INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9190

www.rsisinternational.org

Profound Implications of Aristotelianism and Structural Functionalism in

Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program under

Revised K to 12 Curriculum in Contemporary Governance

Jemboy R. Hermogenes

, Noralyn P. Ronolo

, Genuine Q. Palmes

, Gladys S. Escarlos

Department of Education, Miaray National High School, Philippines

Department of Education, Kilap-agan Integrated School, Philippines

Department of Education, Banisilan National High School, Philippines

College of Teacher Education, Central Mindanao University, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000750

Received: 28 October 2025; Accepted: 03 November 2025; Published: 22 November 2025

ABSTRACT

This systematic review investigates the profound implications of Aristotelianism and Structural Functionalism

in the governance and administration of education policies and programs under the Revised K to 12 Curriculum,

particularly focusing on the Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) program. It synthesizes

contemporary literature to explore how Aristotelianism emphasizes moral character, virtue, and participatory

citizenship as vital values guiding decision-making processes in educational governance. From an Aristotelian

perspective, effective educational leadership arises from cultivating ethical dispositions that prioritize the

common good, justice, and collective well-being.

Meanwhile, structural functionalism highlights the significance of interdependent roles, organizational

efficiency, and social stability within educational systems. It also emphasizes how governance structures,

institutional policies, and administrative mechanisms contribute to maintaining equilibrium and ensuring the

effective delivery of educational programs. Within the ARAL framework, this theoretical perspective explains

how collaboration among administrators, teachers, and stakeholders strengthens system functionality and

responsiveness to students’ learning needs.

The review features the complementary nature of these theoretical frameworks in influencing both the ethical

and operational aspects of educational governance. Empirical findings show that when moral leadership and

functional efficiency converge, educational reforms become more sustainable, inclusive, and aligned with

national learning goals. At the right time, the integration of Aristotelian and Structural-Functionalist perspectives

provides a strong theoretical foundation for advancing governance practices that promote academic recovery,

equitable access, and holistic student development under the evolving K to 12 frameworks.

Keywords: Aristotelianism, Structural-Functionalism, Educational Governance, Educational Administration,

Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL), K to 12 Curriculum, Educational Policy, Moral

Education, Program Implementation, Educational Reform

INTRODUCTION

In the Philippine context, the Department of Education (DepEd) functions as the central authority responsible

for developing and implementing policies, plans, and programs across the basic education spectrum. This role

necessitates effective education governance to ensure that reforms such as the Revised K to 12 Curriculum and

the Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program effectively promote equity, quality, and

access. Education governance in this setting involves a complex network of individuals, institutions, and policy

instruments working collaboratively to foster an interconnected and responsive school system.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9191

www.rsisinternational.org

Historically, the integration of Aristotelian and structural functionalist theories into Philippine education

governance can be traced back to early post-colonial reforms, where moral education was emphasized alongside

structural organization influenced by American educational models. For instance, character formation programs

grounded in virtue ethics found resonance during the 1950s to 1970s, emphasizing civic responsibility amid

nation-building efforts. Concurrently, structural approaches were adopted to streamline administrative functions

and coordinate regional educational governance, reflecting a blend of ethical and functional priorities in policy

design.

According to Wilkins (2018), governance in education encompasses the activities and relationships that enable

the system to function effectively and respond to societal needs. To understand the foundational theories

underlying effective governance, two significant perspectives are investigated. Aristotelianism highlights the

moral and civic purposes of education, advocating for the development of character, practical wisdom, and active

citizenship as essential virtues for democratic participation. Conversely, as stated by Nickerson (2024), structural

functionalism offers a macro-structural view, emphasizing how different components of the education system

such as school boards, officials, and government agencies perform specific roles that sustain the stability,

efficiency, and adaptability of the system.

Moreover, these theories inform governance practices that seek to balance moral-civic development with

systemic stability and efficiency. The Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program

exemplifies this synthesis by embedding moral and civic educational goals within a system designed for

operational effectiveness, accountability, and responsiveness to learners’ needs (DepEd, 2024). Empirical

research accentuates the growing theoretical and practical relevance of these frameworks, Aristotelian principles

shaped character and citizenship education, and Structural Functionalist insights guiding organizational and

systemic reforms aimed at stability and effectiveness.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK SELECTION

The review integrates Aristotelianism, a philosophical framework advanced by Aristotle which positions

education as a crucial vehicle for moral development, civic responsibility, and the nurturing of virtuous citizens

essential for democratic governance.

