic and enthusiastic in
their desire for the improvement of the learning material, which is the main tool for instruction.
Similarly, various researches have already been conducted like that of Tomlinson (2011),
Gravoso (2005) and Sitragool (2003) which attempted to develop learning materials. What
makes the present study distinct from previous researches is the fact that the improvement and
enhancement of the learning material is based on the suggestions of both biology experts and
teacher respondents who were the users of the material and has direct contact with students.
With the fifth year implementation of the K to 12 Curriculum, there is a need for re-evaluation
of the learning materials and check if they are updated, relevant and still suited to the needs of
students. On the other hand, to determine also if the material is aligned with the international
standards of science education. Proper evaluation of learning materials will lead to quality
learning. Without sufficient and quality learning materials, there is always the danger that
learners do not acquire the necessary knowledge, skills, and attitude appropriate for them to be
ready and confident in all the rudiments of learning and are equally competitive with learners
in other parts of the world.

Conclusions
Biology Experts' and Grade 7 Science Teachers rated the five Grade 7 Biology modules as
satisfactory along with the seven dimensions which signify the need for enhancement. The
majority of teacher respondents have low levels of education, mostly, the undergraduate or
bachelor's degree. A poor academic qualification may affect competence and skills for teaching
science in the K to 12 Curriculum. Teacher respondents have limited number of years of
teaching Grade 7 Science in the K to 12 Curriculum, which means they have less mastery of
the content and skills, which could affect the quality of learning of the students. Based on the
findings and conclusions derived from the study, there is a need to encourage more male senior

39
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

high school graduates to take education courses in college major in Science. Retooling and
training of teachers on the appropriate use and implementation of the learning modules. School
administrators need also to encourage teachers to upgrade their educational qualification and
give the same load to teachers for a maximum of five years for them to gain mastery of the
subject taught, thus, improving their competence and skills to teach science in the K to 12
Curriculum.

A similar evaluation study may be undertaken to other disciplines under the K to 12 Curriculum
most especially in science subjects using the researcher-made questionnaire. It means that
findings of the study may be used to revise the existing learning materials in other areas of
Grade 7 Science such as Earth Science, Chemistry, and Physics, so the enhancement of the
Grade 7 modules will be complete and comprehensive. Another investigation study may be
conducted using the students (in other words, the end users) as respondents of the research
undertaking to have triangulation of data. As explained by Koul, Fraser and Nastiti (2018),
assessing students’ actual perception serve as guide in reducing learning gaps. Thus, aside from
DepEd module, teachers and experts could make instructional materials (IMs) at lesser cost
following the K to 12 competences. The said instructional materials should be responsive to
the current needs of the students’ by not limiting to the minimum skills but should maximize
their full scientific potentials to be globally competitive. This evaluation study and its survey
tool hopes to contribute data and information significant for the enhancement of the learning
materials. Enhanced Grade 7 Biology Modules and their use would redound to better and
improved performance of Grade 7 students in Science, specifically in Biology.

Acknowledgements

The researcher would like to extend her gratitude to Dr. Rosalina Hidalgo Coral, the administration of Leyte
Normal University, Department of Education (DepEd), Tacloban City Division both in Tacloban City, Leyte,
Philippines, and Commission on Higher Education (CHED) Region VIII and Central Office, Quezon City,
Philippines for the help given in the completion of this study.

References
Abolade, A. O. (2013). General techniques for evaluation of learning and Instructional materials, Department
of Curriculum & Educational Technology, university of Dorin, Nigeria
Ali, R. (2010). Development and effectiveness of modular teaching in Biology at secondary level. Retrieved
from http://eprints.hec.gov.
Bago, A.L. (2001). Curriculum development: The Philippine experience. De La Salle University Press, Inc.
Manila, Philippines, pp.9, 175, 187
Clark, D. (2010). Types of evaluations in instructional design. Big dog and little dog’s performance
juxtaposition. Retrieved from http://www.nwlink.com/donclark/hrd/isd/types_of_evaluation.html
Chinwendu, P. (2014). Effects of lexico-syntactic errors on teaching materials: A study of textbooks written by
Nigerians. Retrieved from http://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJELS/article/view/235
De la Cruz, J. P. (2015). Development of an experimental science module to improve middle schools students’
integrated science process skills. Retrieved from
www.dlsu.edu.ph/conferences/dlsu_research_congress/2015/proceedings/LLI/018LLI_DelaCruz_JP.pdf
Department of Education Order No. (D.O.) 31, s. 2012. (2012, April 17). Policy
Guidelines on the Implementation of Grades 1 to 10 of the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) Effective
School Year 2012-2013. Pasig City: Philippine Department of Education.
Department of Education Regional Handbook in the Content Evaluation of Supplementary Materials. IMCS.,
2008.
Department of Education (2013). K to 12 science curriculum guide. Retrieved from
http://depedligaocity.net/ScienceCG3-10.pdf
DepEd Regional Handbook in the Content Evaluation of Supplementary Materials, IMCS (2008)
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2001). The systematic design of instruction (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

