WRITING THE RRL

GUIDE:
1. Go over your objectives. Identify the variables per objective. Make these variables as your themes.
Example:

Objectives Themes for the RRL

1. What is the profile of pupils in terms of: On profile of learners
1.1 sex; 1. Sex
1.2 age; and 2. Age
1.3 grade level? 3. Grade level
2. To what extent do pupils absent
themselves due to the following On absenteeism of learners
factors: 1. On physical factors and student`s traits
2.1 physical factors and student’s 2. On home related factors
traits; 3. On social and community factors
2.2 home related factors; 4. On school related factors
2.3 social and community factors; and
2.4 school related factors?
3. Is there a significant difference on the
extent of absenteeism of respondents On significant difference on absenteeism of
3.1 along dimension; and students when grouped according to profile
3.2 when grouped according to
profile?
4. What is the level of academic
performance of the pupils? On level of academic performance pf students
5. Is there a significant relationship of the
extent of absenteeism and academic On relationship of academic performance and
performance of pupils? absenteeism
6. What intervention can be proposed to
address existing issues among pupils? On developing an intervention

Note: based on the objectives, you have 13 themes.

2. Introduce the themes.

3. Survey relevant theories, concepts, and studies relative to the themes. Please use the Google Scholar only.
4. For every theme, synthesize the surveyed literature in the last paragraph. Point out the literature gap that
prompted you to include the variable/objective.
5. Provide a concluding statement in the last paragraph of the RRL. Make sure that the statement shall
convince readers of the significance of the study.
6. Include the reference part below.

Note: Last submission for this will be on Monday.

Examine this example:

Title: KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OF PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS IN LESSON PLANNING: INPUTS TO A LESSON
PLANNING GUIDE (By GEREMY G. SANCHEZ, EdD)

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMS

Generally, the study aimed to undertake a scientific development of a Lesson Planning Guide (LPG) for the Ilocos
Sur Polytechnic State College.
Specifically, it sought to answer the following:
1. What is the level of knowledge of pre-service teachers in lesson planning?
2. What is the level of skills of pre-service teachers in writing lesson plans?
2.1. Is there a significant relationship between the levels of knowledge and skills of pre-service teachers in lesson
planning?
3. What are the experiences of the pre–service teachers in lesson planning?
4. What Lesson Planning Guide (LPG) can be developed?
5. What is the level of validity of the developed LPG in terms of content, presentation, learning and technical
designs?

Review of Related Literature

This section presents related studies, related literature, and related legal bases to which the
study is anchored. The succeeding sections are arranged according to themes as follows: (1) on lesson
plans and lesson planning, (2) on knowledge of pre-service teachers in lesson planning, (3) on skills of pre-
service teachers in lesson planning, (4) on the relationship of knowledge and skills in lesson planning, (5)
on constraints and capabilities of pre-service teachers in lesson planning, (5) on the development of a
lesson planning guide, (6) on the validation of instructional material, and (7) on determining the
effectiveness of a developed instructional material.

