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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5482

www.rsisinternational.org

Professional Development and Digital Literacy as Correlates of

Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers Performance

Elvie M. Excelise, Allene Mae Marapao

Central Mindanao University, Philippines

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100433

Received: 01 December 2025; Accepted: 07 December 2025; Published: 16 December 2025

ABSTRACT

EXCELISE, ELVIE M., Central Mindanao University, Musuan, Maramag, Bukidnon, October 2025. “The

level of Professional Development, Digital Literacy, and its relationship to Performance of Technology and

Livelihood Education Teachers”

Adviser: Allene Mae N. Marapao, PhD

This study examined the levels of professional development, digital literacy, and performance of Technology

and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers in public secondary schools within the Municipality of Maramag,

Bukidnon. Using a validated researcher-made questionnaire and employing descriptive statistics, correlation,

and regression analysis, the study explored how key factors such as collaboration, digital competence, and

institutional support influence teacher performance. Results revealed that TLE teachers demonstrated advanced

professional development, especially in collaborative leadership and shared vision. However, limited access to

technological and fiscal support hindered the full impact of professional learning. Teachers also demonstrated

strong digital literacy, particularly in productivity and perceived importance, but had moderate confidence in

using advanced tools, underscoring the need for more targeted, hands-on digital training. Teacher performance,

as assessed using the IPCRF, was consistently rated very satisfactory, with strengths in assessment and

professional growth. Correlation analysis showed that supportive conditions and digital productivity were

positively and significantly related to teacher performance. Regression analysis identified digital productivity

as the only significant predictor. The findings emphasized the importance of equipping TLE teachers with

relevant digital tools, supportive working environments, and practical training aligned with their instructional

needs. These insights offer actionable guidance for school leaders and policymakers aiming to strengthen

teacher effectiveness through sustainable professional development and meaningful digital integration.

Keywords: collaborative leadership, instructional technology, professional development, teacher performance,

Technology and Livelihood Education.

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) play a crucial role in preparing Filipino learners for real-world

employment, entrepreneurship, and technical careers. As the Philippine education system continues to evolve

under the K to 12 curriculum, the integration of digital tools in teaching and learning has become increasingly

essential, especially in TLE, where practical skills must align with industry standards and technological

advancements.

Professional development is essential for teachers to remain effective and responsive to educational shifts for

the continuous acquisition of new knowledge, skills, and competencies. This includes training in emerging

technologies, pedagogical innovations, and industry-relevant practices. Digital literacy, meanwhile, goes

beyond basic computer use; it involves the ability to integrate digital tools meaningfully into instruction,

enhancing student engagement, learning outcomes, and career readiness (Ng, 2022).

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5483

www.rsisinternational.org

The Department of Education (DepEd) has recognized the transformative potential of digital literacy through

its Digital Rise Program, which embeds ICT competencies across the K to 12 curriculum. This includes

productivity tools for elementary learners, basic programming and multimedia subjects for junior high school,

and vocational ICT skills such as computer servicing and broadband installation for senior high school

students (DepEd, 2022). For TLE teachers, this shift demands proficiency in digital design, e-commerce,

multimedia production, and other technology-driven vocational skills.

Despite these initiatives, many teachers, especially in rural areas, continue to face barriers such as limited

access to devices, inconsistent internet connectivity, and insufficient training in emerging technologies. Rural

schools often struggle with infrastructure gaps and the “last mile” problem, where digital resources fail to

reach remote communities (UNESCO, 2021). Urban schools, while generally better equipped, may still face

overcrowded classrooms and uneven teacher readiness (Salvador & Dela Cruz, 2023).

Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic further exposed and intensified these challenges. With the abrupt shift to

remote and blended learning, educators were compelled to adopt digital platforms such as DepEd Commons,

the Learning Management System (DLMS), and DepEd TV and Radio. These tools became lifelines for

instruction but also revealed disparities in teacher preparedness and access to professional development (Cruz

& Ballesteros, 2021). Post-pandemic teaching continues to emphasize digital integration, not only as a

contingency but as a permanent feature of modern pedagogy.

Given these realities, the study was conducted to investigate how professional development and digital literacy

directly affect the performance of TLE teachers. Understanding this relationship is crucial for designing

responsive, targeted, and sustainable capacity-building programs that empower educators to meet the demands

of the 21st-century workforce. Moreover, this study provides evidence-based insights to inform policy,

improve instructional quality, and ensure that students receive relevant, future-ready education, especially in a

subject area as vital as TLE.

Statement of the Problem

The study aimed to assess the levels of professional development and digital literacy and determine their

relationship to the performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the level of professional development of technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms

of:

1.1 shared and supportive leadership;

1.2 shared values and vision;

1.3 collective learning and application; and

1.4 supportive conditions and structures?

2. What is the level of digital literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of:

2.1 productivity;

2.2 importance;

2.3 confidence; and

2.4 anxiety?

3. What is the level of teaching performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of:

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5484

www.rsisinternational.org

3.1 content knowledge and pedagogy;

3.2 learning environment and diversity of learners;

3.3 curriculum and planning;

3.4 assessment and reporting; and

3.5 personal growth and professional development?

4. Is there a significant relationship between teachers’ performance on:

4.1 professional development; and

4.2 digital literacy?

5. Which variable singly or in combination best predicts teachers’ performance?

Objectives of the Study

The study was conducted to assess the levels of professional development and digital literacy and determine

their relationship to the performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers.

Specifically, it aimed to:

1. Determine the level of professional development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in

terms of:

1.1 shared and supportive leadership;

1.2 shared values and vision;

1.3 collective learning and application; and

1.4 supportive conditions- structures.

2. Ascertain the level of Digital Literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of:

2.1 productivity;

2.2 importance;

2.3 confidence; and

2.4 anxiety.

3. Describe the level of teaching performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of:

3.1 content knowledge and pedagogy;

3.2 learning environment and diversity of learners;

3.3 curriculum and planning;

3.4 assessment and reporting; and

3.5 personal growth and professional development.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5485

www.rsisinternational.org

4. Assess if there is a significant relationship between teachers' performance on:

4.1 professional development; and

4.2 digital literacy.

5. Find out which variable singly or in combination best predicts teachers’ performance.

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study would contribute to a deeper understanding of the role of digital literacy in

enhancing the professional performance of TLE teachers.

To the students, they can receive more dynamic, interactive, and up-to-date instruction through digital tools

and technologies that facilitate hands-on learning, virtual simulations, and access to resources that enhance

vocational skills.

To TLE teachers, it enables teachers to deliver more engaging, relevant, and interactive content, improving

their overall teaching effectiveness and confidence in the classroom.

To school administrators and curriculum developers, the findings of this study highlight the value of

professional development programs that strengthen digital literacy. As TLE teachers enhance their ability to

integrate technology into instruction, schools can expect improved teaching quality in vocational subjects and

better overall student performance.

To DepEd, the study provides insights that can help enhance teacher performance by strengthening

professional development programs focused on digital literacy by providing ongoing support, resources, and

training to ensure that TLE teachers are equipped to deliver effective, technology-integrated instruction aligned

with national standards.

To future researchers, these findings can help explore other variables that might impact the effectiveness of

professional development programs. It can be used to conduct longitudinal studies on the long-term impact of

digital literacy training for teachers.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The study focused only on the level of professional development, digital literacy, and performance of the

secondary Technology and Livelihood Education teachers of all the public high schools in the Municipality of

Maramag, Bukidnon, namely: Bukidnon National School of Home Industries, Dologon National High School,

Dologon National High School-Kiharong Annex, Dologon National High School-San Roque Annex, Musuan

Integrated School, San Miguel National High School, Kuya National High School, La Roxas National High

School, and Dagumbaan Integrated School. These schools were chosen because they represent the diverse

educational contexts within the municipality and provide a comprehensive view of the professional and

technological competencies of TLE teachers across different school settings. The study was conducted from

March 2025 to June 2025.

This study was delimited only to the information provided by the respondents in the survey questionnaires of

professional development and digital literacy questionnaires. In addition, to determine the TLE teachers’

performance, Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF) was used.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined:

Digital literacy refers to the ability of TLE teachers to integrate digital tools into instruction, manage online

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5486

www.rsisinternational.org

resources, and create technology-enhanced learning environments, measured through four subcomponents:

productivity, importance, confidence, and anxiety.

Individual performance commitment and review form (IPCRF) is a standardized DepEd tool used to assess

TLE teachers’ performance across five key result areas: content knowledge and pedagogy, learning

environment and diversity of learners, curriculum and planning, assessment and reporting, and personal growth

and professional development.

