Exploring the Ripple Effect: How Teachers and Feedback Shape the Flow of Student Involvement, Discussion, and Knowledge Exchange to Enrich Learning Outcomes

Exploring the Ripple Effect: How Teachers and Feedback Shape the Flow of Student Involvement, Discussion, and Knowledge Exchange to Enrich Learning Outcomes

Merry Grace B. Alpuerto, Gwen Jelly L. Bentayao, Glein B. Bustamante, Nelson S. Lubguban, Cristy Pearl G. Quibod, Lilian B. Dupa

Holy Cross of Davao College, Davao City, Davao Del Sur, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.905000376

Received: 27 May 2025; Accepted: 30 May 2025; Published: 18 June 2025

ABSTRACT

This study explores how teachers’ roles and feedback can enhance students’ grammar and composition skills. It focuses on understanding how teaching strategies and feedback shape learning outcomes in advanced grammar and composition courses. Through interviews with 12 graduate students in Davao City, the research uncovers how thoughtful feedback and active teacher involvement create a supportive learning environment. The findings reveal that fostering student engagement, encouraging collaboration, and facilitating knowledge exchange are key to improving grammar skills and overall learning outcomes. The study underscores the need for feedback-driven and teacher-guided approaches in language instruction, contributing to the broader goal of providing inclusive, equitable, and high-quality education, as outlined in Sustainable Development Goal 4.

Keywords: Teacher roles, Feedback, Grammar skills, Student engagement

INTRODUCTION

New studies show how difficult integrating digital feedback mechanisms with traditional teaching methods is. As Hossain et al. (2024) stated, digital platforms open many avenues for instant feedback; however, instructors feel constricted by their ability to create feedback through digital means, particularly when interacting with large classes in teaching language courses. Learners do not find e-feedback effective in enhancing their academic performance as they get irritated reading feedback on digital platforms (Abusa’aleek & Yaghi, 2024). This lowers the effectiveness of feedback for learning outcomes. When learning attributes that involve enhancing grammar and composition skills in the English language decrease, it acts as an obstacle to learners’ writing performance (Mao & Yao, 2024).

This educational outcome problem in teaching and learning language is coherent in a secondary English-speaking country like China (Yu & Xu, 2023). The students’ grammatical skill is diminished due to ineffective practice due to one undifferentiated learning material used by the teacher. In the same way, Rahman et al. (2024) describe hostile Malaysian learners’ lack of teachers’ support according to some varying skill levels. In the context of this research, it has also been highlighted that the absence of appropriate teaching strategies and ineffective teachers’ roles impede grammar teaching and learning.

Teachers’ role and feedback problems in learning outcomes also exist in the Philippine setting. As Oranggaga (2022) stated in Marawi City, learners find acquiring grammar skills in a modular setting challenging because of negative perceptions of receiving teachers’ feedback. Bastida et al. (2022) in Cavite City claimed that learners may be hesitant to ask for further explanation or discuss their feedback, which may limit their potential capacity for better understanding of and actions taken in response to given feedback. Therefore, the feedback generalizes and becomes less helpful, yet it does not focus on specific needs to improve grammar and composition skills. This is compounded by an institution’s lack of support toward continuous professional development of strategies to give feedback, therefore sending teachers to only older or less effective methods (Generalao et al., 2022).

These studies above necessitate a descriptive study of how teaching role and feedback integration help student involvement, discussion, and knowledge exchange in the learning outcome attainment of grammar and composition skills.

Statement of the Problem

This study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What are the descriptions of students on the teaching strategy used in the advanced grammar and composition course?
2. What role has been played by the facilitator in this strategy?
3. In what sense did the students learn advanced grammar and composition in applying this strategy?

 Theoretical Lens

This study resonates with the social constructivism theory of Lev Vygotsky. Social constructivism argues that a learning outcome is attained when there is an emphasis on student involvement, discussion, and knowledge exchange (Saleem et al., 2021). This theory emphasizes active student participation, where learners are not passive recipients of the knowledge but active participants in the learning process. Through dialogue and engagement, students share ideas, question assumptions, and collaboratively develop new knowledge. This approach cultivates a profound comprehension as students learn to analyze situations from several viewpoints and enhance their critical thinking abilities. By prioritizing community and collaboration, social constructivism creates a dynamic classroom atmosphere that allows students to co-construct knowledge through shared experiences and reciprocal support.

Conceptual Lens

METHODS

We used a qualitative research design employing a descriptive qualitative method. Qualitative research is inductive, and the researcher generally explores meanings and insights in each situation (Levitt et al., 2021). According to Lim (2024), it is an effective model that emerges naturally and allows researchers to deepen their understanding of actual experiences. We used a descriptive qualitative method to explore and describe phenomena, experiences, or situations in detail by systematically collecting and interpreting narrative, non-numerical data.