Lesson plans and lesson planning

A lesson is defined by researchers and scholars in various ways, but its essence and
functions are at the core of these definitions. For instance, Tumbaach (2019) defines a lesson plan
comprehensively as the title given to the statement of goals to be achieved and has the specific meaning
by which it is achieved as a result of the activities involved during a learning activity. According to Sudhakar
(2017) and Strickroth (2019), a lesson plan shows how the intended lesson works and serves as
documentation for the decision-making process.
A lesson plan is supreme in the field of teaching; thus, it is considered the heart of teaching
(Corpuz & Salandanan, 2015; Lee & Lim, 2017). According to Chalk.com Education Inc. (2021), having a
daily structured plan helps teachers to confidently approach each lesson; manage study time more
efficiently; align training with standards; improve the qualifications of substitute teachers; document learning
progress, and assure consistency of learning.
In the same dimension, Tumbaach (2019) has pronounced that a lesson plan plays an
important role in planning and organizing the teaching procedure for the following reasons: (1)in the teacher
education program, lesson planning is a guide for pre-service teachers during their teaching practice; (2) it
provides an understanding of the learning objectives and the structure of the content, and the teacher must
carry out his activities towards the achievement of the objectives; (3) it develops learners’ apperceptive
mass by the teachers’ linking new knowledge with learners’ previous knowledge.
In relation, Tumbaach also provides significant guidelines for pre-service teachers in
developing lesson plans. He suggests the following: (1) the sequence of content should be planned and
completed through content analysis when planning the lesson; (2) the use of materials, techniques,
methods, and aphorisms is pre-determined for the presentation of the content; (3) maintain the order in
which the content is presented and prevent teachers from escaping the topic; and (4) class activities in the
classroom are structured to take into account individual differences among pre-service teachers.
According to Pinera (2013), lesson plans may come in different ways, depending on the one
who uses them. It may be a Detailed Lesson Plan (DLP), a Semi–Detailed Lesson Plan (SDLP), an
Understanding by Design (UbD), and a Daily Lesson Log (DLL) provided in DO No. 42, s. 2016.
A Detailed Lesson Plan (DLP) provides mastery of what to teach and gives the teacher
confidence when teaching. In this plan, both the teacher`s and the students’ activities are presented.
According to DO No. 42, s. 2016, newly–hired teachers without professional teaching experience are
required to prepare daily DLP for a year. Teachers applying for a teaching position, including teachers in
the service and Master Teachers who will conduct demonstration teaching, shall be required to prepare a
DLP. Newly hired teachers who garnered ratings of “Very Satisfactory” or “Outstanding” in the Results-
based Performance Management System (RPMS) in a year will no longer be required to prepare DLPs.
Those who garnered “Satisfactory” shall still be required to prepare DLPs until such time that their RPMS
Assessment rating has improved.
A Semi–Detailed Lesson Plan (SDLP), on the other hand, is less intricate than the DLP. It is
considered a general game plan of what a teacher wanted to cover for that subject on that particular day.
Meanwhile, an Understanding by Design (UbD) plan is a framework for improving student
achievement through standards-driven curriculum development, instructional design, assessment, and
professional development.
Finally, the Daily Lesson Log, as per DepEd policy, is required of teachers with one year of
experience or newly hired teachers but hade teaching experiences in private schools and Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs). Seasoned or veteran teachers are also required to prepare DLLs.
The aforementioned definitions and uses of various lesson plan forms have far-reaching
implications not only for in-service teachers, but more importantly for pre-service teachers. It implies the
need for PST to acquire lesson planning skills to guide them in teaching during their novice years in the
profession. Additionally, it also suggests that the lesson plan would develop the confidence of PST to
transition to the actual professions as they are being educated in college.
The parts of a lesson plan vary, depending on the model or the format required to be used.
According to Study.com (2021), there are more than seventeen (17) lesson plan models or templates that
one may use depending on the subject matter, the needs of the learners, and the teacher. Some of these
models include: (1) Curriculum Model Lesson Plan, (2) EEI (Essential Elements of Instruction) lesson plan
format, (3) ASSURE Model(Analyze learners, State standards/objectives, elect teaching strategies and
materials, utilize technology, materials, and media, Require learner participation, Evaluate and revise) (4)
Lesson Plan Template, (5) RTI (Response to Intervention) Lesson Plan Template, (6) EATS (Essential
questions, Activating Prior Knowledge, Teaching, Summarizing, Assessment) Lesson Plan, (7) SIOP
(Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol)Lesson Plan Template, (8) Charlotte Danielson Lesson Plan
Format, (9) Madeline Hunter Lesson Plan Template, (10) CALLA (Cognitive Academic Language Learning
Approach) Lesson Plan Template, (11) 4As (Activate Prior Knowledge, Application, Assessment) Lesson
Plan Template, (12) 5Es (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate) Lesson Plan Template, (13)
Backward Design Lesson Plan Template, (14) Backward Design Lesson Plan Example, (15) Achievement
Gap Acquire new knowledge Discussion Questions, (16) Pedagogy of the Oppressed Discussion
Questions, (17) and Growth Mindset Discussion Question.
Meanwhile, DO No. 42, s. 2016 states the parts of a lesson plan that K to 12 teachers should
follow. These parts include the beginning, the middle, and the end, which are referred to Before the Lesson,
the Lesson Proper, and After the Lesson.
Specifically, the part “Before the Lesson” refers to the lesson opening or the beginning of
lesson implementation. In this part, the teacher or the pre-service teacher can do a variety of strategies or
techniques including, but not limited to, the following: a) reviewing the previous lesson/s; b. clarifying
concepts from the previous lesson that learners misunderstood; c) introducing the new lesson; d) informing
the class of the connection between the old and new lesson and establishing the purpose of the new
lesson, and e) stating the new lesson`s objectives as a guide for the learners.
Furthermore, this part of the lesson entails the integration of learners’ prior knowledge into the
current lesson. The teacher activates the learners’ schemata and connect them to new concepts that are
part of the new lesson. It is during this time that teachers or pre-service teachers incite learners’ interest
towards the new lesson through “start-up” or “warm-up” activities. Teachers or pre-service teachers should
also allow learners to ask questions about the new lesson to assess learners’ initial understanding of the
purposes of the new lesson.
Secondly, the part “Lesson Proper” or the main part of the lesson covers the presentation of
the new materials to the class. This is the part of the lesson where the teacher enacts expository teaching,
demonstration or modeling, and facilitating, among others. Finally, the part “After the Lesson” basically
includes strategies for concluding and culminating the lesson. In this part, the teacher could give an
assessment to evaluate the extent of acquisition of new knowledge. The teacher could also discuss an
assignment as an activity outside the classroom that reinforces learning.
In the ISPSC – Cervantes Campus, a document review of the portfolio of previous teacher
interns, reveals that they used only a single format which is very deductive by nature. The parts of the
format include the: (I) Objectives, (II) Subject Matter, (III)Procedures (Preliminary Activities, Presentation,
Discussion, Application, Generalization), (IV) Evaluation, and (V) Assignment.
The related literature in the preceding sections present an array of information about the
lesson plan, including the types, the important parts, and certain procedures in designing a lesson plan.
While these sets of information are relevant to the study, they are also important considerations in
designing a contextualized Lesson Planning Guide. As such, this study also considers existing DepEd
policies that influence its scientific development so that it will be responsive and relevant to pre-service
teachers’ actual practices when they are inducted into the teaching arena.
Furthermore, an article published by Scholastic Inc (2021) averred that regardless of the
lesson plan format, the following shall be taken into consideration to make lesson planning successful: (1)
lessons should be readable and detailed enough that a substitute teacher could teach from them in an
emergency; (2) consider making a copy or two of each week's plan; (3) script the lessons. (4) balance
