Laboratory Resource Availability and Instructional Strategies in Relation to Students’ Academic Performance

This study explored the availability of laboratory resources, the implementation of instructional strategies, and their relationship to learners’ academic performance in the Calamba District of Calamba, Misamis Occidental. A descriptive correlational research design was employed with 120 public elementary and secondary school teachers. Data were gathered using a structured research instrument, and descriptive statistics, including mean and standard deviation, assessed levels of resource availability and instructional strategy implementation. Pearson’s Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient (Pearson r) was used to examine relationships between the independent variables and learners’ academic performance. Findings revealed that teachers perceived laboratory resources as highly available and reported consistently high implementation of instructional strategies. Learners’ academic performance was generally above average. However, no significant relationships were found between laboratory resource availability or instructional strategy implementation and learners’ academic outcomes. The study concludes that while schools provide ample resources and effective teaching strategies, these factors alone do not directly determine academic performance, highlighting the need for complementary student engagement and support mechanisms. School administrators and teachers may collaboratively maintain laboratory resources, strengthen instructional practices, and support learners through targeted interventions, while future studies explore how effective resource use and teaching strategies impact academic performance.

academic performance, instructional strategies, laboratory resources

1. Abbey-Kalio, F. (2024). Availability and utilization of laboratory resources as determinants of students’ academic achievement in chemistry in Nigerian secondary schools. International Journal of Education and Learning Research, 12(2), 45–56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Almazan, R. (2024). Application of Bloom’s taxonomy in science classrooms: Effects on students’ learning outcomes. Journal of Science Education and Practice, 12(1), 45–56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Anning, V., Owusu-Addo, E., Peprah, C., & Konadu Snr, E. (2024). Effect of blended instructional strategies on students’ academic performance in Ghanaian higher education institutions. Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 9(3), 120–134. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Awini, P. (2025). Laboratory infrastructure and student learning: A case study in secondary schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 15(2), 102–114. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans, Green. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bunga, H., Sablić, S., & Daramola, O. (2025). Multigrade teaching strategies and student engagement in science classrooms. Education Today, 9(3), 77–90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cabusor, M., & Antonio, J. (2024). Laboratory facilities and their impact on science learning outcomes among public secondary schools in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Educational Studies, 15(1), 88– 102. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cinadre, M. (2023). The relationship between teaching practices, classroom management, and student academic performance. Asian Journal of Educational Development, 8(4), 56–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Lazaro, R., & Paglinawan, G. (2024). Laboratory resource availability and student engagement among senior high school science students in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Science and Education, 19(2), 65–80. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Mangila, L., & Mangila, R. (2024). Instructional strategies and classroom management practices of teachers in improving learner engagement and performance. Philippine Journal of Basic Education, 10(1), 34–50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Masdoki, M., & Din, R. (2023). Teacher 4.0: Its role in differentiated instruction. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 13(12), 4490–4507. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Preston, M., Subban, P., Suprayogi, M. N., Liyani, A. N., & Ratri, A. P. (2025). “Differentiation is sometimes a hit and miss”: Educator perceptions of differentiated instruction in the higher education sector. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 34, 873–884. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Rabanes, K., & Paglinawan, J. (2025). Learning environment and instructional material adequacy as predictors of student academic success. Southeast Asian Journal of Educational Research, 13(2), 55–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Rosario, J., Aribbay, A. J., Baccay, I. R., Lopez, K. K., Tandayu, C., & Villamor, C. I. (2024). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Differentiating mathematics instruction: Teachers’ experiences in inclusive classrooms. ISU Linker: Journal of Education, Social Sciences and Allied Health, 1(2), 26–42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Sata, L. (2025). Classroom discourse and collaborative learning in secondary science. Journal of Educational Psychology and Practice, 20(1), 34–46. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Subban, P. (2022). Differentiated instruction in inclusive classrooms: A review of strategies and outcomes. Educational Review, 74(2), 246–263. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Suleiman, H., Adhikari, Y., & Tadesse, T. (2024). Formative assessment and academic achievement: Applying Bloom’s taxonomy in classrooms. Journal of Educational Assessment, 12(2), 57–71. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. ASCD. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

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

22. Yousif, A. (2025). Scaffolding and collaborative learning in science classrooms: Impacts on student achievement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 15(2), 120–133 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar