Lived Experiences of Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers

Lived Experiences of Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers

*¹Mary Jean S. Paraiso, PhD, ²Cesar B. Ortiz, PhD, ³Rhondell M. Paraiso

¹Master Teacher 1, Bukidnon National High School

^2,3 Professor, Bukidnon State University

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8120377

Received: 21 December 2024; Accepted: 25 December 2024; Published: 25 January 2025

ABSTRACT

The study explored the lived experiences of the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science teachers. The study was conducted in the main school of Bukidnon National High School for the school year 2017-2018. There were 12 participants purposively selected. This study used descriptive qualitative research design using narrative analysis. Data from semi-structured interview and focus group discussion were coded and analyzed qualitatively to identify pattern in order to create major themes. In each major theme, subthemes were also identified. Furthermore, in each subtheme there were also specific themes identified. The findings reveal that, the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers encountered challenges, problems/difficulties in teaching Science subjects specifically in teaching Science content, in preparing the lesson plan, in choosing instructional materials, in selecting teaching strategies, in integrating technology and in the assessment of learning. However, all the challenges, problems/difficulties encountered by the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers were addressed by them but they still find it inadequate to deliver what is expected of them. Despite the challenges, problems/difficulties encountered by the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers, they still persist to teach Science Subjects because of their pursuit to develop learning effectiveness among the learners.

Keywords: Challenges, Lived Experiences, Out-of-Field Junior High School Science   Teachers, Problems/Difficulties,

INTRODUCTION

Teaching a course content requires competence in one’s field of specialization. This is also true to Science Teachers. Science teachers had to be versatile and equipped oneself with scientific knowledge, skills and abilities to deliver appropriate teaching for learning effectiveness. However, when the K-12 curriculum following the spiral progression approach was implemented in June 2012, the Junior High School Science Teachers are challenged to teach in each grade level the four Science subjects in an increasing degree of difficulty in one curriculum year.  The subjects are Earth Science, Biology, Chemistry and Physics thus, making Science Teachers as Out-of-Field teachers.

Republic Act 10533 also known as Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 has directed the Department of education to implement the K-12 Curriculum in the country. This curriculum follows a spiral progression of content. This means that students learn science concepts repeatedly at a higher degree of complexity as they move from one grade level to another.

The Out–of-Field Science Teachers are those teachers assigned to teach Science subjects for which they have no sufficient training and qualifications (Ingersoll, 2002). Robinson, (1985) supported the idea of Ingersoll (2019) when he claimed that Out–of–Field Science Teachers are teachers teaching subjects for which they have little education or training in that particular subject. In real life situation for example at Bukidnon National High School, a Physics major teacher is made to teach chemistry, Biology, and Earth Science subjects.

In the school where the researchers are teaching, at Bukidnon National High School, the Science Teachers teaching Science subjects following the spiral progression approach of the K-12 curriculum have various experiences. Some claimed that it was too difficult for them to explain the subject not their expertise. They only had limited subject matter content knowledge in discussing the lesson which made them not confident to teach. As observed, Science teachers teaching Science subjects not their major field, tend to be hesitant in explaining the lesson especially in using Science terms which are foreign to them. They also had difficulty in expounding the lesson. In spite of the fact that the Science Teachers are highly qualified to teach, they could be considered as Out-of-Field Science Teachers being made to teach Science subjects not their field of specialization. This could influence the quality of educational outcomes and teachers’ well-being (Ingersoll, 1996).

The four (4) science subjects, namely: Earth Science, Biology, Chemistry and Physics should be taught by Science Teachers in one curriculum year across the five programs offered by Bukidnon National High School. In effect, BNHS Science Teachers teaching in the K-12 curriculum face challenges in teaching Science Subjects which are not their field of specialization. These challenges are manifested in the teaching of science content, in preparing the lesson plan, in choosing instructional materials (IM’s), in selecting teaching strategy, in the integration of technology, and in the assessment of learning.

From the researcher’s personal experience, teaching Science subjects which are not a specialization is a big challenge. Even being a general science major graduate, teaching Physics, Chemistry and biology subjects are very difficult to explain. One of the problems encountered was giving in-depth explanation about the topic. The examples given are limited to those written in the book. Some terms and concepts are foreign to the class discussions. There is difficulty to enable the students to grasp the concepts and develop scientific skills because of insufficient understanding of the content.