The study participants were twelve (12) students enrolled in the Master of Arts in Education program, majoring in English Language Teaching, in one of the private higher institutions in Davao City. Moreover, the participants must be enrolled in an Advanced Grammar and Composition course by the time the data collection was conducted to fit the study’s inclusion criteria.

Furthermore, the participants were identified using purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is a non-probability sampling method, and it occurs when elements selected for the sample are chosen by the researcher’s judgment (Crossman, 2020).

We crafted an interview protocol with open-ended questions based on the context of the research objectives, which they used as the study’s instrument. The researchers presented the contents of the instrument to a group of experts to address the validity issues of this design, specifically focusing on the method.

The data was collected via in-person interviews. After receiving approval from authorities to conduct the study, the researchers obtained informed consent from the identified participants before conducting the in-person interview. The researchers took notes during the interviews to maintain track of the flow of important material pertinent to the study. The coding procedure started right away after each participant. After that, we transcribed the recordings verbatim before data analysis began.

Braun and Clarke’s (2019) thematic analysis was also utilized to identify, analyze, and report patterns that build up the themes in a dataset. We followed the six-phase framework for doing the thematic analysis by Braun & Clarke (2019): familiarize the data, generate initial codes, search for themes, review themes, define the themes, and do the write-up.

Ethical considerations play a crucial role in research. To protect participants’ rights and promote confidence and openness in the research process, the study required informed permission from respondents before any data was collected (Laurijssen et al., 2022).

 RESULTS

This section presents the results of the data analysis through the lens of Social Constructivism Theory by Vygotsky. The framework below shows the new model emerges from the participants’ answers.

The above model shows the new idea that teachers’ role and feedback in teaching grammar and composition skills should be integrated as a key to connecting the main ideas of social constructivism theory to learning outcomes, like getting students involved, having discussions, and sharing knowledge. This emerging theme now modifies the original framework of the Vygotsky theory about social constructivism learning.

Furthermore, two subthemes emerge from each element in the original framework. The subthemes of active participation and student-centered learning best explain student involvement. Discussion is present when there is a collaborative dialogue and peer interaction. We further discuss knowledge exchange through interactive learning and shared understanding.

The emerging theme that links the elements of social constructivism theory to learning outcomes has three subthemes. Accordingly, based on the analysis, teachers’ role and feedback integration can be achieved through guide and support roles, knowledge construction support, and learning environment support. These subthemes solidify the claim that the teacher’s role and feedback integration are needed to explain Vygotsky’s social constructivism theory further.

Lastly, the learning outcomes as the framework’s resulting variable are also explained into four subthemes. These are professional development and teaching strategy, structured learning support, pedagogical application and conceptualization, and skills development beyond content knowledge.

DISCUSSION

The section below provides a thorough explanation of the identified themes. We discussed each central theme and subthemes, referencing the quoted responses from the interviews and recent significant literature.

Students Involvement. Student involvement in grammar composition refers to the extent of engagement and dedication learners exhibit during language learning activities. Notably, Martinez-Lopez et al. (2023) highlight that effective involvement includes both behavioral and cognitive dimensions, which enhance the acquisition of grammar skills. Moreover, Zhou and Wei (2024) argue that more profound levels of involvement significantly improve the retention of grammatical concepts and enhance learners’ ability to apply them effectively. Additionally, Kim et al. (2023) stress that sustained involvement fosters a dynamic learning environment where grammar rules are internalized through consistent and meaningful practice. Thus, active student involvement is essential for mastering grammar, as it promotes comprehension and practical application.

Active participation involves students’ intentional and focused efforts to engage with grammatical concepts through diverse classroom activities. Specifically, Anderson and Rodriguez (2023) demonstrate that active participation leads to significantly greater improvements in grammar proficiency compared to passive learning methods. Furthermore, Abdelghafar et al. (2024) reveal that students who actively engage in grammar exercises achieve better long-term retention of complex structures, underscoring the value of interactive learning. Moreover, Chen et al. (2023) emphasize that active participation enhances metalinguistic awareness, enabling students to understand language patterns and underlying rules better. Consequently, active participation emerges as a critical factor in fostering grammatical competence and deeper linguistic insight.

  “active participation, creativity and critical thinking” (Participant 3)

“emphasizes active participation, independent learning” (Participant 5)

Moreover, “actively participates in writing exercises” (Participant 9).

