INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Development of a CODE-Based Teaching Guide on the Central  
Dogma in Biochemistry: A Study in the Philippines  
Andrea Marie F. Borneo., Douglas A. Salazar*  
Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of  
Technology, Bonifacio Ave. Tibanga, Iligan City, 9200, Philippines  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100196  
Received: 10 November 2025; Accepted: 20 November 2025; Published: 05 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This study developed and validated the CODE Instructional Approach (Case-Organized, Dramatized, and  
Embodied) to enhance preservice science teachers’ understanding of the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology.  
A total of twelve (12) third-year BSED Science students enrolled in PHSc108 Biochemistry participated in the  
implementation phase of the study. Using the ADDIE instructional design model, the Analysis Phase revealed  
several learning needs, such as students' persistent misunderstandings, difficulty visualizing molecular  
processes, and a strong preference for visual and hands-on learning strategies. A panel of seven qualified  
evaluators assessed the instructional materials for validity, clarity, and pedagogical integrity. The overall validity  
rating for the pretest–posttest instrument was 3.77, and the rating for the Teaching Guide was 3.70, both  
interpreted as “very highly valid.” The mean score for students' conceptual understanding increased from 14.25  
to 20.17, representing a substantial improvement. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test confirmed that this increase  
was statistically significant (Z = –3.068, p = .002), with a very large effect size (r = 0.886). Thematic analysis of  
student reflections identified four themes: misconceptions regarding the direction of genetic information flow,  
difficulty understanding molecular processes, incomplete understanding of mutation, and a preference for visual  
and experiential learning. Overall, the results show that the CODE Approach effectively addresses gaps in  
understanding by integrating multimodal, contextualized, and embodied learning activities.  
Keywords: Central Dogma, CODE Instructional Approach, Embodied Learning, Molecular Biology Education,  
Multimodal Instruction  
INTRODUCTION  
The Central Dogma of Molecular Biology explains how genetic information moves from DNA to RNA to  
protein, and it is considered a foundational concept in biology education. For preservice science teachers,  
understanding the Central Dogma is essential because it supports learning in genetics, biochemistry, cell and  
molecular biology, and related fields. Since this concept plays a central role in the curriculum, students need  
instructional approaches that help them build accurate and coherent mental models of molecular processes.  
Despite its importance, the Central Dogma is consistently identified as one of the most challenging topics for  
learners. Many students struggle to differentiate transcription from translation, describe the roles of mRNA and  
tRNA, or explain how mutations affect protein structure. Misconceptions such as the idea that DNA directly  
produces proteins or that replication and transcription refer to the same process have been documented both  
internationally and locally (Wieseman, 2016). More recent studies indicate that these misunderstandings remain  
common among biology majors and preservice teachers, suggesting that traditional instructional methods often  
fail to address them effectively (Dogan and Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, 2021; Brownell and Freeman, 2021). Similar  
difficulties have been observed in local classroom contexts, where many students rely heavily on memorization  
and find it difficult to construct meaningful mental models of molecular events. The diagnostic findings in this  
study reflected the same pattern of fragmented understanding and persistent misconceptions, which suggests that  
lecture-based teaching may not sufficiently promote conceptual learning.  
Page 2447  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
In response to these difficulties, a variety of innovations in molecular biology instruction have emerged.  
Simulation-based and virtual learning tools have been shown to help students visualize abstract molecular  
interactions that cannot be observed directly (Cano, 2022; Park and Lee, 2024). Contextualized instruction  
enables learners to relate gene expression concepts to real-world scenarios, while inquiry-based laboratory  
activities such as GFP plasmid expression provide firsthand experience with transcription and translation  
(Bujanda and Anderson, n.d.). Other multimodal approaches, including manipulatives, model construction, art-  
integrated lessons, and case-based exercises, have also improved student understanding. Emerging research  
shows that embodied and dramatized learning can enhance students’ ability to visualize dynamic molecular  
processes and reason about system-level interactions (Lindgren et al., 2022; Núñez and Fias, 2023). Case-based  
strategies likewise strengthen higher-order reasoning and help learners apply molecular concepts in authentic  
situations (Wood and Anderson, 2023).  