One of the criteria to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of Science Teachers in their specialization is through assessment. The common standardized test given is the National Achievement Test (NAT) given to students in a specific curriculum year level to determine the achievement level of the students. The results of the NAT would continuously identify factors that account academic outcomes in the classroom. These could be correlated to the teachers’ expertise in subject matter knowledge (SMK) (Obiso, 2009).

The national achievement test (NAT) mean percentage score (MPS) in Science for high school in School year 2012-2013, is 41.35 percent. This is several points away from the target which is 75% (Dela Cruz, 2017). Also, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in Math and Science ranks revealed that, from among the 45 countries that participated in the TIMSS for eighth-grade students, the Philippines ranked 42^nd in Science. These results show that Science education in the Philippines has a lot to improve to compete in any standardized test internationally.

Furthermore, Bukidnon National High School data bank records of school year 2017-2018 showed that out from the thirty-one learning competencies in Science of the Junior High School, 18 competencies or 58 percent were not mastered by the Junior High School Out-of-Field Science Teachers. This information conveyed that student would also have the same mastery level as that of the Out-of-Field Science teachers.

Despite Science teachers had tried their best to teach students to master Science skills and concepts, there are still other factors that affect and could hinder them to become effective teachers. One of the reasons is their subject matter content knowledge.  Many of the Science teachers in the field are teaching Science subjects which are not their expertise (Jalmasco, 2011).

DepEd order no.  13, s. 1994 stipulated that all Science teachers with majors in any of the sub-areas of General Science, Biology, Chemistry and Physics will all be qualified to teach any of the Natural Science subjects. However, since the implementation of K-12 curriculum had started, teachers who graduated as General Science majors, claimed that the subject matter content they had learned in their baccalaureate degree is inadequate to cope with the demand of the K-12 Curriculum.

In the K-12 curriculum, it is anticipated that the degree of the difficulty in the Science lesson is also increased as the learners move from one year level to another. This is to ensure mastery of the concepts and develop critical thinking skills among learners. Bruner (1938) claimed that learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their previous knowledge.

In line with the principles of constructivism theory of Bruner is the implementation of the K-12 Basic Education Curriculum on the spiral progression approach (SEAMEO INNOTECH, 2012). The knowledge in spiral progression approach is to expose the learners to a wide variety of concepts/topics and disciplines, until they develop mastery with a different deepening of complexity. The scope and difficulty of the topics increases from grade level to another in Life Sciences, Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences which then concentrates on the mastery of learning competencies until learners understand the concepts from elementary to high school (Ferido, 2013).

Accordingly, Science Teachers who teach Science subjects in the K-12 curriculum following spiral progression approach also need to be skilled and equipped with the necessary competence in content and skills required for a particular Science subject. It is a big challenge to the Out-of-Field Science Teachers teaching other Science subjects. Especially, that Science is a lead subject where students need to learn in organizing, evaluating, analyzing, and interpreting data. These skills could be achieved by the students if the Science Teachers are equipped with subject matter content before coming to class.  The Science Teachers have to plan, prepare and organize lessons; choose teaching strategies, select appropriate instructional materials to use, and teachers who critically assess students’ outcomes.

With these, the researchers would like to explore the lived experiences encountered by the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers of Bukidnon National High School in teaching Science content, in preparing the lesson plan, selecting teaching strategies, in choosing appropriate instructional materials (IM’s), in the integration of technology, and assessment of learning. The researchers assumed that the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers would be more competent and confident to teach if the challenges, problems/difficulties in teaching Science are correctly addressed or be given intervention.

Basic Research Questions

What are the lived experiences of the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science teachers?

 Scope and Limitations

This study was delimited to the lived experiences of Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers. This study was conducted at the main school of Bukidnon National High School during the school year 2017-2018.

There were 12 or 50 percent of the total Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers of Bukidnon National High School, main school participated in the study.

The researchers used descriptive qualitative research design using narrative analysis. Semi-structured interview, focus group discussion and casual observations were used. The study focused on lived experiences of Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers.