 Student-centered learning in grammar instruction shifts the emphasis from teacher-led presentations to learner-driven exploration of grammatical concepts. Notably, Park and Johnson (2024) reveal that this approach enhances student motivation and improves grammar acquisition outcomes. In addition, Aratea and Pasubillo (2024) demonstrate that student-centered discussions encourage learners to construct their understanding of grammar rules through discovery and collaborative peer interactions. Moreover, Munna and Kalam (2021) highlight that this method fosters greater autonomy and responsibility, empowering students to participate actively in their grammar learning process. Student-centered learning improves grammar proficiency and cultivates essential skills for independent learning.

“student-centered approach, whereas students learn by doing things” (Participant 2),

“student-centered and inquiry-driven” (Participant 4),

 “student-centered method… allows students to be independent” (Participant 10).

DISCUSSION

Discussion, as a teaching strategy, involves organized exchanges of ideas and viewpoints between students and instructors. For instance, Liu and Zin (2023) highlight that facilitated discussions encourage critical thinking and deepen students’ understanding of the subject matter. Furthermore, Rafiq et al. (2024) explore the role of asynchronous discussions in online learning, emphasizing their effectiveness in fostering student engagement. Meanwhile, Sarwanto et al. (2021) investigate how discussions aid in developing higher-order thinking skills, such as analysis and evaluation. Discussions are vital to effective learning and supporting intellectual growth in diverse educational settings.

Collaborative Dialogue. It involves meaningful interactions among students as they collaboratively explore and apply grammatical concepts. Cagatan and Quirap (2024) highlight that collaborative dialogue enhances grammar learning by fostering shared problem-solving and facilitating constructive peer feedback. Furthermore, Abdallah and Mohd (2025) emphasize that these interactions allow students to negotiate meaning, leading to a more profound understanding of grammatical structures. Moreover, Kumar and Brown (2023) point out that collaborative dialogue is especially effective for mastering complex grammar concepts, as it promotes critical thinking and active engagement. Therefore, discussion is a powerful tool for deepening learners’ grammatical knowledge and problem-solving skills.

 “collaborative learning will give student confidence to

 participate in the discussion” (Participant 1),

 “lively discussions, group projects and interactive activities” (Participant 3)

“reflective discussions ensures that the learning experience is meaningful” (Participant 4)

 ​​Peer Interaction. Peer interaction in grammar learning encompasses structured and unstructured student exchanges that promote language development. Notably, Garcia and Zhang (2024) found that peer interaction enhances grammar accuracy while boosting learners’ confidence in applying grammatical concepts. Moreover, Mitchell et al. (2023) highlight that these interactions provide opportunities for authentic grammar practice and natural error correction, making the learning process more practical and effective. Additionally, Patel and Nguyen (2023) demonstrate that peer interaction reduces anxiety and fosters a supportive environment, encouraging students to participate in grammar learning actively. Thus, peer interaction emerges as a valuable strategy for improving grammar proficiency and creating an inclusive learning atmosphere.

 “sharing towards the class what we understand” (Participant 2)

“peer reviews and discussions” (Participant 9)

“collaboration with peers to develop a deeper understanding” (Participant 9)

Knowledge Exchange. Knowledge exchange involves the mutual sharing of grammatical insights and understanding among students. As Kim (2023) highlighted, engaging in effective knowledge exchange significantly enhances grammar comprehension and application skills. Similarly, Hassan et al. (2023) underscore that structured activities focused on knowledge exchange improve students’ ability to articulate and apply grammar rules effectively. Moreover, research by Cooper and Lee (2023) reveals that knowledge exchange plays a crucial role in identifying and addressing common grammatical misconceptions. Henceforth, this collaborative approach emerges as an essential strategy for fostering deeper grammatical understanding and skill development.

Interactive Learning. Interactive learning in grammar instruction emphasizes active engagement with language structures through diverse activities and technological tools. Xu (2024) illustrate that interactive methods significantly enhance grammar retention and application. In parallel, research by Robertson et al. (2023) suggests that interactive learning environments foster more efficient grammar acquisition by promoting active participation and immediate feedback. Furthermore, Wei (2023) asserts that these approaches are especially advantageous for digital-native learners who thrive in technology-integrated settings. Interactive learning is a pivotal strategy for improving grammatical proficiency, particularly in contemporary, tech-driven classrooms.

“collaborative learning and problem-solving activities” (Participant 4)

“cooperative learning, where we are a group to collaborate” (Participant 7)

“fostering teamwork and communication in our research presentation” (Participant 7)

 Shared Understanding. Shared understanding emerges when students collaboratively build knowledge of grammar concepts through group activities and discussions. To illustrate, Moore and Ibrahim (2024) discovered that fostering shared understanding results in a more consistent application of grammar across various contexts. Similarly, Peterson et al. (2023) reveal that developing shared understanding enhances students’ grammatical awareness, enabling them to grasp complex language structures more effectively. Additionally, Sun (2024) underscores that this approach supports the long-term retention of grammar rules by reinforcing collective learning. Collectively, shared understanding proves to be a vital strategy for deepening grammatical proficiency and ensuring enduring mastery.