40
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Flagg, B. N. (1990). Formative evaluation of educational technologies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Garcia, C. M. (2001). Effects of modular instruction on the performance of college students in pane
trigonometry. Bulacan State University, Maolos City. Unpublished Thesis.
Gravoso, (2005). Design and use of instructional materials for student-centered learning: A case in learning
ecological concepts, Vol. 7, No. 1, Visayas State University: Asia Pacific Education Researcher
Gutierrez, A. (2014). Development and effectiveness of an educational card game as supplementary material in
understanding selected topics in biology. Retrieved from http://www.lifescied.org/content/13/1/76.full.pdf
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Retrieved from
http://rer.sagepub.com/content/77.full
Hamona, L. A. (2002). Development of prototype pedagogical materials for teacher trainees of basic education.
Philippine Normal University.
Jamwal, G. (2012). Effective use of interactive learning modules in classroom study for computer science
education. All Graduate Plan B and other Reports. Retrieved from digitalcommons.usu.edu
K to 12 Basic Education Program (BEP) (2012). Presidential communication development and strategic
planning office and department of education. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/mojacko69/the-k-to-
12-basic-education-program
Koul, R., Fraser, B.J., & Nastiti, H. (2018). Transdisciplinary instruction: Implementing and evaluating a
Primary- School STEM teaching model, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics
Education, 26(8), 17-29, 2018
Macarandang, M. (2009). Evaluation of a proposed set of modules in principles and methods of teaching. E-
International Scientific Research Journal, Vol. 1.
Mercado, Jr., R. B. (2007). Effectiveness of modularized instruction in entrepreneurship. Bulacan State
University, Malolos City. Unpublished Thesis.
Naval, D. J. (2014). Development and validation of tenth Grade physics modules based on selected least
mastered competencies. International Journal of Education and Research, Vol. 2.
Newby, T. J., Stepich, D. A., Lehman, J. D., & Russell, J. D. (2006). Evaluation of students and materials in
educational technology for teaching and learning. Person Merrill Prentice Hall.
Oakes, J., & Saunders, M. (2002). Access to textbooks, instructional materials, equipment, and technology:
inadequacy and inequality in California's public schools. Retrieved from http://www.ucla-idea.org
Olurinola, O. (2015). Colour in learning: Its effect on the retention rate of graduate students. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080132.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use.
Retrieved from http://www.guilford.com/books/Developmental-Evaluation/Michael-Quinn-
Patton/9781606238721
Pawson, R. (2013). The science of evaluation: A realist manifesto. Retrieved from
https://evaluationcanada.ca/system/files/cjpe-entries/29-2-145.pdf
Peacock, J. (2007). Beyond the fashionable: Strategic planning for critical information literacy education. In S.
C. Curzon & L. D. Lampert (Eds.), Proven strategies for building an information literacy program. (pp. 29-
54). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Phillips, J. A. (2013). Module 7: Evaluating the school curriculum from Chapter 8: Curriculum evaluation.
Race, P. (2000). Audit your own teaching. In A. Brown and S. Homes (Ed.). Internal Audit in Higher Education
(pp. 163-181). Sterling: Stylus Publishing Inc.
Ranjit, K. (2014). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. London: SAGE Publications.
Reardon, S.F., Scott, K., & Verre, J. (1994). Symposium: equity in educational assessment. Harvard
Educational Review, 64 (1), 1-4.
Rodriguez, C. (2015). Status on the use of mother tongue-based and multilingual learning materials in the
Division of Calbayog City (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Leyte Normal University, Tacloban City,
Philippines.
Ronda, R. A. (2012). Public school teachers welcome passage of kindergarten law.Philstar. Retrieved from
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=778647&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H., & Lipsey M. W. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Te, Newburry Park, Ca.
Rouse, M. (2005, September). Definition: Total quality management (TQM). Retrieved from
http://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/Total-Quality-Management.
Salandanan, G.G. (2011). Principles and methods of teaching. Quezon City, Manila: Lorimar Publishung, Inc.
Sañosa, M. (2013). Implementation of K to 12 curriculum program among Grade 7 Science Teachers in Eastern
Visayas. Journal of Society and Technology, 3, 37-44
Sarem, S., Hamidi, H. & Mahmoudie, R. (2013). A critical look at textbook evaluation: A case study of
evaluating an ESP course-book: English for international tourism. International Research Journal of Applied
and Basic Sciences, 4(2), 372-380.

41
International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(5), 27-42, 2019

Sari, U., Hassan, A., Güven, K. & Sen, Ӧ. (2017). Effects of the 5E teaching model using interactive simulation
on achievement and attitude in physics education, International Journal of Innovation in Science and
Mathematics Education, 25(3),20-35,2017
Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R.W. Tyler, R.M. Gagne, & M. Scriven (Eds.),
Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (pp. 39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Sitragool, W. (2003). Project on research study and materials development of a literacy programme for ethnic
minority in Omkoi, Chiang Mai (Thailand)”, a Paper presented at the Conference on Language
Development.
Tomlinson, B. (2011). Introduction: principles and procedures of materials development. In B. Tomlinson (ed.)
Materials Development in Language Teaching (second edition) (pp. 1-34). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS): Overview (2013). National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES), USA. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/index.asp
Villarino, G.N. (2019). Constructivist strategy, microcomputer-based laboratory, and students’ alternative
conceptions of force and motion. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics
Education, 27(1), 47-60, 2019.
Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2013). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An
annual review of state-level policy and practice. Evergreen, CO: Evergreen Education Group. Retrieved
from http://kpk12.com//cms/wp-content/uploads/EEG_KP2013-lr.pdf

42