However, most instructional innovations focus on a single strategy, such as simulation, modeling, or inquiry-  
based learning, without combining these methods into an integrated framework. Only a few studies have  
attempted to unify case-based learning, dramatized role-play, and embodied modeling within a single  
instructional design. Even fewer have formally developed, validated, and pilot-tested such an approach within  
preservice teacher education in the Philippines. Recent literature continues to emphasize the need for multimodal  
and research-informed strategies that correct misconceptions and support visualization of molecular phenomena  
(Mhlongo and Govender, 2024; Abuhassna, 2024; Reyes and Constantino, 2024). This points to a clear gap in  
the field. There is a lack of comprehensive, classroom-tested instructional models that combine contextualized,  
dramatized, and embodied learning experiences to address persistent misconceptions about the Central Dogma.  
The CODE Instructional Approach was developed to address this gap. CODE refers to Case-Organized,  
Dramatized, and Embodied learning. It combines real-world biological case scenarios, dramatized simulations  
in which students act out transcription and translation, and embodied modeling activities that involve  
constructing and manipulating representations of DNA, RNA, and proteins. These strategies are intended to  
create a coherent, immersive, and student-centered learning experience that helps students refine their  
understanding and overcome misconceptions. The approach is grounded in constructivist learning theory, case-  
based learning, and embodied cognition, which emphasize active engagement, contextual meaning-making, and  
physical involvement in learning. Its development followed the ADDIE Model, an instructional design  
framework that is widely used to produce effective science instructional materials (Martin and Sun, 2022).  
The local educational context strengthens the need for such an approach. Many preservice science teachers in  
regional institutions begin their Biochemistry courses with limited prior knowledge of molecular biology and  
often rely on memorization rather than conceptual reasoning. Recent findings indicate that multimodal and  
interactive teaching strategies can substantially improve molecular biology understanding across different  
learning environments (Mhlongo and Govender, 2024). These observations highlight the importance of  
designing contextualized, embodied, and interactive instructional tools that match the learning needs of Filipino  
preservice teachers.  
To ensure curricular relevance, the CODE Instructional Approach was aligned with the learning outcomes of  
Module 2, Lesson 2.5 of the PHSc108 Biochemistry course. These outcomes include explaining how DNA  
encodes genetic information, distinguishing among transcription, translation, and mutation, and relating the  
Central Dogma to genetic disorders and biotechnology. These objectives guided the development of the case  
tasks, dramatized activities, and embodied modeling components of the teaching guide.  
With this context in mind, the study aimed to develop and validate the CODE Instructional Approach and  
determine its effectiveness in improving preservice teachers’ understanding of the Central Dogma. Specifically,  
the study sought to:  
1. develop and validate the CODE teaching materials using the ADDIE Model,  
2. determine the change in students’ conceptual understanding before and after the intervention, and  
3. explore students’ perceptions and learning experiences with the CODE Approach.  
Page 2448  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Overall, this research presents a multimodal instructional framework for molecular biology education and  
provides a replicable model for preservice science teacher training in the Philippines.  
METHODOLOGY  
Research Design  
This study used a developmental research design guided by the ADDIE instructional model, which involves the  
stages of Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. The model was applied to create and  
validate the CODE Instructional Approach. To determine the effectiveness of the intervention, a one-group  
pretest–posttest design was employed to measure changes in students’ conceptual understanding of the Central  
Dogma of Molecular Biology. A qualitative descriptive approach supported the quantitative analysis by  
documenting students’ perceptions and learning experiences through written reflections.  
Participants  
The participants were twelve third-year BSED Science students who were officially enrolled in PHSc108  
Biochemistry during the First Semester of Academic Year 2025–2026 at Visayas State University–Isabel  
Campus. This group represented the entire population of third-year BSED Science students enrolled in the course  
for that semester.  
Purposive sampling was used because PHSc108 covers Module 2, Lesson 2.5, which focuses on the Central  
Dogma. Since the intervention specifically targeted this lesson, these students were the most relevant participants  
for the development, validation, and pilot testing of the teaching guide. Participation was voluntary, and informed  
consent was obtained from all students before data collection.  
Development of the CODE Instructional Approach  
The CODE (Case-Organized, Dramatized, and Embodied) Approach was developed using the ADDIE Model as  
follows:  
1) Analysis: Students’ prior knowledge and misconceptions were identified using a diagnostic test and three  
open-ended questions. Additional input from biology educators emphasized the need for multimodal,  
contextualized, and embodied strategies to support learning of abstract molecular concepts.  