“dig things deeper by sharing towards the class” (Participant 2)

“exploring complex grammatical concepts” (Participant 11)

“exploring information” (Participant 10)

 Therefore, to sum up all the descriptions based on the results, we devised a new teaching strategy that would help teach advanced grammar and composition: the Interactive Research-Based Collaborative Learning (IRBCL) approach. This strategy encompasses the student-centered approach, allowing students to interact and collaborate with their peers while researching. According to the participants’ answers, this strategy could enhance learning outcomes in advanced grammar and composition learning outcomes.

Teacher Role. The teacher role represents a paradigm shift in educational roles where educators transition from traditional instructors to learning facilitators who orchestrate meaningful educational experiences. Anderson et al. (2023) emphasize that teacher facilitators create student-centered learning environments that promote active engagement and autonomous learning, supported by well-structured language use and the ability to guide learners in improving their written and verbal expression. This role involves strategic intervention and scaffolding to support learner development while maintaining student agency in the learning process. Lee and Martinez (2022) further elaborate that teacher facilitators employ pedagogical strategies, such as integrating grammar and composition exercises, to encourage critical thinking and problem-solving skills. The significance of this role is highlighted by Thompson (2024), who demonstrates how teacher facilitators enhance student motivation and self-directed learning capabilities through targeted support and guidance, which includes fostering communication skills necessary for academic success.

Feedback Integration. Feedback integration emerges as a transformative approach that embeds feedback mechanisms seamlessly into the learning process. Effective feedback, especially in grammar and composition, ensures students can refine their linguistic accuracy and expressive clarity, essential to effective communication. Chen and Rodriguez (2023) conceptualize feedback integration as a holistic system where feedback becomes an organic part of the learning journey rather than a separate evaluative component. The importance of integrating feedback across multiple learning touchpoints is emphasized by Wilson et al. (2022), who demonstrate how embedded feedback mechanisms foster continuous improvement and more profound learning engagement, particularly in enhancing writing and grammar proficiency. Kumar (2023) explores how modern educational technologies facilitate seamless feedback integration through adaptive learning systems and real-time performance analytics. This creates a more responsive and personalized learning experience that supports general knowledge acquisition and specific grammar and composition skill development.

Guide and Support Role. The guide and support role involves teachers facilitating complex learning tasks. These skills are essential for creating clear instructional communication and scaffolding students’ abilities to express ideas effectively in writing and speech. Rivera et al. (2022) reinforce this by highlighting the importance of balanced support that promotes learner independence while preventing overdependence on teacher intervention, emphasizing teachers’ need to guide students in mastering foundational language skills. Moreover, Zhang (2024) contributes valuable insights into how cultural sensitivity in guidance roles impacts student engagement and achievement, particularly in contexts where grammar and composition practices must reflect linguistic diversity and cultural nuances. Practical guidance helps learners develop confidence in their communication abilities while achieving academic goals.

“our teacher played an important role as mentor, guide, and facilitator, providing expert instruction, feedback and encouragement” (Participant 3)

“The facilitator has primarily acted as a guide, resource provider, and coach” (Participant 4)

“The facilitator acts as both a guide and a resource” (Participant 5)

“The facilitators’ role is to guide, assess and provide constructive feedback” (Participant 8)

“The facilitator’s role was pivotal in guiding our inquiries and providing us with essential resources” (Participant 11)

Knowledge Construction Support. Knowledge construction support focuses on facilitating student understanding through active learning experiences. These skills enable students to articulate their thoughts, analyze information critically, and organize their ideas effectively during the learning process. Grammar and composition skills are essential to this process, as they equip learners with the tools to express ideas precisely and coherently. Davidson and Lee (2023) emphasize the importance of creating opportunities for students to build their understanding through guided discovery and experiential learning, with writing tasks reinforcing these skills. Morgan et al. (2022) further highlight that activities promoting linguistic precision and structured writing foster deeper learning and improve concept retention, demonstrating the interconnectedness of grammar, composition, and knowledge construction. Patel (2024) also explores the role of technology in blended learning environments, showing how grammar-focused tools enhance written communication and support effective knowledge construction processes, ultimately enriching the learning experience.

“The facilitator shared valuable thoughts and corrected some misconceptions and ideas about research” (Participant 2)

“encourages dialogue, facilitates critical discussions, and provides constructive feedback” (Participant 4)

“setting the tone, active listening, providing feedback” (Participant 6)

“facilitates to help the researchers in providing advice/tips” (Participant 7)

“offering insightful comments and questions to stimulate deeper thinking” (Participant 11)

Learning Environment Management. Learning environment management encompasses creating and maintaining productive learning spaces, both physical and virtual. Hamilton and Liu (2023) discuss how well-managed learning environments contribute to student engagement and achievement. These spaces play a pivotal role in teaching grammar and composition, as a structured environment allows students to focus on understanding linguistic concepts and honing their writing skills. The importance of establishing clear expectations and routines, highlighted by Sanchez et al. (2022), is particularly relevant in grammar instruction, where consistent practice and feedback are essential for skill mastery.

