Social Inclusion Policies and Learners’ Engagement in School Activities

This study assessed the relationship between social inclusion policies and learner engagement in District V, Division of Malaybalay City, during the 2025–2026 school year. Using a descriptive-correlational design, the research examined policy implementation across five domains: teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, school resources, professional development, and administrative support. Data were collected through complete enumeration of public-school teachers using a validated questionnaire and analyzed via descriptive and inferential statistics.
Findings reveal a large extent of implementation across all social inclusion domains, with teachers demonstrating robust knowledge and egalitarian attitudes. Similarly, learners exhibit high engagement in both curricular and co-curricular activities, reflecting strong academic investment and a sense of belonging. Correlation analysis confirms a significant positive relationship between policy implementation and learner engagement (r = .497, p = .000), with administrative support and resource availability emerging as the strongest predictors of student involvement.
The study concludes that while teacher readiness is high, sustained success depends on bridging the gap between theoretical knowledge and structural support. Structured policy implementation, driven by proactive leadership and equitable resource distribution, directly enhances student participation. Recommendations include institutionalizing specialized professional development for teachers to refine inclusive pedagogies and empowering learners to take active roles in classroom discourse. Furthermore, school heads must champion a supportive climate by regularly evaluating policies and strategically allocating resources. By fostering a "wraparound" support system, schools can transform inclusive frameworks into a lived reality that ensures the academic and social success of every learner.

Social Inclusion Policies, Learner Engagement, Teacher Perspectives, Malaybalay City, Inclusive Education

1. Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al-Hussaini, S. I., & Al-Barwani, T. N. (2021). The role of school principals in promoting inclusive schools: A teachers’ perspective. Frontiers in Education, 6, 603241. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.603241 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Cabrera, M., Zamudio Garnica, L. Y., & Martínez Farfán, I. C. (2019). How distance learning based on inclusion led to the proposal of a distributed access research strategy (DARS). Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5525 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chen, E., & Lee, W. K. (2020). School funding and educational inequality: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(2), 240–280. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320908322 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cohen, L. (2015). School leadership and inclusive education: The role of the principal. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Department of Education. (2019). Operational guidelines on the implementation of inclusive education programs for learners with disabilities (DepEd Order No. 21, s. 2019). Department of Education, Republic of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Department of Education. (2009). Policy guidelines on inclusive education for learners with disabilities (DepEd Order No. 72, s. 2009). Department of Education, Republic of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Euscategui, B. M. E., & Saavedra, L. R. (2024). Attitude towards students with disabilities and their relationship with school coexistence. International Journal of Instruction, 17(2), 667–684. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2024.17237a [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Florian, L., & Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for interrogating inclusive practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Forlin, C. (2017). Teacher education for inclusion: Changing paradigms and innovative directions. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(7–8), 812–825. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1283719 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Huo, Y., Lan, J., & Guo, W. (2024). The influence of teacher support on student engagement: The mediating role of self-efficacy and task value. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 132456. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.132456 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kewalramani, S., Aranda, G., & Sun, J. (2024). A systematic review of the role of multimodal resources for inclusive STEM engagement. Education Sciences, 14(6), 604. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060604 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Khumalo, M. A., Rantho, P., Ntsukunyane, L., Nthoko, T., & Nkhahle, M. (2024). Possible remedies to address the impact of early childhood trauma in Lesotho's inclusive schools. European Journal of Open Education and E-Learning Studies, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v9i1.5942 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mackenzie, E., Holmes, K., Berger, N., & Cole, C. (2024). Adolescents’ intentions to study science: The role of classroom-based social support, task values, and self-efficacy. Research in Science Education, 54, 1075–1093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10169-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Martin, M. (2021). Lens of inclusive education: School heads and classroom teachers’ perspectives on policy implementation and institutional challenges in the Philippines. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(3), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.3.10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mosito, C. P., Adewumi, T. M., & Nissen, S. (2025). How informed are teacher educators about the care and support for the teaching and learning framework? International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2025.2501117 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nugraha, M. G., Kidman, G., & Tan, H. (2023). Pre-service teacher in STEM education: An integrative review and mapping of the Indonesian research literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(3), em2262. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13155 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Equity in education: Breaking down barriers to social mobility. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264073234-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. RSIS International. (2024). Teacher readiness and inclusion practices in developing education systems. RSIS International Research Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Rowen, B. (2007). The pathways to education program: Breaking the cycle of poverty through education. Pathways to Education Canada. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. UNESCO. (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000248254 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. UNESCO. (2020). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education—All means all. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. UNICEF. (2021). Reimagine education: Inclusive learning for every child. United Nations Children’s Fund. https://www.unicef.org/education/inclusive-education [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Uzorka, A., Kalabuki, K., & Odebiyi, O. A. (2024). The effectiveness of in-service teacher training programs in enhancing teaching quality and student achievement. Forum for Education Studies, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.59400/fes.v2i3.1465 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Vaz, S., Wilson, N., Falkmer, M., Passmore, A. E., & Black, M. H. (2015). Factors associated with the attitudes of mainstream school teachers towards students with disabilities: A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 10(7), e0134408. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134408 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Woodcock, S., & Jones, A. (2023). Teacher self-efficacy, inclusion, and professional development practices: Cultivating a learning environment for all. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(12), 1438–1457. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2022.2032310 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Wu, Y., et al. (2024). The effectiveness of professional development on the self-efficacy of in-service teachers in STEM education: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Yoon, J., Ko, Y., & Lee, H. (2021). Virtual and open integration of culture for education (VOICE) with science teacher candidates from Korea during COVID-19. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 7(2), 384–420. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-bja10031 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Zuber, M., Graham, L., & Carrington, S. (2025). Teacher expectations and equity groups: Preservice teacher views from Australia, Sweden, and England. The Curriculum Journal, 36(1), 173–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.310 [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