2) Design: The CODE Teaching Guide was structured to align with the PHSc108 Biochemistry course syllabus  
and constructivist learning principles. The design involved planning real-world case scenarios, dramatized  
simulations of transcription and translation, and embodied molecular modeling tasks. Assessment tools,  
including the pretest–posttest instrument and reflection prompts, were also prepared.  
3) Development: All instructional materials were created by the researcher, including the full teaching guide,  
role-play scripts, case narratives, embodied activity guides, and molecular modeling tasks. The pretest–  
posttest assessment and validation rating sheets were developed in this phase. Adopted rubrics were used by  
the panel of evaluators to examine content accuracy, clarity, pedagogical alignment, feasibility, and scientific  
correctness.  
4) Implementation: The CODE Approach was implemented through three instructional sessions. These  
included case analysis, dramatized simulations of transcription and translation, and embodied modeling of  
molecular interactions. The teaching guide served as the primary reference for activity flow and sequencing.  
5) Evaluation: The teaching guide and assessment tools were evaluated by seven qualified experts. Data from  
the pretest–posttest and student reflections were analyzed to determine the validity, effectiveness, and  
acceptability of the instructional model, completing the ADDIE cycle.  
Page 2449  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Instruments  
Three sets of instruments were used: (1) researcher-developed instructional and assessment tools, (2) adopted  
validation rubrics, and (3) student reflection instruments. Full copies of these instruments are not included in  
this article to maintain conciseness and in keeping with IJRISS publication guidelines.  
1) Pretest–Posttest Conceptual Understanding Test:  
A researcher-developed 25-item test measured students’ understanding of DNA, RNA, transcription, translation,  
and mutation. Seven evaluators reviewed the instrument using an adopted validation rating sheet that assessed  
content relevance, clarity, scientific accuracy, cognitive demand, grammar, fairness, and feasibility.  
2) CODE Teaching Guide Validation Rubric:  
The teaching guide was evaluated using an adapted validation rubric based on established instructional design  
tools. It examined ten criteria, including accuracy, alignment with learning outcomes, sequencing, engagement,  
contextualization, differentiation, assessment integration, material feasibility, and visual presentation.  
3) Student Reflection Instrument:  
A semi-structured reflection form allowed students to describe their experiences with the CODE Approach. The  
tool guided them to reflect on challenges, conceptual changes, engagement in activities, and the usefulness of  
the case-based, dramatized, and embodied strategies.  
Panel of Evaluators  
Seven evaluators reviewed the pretest–posttest instrument, teaching guide, and perception tools. Selection  
criteria included:  
(1) holding at least a master’s degree in Biology, Science Education, Biochemistry, Curriculum Studies, or  
related fields;  
(2) having expertise or teaching experience in molecular biology, biochemistry, or science education;  
(3) having three to five years of tertiary-level teaching experience;  
(4) involvement in research, curriculum review, or instructional materials validation; and  
(5) willingness and availability to provide feedback.  
The panel consisted of faculty members and academic heads from multiple campuses within a state university  
system, representing strong expertise in biology education, curriculum development, and instructional design.  
Data Collection Procedure  
Data collection proceeded in three phases:  
1) Development Phase: Needs analysis, activity planning, and material development were completed following  
the ADDIE model. The panel of evaluators reviewed the teaching guide and the pretest–posttest instrument.  
2) Implementation Phase: A pretest was given one week before the intervention. The CODE lessons were  
implemented through three instructional sessions, and the posttest was administered two weeks after the  
intervention.  
3) Qualitative Phase: Students submitted written reflections immediately after the final session. These were  
collected and prepared for thematic analysis.  
Page 2450  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Data Analysis  
Quantitative data were analyzed using JAMOVI statistical software Version 2.4. Descriptive statistics, including  
mean, range, and standard deviation, were computed. Normality was tested using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and  
Shapiro–Wilk tests. Since the pretest scores were not normally distributed and the sample size was small, the  
Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test was used to assess the significance of the difference between pretest and posttest  
scores. Effect size (r) was computed using the Z-value produced by JAMOVI.  