grouping strategies and activities in each learning style or multiple intelligence types to meet the needs of
all the learners. Furthermore, the author contends that although lesson planning is time-consuming, it
helped one be better organized and more confident in front of students during their few years of teaching.
Along similar veins, other researcher also posit that in order for teachers to write effective lesson plans,
they need to consider the following factors: continuity, flexibility, knowledge integration, and taking into
account many factors, such as learners' learning style, prior knowledge, intelligence type, and interests
(Lee & Lim, 2017).
In the same line, DO No. 42, s. 2016 articulates that the lesson plan shall emphasize the
features of the K to 12 Curriculum as follows: (1) learner-centered, (2) inclusive and developmentally
appropriate; (3) relevant, responsive and research-based; (4) gender- and culture-sensitive; (5)
contextualized and global.
In addition, the K-12 curriculum is also guided by the following modes: (1) uses pedagogical
approaches that are constructivist, inquiry-based, reflective, collaborative and integrative; (2) adheres to the
principles and framework of Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE), which starts from
where the learners are and from what they already know, proceeding from the known to the unknown; (3)
uses the spiral progression approach to ensure mastery of knowledge and skills after each level, flexible
enough to enable and allow schools to localize, indigenize and enhance the same based on their
respective educational and social contexts; and (4) integrates ICT.
Moreover, UNESCO demanded that lesson plans must have several characteristics to ensure
their appropriateness to the learning context:
1. Teaching and learning materials must be put at disposition for the subject taught;
2. Duration, timing, and environment, must be adjusted to topic-specific learning activities;
3. A set of objectives must be reached after one lesson. These may be fixed according to the SMART
goals reference, which means that they must be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and
Time-scaled;
4. There has to be an elaboration of a prior organization and progression related to each activity
before it is taught; and
5. It must include an evaluation, including marking and feedback, and be adapted to the type of
activity taught.
An excellent lesson plan is contingent on excellent lesson planning. According to DepEd
Order No. 4, s. 2016, lesson planning is a way of planning instruction. It is a way of visualizing a lesson
before it is being taught. It entails prediction, anticipation, sequencing, and simplifying. With these, lesson
planning is a critical part of the teaching and learning process.
The same policy pronounces that lesson planning is a hallmark of effective teaching. As
mentioned, effective teachers organize and plan instruction to ensure learners’ success inside the
classroom. Elements of instructional planning for effective teaching include:
1. Identifying clear lesson and learning objectives while carefully linking
activities to them, which is essential for effectiveness;
2. Creating quality assignments, which is positively associated with quality
instruction and quality student work;
3. Planning lessons that have clear goals, are logically structured, and
progress through the content step-by-step;
4. Planning the instructional strategies to be deployed in the classroom and
the timing of these strategies;
5. Using advance organizers, graphic organizers, and outlines to plan for
effective instructional delivery;
6. Considering student attention spans and learning styles when designing
lessons;
7. Systematically developing objectives, questions, and activities that reflect
higher-level and lower-level cognitive skills as appropriate for the content
and the student therefore, have learner-centered objectives that are aligned
with the standards of the curriculum.
Excellent lesson planning relies on an excellent teacher. As per DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017
or the National Adoption and Implementation of The Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers,
excellent Filipino K to 12 teachers shall embody the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers
(PPST).
The PPST defines teacher quality in the Philippines. The standards describe the expectations
of teachers’ increasing levels of knowledge, practice, and professional engagement. At the same time, the
standards allow for teachers’ growing understanding, applied with increasing sophistication across a
broader and more complex range of teaching/learning situations.
Below are the competencies relative to lesson planning expected of a beginning teacher lifted
from the different domains of the PPST of which the pre-service teachers and teacher interns shall be
prepared (DO No. 42, s. 2017):
Domain I: Content Knowledge and Pedagogy
1. Demonstrate content knowledge and its application within and/or across curriculum
teaching areas.
2. Demonstrate an understanding of research-based knowledge and principles of teaching
and learning.
3. Show skills in the positive use of ICT to facilitate the teaching and learning process.
4. Demonstrate knowledge of teaching strategies that promote literacy and numeracy skills.
5. Apply teaching strategies that develop critical and creative thinking, and/or other higher-
order thinking skills.
6. Demonstrate an understanding of the range of verbal and non-verbal classroom
communication strategies that support learner understanding, participation, engagement
and achievement.
Domain II: Learning Environment
7. Demonstrate knowledge of policies, guidelines and procedures that provide safe and
secure learning environments.
8. Demonstrate understanding of learning environments that promote fairness, respect and
care to encourage learning.
9. Demonstrate knowledge of managing classroom structure that engages learners,
individually or in groups, in meaningful exploration, discovery and hands-on activities within
the available physical learning environments.
10. Demonstrate understanding of supportive learning environments that nurture and
inspire learner participation.
11. Demonstrate knowledge of learning environments that motivate learners to work
productively by assuming responsibility for their own learning.
Domain III: Diversity of Learners
12. Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of differentiated teaching to suit the
learners' gender, needs, strengths, interests and experiences.
13. Implement teaching strategies that are responsive to the learners' linguistic, cultural,
socio-economic and religious backgrounds.
14. Use strategies responsive to learners with disabilities, giftedness and talents.
15. Demonstrate knowledge of teaching strategies that are inclusive of learners from
indigenous groups.
Domain IV: Curriculum and Planning
16. Prepare developmentally sequenced teaching and learning process to meet curriculum
requirements.
17. Identify learning outcomes that are aligned with learning competencies.
18. Demonstrate knowledge in the implementation of relevant and responsive learning
programs.
Domain V: Assessment and Reporting
19. Show skills in the selection, development and use of a variety of teaching and learning
resources, including ICT, to address learning goals.
20. Demonstrate knowledge of the design, selection, organization and use of diagnostic,
formative and summative assessment strategies consistent with curriculum
requirements.
21. Demonstrate knowledge of monitoring and evaluation of learner progress and
achievement using learner attainment data.
22. Demonstrate knowledge of providing timely, accurate and constructive feedback to
improve learner performance.
23. Demonstrate familiarity with a range of strategies for communicating learner needs,
progress and achievement.
24. Demonstrate an understanding of the role of assessment data as feedback in teaching
and learning practices and programs.
Sudirman (2017) suggested the following steps for teachers and pre-service teachers to follow
in writing a plan.
1. Fill out an identity column,
2. Determine the allocation of time required for the meeting,
3. Consider the competencies in the curriculum guide,
4. Formulate learning objectives,
5. Identify the teaching material by subject matter/learning,
6. Determine the method of learning which will used,
7. Prepare measures that consist of initial activities, core and end,
8. Determine the equipment/materials/learning resources to be used,
9. Develop criteria for assessment, observation sheets, example problems, a technique of
scoring and answer keys.
The foregoing review of related literature emphasizes what a lesson plan should be and what
lesson planners should consider. The researcher, therefore, sees these features as relevant to the study as
well as in the development of the LPG and the corresponding rubrics. Through this, the congruence of the
tool with the output to be evaluated is ensured. Additionally, the research and its expected output are
consistent with existing policies and practices of the Department of Education. The Lesson Plan Framework
is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Framework of the Lesson Plan for pre-service teachers and the development of an Evaluation
Checklist for Lesson Planning