METHODOLOGY

Sampling

The study used a qualitative research method using narrative analysis, the researchers would get the 50% of the twenty-four (24) total number of Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers of Bukidnon National High School. The composition of the 12 Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers were; three General Science majors, three Physics majors, three Biology majors, one Chemistry major, and two Natural Science majors.  These teachers were chosen based from their field of specialization. Science teachers in each grade level were also represented.

The average years of experience of the 12 Out-of-Field participants were 20.5 years of service in the department of education. With 20.5 years as average years of experience, it was only in 2012 that all the participants were teaching 4 Science subjects in one curriculum year. Few of the participants had attended seminars/trainings related to subjects not their major field specifically on Physics, Chemistry and Biology subjects. Majority of them had trainings on their major field.

Data Collection

Upon the approval by the principal, the researchers and the Science department head identified the 12 Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers of Bukidnon National High School based from the teachers’ field of specialization. After identification of the participants, each of them was given consent letter signed by the researchers inviting them to become one of the participants of the study.  They were also informed of the intent of the study and were assured of the confidentiality of their responses as well as their identities as participants of the study.

The letter also informed them of the schedule of the interview and focus group discussion (FGD). The schedule for interview was arranged properly by the researchers during free time of the participants so as not to disrupt classes. During the interview motive questions which were validated by the experts were asked regarding the lived experiences of Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers.

During FGD participants were asked to answer to the questions asked by the researchers being the moderator of the FGD. The researchers followed the standard procedure in conducting the FGD. It started with an introduction of the researchers, the explanation of the purpose of the FGD, the gathering of the consent from the participants, the establishment of rules of the FGD, the setting of roles of each participant, and the recording of the session.

Next, after participants and the researchers encounter, qualitative data were coded following the method of (Creswell 2007). These include: coding or identifying concepts from raw data through multiple coding processes; categorizing or linking codes to create a unit or category; identifying patterns or repeated units from categories; and creating a theme that represent similar pattern (Creswell, 2007). All the identified themes and sub-themes were described using a narrative analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

From the lived experiences of the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers, Six (6) grand themes had emerged. They are: teaching Science content, preparation of the lesson plan, choosing appropriate instructional materials, selecting teaching strategy, integration of technology, and the assessment of learning. In each grand theme, sub themes are also identified. These are the challenges, problems/difficulties and strategies to address challenges, problems/difficulties.

Teaching Science Content

In Teaching Science content, the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers major challenge is they are not prepared to teach Science subjects not their major field following the structure of the spiraling approach of the k-12 curriculum specifically in teaching content of the subject physics. They claimed that they were challenged to teach physics because it was not their major field. Besides, there were formula and mathematical computations that need to be taught to the students.  Participant 5 claimed,

“…usual challenge, if I encountered topics outside of my expertise specially sa physics nga not my field of specialization. There are problem solving nga ako poor in computations or I am not good in mathematics”

Although, some of them said that they had a little background about this subject, but still the knowledge was not enough especially that the complexity of the lesson was increasing for every grade level.

The result supports the idea of Shulman (1986). He claimed that Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers must know and understand the subjects that they teach, including knowledge of central facts, concepts, theories, and procedures within a given field.

Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers major problem/difficulty is they cannot expound the topic with increasing complexity. The following are the reasons: they have difficulty in comprehending the concepts not their major field, difficulty in giving extra activities, and difficulty in dealing with problem solving and formula writing.

However, these are addressed by: doing a lot of readings, asking help from co-teachers who are expert in the particular field, and researching in the internet.

Preparation of the lesson Plan

 In the Preparation of the lesson plan, Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers’ great challenge is in preparing the Daily Lesson Plan following the new format of the Daily Lesson Plan (DLP) of the K-12 curriculum. Participant 8 said,

              “…na kani jud. Daghan kau ibutang sa lesson plan kay daghan man xa na parts nga ang uban na part di ko kamao unsay akong ibutang.. labi na sa subject na not my expertise”.

In the new DLP there are parts that needed to be filled out.  The Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers find it very challenging because they do not know what to write in every part of the lesson Plan.

DepEd order no. 42 s. 2016 stipulated that there were many parts that teachers had to fill out. Lesson planning helps teachers’ master the content of learning area. Through the preparation of effective lesson plans, teachers are able to relearn what they need to teach.