Professional Development is the average score of TLE teachers’ responses on a questionnaire measuring four

dimensions: shared and supportive leadership, shared values and vision, collective learning and application,

and supportive conditions and structures.

Technology and Livelihood Education refer to a subject in the secondary public schools being focus of the

study within the Municipality of Maramag, Bukidnon.

Technology and Livelihood Education teachers are educators specialized in teaching Technology and

Livelihood Education in the secondary public schools being studied in the Municipality of Maramag,

Bukidnon.

Teachers’ performance refers to the educator’s effectiveness and quality of TLE teachers in the secondary

public schools in the Municipality of Maramag, Bukidnon.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter contains the conceptual framework and a review of the related literature of the study. Literature is

presented in terms of the variables under investigation.

Review of Related Literature and Studies

Professional Development

Professional development (PD) is a continuous process aimed at enhancing the skills, knowledge, and

effectiveness of educators and other professionals. According to Darling-Hammond, Hyler, and Gardner

(2017), effective PD involves active learning, sustained engagement, and is content-focused, directly

influencing teaching practices and student achievement. In addition, professional development (PD) plays a

vital role in improving student learning outcomes. According to the Education Commission II (2024), PD

programs in the Philippines that focus on 21st-century skills, technology integration, collaboration, and

curriculum alignment significantly enhance teachers’ instructional competence, which consequently leads to

improved student achievement. Similarly, Reyes and Dela Cruz (2024 found that PD initiatives improved

teachers’ classroom practices, lesson planning, assessment techniques, and overall teaching quality, which

fostered a more positive and engaging learning environment.

For Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers, whose curriculum emphasizes technical and

practical skills, professional development provides not only theoretical knowledge but also hands-on training,

technological support, and opportunities for specialization. Moreover, higher instructional competence among

TLE teachers strengthened through continuous professional development and graduate studies was positively

correlated with improved teaching performance and student engagement. However, Anderson (2023) noted

that challenges such as limited access to instructional materials, heavy workloads, and inadequate

technological resources still hinder the full potential of professional development programs in sustaining long-

term teacher and student growth.

Shared and supportive leadership is one of the components of professional development that refers to

leadership practices where decision-making and responsibility are distributed among members of an

organization rather than concentrated in a single leader. In the context of education and professional

development (PD), this leadership style fosters an inclusive culture where teachers and staff feel empowered to

contribute ideas and shape their learning experiences. According to Harris (2014), shared leadership creates a

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5487

www.rsisinternational.org

collaborative environment that enhances teacher motivation and professional growth by promoting trust and

accountability among colleagues.

Furthermore, research has shown that shared and supportive leadership positively influences professional

development by creating conditions for meaningful, sustained learning. A study by Leithwood and Sun (2018)

found that schools with distributed leadership models had higher levels of teacher engagement in PD activities.

This engagement was linked to increased collaboration, collective problem-solving, and a stronger sense of

ownership over PD initiatives. The study emphasizes that when teachers are actively involved in shaping PD,

the relevance and effectiveness of these programs improve significantly.

Similarly, Wenner & Campbell (2017) emphasized that shared leadership not only boosts the implementation

of PD practices but also supports a culture of continuous improvement. Teachers in environments with

supportive leadership report greater satisfaction with PD experience and a stronger commitment to applying

new strategies in their classrooms. The study also underscores the importance of leadership support in

providing time, resources, and emotional backing for professional learning, especially during times of change

or reform.

Effective shared leadership in PD involves several key mechanisms, including the establishment of

Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), distributed leadership roles, and active communication channels.

PLCs, as described by DuFour (2015), are collaborative groups where teachers engage in data-driven

discussions, reflect on teaching practices, and co-develop strategies for improvement. Shared leadership within

PLCs ensures that all members contribute to decision-making, enhancing the overall impact of professional

learning activities. The role of school administrators in fostering supportive leadership is also crucial.

According to research by Hallinger and Heck (2015), principals who distribute leadership responsibilities and

provide consistent support enable teachers to take more initiative in their professional learning. This supportive

environment has been linked to higher rates of teacher retention and greater adaptability to new educational

practices.

Another component of professional development is the shared values and a common vision, which are

fundamental to effective professional development in education. This element fosters coherence and a unified

approach among teachers, administrators, and other stakeholders. When educators share a common purpose

and align their efforts, professional learning becomes more meaningful and impactful, supporting sustained

school improvement. Moreso, these elements foster coherence and a unified approach among teachers,

administrators, and other stakeholders. When educators share a common purpose and align their efforts,

professional learning becomes more meaningful and impactful, supporting sustained school improvement.