DO No. 42, s. DepEd Order No.

RA 10533
2016 42, s. 2017
ISPSC existing
UNESCO, 2019
practices

Lesson Plan for pre-service

teacher and the development
of an Evaluation Checklist
for Lesson Planning
Knowledge of pre-service teachers in lesson planning
In this study, the baseline data used to determine the direction of the researcher is the pre-
service teachers’ knowledge and skills in lesson planning. Thus, it is important to survey related literature
on this aspect to guide the research framework.
According to Stigler and Miller (2018), teachers are functional if they have clearly defined
goals for what they want students to learn, and the ability to assess the gap between students' current
knowledge and where they are trying to help students go next. To make this successful requires
knowledge, skills, and judgment.
The knowledge of teachers in the teaching and learning process was coined by Shulman
(1987) as pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). PCK refers to the special knowledge that teachers need
to teach effectively. Shulman (1987) proposed a taxonomy of teacher knowledge that still proves useful
today. Teacher knowledge includes: (1) content knowledge; (2) general pedagogical knowledge, with
special reference to those broad principles and strategies of classroom management and organization that
appear to transcend subject matter; (3) curriculum knowledge, with a particular grasp of the materials and
programs that serve as “tools of the trade” for teachers; (4) pedagogical content knowledge, that special
amalgam of content and pedagogy that is uniquely the province of teachers, their special form of
professional understanding; (5) knowledge of learners and their characteristics; (6) knowledge of
educational contexts, ranging from the workings of the group or classroom, the governance, and financing
of school districts, to the character of communities and cultures; and (7) knowledge of educational ends,
purposes, and values, and their philosophical and historical grounds.
However, in this study, the researcher largely focused on content knowledge, pedagogical
knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and curriculum knowledge. This focus is attributed to the fact
that preservice teachers have fundamental knowledge acquired through their years of education,
particularly in writing effective lesson plans.
Previous studies examined pre-service teachers’ curriculum knowledge. For instance, Taskin
(2017) revealed in his study that pre-service teachers are knowledgeable on the significance of lesson
plans but have difficulties in writing one. In contrast, Sudirman (2017), who conducted content analysis and
observation his study, showed that teachers in the field are not knowledgeable on the framework of the
preparation of lesson plans and are not knowledgeable on the components of a complete lesson plan.
Evidently, there have been few studies conducted in examining the level of knowledge of both
teachers and pre-service teachers. As such, this study aims to contribute to the academic literature on
determining pre-service teachers’ level of knowledge in lesson planning as baseline data for the study.
Likewise, the study wishes to explore if knowledge is contributory to the lesson planning skills of the pre-
service teachers.

Skills of pre-service teachers in lesson planning

In addition to the importance of teacher knowledge, teaching or the performance component,
is equally essential. It is not enough for teachers to just know what to do, but they also need to implement
in the classroom the blueprint that they designed. Most teacher education and professional development
programs for teachers have focused on making teachers more knowledgeable; few allow teachers to
practice the skills (Stigler & Miller, 2018).
Previous studies demonstrate the challenges related to the acquisition of lesson planning
skills among pre-service teachers. For instance, Tantoy (2019) found in his study that not too many pre-
service teachers could write well-prepared lesson plans even at the end of their second-grade level
teaching assignment. The findings of the study served as a reminder that sometimes, the expectations of
PST are not met by teacher education programs. They are expected to at least improve their lesson
planning skills after completing certain courses; however, the result is the opposite. In relation, Mufidah
(2019) found that pre-service teachers lack time management skills in planning. As a result, they fail to
undertake consultations with their supervisors that result in poorly constructed lesson plans as outputs of
their courses. The issue of time management later resulted in a problem in terms of material mastery,
pronunciation, and grammar accuracy. The reason behind the lack of grammar mastery is their lack of time
for preparing the lesson. They focused on preparing the lesson plan but did not have enough time to learn
the topic/ material comprehensively. The pronunciation problems emerged because of the same reasons.
Next, the grammatical mistakes they made did not interfere with the process of teaching and learning.
Some of the mistakes they made related to subject-verb agreement or some tenses.
The literature surveyed in the preceding section shows that writing a lesson plan is a difficult
task for pre-service teachers. Factors causing this difficulty include poor time management, lack of
coaching or mentoring during consultation periods, and lack of knowledge of lesson planning per se. Like
the level of knowledge of pre-service teachers on lesson planning, the level of pre-service teachers’ lesson
planning skills is not examined well by previous studies.