Their common challenge is: Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers are not certain what to write in every part of the lesson plan, and cannot actualize in the classroom what was written in the Daily Lesson Plan. Borich (2007), claimed that lesson planning is an organized process of deciding what and how learners should learn. Planning is generally the responsibility of teachers. Teachers choose about the procedure and content of their instruction

Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers major problem/difficulty in preparing Daily Lesson Plan is they spend longer time in preparing DLP. However, the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers addressed the challenges, problems/difficulties by consulting expert teachers in preparing Daily Lesson Plan of that field and by employing wise time management.

Choosing Instructional Materials

 In Choosing Appropriate Instructional Materials, the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers number 1 challenge is in finding appropriate instructional materials which are applicable to the varied type of learners. Participant 3, claimed that,

“…kailangan lahi lahi, varied IMs nga mag cater sa type of learners dili manko kabalo unsaun kay ako mismo kulangan ug sabot sa topic.”

They explained that not all instructional materials are suited to all types of learners. This finding support Ossola (2014) who claimed that the key feature of effective teaching is the selection of instructional materials that meet the needs of students and fit the limitations of the teaching and learning environment. Lardizabal (2000) stated also that the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process could be increased significantly if instructional materials are suitably used.

 Their major problem/difficulty is in the construction and revision of instructional materials. Consultation with experts in that particular field, borrowing Instructional materials from expert teachers, surfing the internet and making their own Instructional Materials are the common strategies of the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers in addressing the aforementioned challenges, problems/difficulties.

Selecting Teaching Strategy

In Selecting Teaching Strategies, the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science teachers are challenge in finding and selecting teaching strategy that would fit with students having different levels of understanding and with different learning styles. Adunola (2011) stressed that teachers must be knowledgeable with several teaching strategies that would addressed the degree of complexity of the concepts to be covered. Participant 5 expressed,

“..how to select teaching strategy dealing students with different IQs, slow and fast learners..kana bitaw ma handle nimu ang strategy especially big classes with different learning styles.”

Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers had to bring along with them numerous teaching strategies before coming into the class.  Their common problems /difficulties are the teaching strategy chosen didn’t work with all the sections they handled. Another is in the students’ difficulty with following instruction.

Nevertheless, the major challenge, problems/difficulties were addressed by the Out-of-Field Junior High School Teachers by consulting or asking assistance from co-teachers who are expert in that particular subject, surfing the internet and by revising and modifying teaching strategies.

Integration of Technology

In the Integration of Technology Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers are challenged to use technology in teaching the subject which are not their major fields. Technical skills and lack of expertise in the manipulation of technology are their common problems/difficulties. Participant 2 alleged,

“…it is really a big problem for me kay I am not a computer literate.honestly speaking dili jud ko master sa computer…I need to be trained jud”.

 The result supports the claim of Sandholtz & Reilly (2004) that teachers’ technology skills are a strong determinant of ICT integration. Asking assistance from experts in using technology is one of the many ways used by the teachers to address the aforementioned challenges, problems/difficulties.

Assessment of Learning

In the Assessment of learning, the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers are challenge in constructing a reliable assessment tool of the subject not their expertise. Most of the Out-of-Field Science Teachers claimed that,

“…challenged kayo on how to make a good assessment tool to assess students learning. Participant 2 also claimed “ …maglisod ko ug himu kung correct ba akong gihimu.”

Following the spiral progression approach of the K-12 curriculum, the level of the complexity of the assessment questions is increasing as the learner moves from one grade level to the other.  In consonance, out-of-field Science Teachers have to prepare assessment questions which fit to the level of students understanding.

Most of the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers have problems/difficulties in constructing assessment tool particularly in formulating physics questions. Aside from that, the Science teachers have also a problem/difficulty with the poor retention skills of the students.