While Aristotelianism offers a compelling normative focus on moral and civic development, its idealistic nature

may pose challenges in addressing pragmatic governance issues and diverse learner contexts. Moreover,

Structural Functionalism's inclination towards maintaining systemic equilibrium sometimes risks overlooking

inherent inequalities and innovation barriers within educational systems. To counterbalance these limitations,

incorporating complementary frameworks such as transformational leadership which emphasizes inspirational

motivation and change management and ethical leadership, which foregrounds principled decision-making,

could enrich the moral and administrative dimensions of governance.

Recent studies conducted by Ijaz et al. (2025) and Lu (2024) continue to emphasize Aristotle’s moral philosophy

as foundational, asserting that education’s primary aim is the cultivation of practical wisdom and character

through dispositions aligned with reason and virtue, ultimately fostering human flourishing. Aristotle’s

educational paradigm advocates for individualized instruction, active engagement, and a seamless integration of

theory and practice, all of which are crucial for nurturing practical wisdom and the development of virtuous

character. This paradigm aligns closely with the Philippine Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning

(ARAL) Program, which emphasizes holistic student development, particularly the cultivation of resilience and

responsibility.

In contrast, structural functionalism, a sociological theory proposed by Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) and further

developed by Talcott Parsons (1902–1979) and Robert K. Merton (1910–2003), conceptualizes education

governance as an interconnected system where multiple components—such as school boards, superintendents,

and government agencies—perform distinct functional roles to ensure coordination, accountability, and

operational effectiveness. This theory views education as a vital mechanism for socialization, role allocation,

and the promotion of social cohesion. It highlights how governance structures contribute to system stability and

adaptive functionality by organizing roles and maintaining social order (Supriadi, 2021). Through addressing

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9192

www.rsisinternational.org

both the moral-civic aims of education and the organizational necessities of system functioning, these

frameworks collectively provide a strong, multidimensional perspective that informs the design and execution

of education policy.

ARAL Program Under the Revised K-12 Curriculum

The Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program, mandated under Republic Act No. 12028,

represents the Philippine Department of Education’s comprehensive national initiative to address significant

learning gaps and long-standing challenges in foundational education (Bajo, 2025).

Comparatively, similar educational recovery programs in Southeast Asia, such as Indonesia's Program

Penguatan Pendidikan Karakter and Malaysia's Program Pemulihan Akademik, emphasize holistic learner

development and equity. These programs also integrate socio-emotional learning and community involvement,

reflecting regional trends toward inclusive education governance. These parallels offer valuable insights into

program design and implementation challenges, providing a regional perspective that bolsters the contextual

understanding of the ARAL initiative.

Starting in the School Year 2025–2026 alongside the revised K to 12 curriculum, ARAL targets struggling

learners from Grades 1 to 10 by providing focused tutorial interventions in reading, mathematics, and science,

with ARAL-Reading launching initially for Grades 1 to 10 and emphasizing support for low, high-emerging,

and frustrated readers (Malipot, 2025). The program aims to strengthen foundational skills, improve literacy and

numeracy, and accelerate the academic recovery of learners to meet national educational standards.

To operationalize this initiative, DepEd has instituted extensive capacity-building efforts for tutors comprising

teachers, para-teachers, pre-service teachers, and other qualified personnel ensuring they are equipped in creating

tailored, needs-based remediation strategies and assessments. Nationwide tutor training, the distribution of

learning resources, and the ARAL School Readiness and Responsiveness Audit (ASRRA) are critical

components to guarantee quality and readiness in program delivery. The program promotes social and emotional

learning integration, fostering socio-emotional development in learners aged 7 to 16, recognizing the

interrelation of academic and non-academic dimensions in recovery.

According to Malipot (2025), parental involvement is also a vital aspect of ARAL, as parents receive orientation

to support their children's learning at home, fostering a collaborative approach between schools and families.

Community and stakeholder engagement are encouraged through local kickoff activities and advocacy sessions

to build widespread support. By aligning with national education policies and literacy goals, ARAL serves as a

strategic, multi-sectoral effort to bridge learning disparities, ensure inclusive quality education, and enhance

Filipino learners' competencies for lifelong success.

Application of Theories in Governance and Administration and Its Implications

The application of Aristotelianism and Structural Functionalism in governance and administration offers a rich,

dual-perspective framework for understanding how education systems function both ethically and operationally.