Relationship of knowledge and skills in lesson planning

In the lecture of Aga (2021) on Prerequisite Relationships and Lesson Planning, she
emphasized that before one advances to a higher level, they need to have mastery on the foundation. She
added:
Can you imagine having to learn how to spell supercalifragilisticexpialidocious before
learning the alphabet and phonics? Each part of our learning process is based on something
we already know. In an educational setting, it's especially important to remember that the
content you're sharing may be very familiar to you as the educator, but can be considered
rocket science to those you're trying to teach.

Based on Aga’s contention, the researcher advances an assumption that pre-service teachers
should acquire sufficient knowledge on lesson planning concepts before attempting to write lesson plans.
This assumption is anchored to the Theory of Cognitive Learning of Piaget (1971) which espouses that
knowledge and skills are directly associated elements that undergird effective teaching and learning
(Arshavskiy, 2018). This study is interested in looking further into the veracity of this theory by looking into
the significant relationship between the knowledge and skills of the pre – service teachers in lesson
planning.

Constraints and capabilities of pre-service teachers in lesson planning

Previous and recent studies point out that pre-service teachers consistently face various
challenges in lesson planning endeavors. The succeeding survey of literature presents such findings.
Gafoor and Farooque (2010) found that pre-service teachers in India have difficulty writing
lesson plans in terms of(1) choosing learning experiences appropriate to the learners, (2) deciding and
allotting the time suitably for every lesson, (3)identifying and developing proper learning aids, (4) executing
the planned lesson in the classroom, (5)psychological sequencing of the lessons, (6)bringing about
necessary adaptations to the lessons according to the requirements of individual classrooms, (7)specifying
the educational objectives;(8) identifying instructional objectives matching students and curriculum,
(9)finding and using appropriate teaching methods, and (10) choosing life experiences and illustrations
capable of creating the set and motivation in students regarding the lesson.
Taskin (2017) divulged that pre-service teacher have difficulty preparing an activity
appropriate for their students' learning levels. This is attributed to their lack of knowledge of their learners,
the lack of guide books to use, lack of understanding regarding the teaching methods and techniques, and
lack of awareness of the functions and importance of a lesson plan. These factors directly influenced pre-
service teachers’ lesson planning capability negatively. Hill (2021) found that teachers design lesson plans
that do not rely on good assessment practices. Lesson plans are not flexible enough to respond and satisfy
the needs of all categories of learners, impacting the quality of instruction and learning.
In relation, Cuñado and Abocejo (2018) revealed that English major sophomore university
students enrolled in a government higher education institution in Cebu City, Philippines, have common
lesson planning pitfalls like (1)limited teacher experience and access to instructional materials, poor
students’ interests; (2) less spontaneity in the classroom, limited freedom, teacher’s struggle upon starting
a lesson, and (3) assessment not matching the learning objectives which often confuses the pre-service
teachers. However, they also manifested strength towards lesson planning competencies with very high
capability to construct an effective lesson plan. The study also found out that lesson planning competencies
are highly useful for pre-service teachers in developing their potentials.
Farooq, Hassan, and Wahid (2022) found that pre-service teachers have difficulty in using
English as the medium of writing lesson plans which was evident in their defective sentences.
The study of Polonio (2019) at the Ilocos Sur Polytechnic State College – Cervantes Campus
found that CTE students had difficulties in the formulation of learning objectives and have poor skills in
aligning the lesson planning parts to the learning objectives.
Many research studies were conducted along with the difficulties encountered by pre-service
teachers and even teachers, yet findings are limited due to the choice of research instrument used – the
questionnaire. The researcher contributed new knowledge in the field by examining this phenomenon
through a qualitative study to uncover pre-service teachers’ experiences on lesson planning.