However, these are addressed by the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers by asking experts to check the test constructed, and conducted remedial class. For the poor retention of students, the Science teachers give assessment right after the discussion of the lesson. They also used many references where they can read samples of assessment tool.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The Schools Division of Malaybalay City may conduct seminar or trainingsabout enhancing Out-of Field Junior High Science Teachers       Subject Matter Content knowledge in Physics subject.
2. The Schools Division of Malaybalay City may also offer trainings to ScienceTeachers in developing and producing instructional materials adapted to varied types of learners. Moreover, the Science Department with the Department Head and Master Teachers with expertise  in developing IMs, may also conduct a School Based Training in developing and producing IMS.
3. The School Administrators may include in the In Service Training (INSET) for the teachers a schedule for writeshop of New Daily       Lesson Plan. They will also conduct trainings or seminars introducing Innovative strategies applicable to the 21^st century  types of learners and suitable to a big class size.
4. School–based training on Computer and Internet Literacy Course may be scheduled and given priority to encourage teachers to integrate technology and online resources to the 21^st century learners in the teaching learning process.
5. The Department Heads and Master Teachers in every school who are expert in making assessment tool for the particular subject are encourage to mentor their co- teachers who had difficulty in constructing assessment tool.
6. The Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers may take advanced studies by enrolling in the master’s degree in order for them to enrich subject matter content knowledge.
7. Future research could expand the scope to include a larger and more diverse sample of schools and teachers to enhance the generalizability of the findings. Incorporating quantitative methods alongside qualitative analysis could provide a more robust understanding of the prevalence and impact of out-of-field teaching. Developing and testing specific interventions or support programs based on the study’s findings could provide practical solutions to the challenges identified and further validate the research.

Developed Model on the Qualitative Analysis of the Lived Experiences by the Out-of-Field Junior High School Science Teachers MaryJean S. Paraiso (2018)

REFERENCES

1. Adunola, O. (2011), The Impact of Teachers’ Teaching Methods on the Academic Performance of Primary School Pupils in Ijebu-Ode Local cut Area of Ogun State,” Ego Booster Books, Ogun State, Nigeria
2. Borich, G. D. (2007). Effective Teaching methods, Unit and Lesson Planning, six edition, Pearon, Merrill Prentice Hall, Ohio.
3. Bruner J. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Creswell, J. W., Hanson, W. E., Clark Plano, V. L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation. The counseling psychologist, 35(2), 236-264.
5. Department of Education Order No. 42, s. 2016. Policy Guidelines on Daily Lesson Preparation for the K to 12 Basic Education Program
6. Ducot, L. O. (2011). Instructional Materials Used by Teachers in Teaching Intermediate Mathematics and the Academic Achievement of the Pupils. Unpublished MAED Thesis.
7. Ferido, M. (2013). The Spiral Progression Approach in Science. Diliman Quezon City, UPNISMED
8. Ingersoll, R. M. (2019). Measuring out-of-field teaching. In Examining the Phenomenon of “Teaching Out-of-field” International Perspectives on Teaching as a Non-specialist(pp. 21-51). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
9. Ingersoll, R. M., & Gruber, K. (1996). Out-of-field teaching and educational equality. Washington, DC: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics.
10. Lardizabal, A. S. (2000). Principles and Methods of Teaching. National Bookstore
11. Misulis, K. (1997). Content analysis: A Useful Tool for Instructional Planning. Contemporary Education 69: 45-47.
12. Obiso, E. (2009). Teaching Performance of Non- Science Majors and Achievement of High school Students in science and Technology.
13. Ogwa, C. E. (2002). Effective Teaching Methods, Enuges: Cheston Ltd.
14. Protheroe, N. & Suzanne, C. (2008). Learning Strategies as a Key to Student Success
15. Racho, L. S. (2016). Experiences and Challenges of Teacher Teaching Out-of-Field Subject. Unpublished master’s thesis Bukidnon State University, City of Malaybalay.
16. Republic Act 10533. Enhanced Basic education Act of 2013.
17. Robinson, V. (1985). Making Do in the Classroom: A Report on the Miss-assignment of Teachers.
18. Sandholtz, J. H., & Reilly, B. (2004). Teachers, not technicians: Rethinking technical expectations for teachers. Teachers College Record, 106(3), 487–512.
19. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4 –14
20. Scrivener, J (2005). Learning Teaching: The Essential   Guide to English Language Teaching (3rd Ed.).  Oxford: Macmillan.
21. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4 –14
22. Stice (1987). Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education