Brown (2024) provides insights into how adaptive learning environments can accommodate diverse learning needs and preferences. This adaptability is crucial in grammar and composition classes, where students may have varying proficiency levels and require tailored instruction to succeed. Such environments promote inclusivity and foster active engagement, enabling learners to develop practical communication skills. Educators can create spaces that support academic growth and positive learning outcomes by integrating grammar and composition instruction into well-managed and adaptive environments.

“The facilitator also gives us time to search and create our ideas” (Participant 1)

“managing time and encouraging discussion” (Participant 6)

“The facilitator gave us numerical supervision to ensure independence in learning” (Participant 10)

“fostered a supportive and stimulating learning environment” (Participant 11)

 Learning Outcome. Learning outcomes serve as precise statements that describe what students are expected to know, be able to do, or value after completing a learning activity or program. The quality of learning outcomes can be determined based on students’ achievement of specific targets and their creative, innovative, critical thinking, problem-solving, communication, and collaboration abilities (Wakhidah & Bandono, 2022).

 Practical Application and Contextualization. Practical application and contextualization of advanced grammar and composition instructional materials create a dynamic and responsive learning environment. Combining these strategies will help teachers equip students for academic and career success. Abad (2020) cites that contextualized teaching and learning involves imparting content through pertinent materials that maintain student engagement in the learning process. This pertains to pedagogical approaches aimed at connecting the acquisition of fundamental abilities with academic or vocational content by emphasizing direct instruction and learning in practical applications relevant to the student’s interests (Bird et al., 2010). Participants expressed that they could learn effectively by connecting their learning to their daily activities. Their responses are as follows:

 “working on real-life exercise” (Participant 3)

“integrating theory and practice” (Participant 4)

“learned advanced grammar and composition in an efficient and applied way; applying effective strategies” (Participant 5)

“practical application through presentations and research proposals” (Participant 7)

Lorbis (2019) cited Perin (2011) to show that contextualized learning improves academic performance and student engagement. Students learn advanced grammar and composition better when they write research papers or give presentations. Thus, practical application and contextualization of educational content are essential for a dynamic and responsive learning environment. By using these methods, instructors may provide students with the skills they need for academic and professional success.

 Skill Development Beyond Context Knowledge. Modern education increasingly realizes the need to acquire abilities outside simple topic knowledge. For students to negotiate complex challenges and operate well in teams, critical thinking and teamwork are skills necessary for content construction and knowledge (Smith, 2021). More profound knowledge and involvement with material depend on these abilities since students are urged to examine, assess, and synthesize knowledge instead of merely passively absorbing it (Brown & Campione, 2022). As participants articulated:

 “develop the critical thinking and collaborative skills” (Participant 1)

“developed critical thinking effective communication and problem-solving skills.” (Participant 3)

“evaluating research sources, analyzing data, and drawing informed conclusions” (Participant 11)

“organize ideas clearly and communicate effectively” (Participant 7)

 Academic and workplace success also depends on excellent communication and problem-solving skills. Through exercises including assessing research sources, data analysis, and informed conclusion drawing, students can approach problems methodically and consider their solutions critically (Jones et al., 2023).

 Professional Development and Teaching Strategy. Professional development is vital in improving the teaching methods and student learning outcomes. Effective professional development as structured professional learning results in changes to teacher practices and improvements in student learning outcomes (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Participants have asserted that professional development is an aid to generate more knowledge and strengthen ideas on advanced grammar and composition. As graduate school students articulated:

 “Enhance my ability to teach these concepts to secondary to college students” (Participant 4)

“Benefit them throughout academic and professional lives” (Participant 5)

“Develop the skills necessary for success in academic and professional settings” (Participant 11)

 Moreover, Samundeeswari and colleagues (2023) found that sustained professional development, defined by continuous support, cooperation, and reflective practice, has the most substantial effect on teacher efficacy and student achievement. Integrating novel pedagogical methods, technological inclusion, and culturally relevant teaching practices is vital for effective professional development programs.