Validation ratings from the evaluators were analyzed using mean scores and standard deviations. Qualitative data  
from student reflections were examined using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis. Themes were  
triangulated with quantitative results to enhance the interpretation of findings.  
Ethical Considerations  
Ethical approval was obtained from the Office of the Campus Chancellor. Participation was voluntary, and  
confidentiality was maintained throughout the research process. Students were informed that they could  
withdraw from the study at any time without penalty.  
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  
Analysis Phase: Needs Assessment for CODE Development  
The Analysis Phase of the ADDIE Model examined students’ prior knowledge, misconceptions, and learning  
preferences related to the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology. A 10-item diagnostic test and three open-ended  
questions were administered to twelve third-year BSED Science students. The diagnostic test produced a mean  
score of 7.25 out of 10, with scores ranging from 4 to 9, which indicates a moderate level of understanding.  
Although most students recognized the basic relationship among DNA, RNA, and proteins, weaknesses were  
evident in items related to transcription output, mutation effects, and the direction of genetic information flow.  
Item-level analysis showed that questions involving mutation, transcription products, and identifying incorrect  
statements about the Central Dogma had the lowest percentages of correct responses. Qualitative answers  
supported these findings, with several students showing confusion about the distinctions among replication,  
transcription, and translation, or expressing uncertainty about the origin and consequences of mutations.  
The thematic analysis of the open-ended responses produced four major themes:  
1.  
Misconception on the Direction and Location of Genetic Information Flow (1 of 12 students; 8.3 percent)  
A small number of students held explicit misconceptions, such as believing that transcription occurs in the  
cytoplasm or that DNAproduces proteins directly. These reveal inaccurate views about the sequence and location  
of gene expression processes.  
2.  
Difficulty in Understanding Molecular Processes and Components (12 of 12 students; 100 percent)  
All students indicated difficulty with at least one molecular process. Translation was the most challenging (6 of  
12; 50.0 percent), followed by mutation (5 of 12; 41.7 percent) and transcription (3 of 12; 25.0 percent). Students  
struggled with codon–amino acid relationships, roles of mRNA and tRNA, and the intracellular mechanisms  
involved.  
3.  
Limited Understanding of Mutation and Its Biological Implications (5 of 12 students; 41.7 percent)  
Almost half of the students were unsure how mutations arise and how they affect protein structure and traits,  
which suggests weak integration between molecular-level events and phenotype expression.  
4.  
Preference for Visual and Experiential Learning Approaches (12 of 12 students; 100 percent)  
Page 2451  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
All students preferred visual, interactive, or hands-on learning activities. Videos and animations were favored  
by most students (10 of 12; 83.3 percent), followed by model-building activities (7 of 12; 58.3 percent). Several  
emphasized the value of role-playing and embodied tasks in understanding abstract molecular processes.  
Overall, the Analysis Phase showed that while students possessed some factual knowledge, they experienced  
substantial difficulty visualizing molecular processes and connecting abstract ideas to observable biological  
phenomena. Their strong preference for visual and experiential approaches supported the development of the  
CODE Instructional Approach, which integrates contextualized cases, dramatized simulations, and embodied  
modeling. These findings align with Research Objective 1 by providing the empirical basis for designing the  
teaching guide.  
Validation of Instruments and Teaching Guide  
The CODE Instructional Approach and its associated materials were evaluated by a panel of seven experts. The  
pretest–posttest instrument received an overall mean rating of 3.77, which is interpreted as Very Highly Valid.  
Scientific correctness, grammatical clarity, and fairness received perfect mean scores of 4.00, indicating that the  
tool was appropriate for measuring conceptual understanding of the Central Dogma.  
The teaching guide received an overall mean rating of 3.70, interpreted as Very Highly Acceptable. Evaluators  
identified strengths in instructional sequencing, contextualization, and the use of multimodal strategies. Minor  
improvements were suggested for differentiation strategies and visual layout. These results confirm the  
instructional and scientific quality of the materials and support the Development and Evaluation phases of the  
ADDIE Model under Research Objective 1.  
