Digital Competence and School Resources on Instructional Delivery of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) Teachers

This study aimed to determine the relationship between digital competencies, school resources, and the instructional delivery of Technology and Livelihood Education teachers in the Division of Valencia City during the 2025-2026 school year. The research employed a descriptive-correlational design and collected data from the teaching staff using a survey instrument to assess technical proficiencies and institutional support systems. The findings revealed that teachers possess a high level of digital competency, particularly in using digital resources, although empowering students through digital creativity remained the lowest-scoring domain. School resources were rated as adequate, with Information and Communications Technology equipment being the most sufficient, while physical laboratory infrastructure was identified as the weakest area. Statistical analysis established a strong positive correlation between digital competencies and instructional delivery, alongside a moderate positive relationship regarding school resources. Regression analysis further demonstrated that the ability to evaluate and assess, combined with the availability of functional ICT hardware, served as the primary predictors of teaching success, explaining over sixty percent of the variance in instructional performance. It was concluded that strengthening personal digital proficiency and ensuring targeted resource access are critical for maintaining instructional excellence. The study recommends that the Department of Education prioritize specialized training in digital assessment and modernize physical workshops to bridge the gap between digital theory and practical vocational mastery.

Digital Competencies, School Resources, Instructional Delivery, TLE Teachers, Descriptive- Correlational Research, Valencia City, ICT Resources.