Development of instructional materials

The availability of instructional materials is one of the recurrent issues confronting the
educational arena. According to the Schools Division of Baguio, the desired ratio of 1 is to 1 in terms of
textbook use does not exist in most schools surveyed. In fact, most teachers had no teacher manual.
Teachers used their own money to augment the instructional resources in the schools. In addition, when
schools’ textbook collection is reduced because of calamities, concerned authorities do not replace the
books. Lastly, few supplementary materials are available at the schools.
The University of Northern Colorado (2018) views the lesson planning guide as an essential
tool for both in-service and pre-service teachers. With the development of content standards-driven
courses, teachers have less flexibility in what to teach, but there are quite a few choices in how to teach.
Matching the format of the lesson plan with the content (the skills/knowledge), and background taught (who
is being taught, when/where, why is it necessary, etc.) is an important part of good teaching.
According to Modesto (2019), learning guides are designed to provide a complete coverage of
one or more topics included in each discipline, to meet the various learning ability levels of pre-service
teachers on a given age group, and to meet the diverse educational needs of pre-service teachers in this
time of pandemic. Along similar lines, Taskin (2017) claimed that having a guide is a helpful way to make
pre-service teachers master and independently construct a lesson plan.
In his study, Sanchez (2018) found that these issues revealed by the Schools Division of
Baguio occur in the School District of Cervantes. Books and other instructional materials have been a long
concern of teachers and students since the implementation of the K to 12 Program in 2012. Recently, the
study of Sanchez, Pe, and Tomas (2021) validated said findings on the challenges of school districts in
terms of learning resources. Higher education institutions in the country, including the Ilocos Sur
Polytechnic State College, similarly experience persistent issues on limited instructional materials,
especially in teacher education programs with new major courses (Sanchez, 2021).
According to the University of BATH (2022), guides are created to provide information, advice,
or instruction to help someone complete a specific task. In writing instructional guides, the following shall be
considered: (1) write concise phrases, (2) write in plain English to make your content as understandable as
possible, (3) structure your content so that the most important information is at the top, (4) break content up
into sections that are easy to read, (5) use headings to structure the content and help users to navigate, (6)
consider breaking long sentences or paragraphs with a lot of information into bulleted lists, (7) make sure
your headings follow the same principles as when writing the title, and (8) make it clear when an action is
required by the user.
WikiHow (2020) suggests the following steps in planning a guide: (1) consider the
audience, (2) familiarize yourself with the processes, (3) research about the process, (4) and, gather
materials needed to create your guide.
In the same material, the author suggests the following steps in writing a guide: (1) establish
the sequence, (2) create clear, active headings, (3) use explanatory text and bullet points, when necessary,
(4) write in an active, clear style, (5) use graphics to support your text, and, (6) edit graphics or screenshots
to highlight key information. In finishing the guide, the following shall be taken into account: (1)
proofreading, (2) testing the guide for accuracy, and (3) publishing the guide. The researcher considers this
process as scientific and well-structured. Thus, this framework was considered by the researcher in the
scientific development of the LPG as the major output of the proposed study.
However, to make the guide consistent with instructional materials for the K to 12 Program,
features as stipulated in RA 10533 or Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 under Section 5, Item H
(Curriculum Development) were considered. These include concepts like contextualization, flexibility, and
learner – centeredness.
Likewise, DepEd Order No. 32 S. 2015 or Adopting IPEd Framework stipulates the need to
establish an institutionalized partnership between indigenous communities and the school through the
inclusion of their Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Indigenous Learning Systems
(ILS) in the Basic Education Curriculum. Again, cognizant of the critical importance of these frameworks,
the researcher anchored the LPG to these works.
This has paved the way to the conceptualization of this study – to develop an instructional
material, particularly a guide for the college of teacher education courses.

Validation of instructional materials

Validating instructional materials is imperative to ensure quality before their widespread
utilization. This is common knowledge in the field of teaching and teacher education. For instance, Funa
and Ricafort (2019) contend that instructional materials are integral parts of the teaching and learning
process. In their study, they focused on validation of gamified instructional materials to establish their
instructional potential and quality. Their findings revealed that students and experts strongly agreed that the
GIM satisfied the criteria for sound and valid instructional material. Further, the significant change in the
pretest and posttest scores of the students indicated an improvement in their knowledge of genetics. It is
recommended that the GIM be used as supplementary instructional material in teaching genetics.
Similarly, the study of Morelos (2021) which focused on the development and validation of
learning resource materials in upgrading the comprehension skills of senior high school students centered
on instructional materials validation. In the study, the developed materials were evaluated across their
objectives, contents, vocabulary, usefulness, and presentation. After the evaluation, the study found that
the developed IMs were acceptable, hence, these were recommended for utilization.
Robles and Acedo (2019) have likewise ventured into development and validation of
educational video tutorials for 21st Century secondary learners. Findings revealed that the developed
videos are highly acceptable and highly relevant. Further, as rated by the Master teachers, the video
tutorials possessed a high extent of applicability since the developed videos were highly usable and highly
appropriate.
In the same vein, several research studies on the development and validation of
contextualized instructional materials were done to enhance the comprehension and critical thinking of
learners. After undergoing the validation processes, the developed contextualized materials were
forwarded for utilization. (e.g., Aspillaga, 2021; Cano & Lomibao, 2022; Darojah, Winarni, & Murwaningsh,
2018; Lee, Wong, Lee, White, Takeuchi, 2022; & Quimque, 2019). To single out, Quimque (2019)
developed a contextualized supplementary learner` reading materials in English to improve the poor
comprehension skills of the learners. Following scientific processes, the developed material was found
valid, hence recommended for wide utilization.
Validation is indeed indispensable to the development of acceptable instructional material.
With the inputs of experts, the developed outputs in this study will serve their purpose well. In fact, the
researcher included the validation of the developed LPG to ensure instructional quality and value for its
end-users.

Theoretical Framework
This research was firmly grounded on the Experiential Learning Theory, the Theory of
Constructivism, and the Configuration Theory.

Experiential Learning Theory

Kolb's (1984) Theory of Experiential Learning discusses the key components of learning-by-
doing, how it works, and the characteristics which contribute to meaningful practice. As a widely-accepted
theory, educators can incorporate the model to support teaching practice and learner experience. The
model is known for its holistic approach to student learning, which incorporates action/reflection and
experience/abstraction (Sharlanova, 2004).
Lesson planning is an experiential learning task for pre–service teachers. This is a task where
the knowledge they learned about lesson planning from their different courses are put into practice. These
concepts formed the theoretical underpinnings of this study, particularly in exploring the relationship of the
knowledge and skills of the pre–service teachers in lesson planning.
As a matter of fact, lesson planning is one of the most challenging learning tasks or
experiences of pre-service teachers. These challenges were documented in previous research findings
(e.g., Cuñado & Abocejo,2018; Latifa, 2016; Konig, Voz, Glutsch, 2020; Nzilano,2013; Sesiorina,2014;
Sherrie & Mawela; Sudirman,2017; Tasheskva, 2018; Taskin,2017; 2021). While this is true, the need for
pre-service teachers to embrace lesson planning and get to use it is necessary as this is fundamental to
their teaching career. This was the prime reason why this study was conducted along this area of interest. It
sought to scientifically find out and alleviate the usual difficulties the pre – service teachers are
experiencing. In such manner, instructors are given first-hand data where their interventions will be based.