Aristotelianism informs governance by positioning education as a deliberate and ethically grounded endeavor

aimed at nurturing civic virtues, moral character, and participatory citizenship. These elements are foundational

for democratic legitimacy and active engagement within governance structures, emphasizing the development

of practical wisdom (phronesis) as a guiding principle for ethical decision-making and leadership. Governance

informed by Aristotelian philosophy prioritizes creating inclusive and equitable learning spaces where students

not only achieve academically but also develop resilience, responsibility, and a sense of civic duty. This ethical

emphasis aligns closely with programs such as the Philippine Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning

(ARAL) initiative, which integrates policies fostering academic achievement alongside the cultivation of moral

and civic competencies, thereby preparing learners to participate effectively as citizens in democratic societies

(Department of Education, 2024; Ijaz et al., 2025; Lu, 2024).

On the other hand, structural Functionalism provides a sociological lens that explicates the organizational and

system-level dynamics of governance and administration. This framework clarifies the interconnected and

interdependent roles played by multiple stakeholders including policymakers, school leaders, educators, and

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9193

www.rsisinternational.org

community members in ensuring cohesive educational program delivery and responsiveness to community

needs. Structural Functionalism underscores the importance of effective operational processes, such as resource

allocation, policy implementation, and accountability mechanisms, which serve to uphold system stability, social

cohesion, and continuous improvement. It highlights that the education system is a complex structure wherein

each component fulfills specific functions that contribute to the system’s overall health, effectiveness, and

adaptability in the face of changing educational demands (Smith, 2024; Taylor, Taylor-Neu, & Butterwick,

2024).

In addition, Aristotelianism in education governance emphasizes the moral and ethical development of leaders

and learners alike. Grounded in Aristotle’s philosophy, it views education as a means to cultivate virtue, practical

wisdom, and active citizenship. This perspective calls for leadership that makes decisions based on justice and

the common good, prioritizing holistic learner development and moral responsibility. Within the ARAL

Program, this translates into policies that foster character formation alongside academic recovery, aligning

educational goals with democratic values and human flourishing.

Meanwhile, structural functionalism, on the other hand, offers a view of education governance as a coordinated

system of interdependent roles working together to maintain social stability, accountability, and effective

program delivery. Developed by Durkheim and furthered by Parsons and Merton, this theory highlights the

importance of collaboration among administrators, teachers, parents, and stakeholders to ensure that educational

initiatives are responsive, efficient, and equitable. In the context of the ARAL Program, Structural Functionalism

explains how well-organized governance structures support the smooth and effective implementation of learning

recovery efforts.

Combining these theories complement one another by balancing normative ethical imperatives with practical

organizational considerations. Aristotelianism grounds governance in moral purpose and civic engagement,

while Structural Functionalism ensures education systems function smoothly through well-defined roles,

responsibilities, and systemic coordination. This integrated approach informs educational governance and

administration in ways that promote both equitable student development and sustainable institutional

performance.

EFFECTIVENESS AND EVIDENCE FROM RECENT RESEARCH

Empirical studies have long affirmed the influence of Aristotelian principles in shaping education policies that

holistically integrate moral, intellectual, and social dimensions, thereby yielding heightened student engagement

and improved learning outcomes (DepEd, 2024). Specifically, Aristotle’s emphasis on active, personalized, and

inquiry-driven learning underpins many of the pedagogical reforms embedded in the ARAL Program (Growth

Engineering, 2024). In this regard, the ARAL initiative reflects the fusion of ethical development with cognitive

and affective learning through learner- centered strategies.

Meanwhile, Structural Functionalism provides a complementary analytical framework for evaluating

governance infrastructures and their ability to coordinate resources and actors efficiently within multi-layered

education systems (School Governance Literature Review, 2025). Empirical evidence further shows that

education programs modelled on structural-functionalist principles demonstrate higher organizational efficiency

and accountability, thereby supporting sustained educational recovery and improved access to learning

opportunities (Supriadi, 2021; ChalkyPapers, 2023).