 Structured Learning Support. Structured learning support is a method of instruction whereby clear direction and ongoing feedback improve student learning. Critical components of this approach are explicit instruction and guided practice, in which teachers model activities before letting students practice alone and provide unambiguous directions (Hattie, 2021). Participants exclaimed:

“explicit teaching, guided practice, immediate feedback, and personalized learning” (Participant 5)

“scaffolding exercises” (Participant 9)

“facilitator also provides additional input and useful feedback” (Participant 12)

 Participants unanimously said that they could gain learning if there was structured support from the teachers. In this way, there will be continuous feedback. By addressing specific student needs in real-time and enhancing understanding and retention, immediate feedback and personalized learning help to strengthen this process further (Hattie & Timperley, 2020).

  Implications

 The findings of this study have significant implications regarding sustainable developmental goals (SDG) of quality education. Both roles of teachers and feedback are embedded within the framework of Vygotsky’s Social Constructivism Theory; hence, this study underlines the importance of proactive teachers in creating an engaging and collaborative learning environment to satisfy the expectations of SDG 4 in ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all.

Furthermore, the findings of this study, given the current trends of our educational landscape, debunk the old framework of Vygotsky about social constructivism. This highlights the importance of teachers’ role and feedback integration in teaching advanced grammar and composition courses.

The interactive research-based collaborative learning (IRBCL) approach implies that students could improve their advanced grammar and composition by immersing themselves in writing research. In this way, the study contributes to the broader aim of building educational quality and ensuring that all students benefit from well-crafted learning experiences that may prepare them to meet and overcome future challenges and opportunities.

 Future Directions

 The future direction of this study suggests that the integration of roles and feedback of the teacher will continue to be necessary within the framework of social constructivism. Future research could look at the specific strategies and practices by which teachers can influence student construction of knowledge. Also, the effect of different types of feedback on student learning could offer insight into maximizing optimal feedback to enhance students’ engagement and understanding.

One possible avenue for further research is considering how this extended framework can be deployed in various educational contexts. From this new emerging model, we, the researchers, invite future scholars to utilize this framework instead of the traditional one proposed by Vygotsky. The prime interest is how integrating teachers’ roles and constructive feedback can be tailored to local, diverse cultural, socio-economic, and educational ecosystems to work effectively in practice.

 Limitations of the Study

The limitation of this study is that it utilizes descriptive qualitative research, encompassing several significant challenges that affect its implementation and outcomes. These include the inherent subjectivity and potential researcher bias during data collection and analysis, limited generalizability due to typically small sample sizes, and the time-intensive nature of gathering and processing qualitative data. Additionally, the research faces challenges in reproducibility due to unique contextual factors, and the lack of standardized data collection and analysis procedures may raise questions about consistency and reliability among scholars in the field.

