Impact of Foldable Graphic Organizer on Cognitive and Affective Learning in Grade 9 Science

The present study focused on the impact of foldable graphic organizers on cognitive and affective learning among Grade 9 science learners in Western Bicutan National High School in the Division of Taguig City and Pateros. The objectives of this study included identifying learning gaps in cognitive and affective learning in science, determining the role of foldable graphic organizers in solving the identified learning gaps as perceived by science teachers, designing the foldable graphic organizers, assessing their acceptability by science teachers and science experts, and determining the impact on cognitive and affective learning among Grade 9 Science learners.
The study employed a descriptive quantitative research design. Data were collected through validated survey questionnaires, pre-test and post-test, and an acceptability checklist. Descriptive statistics, mean comparison, and t-tests were used for data analysis.
The developed instructional materials were found to be highly acceptable by both science teachers and science experts across eight evaluation domains: objectives, content, activities, usefulness, language and style, organization, presentation, and evaluation.
Based on the findings of this study, the use of Foldable Graphic Organizers had a significant positive impact on learners’ cognitive learning and also strengthened their affective learning. The learners’ cognitive performance improved from Low to Closely Approximating Mastery, while their affective responses showed Strong Agreement in commitment, positive attitude, confidence, interest and motivation, engagement, and participation in Science learning.

foldable graphic organizer, learning gaps, cognitive learning, affective learning, impact.