Moreover, Structural Functionalism, explored extensively by Asuncion Edelyn B. Asuncion, continues to serve

as a vital sociological framework explaining education’s role in fostering social integration and maintaining

systemic equilibrium (Asuncion, 2025). Correspondingly, this theoretical view aligns with the ARAL

Program’s function of preserving social order through structured educational recovery. In support of this, the

Philippine Department of Education (DepEd) has institutionalized the ARAL Program through official policy

releases, including the 2025 DepEd Memorandum and program announcements that emphasize learning

recovery in basic subjects and promote inclusive education governance (DepEd, 2025).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9194

www.rsisinternational.org

Likewise, the Quality Basic Education Development Plan authored by the DepEd Planning and Development

Office situates ARAL within the broader national reform agenda that envisions systemic improvements in

access, quality, and governance over the next decade (DepEd Planning Office, 2025). Complementing this

structural vision, educational scholars such as Matthew O. Miller (2023) advance the neo-Aristotelian

perspective, emphasizing practical wisdom and moral development as critical complements to cognitive

learning—concepts that enrich the learner-centred goals of the ARAL framework.

In addition, governance scholars like J. P. Smith (2025) contribute insights into school-based management

reforms that enhance educational outcomes and strengthen ARAL’s localized implementation. Finally,

foundational theoretical resources such as Brian Legget’s exposition on Structural Functionalism in the Stanford

Encyclopedia of Philosophy offer essential background for understanding education’s structural purpose and its

functional role in sustaining the broader social system (Legget, 2004).

Taken together, these authors and institutional documents present a coherent and contemporary foundation that

integrates Aristotelian moral and intellectual education with Structural-Functionalist social theory and pragmatic

governance approaches an integration central to the ARAL Program and the continuing reforms within the

Revised K to 12 Curriculum of Philippine education.

Synthesis of Theory Alignment with Practical Outcomes

Aristotelianism and structural functionalism offer a comprehensive dual vantage point that significantly enriches

the understanding of education governance and administration. Aristotelianism provides the normative and

ethical foundation for governance by articulating the moral, civic, and democratic purposes that should underpin

educational objectives. Grounded in the cultivation of virtues such as practical wisdom, justice, and active

citizenship, this perspective emphasizes that governance aims not only to manage systems but to nurture

responsible individuals capable of contributing meaningfully to the democratic fabric of society. It foregrounds

education as a deliberate project where policy decisions are ethically informed and oriented toward the holistic

development of learners as virtuous citizens (Wilkins & Olmedo, 2018; Ijaz et al., 2025; Lu, 2024).

Conversely, structural functionalism complements this normative framework by elucidating the functional and

operational mechanisms necessary to realize these ethical and civic aims effectively within complex educational

systems. It describes how governance structures comprising policymakers, administrators, school leaders,

teachers, and community actors are interrelated components fulfilling specific roles that ensure coordination,

accountability, and responsiveness. This framework highlights how programmatic coherence, resource

allocation, stakeholder collaboration, and systematic monitoring uphold the stability, adaptability, and

continuing effectiveness of education governance. It affirms that the education system functions as an

interdependent whole, where stability and change coexist through dynamic stakeholder engagement and clearly

defined operational procedures (Smith, 2024).

This theoretical synergy is clearly observable in contemporary reforms such as the Philippine Revised K to 12

Curriculum and its associated governance frameworks. These reforms exemplify an integrated approach that

simultaneously promotes democratic participation by fostering inclusive and equitable education and maintains

system coherence by leveraging collaborative stakeholder engagement and rigorous programmatic

accountability. The Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) program particularly embodies this

integrated governance model: it aims to provide equitable access to quality education and to accelerate academic

recovery through a coordinated governance architecture that engages teachers, parents, community members,

and policymakers in a unified effort to address learning gaps and improve educational outcomes (Department of

Education, 2024).

Thus, the integration of Aristotelian ethics and Structural Functionalist organizational insights provides

education governance with a robust, multidimensional conceptual foundation. It fosters policymaking and

administration that are simultaneously morally grounded, socially responsive, operationally sound, and

strategically adaptive—qualities indispensable for advancing equitable, effective, and democratic education

systems in today’s dynamic contexts.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9195

www.rsisinternational.org

CONCLUSION ON THEORY EFFECTIVENESS

This systematic review substantiates that Aristotelianism and Structural Functionalism together provide

profound theoretical insights and practical tools that profoundly enhance education governance and

administration. Aristotelianism offers normative guidance by framing education governance as an ethically

driven pursuit focused on nurturing civic virtues, practical wisdom, and participatory citizenship all essential for

the legitimacy and vitality of democratic governance structures. This ethical foundation informs policy

formulation to prioritize not only academic achievement but also moral and civic development, ensuring

education serves as a transformative force for both individuals and society. Structural Functionalism

complements this by elucidating the functional and operational mechanisms crucial for translating these

normative goals into effective and stable educational systems. It clarifies how the interdependent roles of diverse

governance stakeholders, policymakers, school leaders, community actors, and others maintain accountability,

coordination, responsiveness, and systemic coherence in program delivery. This dual framework enables a

holistic understanding of education governance that balances moral purpose with organizational efficiency and

adaptability.