Table 1. Validation Results for the Pretest-Posttest Instrument  
Criterion  
Mean Rating Verbal Interpretation  
Content Relevance  
Item Clarity  
3.83  
3.50  
4.00  
3.50  
3.33  
4.00  
4.00  
Very Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
Scientific Correctness  
Cognitive Level  
Item Format  
Very Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
Grammar & Language  
Bias / Fairness  
Very Highly Valid  
Very Highly Valid  
Very Highly Valid  
Very Highly Valid  
Feasibility & Time Allocation 3.83  
Overall Mean 3.77  
Improvement in Conceptual Understanding  
A pretest was given one week prior to the intervention, and a posttest was administered two weeks after. All  
twelve students completed both assessments.  
Page 2452  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
1) Descriptive Statistics:  
Pretest scores ranged from 9 to 21, while posttest scores ranged from 17 to 23. The mean pretest score was 14.25,  
increasing to 20.17 in the posttest, resulting in a gain of 5.92 points. Every student showed improvement,  
indicating an overall increase in conceptual understanding.  
Figure 1. Mean Pretest and Posttest Scores  
Figure 2. Individual Student Score Changes  
2) Test of Normality:  
Normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K–S) and Shapiro–Wilk (S–W) tests. While Shapiro–  
Wilk indicated approximate normality for both score distributions (p > .05), the K–S test revealed that the pretest  
distribution significantly deviated from normality (p = .018). Given the small sample size (n = 12), bounded  
score scale, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test was deemed appropriate for analyzing the difference between pretest  
and posttest scores.  
Table 2. Test of Normality for Pretest and Posttest Scores  
Test  
Score Set p-Value Interpretation  
Kolmogorov–Smirnov Pretest  
Kolmogorov–Smirnov Posttest  
0.018  
0.062  
0.174  
Not Normal  
Approximately Normal  
Approximately Normal  
Shapiro–Wilk  
Pretest  
Page 2453  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Shapiro–Wilk  
Posttest  
0.255  
Approximately Normal  
3) Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test:  
To determine whether the observed improvement was statistically significant, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test  
was performed. All twelve students obtained higher posttest scores, resulting in 12 positive ranks, 0 negative  
ranks, and 0 ties.  
The Wilcoxon test produced a Z-value of –3.068 with a p-value of .002, indicating a statistically significant  
increase in conceptual understanding after exposure to the CODE Instructional Approach.  
Table 3. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test: Ranks Summary  
Category  
N
Mean Rank Sum of Ranks  
Negative Ranks 0 0.00  
Positive Ranks 12 6.50  
0.00  
78.00  
–
Ties  
0
–
Total  
12 –  
–
Table 4. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test: Test Statistics  
Statistic  
Z-value  
p-value  
Value  
–3.068  
0.002  
Interpretation Significant at α = 0.05  
4) Effect Size:  
Effect size was computed using the formula r = Z/√N, yielding r = 0.886, which represents a very large effect.  
This confirms the strong and meaningful impact of the CODE Instructional Approach on student learning and  
addresses Research Objective 2.  
Students’ Experiences and Perceptions  
Thematic analysis of students’ post-intervention reflections identified four major themes that describe how  
learners experienced the CODE Approach.  
1) Emerging Themes:  
1. Misconception on the Direction of Genetic Information Flow: Students initially misordered or conflated  
replication, transcription, and translation, with some believing that DNA directly produces proteins. Sample  
Quote: “DNA makes proteins directly without RNA.”  
2. Difficulty in Understanding Molecular Processes and Components: Students struggled to visualize cellular  
locations  
and  
molecular  
functions  
of  
mRNA,  
tRNA,  
ribosomes,  
and  
enzymes.  
Sample Quote: “Replication happens in the nucleus, transcription in the cytoplasm.”  
Page 2454  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
3. Limited Understanding of Mutation and Its Biological Implications: Students expressed uncertainty about  
how mutations arise and how they influence protein structure and traits. Sample Quote: “Even though the  
process is correct, mutation still appears.”  
4. Preference for Visual and Experiential Learning Approaches: Learners favored hands-on modeling, role-  
playing, and visual aids that helped them engage with abstract molecular concepts. Sample Quote: “I prefer  
to learn through interactive videos and model-building.”  
Triangulation of Quantitative and Qualitative Findings  
Triangulation revealed strong alignment between diagnostic test weaknesses and thematic patterns. Items with  
the lowest pretest accuracy, such as those assessing information flow and mutation, directly corresponded to  
themes showing misconceptions and limited understanding. Students’ stated preference for visual and  
experiential learning validated the multimodal design of the CODE Approach.  