1. Alieto, E. O., Cabangcala, R. B., Estigoy, E. B., Delos Santos, M. R., & Torres, J. M. (2021). When language learning suddenly becomes online: Analyzing English as Second Language learners’ (ELLs) attitude and technological competence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bacarro, J. M., Galorport, A. E., Quimco, R. F. H., Rollon, M., Sua, A. J., Cabanilla, A., & Cortes, V. (2024). Graphic organizers pedagogy and retention skills of students with intellectual disability: a sequential explanatory mixed methods inquiry [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Basco, R. O. (2020). Catalyzing creativity and critical thinking through science graphic organizers. Instabright International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bromley, K., Irwin-Devitis, L., and Modlo, M. (1999). Graphic organizers: Visual strategies for active learning scholastic. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chafla Ruiz, S. P. (2022). 3D graphic organizers (Foldables) for vocabulary learning. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador Repository [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Department of Education. (2017). DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017: National adoption and implementation of the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (PPST). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Eldred, N. (2024). The impact of visuals and graphic organizers on student learning of social studies (Master's thesis, Bethel University). Spark Repository. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Elechicon, J., & Paris, P. E. (2023). Developing students' conceptual understanding using interactive notebook: A quasi-experimental study. WVSU Research Journal [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Esquillo, S. V. (2021). Argument mapping method and critical thinking dispositions of learners in Physics (Master's thesis, West Visayas State University). WVSU Institutional Repository and Electronic Dissertations and Theses PLUS. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Estacio, R. D. (2022). Graphic organizers in an online learning environment: Its influence on students' performances, cognitive load, knowledge gain, and self-efficacy in Science, Technology, and Society (STS) subject (Doctoral dissertation, Central Luzon State University) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ga, A. C., Jr. (2021). Learning materials for modular distance learning on academically-challenged learners' science process skills and conceptual understanding of matter (Master's thesis, West Visayas State University). WVSU Institutional Repository. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Galvez, G. D. (2024). Drawing coupled with feedback: Effects on Filipino senior high school students' submicroscopic understanding of chemical reactions (Doctoral dissertation, University of Waikato). University of Waikato Research Commons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Goodwin, W. L., & Goodwin, L. D. (1996). Understanding quantitative and qualitative research in early childhood education. Teachers College Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Herrera, S. G., & Holmes, M. A. (2022). Bringing theory to life: Strategies that make culturally responsive pedagogy a reality in diverse secondary classrooms. International Journal of Multicultural Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Idlisan, R. (2022). Effectiveness of graphic organizer in cooperative learning approach in teaching chemical equations and reactions. SSRN Electronic Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. İlter, İ. (2021). The power of graphic organizers: Effects on students’ word-learning and achievement emotions in social studies. Australian Journal of Teacher Education [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Jaramillo, I. J. M. (2023). Foldables as a resource for vocabulary teaching (Master’s thesis, Universidad Estatal Península de Santa Elena). UPSE Institutional Repository. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Karnishyna, D. A., & Selivanova, T. V. (2024). Enhancing high school students’ understanding of molecular geometry with augmented reality. Science Education Quarterly, [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kwinram, N., Nuangchalerm, P., & Thammasena, B. (2022). The development of science learning achievement and analytical thinking of Grade 7 students using 5E inquiry- based learning cooperated with graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Issues [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Leorito, K., & Leorito, A. (2025). Graphic organizer materials on self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) and content mastery in science: A photovoice approach. Journal of Innovative Research [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Ligasan, J. M. C., & Doysabas, J. C. L. (2024). Enhancing news writing skills of Grade 4 students through graphic organizer strategy. Davao Research Journal [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Lumampao, G. B. (2023). 5 Es instructional learning activities on learners' conceptual understanding, science process skills, and attitudes towards physics (Master's thesis, West Visayas State University). WVSU Institutional Repository and Electronic Dissertations and Theses PLUS [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mannag, C. M., & Dagdag, J. (2024). The effect of graphic organizers on vocabulary acquisition, reading performance, and English learning attitude of Grade 8 students. Journal of Education and Innovation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Marginingsih, M., Muhtarom, M., Sundari, & Ahmad, N. (2025). Improving students' ability in reading comprehension news item text by using graphic organizer. FRASA: English Education and Literature Journal [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Pepple, B. G., & Danladi, S. A. (2024). Impact of Jigsaw and graphic organizers instructional strategies on students’ retentions and academic performance in secondary school biology students. International Journal of Innovative Psychology & Social Development [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. ‌Ponce, H. R., Mayer, R. E., & Méndez, E. E. (2025). Learner-generated and instructor-provided graphic organizers as aids to learning from text: a meta-analysis. educational psychology review [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Qin, T., & Wu, C.-J. (2025). Graphic organizers’ optimized design through segmenting and signaling principle: Based on generative learning theory. Computers & Education, [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Quillao, J. L. (2023). The use of multimodal instructional materials in teaching science. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343557958_The_Use_of_Multimodal_Instructional_Materials_in_Teaching_Science [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Republic Act No. 10533. (2013). Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013. Congress of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Riyani, A. P. (2025). Using graphic organizers in reading text: Its effect on students' critical thinking skills at SMAIT Al Fityah Pekanbaru (Bachelor's thesis). State Islamic University Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2007). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Shi, et.al. (2022). Effects of mind mapping-based instruction on student cognitive learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 24(1), 37–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Tandog, V. O., & Bucayong, C. O. (2021). Graphic organizer: A learning tool in teaching physical science. International Journal of Social Sciences, [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Tenzin, S. (2021). The effectiveness of integrating graphic organizers in fostering the students' learning of chemical bonding in chemistry (Master of Education thesis). Samtse College of Education, Royal University of Bhutan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Treviño, C. (2023). Mind mapping and outlining: Comparing two types of graphic organizers for learning seventh-grade life science (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University). Texas Tech University Repository. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Tzuriel, D. (2021). The socio-cultural theory of Vygotsky. In Mediated learning and cognitive modifiability. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Green Synthesis of Calcium Oxide Nanoparticles from Pigeon Eggshells for Cement Composites
• Needs Analysis: Development of an Interactive Digital Storybook in Teaching Mixtures and their Characteristics among Grade 6 Learners
• Thickness Dependent Structural, Optical, Electrical and Gas Sensing properties of ZnO thin film
• Forensic Chemistry Laboratory Works from Home: Challenges Encountered by Criminology Students During the Conduct of their Laboratory Activities at Home
• The Concept of Wellness Club and How it Differs from the Present Gym?