 REFERENCES

1. Abad, D. V. (2020). Designing contextualized and culture-based reading materials for indigenous learners. Palarch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology 17(1), 153–163. ISSN 1567-214X
2. Abdallah, H., & Mohd, S. (2025). The Importance of Grammatical Competence for Non-Arabic Speakers in Constructing Correct Structures. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, VIII(XII), 1631–1643. https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2024.8120139
3. Abdelghafar, A., Costales, A. F., & Belver, L. (2024). The Flipped-based WebQuest Model (FWQ): An Innovative Approach for Teaching Grammar and Alleviating Students’ Anxiety. International Educational Review, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.58693/ier.211
4. Abusa’aleek, A., & Yaghi, E. (2024). An Investigation into EFL Learners’ Electronic Feedback Practices During the Coronavirus Pandemic: Support and Challenges. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 15(1), 86–108. https://doi.org/10.37237/150107
5. Anderson, K., Smith, B., & Johnson, R. (2023). Redefining teacher roles in modern education. Journal of Educational Research, 45(2), 123–140.
6. Anderson, M. J., & Rodriguez, C. A. (2023). Active participation in grammar instruction: A longitudinal study. Journal of Language Teaching, 45(2), 112-128. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlt.2023.45.2.112
7. Aratea, M. L., & Pasubillo, M. A. (2024). Effects of Game-Based Learning on Improving Grammar Skills of Grade 9 Students. Journal of English as a Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.31098/jefltr.v4i2.2445
8. Bastida, E., Saysi, J., Vigil, L., Batuctoc, M., & Orcid. (2022). Pedagogical struggles and gaps in language literacy enhancement: the case of Indigenous people’s education teachers in the Philippines under the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY-NC-ND). International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 15(1), 142–165. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1383105.pdf
9. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative research in sport, exercise, and health, 11(4), 589–597.
10. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (2022). Classrooms as Learning Communities: Designs for Enhancing the Development of Collaborative Skills. Journal of Educational Research, 95(1), 123–137.
11. Brown, M. (2024). Adaptive learning environments: Meeting diverse student needs. Educational Technology Quarterly, 18(1), 67–82.
12. Cagatan, N. P., & Quirap, E. A. (2024). Collaborative Learning and Learners’ Academic Performance. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 07(03). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v7-i03-57
13. Chen, H., & Rodriguez, S. (2023). Embedding feedback in learning processes. Learning and Instruction, 52, 45-62.
14. Chen, J. H., Wang, L. M., & Kim, S. Y. (2023). Metalinguistic awareness through active learning. Applied Linguistics Review, 12(3), 89-104. https://doi.org/10.1515/alr.2023.12.3.89
15. Cooper, R. B., & Lee, M. K. (2023). Addressing grammatical misconceptions through peer knowledge exchange. Language Learning Journal, 41(4), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/llj.2023.41.4.201
16. Crossman, A. (2020, March 19). Understanding Purposive Sampling. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/purposive-sampling-3026727
17. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., Gardner, M., & Espinoza, D. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. In Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_BRIEF.pdf
18. Davidson, P., & Lee, S. (2023). Facilitating knowledge construction in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, pp. 89, 234–249.
19. Garcia, A. R., & Zhang, Y. P. (2024). The impact of peer interaction on grammar development. TESOL Quarterly, 58(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.2024.58.1.45
20. Generalao, I., Ducanes, G., Yee, K., & David, C. (2022). Teacher Education in the Philippines: Are We Meeting the Demand for Quality? https://cids.up.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1-Generalao-et-al.-2022-Teacher-education-in-the-PH.pdf
21. Hamilton, J., & Liu, X. (2023). Managing learning spaces for optimal student engagement. Educational Management Review, 31(4), 178–193.
22. Hassan, M. S., Ali, K. T., & Baker, J. R. (2023). Structured knowledge exchange in language learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 178-193. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.2023.33.2.178
23. Hattie, J. (2021). Visible Learning: The Sequel. Routledge.
24. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2020). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
25. Hossain, K. I., Ahmed, M. K., & Mahmud, M. S. (2024). A Comprehensive Review on the Impact of Teacher Feedback in Language Development for ESL/EFL Learners. IUBAT Review, 7(1), 218–229. https://doi.org/10.3329/iubatr.v7i1.74421
26. Jones, M., Smith, L., & Clark, R. (2023). Critical Thinking in Higher Education: Evaluating Sources and Analyzing Data. Higher Education Journal, 19(2), 145–167.
27. Kim, S. J., Lee, J. H., & Park, H. W. (2023). Student involvement patterns in grammar learning. Language Teaching Research, 27(3), 334-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/ltr.2023.27.3.334
28. Kim, T. P. (2023). Reviewing the Significance of Practice in Learning English as a Second Language. Journal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN 2959-6386 (Online), 2(2). https://doi.org/10.60087/jklst.vol2.n2.p.67
29. Kumar, R. K., & Brown, T. M. (2023). Collaborative dialogue in grammar acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(4), 412-427. https://doi.org/10.1017/sla.2023.45.4.412
30. Kumar, V. (2023). Technology-enhanced feedback integration. Technology in Education, 28(3), 156–171.
31. Laurijssen, S. J., van der Graaf, R., van Dijk, W. B., Schuit, E., Groenwold, R. H., Grobbee, D. E., & de Vries, M. C. (2022). When is it impractical to ask for informed consent? A systematic review. Clinical Trials, 19(5), 545-560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745221103567
32. Lee, M., & Martinez, C. (2022). Strategic facilitation in student-centered learning. Educational Studies, 47(3), 289-304.
33. Levitt, H. M., Morrill, Z., Collins, K. M., & Rizo, J. L. (2021). The methodological integrity of critical qualitative research: Principles to support design and research review. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 68(3), 357.