Theory of Constructivism
According to Brunner (1960 as cited by Mcleod, 2019), the main premise of constructivism is
the construction of knowledge. For him, the purpose of education is not to impart knowledge, but instead to
facilitate a child's thinking and problem-solving skills which can then be transferred to a range of situations.
Specifically, education should also develop symbolic thinking in children. Further, he posits that the main
aim of education is to create autonomous learners.
This research subscribed to the idea of constructivism, specifically on developing autonomous
learners. Pre-service teachers should be provided opportunities to create knowledge through practical
experiences that challenge and enhance their intellectual and emotional faculties to produce quality lesson
plans. This study also advanced the assumption that teacher educators, as facilitators of knowledge
construction would also empower pre-service teachers to integrate their schema, previous experiences,
and relevant perspectives into lesson planning. This experience could be further facilitated by the lesson
planning guide that increases the autonomy of pre-service teachers to learn and develop lesson plans.

Theory of Configuration
The Theory of Configuration, based on the Gestalt theory as cited by Bagayao (2013), states
that the teacher should facilitate transfer of learning in teaching. In the transfer stage, the teacher must
guide the learners to ensure a successful learning process by giving them developed instructional materials
like guides that will help them enhance their critical thinking.
The basic assumptions and concepts of the Configuration Theory imply that through the given
guide, pre-service teachers will be able to work at their own pace regardless of the situation and the
conditions that could affect learning. Through instructional guides, classroom teaching could be re-
configured, in that, these instructional materials have the capacity to transfer information to learners at their
own pace of, style in, and dispositions to learnings. Moreover, self-discovery and independent learning
would entail sustained efforts among preservice teachers as they use the developed instructional guides.
Yet, said materials would also alleviate the challenges that pre-service teachers usually encounter in the
lesson planning process. Also, receptive learning would be very meaningful to them since the materials
could provide them cognitive structures, thus, the learners will discover concepts and synthesize them
before the consequential application (Dietz, 2018).
Overall, the Experiential Learning Theory, the Theory of Constructivism, and the Configuration
Theory support the goals and the methods of the study. Specifically, these theories emphasize the
importance of independent learning, knowledge construction, and guided learning, which are the very
concepts that underpin the development of instructional guides in lesson planning. With the documented
challenges that pre-service teachers continually encounter in lesson planning, the instructional guides are
theoretically and practically significant in ensuring pre-service teachers’ meaningful experiences in lesson
planning.

Conceptual Framework
The Input–Process–Output was used following the concepts of the ADDIE (Analysis, Design,
Development, Implementation, and Evaluation) model. However, due to time constraints in the data
gathering, the study only covered the first three phases, namely the Analysis, Design, and Development.
The ADDIE model is the generic process traditionally used by instructional designers and
training developers. The five phases represent a dynamic, flexible guideline for building effective training,
and performance support tools. Theories such as behaviorism, constructivism, social learning, and
cognitivism help shape and define the outcome of the ADDIE Model (Culatta, 2021).
According to Susiana (2019), the ADDIE Model is most relevant for development types of
research studies. This model is one of the systematic learning design models, and the theoretical basis for
system development and learning design based on this model is selected. The model is based on the
needs and characteristics of pre-service teachers, following the sequence of system activities for structured
programming, to strive to solve learning problems related to learning resources.