1. Ajlouni et al. 2023.Teachers’ Digital Technology Competencies for Use in Distance Education in Schools.International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 7(1): 55-73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Akintayo et al. 2024.Technology-enhanced vocational education outcomes.Journal of Vocational Education, 12(4): 112-130. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alegre. 2023.Challenges in digital TLE delivery.Philippine Journal of Education, 45(2): 78-92. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Anoba, J. L. D. & Cahapay, M. B. 2020.The Readiness of Teachers on Blended Learning Transition for Post-COVID-19 Period: An Assessment Using Parallel Mixed Method.PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 4(2): 295-316. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Anorue, H. C. et al. 2023.Artificial Intelligence Application in Instructional Delivery of Business Education in Nigerian Universities.International Policy Brief, 10(2): 145-160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Arık Güngör, M. et al. 2025.Digital Competencies Scale for Teachers: A Validity and Reliability Study.International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 9(2): 375-390. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Aying. 2026.Instructional and digital competence of teachers in teaching Technology and Livelihood Education in Lapu-Lapu City.International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 25(1): 45-62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Ayala & Andal. 2025.Digital tools in technical-vocational education.Journal of Technical Education, 8(3): 201-218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Baker et al. 2018.Educational resource allocation and student achievement.Journal of Education Finance, 43(4): 345-367. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Barrot. 2021.Education 4.0 in the Philippines: Digital transformation in schools.Philippine Journal of Education, 100(1): 12-28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Barcelona et al. 2023.Facilities and equipment challenges in Philippine TLE education.Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 10(2): 89-104. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Bardelli. 2022.Teaching as a deliberate and situated activity.Journal of Pedagogy and Education, 15(3): 201-215. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Biray et al. 2024.ICT enhancement programs for TLE teachers in non-urban settings.Journal of Educational Technology, 22(1): 56-72. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Cabellos et al. 2023.Digital integration in pedagogy.Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 52(2): 145-162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Cadiz et al. 2024.Fostering student digital skills in TLE classrooms.Philippine Journal of Education Research, 12(1): 78-95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Casane. 2025.Resource gaps in Davao del Norte TLE implementation.Asia Pacific Education Review, 26(3): 210-228. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Cattáneo et al. 2021.Digital workforce preparation through vocational education.Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 73(4): 456-473. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Code et al. 2021.Hands-on TLE challenges in online platforms.Computers & Education, 165: 104-120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Coşkunserçe & Aydoğdu. 2022.Teacher digital proficiency and student outcomes.European Journal of Education, 57(5): 678-695. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Edokpolor. 2019.Vocational resource adequacy and teaching effectiveness.Journal of Technical and Vocational Education, 8(2): 123-140. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Edokpolor & Dumbiri. 2019.Teaching effectiveness in vocational programs.International Journal of Vocational Education, 9(1): 45-62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Embodo & Alonzo. 2024.Instructional resources correlation with student performance.Philippine Educational Studies, 15(4): 301-318. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Eslit. 2023.Digital transformation in Philippine schools during Education 4.0.Asian Journal of Education, 10(3): 167-184. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Excelise & Marapao. 2025.Resource-digital synergy in TLE instructional delivery.Journal of Instructional Research, 14(2): 89-106. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Fernando & Jain. 2022.Technical literacy gaps in online TLE instruction.Education and Information Technologies, 27(6): 7890 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Gómez-Pablos et al. 2022. Teachers' digital competence based on self-perception. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3): 4285-4306. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. González-Medina et al. 2025. Digital assessment literacy as predictor of instructional quality. Computers & Education, 205: 104-119. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Graham et al. 2019. Instructional delivery framework for blended learning environments. Journal of Online Learning Research, 5(2): 123-145. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Hamdani & Puspita. 2022. Teacher-oriented curricula limitations for 21st-century skills. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 54(4): 512-530. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Hamoc. 2024. Resource availability challenges in Catanduanes Division. Philippine Journal of Education, 103(1): 67-82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Hao & Florez-Perez. 2021. Classroom environment impact on student performance. Learning Environments Research, 24(2): 201-218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Hassan & Mirza. 2021. Dynamic digital methods for ICT utilization. International Journal of Educational Technology, 18(3): 345-362. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Jacolbia. 2016. Competency-based instruction in technical education. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(4): 521-538. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Jorilla & Bual. 2021. Instructional planning in Philippine Professional Standards. Teacher Education Quarterly, 48(2): 89-105. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Keche. 2021. Challenges of skill-based TLE in digital platforms. Journal of Vocational Education, 13(1): 34-50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Khateeb. 2017. Epistemological and pedagogical technology integration. Computers in Human Behavior, 75: 123-135. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Li et al. 2022. Teachers' technical proficiency in digital resource management. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4): 987-1005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Linhalis & Silva. 2023. Infrastructure limitations in digital assessment. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5): 5678-5695. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Lingam et al. 2017. Continuous inquiry into 21st-century teaching adaptation. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(2): 245-262. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Mack. 2024.Institutional support for TLE teacher resilience.Journal of Teacher Development, 29(2): 134-150. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Madkour & Alaskar. 2024.Plagiarism challenges in technology-mediated delivery.Journal of Educational Integrity, 20(1): 45-62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Maed & Joseph. 2026.School resource allocation impact on TLE performance.Educational Management Journal, 14(1): 78-95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Maghfiroh et al. 2023.Digital teaching competence as instructional predictor.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(4): 789-810. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Magulod et al. 2020.Curriculum alignment in Philippine teacher standards.Philippine Journal of Education, 99(3): 210-228. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Mehmood. 2023.Digital literacy integration in complex educational environments.Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 32(2): 167-184. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Meisuri et al. 2024.Digital role modeling in teacher professional development.Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1): 56-73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Meriyanti & Jasmina. 2022.Vocational skill development through digital platforms.Asian Journal of Education, 9(4): 301-319. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Mrutu et al. 2023.Connectivity barriers in digital education management.African Journal of Education Technology, 12(3): 123-140. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Mutohhari et al. 2021.Technological competence levels in rural Indonesia.Journal of Southeast Asian Education, 7(2): 89-106. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Navarro. 2019.School resources assessment framework for vocational education.Philippine Educational Review, 8(1): 34-52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Nguyen & Habók. 2023.Technology-pedagogy-content alignment in digital competence.Computers & Education, 197: 104-122. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Nqoma. 2024.On-site laboratory engagement vs digital alternatives.Journal of Vocational Studies, 16(2): 201-218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Nuñeza. 2024.TLE adaptation to blended learning modalities.Philippine Journal of Instructional Design, 11(3): 145-162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Nückles. 2020.Complexity of situated teaching practices.Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(5): 987-1005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Oshionebo & Abiodun. 2022.School inputs as foundational teaching support.African Education Review, 19(1): 67-84. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Pamor et al. 2024.Tangible resources for TLE practical application.Journal of Technical Education Research, 13(4): 234-251. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Pettersson & Pettersson. 2017.Interplay of digital competence and school resources.European Journal of Education, 52(3): 345-362. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Qazi & Pachler. 2024.Innovative digital tools for data-driven pedagogy.British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(2): 456-473 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Ramos. 2021.Inadequate facilities hindering TLE instruction in Philippines.Journal of Technical Vocational Education, 10(2): 123-140. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Regli et al. 2026.ICT resources for Education 4.0 workforce development.Journal of Vocational Digital Learning, 15(1): 89-106. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Reyes & Gurubel-Tec. 2024.Continuous professional development for digital competence.Asian Journal of Teacher Education, 12(3): 167-184. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Runge et al. 2023.Digital teaching competence and student empowerment.Journal of Educational Technology, 21(4): 456-472. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Saeed. 2017.Teachers as dynamic facilitators of 21st-century learning.Journal of Educational Innovation, 14(1): 34-50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Sicuan et al. 2024.Curriculum gaps in Pangasinan TLE faculty development.Philippine Journal of Education Research, 13(2): 78-95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Soekamto et al. 2022.Low technological competence in rural Indonesian vocational schools.Journal of Southeast Asian Education, 8(1): 45-62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Soipimai & Sanrattana. 2023.Technologically proficient adaptive teaching practices.Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 43(3): 210-228. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Suzer & Koç. 2024.Teacher digital competence profiles: Integrators and Explorers.Computers & Education, 212: 104-120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Tan. 2021.Resource shortages in Northern Samar TLE implementation.Philippine Educational Review, 9(4): 301-318. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Tijtgat. 2025.Technological-pedagogical-content knowledge in TLE.Journal of Instructional Technology, 23(2): 134-150. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Tingzon & Buyok. 2022.TLE educators adaptation to new normal instruction.Asian Journal of Distance Education, 17(1): 67-84. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Tutica. 2024.Digital creativity challenges in student empowerment.Journal of Educational Innovation, 19(3): 201-218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Umeji. 2020.School facilities impact on academic achievement.Nigerian Journal of Educational Management, 11(2): 145-162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Vasilev. 2024.Advanced digital assessment strategies for vocational teachers.European Journal of Vocational Training, 28(1): 56-73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. Yadav. 2025.Data-driven pedagogical approaches in digital TLE classrooms.Journal of Educational Computing, 62(4): 789-806. [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