Table 5. Triangulation of Quantitative and Qualitative Findings  
Theme  
Quantitative Support  
Qualitative Support  
Integrated Interpretation  
Misconception on the Lowest score in Item 9 Students confused DNA → Confirms conceptual gaps in  
Direction of Information (50% correct)  
Flow  
RNA → Protein; some the direction of genetic  
believed DNA makes information flow  
proteins directly  
Difficulty  
Understanding  
Molecular Processes  
in Moderate difficulty in Confusion about location Indicates the need for  
Items 5, 7, and 8 and function of diagramming, modeling, and  
transcription, translation, embodied simulations  
and enzymes  
Limited Understanding Item 6 at 58% correct  
of Mutation  
Students  
mutations arise or affect understanding  
proteins  
unsure  
how Shows  
fragmented  
requiring  
contextualized examples  
Preference for Visual and Moderate  
initial Students preferred role- Supports the effectiveness of  
Experiential Learning  
performance; strong gains play, modeling, videos, and multimodal and embodied  
after intervention interactive resources learning strategies  
Integrated Interpretation  
Overall results show that students initially exhibited fragmented understanding and misconceptions regarding  
the Central Dogma. The CODE Instructional Approach significantly improved their conceptual understanding,  
with a very large effect size and consistent qualitative support. The integration of contextualized cases,  
dramatized simulations, and embodied modeling enhanced visualization, engagement, and conceptual clarity.  
These findings validate the theoretical foundations of the CODE Approach and demonstrate that all research  
objectives were achieved within the ADDIE Model.  
CONCLUSION  
This study developed, validated, and evaluated the CODE Instructional Approach using the ADDIE Model with  
the goal of improving preservice science teachers’ understanding of the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology.  
Findings from the Analysis Phase showed that many students held persistent misconceptions about transcription,  
translation, and mutation, and that they preferred visual and experiential modes of learning. These results guided  
the creation of a teaching guide that incorporated contextualized case examples, dramatized simulations, and  
embodied modeling activities.  
Page 2455  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Validation results from the panel of evaluators indicated that the instructional materials possessed high scientific  
accuracy, clarity, alignment with learning outcomes, and pedagogical soundness. The implementation of the  
CODE Approach led to substantial gains in conceptual understanding, reflected in the significant difference  
between pretest and posttest scores (p = .002) and a very large effect size (r = 0.886). Students’ written reflections  
further affirmed that the multimodal and embodied learning activities made abstract molecular processes more  
engaging and easier to comprehend.  
Overall, the study demonstrates that the CODE Instructional Approach provides an effective, contextually  
grounded, and multimodal framework for teaching the Central Dogma. It successfully addresses common  
misconceptions, enhances students’ ability to visualize molecular events, and promotes deeper conceptual  
learning among preservice science teachers.  
RECOMMENDATIONS  
Recommendations for Teaching Practice  
Integrate the CODE Approach when teaching topics involving gene expression, transcription, translation, and  
mutation.  
Use multimodal strategies such as case-based learning, role-play, embodied simulations, and molecular  
modeling to support conceptual clarity.  
Implement diagnostic assessments to identify misconceptions early and apply conceptual-change strategies  
accordingly.  
Incorporate animations, 3D models, diagramming activities, and interactive simulations to facilitate  
visualization of microscopic processes.  
Recommendations for Curriculum and Instructional Design  
• Embed embodied and dramatized learning activities within biology curricula to enhance learner engagement  
and comprehension.  
• Utilize the CODE Teaching Guide as a model for developing instructional materials for other topics in  
molecular biology and related life sciences.  
• Provide professional development programs focused on embodied cognition, multimodal instruction, and  
innovative teaching methodologies for pre-service and in-service teachers.  
Recommendations for Future Research  
Given that this study involved a small group of twelve (12) preservice teachers from a single institution and was  
implemented over a short instructional period, future research may extend and strengthen the present findings  
by:  
• Replicating the study with larger and more diverse samples across multiple institutions to enhance  
generalizability.  
• Conducting comparative or quasi-experimental studies to determine how the CODE Approach performs  
relative to traditional or other multimodal instructional strategies.  
• Examining long-term retention by administering delayed posttests, as this study measured only immediate  
learning gains.  