Analysis phase
The analysis phase considers the “Goal-Setting Stage” (Kurt, 2018). According to Cullata
(2019), it is where the instructional problem is clarified, the instructional goals and objectives are
established, and the learning environment and learner’s existing knowledge and skills are identified.
Further, the questions below shall be considered: (1) Who are the audience and their characteristics? (2)
What are the new behavioral outcomes? (3) What types of learning constraints exist? (4) What are the
delivery options? (5) What are the online pedagogical considerations? (6) What is the timeline for project
completion?
The study assessed the pre–service teachers` knowledge and skill levels in lesson planning
both to show their readiness towards such endeavor, and as a basis for the crafting of interventions and
fully prepare them for Teaching Internship. The Joint CHED–DEPED Memorandum Order No. 1, s. 2021,
states that one of the tasks of teaching interns is to prepare lesson plans, study guides, modules, and
teaching materials, and conduct daily and final demonstration teaching. Likewise, the same memorandum
requires teaching interns to conduct Classroom-Based Action Research (CBAR) in which lesson planning
competence is essential. Hence, the study endeavored to establish baseline data through an examination
of degree III pre– service teachers` level of knowledge and skills in lesson planning.
In an article published in Valamis (2021), Cognitive Learning Theory believes that knowledge
and skills are consistent. The theory states that through Cognitive learning strategies, one may apply new
information or skills in life situations. Consequently, the study is interested in looking further into the
veracity of this theory by looking into the significant relationship of the knowledge and skills of the pre-
service teachers in lesson planning which are covered by the third research problem.
Furthermore, the theory of Cognitive Learning acknowledges that delays and difficulties in
learning are seen when cognitive processes are not working regularly (Arshavskiy, 2018). This means that
when internal or external factors occur like inaccessibility and inadequacy of references, poor internet
connectivity, limited consultation hours due to the COVID–19 Pandemic, the acquisition of knowledge may
be hampered or adversely affected. As such, this study also aims to qualitatively determine the constraints
and capabilities or the difficulties and strengths, among others, of the pre-service teachers in lesson
planning wrapped in the fourth research problem as the lived experiences of the pre–service teachers.
Moreover, significant elements in developing a lesson plan are integrated in the study. These
legal mandates include: (1) the existing LP practices of the institution; (2) DepEd Order No. 42, S. 2016; (3)
the guidelines of lesson planning of UNESCO (2019); (4) DO No. 42, s. 2017; and (5) RA 10533. These
documents were also analyzed to serve as a springboard for the scientific development of the instructional
guides.
The existing lesson planning practices of the institution was analyzed to determine salient
points that guide the development of the LPG. While it is true that the K to 12 curriculum contains essential
features for teacher educators and pre-service teachers, institutional practices were also considered to
enable the researcher to attain the study’s optimum results. Such practices are time-tested, as such, they
could contribute to the study’s goals.
The DO No. 42, s. 2017, or the Policy Guidelines on Daily Preparation for the K to 12
Curriculum Program, was the primer of the study, particularly in the content of the LPG. Since the main
objective of the ISPSC is to prepare competent teachers in the area of instructional planning useful to their
chosen field of specialization, it is necessary to consider this DepEd policy to render the concepts of the
instructional guide relevant and appropriate. This alignment also enabled pre-service teachers to learn and
practice DepEd policies at this time in their learning experiences.
Furthermore, the guideline of lesson planning prescribed by the UNESCO (2019) was
considered in the guide to align it to international standards. This alignment also contributed to one of the
goals of the College in producing globally competitive graduates.
The DO No. 42, s. 2017, or the National Adoption and Implementation of the Philippine
Professional Standards for Teachers was likewise reviewed as consideration of this study. The PPST
stipulates the fundamental characteristics of a Filipino K to 12 teachers, particularly on their competencies
related to lesson planning. This is taken into account to assure that the instructional guide of ISPSC will
help in developing future teachers who could meet the standards prescribed by the PPST.
Moreover, Republic Act 10533, particularly in the development of curriculum section, was
reviewed and considered, particularly in the development of the LPG to assure that the guide is
contextualized, flexible, and learner–centered.
Design Phase
At this stage, all goals, tools used to measure performance, various tests, topic analysis,
planning, and resources are determined. The focus of this phase is on learning objectives, content, topic
analysis, exercises, lesson plans, evaluation tools used, and media selection (Kurt, 2018).
In conformity with the aforesaid definition, the results of the knowledge and skill levels of pre-
service teachers and their constraints and capabilities were the major bases in designing the LPG. The
identified constraints and capabilities of the pre-service teachers through their experiences served as
signposts in determining the depth of discussions to be allotted for each topic.
All concepts relative to lesson planning, particularly to the topics where students and teachers
are usually challenged, were the focus of the Guide. Topics include, but are not limited to: an overview of
the lesson plan, concepts, frameworks and models of lesson plans, types of the lesson plan, characteristics
of lesson plans, parts of lesson plans according to model (Sudirman, 2017); concepts and formulations of
intended learning outcomes; strategies to use, and activities to cater learning differences (e.g., Konig,
2020; Latifa, 2016;Nzilano, 2013; Sesiorina, 2014; Tasheskva, 2018; Taskin, 2017; Sherrie & Mawela,
2021); assessment practices (Kim, 2017); and alignment of the parts to the intended learning objectives
(Polonio, 2019); and attributes of lesson planners (Cunado & Abocejo, 2018).
Likewise, the researcher considered the features of lesson plans according to DepEd Order
No. 42, S. 2016, the Philippine Professional Standards for teachers, the RA 10533, and the guidelines
prescribed by UNESCO.

Development phase
In this phase, designers use the data gathered in the previous two phases and use that
information to create a program that communicates what needs to be taught to participants (Kurt, 2019). If
the previous two stages required planning and brainstorming, then at the development stage it all comes
down to putting it into action (Kurt, 2019).
In this study, this phase included the development of the LPG prototype. After this, the
prototype of the LPG was validated by experts whose qualifications are discussed in the Methods section.

Implementation and evaluation phases

According to Kurt (2018), the Implementation phase entails the process of testing the efficacy
of the developed guide on a group of learners. This determines the effectiveness of the output through
experimentation. On the other hand, the Evaluation Phase determines the effect of a developed
instructional material through relevant statistical tools or through gathering qualitative feedback. However,
because of time constraints, these phases were not carried out. It only ended at determining the level of
validity of the developed output. Hence, the research paper humbly acknowledges this as its limitation.
Figure 2 presents the conceptual paradigm of the study in which the researcher fused the
input – process – output and the ADDIE Model into a single paradigm.
Frame 1 holds the Analysis Phase. This Phase covers the analysis of the levels of knowledge
and skills of pre-service teachers in lesson planning as well as their constraints and capabilities. It also
considers 5 elements namely: (1) the existing LP practices of the institution; (2) DepEd Order No. 42, S.
2016; (3) the guidelines of lesson planning of UNESCO (2019); (4) DO No. 42, s. 2017; and (5) RA 10533.
Frame 2 covers three phases–Design, Development, and Implementation. It is where the
prototype was designed and developed based on the results of Frame I. However, the paper reiterates that
due to time constraints, the Implementation Phase together with the Evaluation Phase in Frame 3 were not
conducted.