Linking Strategic Instructional Management and Science Teaching Approaches among Public Secondary School Teachers

This study examined the relationship between strategic instructional management and science teaching approaches among public secondary school teachers in the Wright Districts of Paranas, Samar, Philippines. Specifically, it determined the extent of implementation of strategic instructional management, identified the teaching approaches employed by science teachers, examined the relationship between these variables, and identified the challenges encountered in their implementation. A quantitative descriptive-correlational research design was employed involving 35 science teachers and 8 school heads through total enumeration. Data were gathered using a researcher-developed questionnaire that underwent expert validation (CVI = 1.00) and reliability testing (Cronbach's α = 0.79). Descriptive statistics and Kendall's Tau-b correlation were used to analyze the data. The findings revealed a very high level of implementation of strategic instructional management, with grand mean ratings of 4.49 among teachers and 4.81 among school heads. Science teachers consistently employed diverse teaching approaches, yielding an overall mean of 4.63, with the Science–Technology–Society (STS) approach obtaining the highest rating (M = 4.71). Significant positive relationships were found between strategic instructional management and teaching approaches, particularly between instructional support systems and inquiry-based learning (τ = .51, p < .001), and instructional support systems and project-based learning (τ = .50, p < .001). Challenges in implementing strategic instructional management (M = 2.93) and teaching approaches (M = 2.98) were encountered only sometimes. The study concludes that strategic instructional management serves as an enabling mechanism for adopting diverse, learner-centered teaching approaches in science education. Strengthening instructional support systems, resource provision, and teacher development initiatives may further enhance the quality of science instruction.

instructional management, science education, science teaching approaches

1. Affandi, A. L. (2025). Supporting resources for the successful implementation of the curriculum. Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.59141/jiss.v6i2.1619 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alvarez-Bell, R. M., Wirtz, D., & Bian, H. (2017). Identifying keys to success in innovative teaching: Student engagement and instructional practices as predictors of student learning in a course using a team-based learning approach. Teaching and learning inquiry, 5(2), 128-146. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Boller-Aying, S., & Villegas-Mendaño, R. (2024). STUDENTS' PERFORMANCE ON THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL COMPONENTS OF PROJECTILE MOTION USING PROJECT-BASED LEARNING. Ignatian International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 2(4), 1689–1704. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11090569 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bybee, R. W. (2015). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Creating teachable moments. Arlington, TX: NSTA Press, National Science Teachers Association. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cabural, A. (2024). Beyond benchmarking: A diagnostic inquiry into the underlying determinants of low performance in Philippine PISA science. Journal of Tertiary Education and Learning, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.54536/jtel.v2i3.3063 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chowdhury, M. A. (2016). The Integration of Science-Technology-Society/Science-Technology-Society-Environment and Socio-Scientific-Issues for Effective Science Education and Science Teaching. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 19-38. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chowdhury, T. A. (2021). Fostering learner autonomy through cooperative and collaborative learning. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 10(1), 89-95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Covitt, B. A., de los Santos, E. X., Lin, Q., Morrison Thomas, C., & Anderson, C. W. (2024). Instructional practices in secondary science: How teachers achieve local and standards‐based success. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(1), 170-202. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Department of Education. (2016). K to 12 curriculum guide: Science (Grade 3 to Grade 10). Department of Education, Republic of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Guerrero, J. S., & Bautista, R. G. (2023). Inquiry-based teaching in secondary science. International Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities (IJSSH), 8(2), 146-154. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hannah B. Arceño, Rezy V. Mendaño, PhD (2026). Students’ Misconceptions and Learning Experiences in Linear Motion: Basis for an Evidence-Based Intervention Framework. , 10(26), https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2026.1026EDU0276. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Istiana, I., Jatmiko, B., & Prahani, B. K. (2023). Effectiveness of Implementing Guided Inquiry to Improve Students' Critical Thinking Skills. SAR Journal (2619-9955), 6(4). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Istikomah, I., Iswan, I., & Winata, W. (2025). Instructional Leadership Practice in Elevating the Quality of Education in Islamic School. Al’adzkiya International of Education and Sossial (AIoEs), 6, 7-13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Koimah, S. M., Zahra, N. A., Prastini, E., Sasmita, S. K., & Sari, N. (2024). Implementasi pembelajaran berdiferensiasi untuk memenuhi kebutuhan belajar siswa yang beragam. JISBI: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Budaya Indonesia, 2(2), 58–66. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Makin, M., Abdullah, Z., & Shafee, S. (2018). The art of supervision: Role of supervisory skills in developing teacher capacity. MOJEM: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management, 6(4), 37-55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mckeown, T., Abrams, L., Slattum, P., & Kirk, S. (2016). Enhancing teacher beliefs through an inquiry-based professional development program. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 2(1), 85-97. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Meng, S. (2023). Enhancing teaching and learning: Aligning instructional practices with education quality standards. Research and Advances in Education, 2(7). https://doi.org/10.56397/RAE.2023.07.04 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mikeska, J. N., Shattuck, T., Holtzman, S., McCaffrey, D. F., Duchesneau, N., Qi, Y., & Stickler, L. (2017). Understanding science teaching effectiveness: examining how science-specific and generic instructional practices relate to student achievement in secondary science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 39(18), 2594-2623. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Morris, D. L. (2025). Rethinking science education practices: Shifting from investigation-centric to comprehensive inquiry-based instruction. Education Sciences, 15(1), 73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Pacala, F. A. (2025). ENHANCING SCIENCE TEACHERS’SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS USING TECHNOLOGY-DRIVEN INTERDISCIPLINARY PROJECT-BASED LEARNING. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 107(3), 207. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Riga, F., Winterbottom, M., Harris, E., & Newby, L. (2017). Inquiry-based science education. In Science education: An international course companion (pp. 247-261). Rotterdam: SensePublishers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Slavin, R. E., Madden, N., & Ross, S. (2025). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. Pearson. One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Stevenson, M., Hedberg, J. G., O’Sullivan, K. A., & Howe, C. (2016). Leading learning: The role of school leaders in supporting continuous professional development. Professional development in education, 42(5), 818-835. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Supovitz, J. A., Mayer, D. P., & Kahle, J. B. (2000). Promoting inquiry-based instructional practice: The longitudinal impact of professional development in the context of systemic reform. Educational policy, 14(3), 331-356. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Tursunov, M. M. (2016). A comparative analysis of teacher-centered and learner-centered classes. Міжнародний науковий журнал, (6 (3)), 65-67. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ulit, J. (2025). Impact of school heads' instructional leadership on teaching and learning outcomes: Philippine’s context. Divine Word International Journal of Management and Humanities (DWIJMH)(ISSN: 2980-4817), 4(3), 2109-2126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study