The governance and administration of the Philippine Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL)

program exemplify this complementary effectiveness of the two theories. The ARAL program incorporates the

Aristotelian vision by fostering equitable access and holistic learner development while simultaneously applying

Structural Functionalist principles in its coordinated, multi-stakeholder governance architecture to ensure

programmatic accountability, operational efficiency, and responsiveness to learners' needs. This integration

demonstrates the ongoing relevance and applicability of both theories in shaping contemporary education reform

initiatives. Together, Aristotelianism and Structural Functionalism form a robust conceptual foundation that

advances equity, democratic participation, and educational quality within Philippine educational governance and

reform.

REFERENCES

1. Asuncion, A. B. (2025). Structural functionalism and educational recovery: The sociology of the ARAL

Program. Philippine Journal of Educational Development, 15(2), 45–62.

2. Bajo, N. (2025). National learning recovery initiatives in the Philippines. Philippine Education Journal,

12(1), 45-63.

3. Cambridge Handbook of Democratic Education. (2023). Aristotle on education, democracy, and civic

friendship. Cambridge University Press.

4. Department of Education (DepEd). (2024). Implementing guidelines of the Academic Recovery and

Accessible Learning Program. DepEd Memorandum No. 018, s. 2024.

https://www.deped.gov.ph/2025/06/13/june-13-2025-do-018-s-2025-implementing-guidelines-of-the-

academic-recovery-and-accessible-learning-program/

5. Department of Education (DepEd). (2025). Implementation of the ARAL Program for learning recovery

in basic education [DepEd Memorandum No. 32, s. 2025]. Department of Education.

6. Department of Education Planning and Development Office. (2025). Quality Basic Education

Development Plan 2025–2035. Department of Education.

7. Department of Education, Philippines. (2024). Implementing Rules and Regulations of the ARAL

Program. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/IRR-of-ARAL-Program-Act.pdf

8. Department of Education. (2024). Annual report on the implementation of the Revised K to 12 Curriculum

and ARAL Program. Department of Education, Philippines.

9. Department of Education. (2024). Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program

guidelines. DepEd.

10. Ijaz, M., Lu, X., & Santos, R. (2025). Aristotelian ethics and moral education. Journal of Educational

Philosophy, 29(3), 210-228.

11. Legget, B. (2004). Structural functionalism. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University

Press.

12. Lu, Y. C. (2024). The compatibility of character education and citizenship education in Aristotelian

theory. Journal of Moral Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2024.2354746

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Page 9196

www.rsisinternational.org

13. Malipot, M. (2025). Addressing literacy gaps through ARAL. Philippine Basic Education Review, 7(2),

72-89.

14. Miller, M. O. (2023). Neo-Aristotelian character education: The integration of moral and intellectual

virtues in learning. Oxford University Press.

15. Nickerson, C. (2024). Structural Functionalism in Educational Systems. Educational Theory.

16. Nickerson, R. (2024). Structural functionalism in contemporary education systems. Sociology of

Education Quarterly, 58(4), 330-348.

17. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). Reviews of school resources: School

governance and effectiveness.

18. Republic Act No. 12028. An Act Establishing an Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL)

Program and Appropriating Funds Therefor. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.

19. School Governance Literature Review. (2025). A systematic review of governance literature in education

policy and administration.

20. Smith, J. P. (2025). School governance reforms and learning recovery: Localized management in post-

pandemic education. Journal of Educational Governance and Policy, 38(1), 23–41

21. Smith, R. (2024). Foundations of sociology: Structural functionalism. Sociology Today.

22. Supriadi, R. (2021). Education governance and structural functionalism: A Southeast Asian

perspective. International Journal of Educational Development, 68, 101-116.

23. Taylor, J., Taylor-Neu, K., & Butterwick, S. (2024). Social processes and institutions: Functions and

dysfunctions. Sociological Perspectives.

24. Wilkins, A. (2018). Education governance and social theory: Interdisciplinary approaches. In Education

Governance and Social Theory. Springer.

25. Wilkins, A., & Olmedo, I. (2018). Conceptualizing education governance: Framings, Continuities and

new directions. Journal of Education Policy.