• Investigating the approach’s influence on scientific reasoning, procedural skills, creativity, and student  
engagement.  
Page 2456  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
• Developing digital, virtual, or hybrid versions of the CODE Approach—including VR/AR-based embodied  
simulations—to broaden access and further enhance experiential learning.  
ACKNOWLEDGMENT  
The researcher sincerely expresses gratitude to the panel of evaluators for their time, expertise, and constructive  
feedback in validating the instructional materials and assessment tools. Heartfelt appreciation is extended to the  
participating students for their cooperation and active engagement throughout the implementation of the CODE  
Instructional Approach. Special thanks are likewise given to the faculty and administration of Visayas State  
University Isabel for their support and permission to conduct this study. Finally, the researcher acknowledges all  
individuals who provided guidance, encouragement, and assistance in the completion of this research.  
REFERENCES  
1. Abuhassna, H. (2024). Enhancing learning experience through technology-integrated instructional  
design: An ADDIE-based framework. Journal of Educational Technology and Innovation, 18(2), 45–58.  
2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in  
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.  
3. Bujanda, C., & Anderson, N. (n.d.). Teaching the Central Dogma through an inquiry-based project using  
GFP.  
University  
of  
Arizona.  
Retrieved  
on  
October  
7,  
2025,  
from  
https://repository.arizona.edu/handle/10150/663549  
4. Cano, F. (2022). Designing instructional assessment tools: Validation frameworks and applications in  
higher education. International Journal of Assessment and Evaluation, 29(3), 112–126.  
5. Cano, J. S. (2022). Development and validation of simulation-based instructional materials on the Central  
Dogma of Molecular Biology for senior high school. International Journal of Technology in Education  
and Science, 6(2), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.368  
6. Ding, L., & Toran, M. (2025). Application of the ADDIE model in supporting children with autism: A  
systematic instructional design approach. Journal of Developmental and Educational Studies, 14(1), 22–  
38.  
7. Haberbosch, M., Vick, P., Feuchter, F., & Schaal, S. (2025). Exploring molecular biology in lower  
secondary education: Assessing content relevance and teachers’ challenges, self-efficacy, and knowledge.  
International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2517887  
8. Hu, Y. (2022). Students’ perceptions of instructional quality and their relationship to digital reading  
performance. Journal of Learning Analytics, 9(1), 89–105.  
9. Knapp, N. (2016). Rubric development for performance-based assessments: A practical guide for  
educators. Assessment in Education Journal, 23(4), 367–385.  
10. Kunze, A. (2022). Discipline-specific perceptions of effective course structures and learning activities in  
higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(5), 1023–1039.  
11. Newman, D., Johnson, C., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (2016). Validating education-based evaluation  
rubrics: A multidimensional framework. Journal of Educational Measurement and Design, 41(2), 130–  
148.  
12. Pérez Zúñiga, R., Martínez García, M., Campos-Valdez, M., & Sánchez-Orozco, L. V. (2025).  
Pedagogical and evaluative competencies for the 21st century in molecular biology education and their  
relationship with honors programs: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Education, 10. Retrieved  
on October 14, 2025, from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1616858/full  
13. Roush, A. (2020). A classroom activity to deepen student understanding of genetic information flow.  
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 48(3), 292–299. Retrieved on October 10, 2025, from  
https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21342  
14. Sharp, L. (2023). Using medical case studies to strengthen understanding of the Central Dogma in  
undergraduate biochemistry courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(1), 112–124.  
Retrieved on October 14, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-10011-5  
15. Wieseman, A. L. (2016). Tracking the resolution of student misconceptions about the Central Dogma of  
Molecular  
Biology.  
Journal  
of  
Microbiology  
&
Biology  
Education,  
17(3).  
https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1165  
Page 2457  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
16. Yusoff, N., et al. (2023). Assessing undergraduates’ misconceptions on the Central Dogma of Molecular  
Biology. Journal of Science & Sport Management, 18(10). Retrieved on October 14, 2025, from  
http://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2023.10.010  
17. Zhu, H., Zeng, W., & Chen, L. (2025). Transforming molecular diagnostics learning: The power of  
gamification in higher medical education. Frontiers in Education, 10. Retrieved on October 14, 2025,  
from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1502203/full  
Page 2458  
www.rsisinternational.org