34. Lim, W. M. (2024). What is qualitative research? An overview and guidelines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 14413582241264619.
35. Liu, R. Y., Chen, H. L., & Wong, M. T. (2023). Understanding grammar through peer collaboration. Language Learning, 73(2), 289-304. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.2023.73.2.289
36. Liu, Y., & Zin, Z. M. (2023). The critical thinking-oriented adaptations of problem-based learning models: a systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1139987
37. Lorbis, J. C. (2019). Utilization of Contextualized Teaching and Learning (Ctl) Approach in Grade Two Araling Panlipunan. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED603874.pdf
38. Mao, J., & Yao, K. (2024). An Analysis of Grammatical Errors in Students’ English Compositions. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media, 58(1), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/58/20241698
39. Martinez-Lopez, A. B., Santos, R. C., & Chen, K. D. (2023). Dimensions of student involvement in language learning. Applied Linguistics, 44(3), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin.2023.44.3.167
40. Mitchell, R. S., Davis, S. T., & Wilson, K. L. (2023). Peer interaction in grammar development. Language Teaching, 56(4), 445–460. https://doi.org/10.1017/lt.2023.56.4.445
41. Morgan, R., White, K., & Chen, L. (2022). Supporting knowledge construction through guided discovery. Learning and Instruction, 50, 167-182.
42. Moore, S. H., & Ibrahim, A. M. (2024). Building shared understanding in grammar instruction. TESOL Journal, 15(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.2024.15.1.23
43. Munna, A. S., & Kalam, A. (2021). Impact of Active Learning Strategy on the Student Engagement. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Theory and Praxis, 4(2). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED614302.pdf
44. Oranggaga, S. (2022). Challenges and Prospects in Teaching Grammar Using Modular Distance Learning in Marawi City, Philippines. International Journal of Linguistics Studies; Al-Kindi Center for Research and Development. https://www.academia.edu/76577716/Challenges_and_Prospects_in_Teaching_Grammar_using_the_Modular_Distance_Learning_in_Marawi_City_Philippines
45. Park, S., & Johnson, T. (2023). Effective mentoring strategies in education. Teaching and Learning Research, 42(1), 78–93.
46. Park, J. Y., & Johnson, M. R. (2024). Student-centered approaches to grammar teaching. Language Education, 38(1), 78–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/le.2024.38.1.78
47. Patel, R. (2024). Technology integration in knowledge construction. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(2), 112–127.
48. Patel, R. K., & Nguyen, T. H. (2023). Anxiety reduction through peer interaction. Journal of Language Education, 35(3), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/jle.2023.35.3.234
49. Peterson, K. L., Lee, S. M., & Wang, R. J. (2023). Collective grammar awareness development. Language Awareness, 32(4), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/la.2023.32.4.167
50. Rafiq, S., Iqbal, S., & Afzal, D. A. (2024, May 21). The Impact of Digital Tools and Online Learning Platforms on Higher Education Learning Outcomes. ResearchGate; unknown. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380734414_The_Impact_of_Digital_Tools_and_Online_Learning_Platforms_on_Higher_Education_Learning_Outcomes
51. Rahman, A., Ismail, H., & Ismail, N. (2024). Grammar Teaching Challenges In Malaysian Higher Education. Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching, 8(1), 1–7. https://jurnal.uisu.ac.id/index.php/languageliteracy/article/view/3899/pdf
52. Robertson, J., Lee, A., & Kim, S. (2023). Effects of gamified grammar and vocabulary learning in an English course on EFL students in Thailand. Teaching English with Technology, 24(2), 22-46. https://doi.org/10.56297/vaca6841/LRDX3699/DJJL1101
53. Rivera, M., Santos, J., & Kim, H. (2022). Balancing support in educational facilitation. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 145-160.
54. Saleem, A., Kausar, H., & Deeba, F. (2021). Social Constructivism: A New Paradigm in Teaching and Learning Environment. Perennial Journal of History, 2(2), 403–421. https://doi.org/10.52700/pjh.v2i2.86
55. Samundeeswari, Dr. D., Angayarkanni, Dr. R., Raju, S. G., Rana, Dr. N., & Sharma, Dr. A. (2023). View of Teacher Professional Development: Effective Strategies and Evaluation Methods. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(6). https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i6.5578
56. Smith, L. (2021). Developing Effective Communication and Problem-Solving Skills in Secondary Education. Educational Leadership, 78(4), 34–45.
57. Sanchez, L., Peters, M., & Wong, T. (2022). Environment management impacts learning outcomes. Classroom Management Studies, 25(4), 201-216.
58. Sun, L. (2024). Translanguaging pedagogy on the digital stage: exploring Chinese undergraduates’ English grammar learning through DingTalk platform. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03771-2
59. Thompson, E. (2024). Student motivation through facilitative teaching. Educational Psychology Quarterly, 19(1), 34–49.
60. Wakhidah, A., & Bandono, A. (2022). Strategies for Improving the Quality of Learning Outcomes in Elementary Schools. KnE Social Sciences, 377–385. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v7i10.11240
61. Wei, Z. (2023). Navigating Digital Learning Landscapes: Unveiling the Interplay Between Learning Behaviors, Digital Literacy, and Educational Outcomes. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01522-3
62. Wilson, K., Taylor, M., & Brown, J. (2022). Integrated feedback approaches in higher education. Assessment in Education, 29(3), 267–282.
63. Xu , L. (2024). The Application of Interactive English Teaching in Students’ Language Acquisition. Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.23977/aetp.2024.080122
64. Yu, M., & Xu, J. (2023). Design of Chinese Grammar Smart Learning System. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 462–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2446-2_42
65. Zhang, Y. (2024). Cultural dimensions of educational guidance. International Journal of Education, 41(2), 190–205.
66. Zhou, Y., & Wei, M. (2024). Gamification and Language Learning. Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design Book Series, 341–374. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-2687-9.ch012