According to Senge (2014), shared vision serves as a driving force, motivating all members of the educational

community to work collaboratively towards common goals.

In addition, professional development anchored in shared values fosters an environment where teachers feel a

strong sense of belonging and commitment. DuFour & Fullan (2015) emphasize that professional learning

communities (PLCs) thrive when there is a collective understanding of the school’s mission and values. This

shared sense of purpose aligns teachers' professional development goals with the broader aims of the school,

enhancing engagement and ensuring that PD activities are relevant and focused.

A study of Hord (2016) demonstrated that schools with a clearly articulated vision and shared values among

staff members experienced higher levels of teacher collaboration and a stronger sense of community. These

schools reported greater success in implementing new instructional practices, as teachers were motivated to

work together and support one another in achieving the school’s vision for student success.

Collective learning and application is another component in professional development, which emphasizes

collaboration among educators to improve teaching practices and student outcomes. Accordingly, structured

collaboration helps educators refine and implement instructional strategies effectively. The study revealed that

shared leadership and continuous support from school administrators, such as principals, are critical to

sustaining PLCs (Emerald Insight, 2023).

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5488

www.rsisinternational.org

Supportive conditions in professional development play a crucial role in sustaining effective professional

learning communities (PLCs). Gavin Publishers (2019) highlighted that administrative support and structural

organization are fundamental in promoting effective PLCs. Providing time and space specifically for

professional collaboration ensures that teachers can engage meaningfully in shared practices. Enabling school

structures fosters a culture of trust and collaboration, empowering teachers to engage in collective learning.

A study of Emerald Insight (2023) indicated that supportive organizational frameworks, such as streamlined

communication and teacher autonomy in decision-making, significantly contribute to PLC sustainability and

effectiveness. Teachers in schools with well-established supportive structures often demonstrate higher

engagement in professional development activities. Examples include mentoring programs and scheduled team

meetings, which are shown to increase teaching efficacy and knowledge application (Academia, 2020).

In addition, the role of innovative PLCs in promoting sustainable educational practices through digital

transformation found that effective PLCs integrate formal structures with broader, informal collaborative

networks, fostering innovation and sustainable pedagogical shifts. By incorporating digital tools and shared

strategies, PLCs enhance teacher efficacy, contributing to improved teaching quality and student performance.

The findings emphasize that PLCs should remain dynamic, adapting to evolving educational landscapes to

maintain relevance and impact (Kustec et al., 2024).

A study of Capraro et al. (2016) empahasized that PLCs, particularly those that focus on project-based learning

and sustained professional development, foster environments where teachers can engage in collaborative

reflection. This leads to significant improvements in both teaching practices and student achievement are key

factors in its success (Learning Policy Institute, 2020).

Moreover, effective professional development involves engaging teachers directly in learning activities, such

as designing and applying new teaching strategies in their own classrooms. It also highlights the importance of

providing sustained, reflective practices that lead to lasting changes in teaching behaviors. Active learning, in

particular, is crucial, as it ensures that teachers are not passive recipients but active participants in shaping their

teaching practices (Learning Policy Institute, 2017).

Additionally, effective Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) depend heavily on supportive structural

conditions. For instance, Harris, Jones, and Huffman (2017) highlight that PLCs must include scheduled

collaboration time, adequate resources, and strong administrative support to foster teacher professional growth

and lead meaningful educational reform globally. They illustrate how focused teacher collaboration drives

systemic school improvement by addressing authentic teaching and learning challenges within a structured

environment.

The importance of structural supports, such as dedicated collaboration time and access to expert guidance, in

fostering successful professional development (PD) for teachers. In particular, Darling-Hammond, Hyler, and

Gardner (2017) highlight that creating organizational structures that prioritize PD, such as scheduling regular

time for collaboration, increases teacher engagement and enhances the practical application of new strategies.

These structures help to build a culture of continuous improvement and provide teachers with the resources

and support necessary for effective implementation of new practices. The study stresses that schools should

ensure that PD is embedded within the workday and supported by school leadership to increase participation

and create a sense of shared purpose among teachers.

According to DuFour et al. (2016), successful Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) require clear

communication, leadership support, and dedicated time for collaboration to foster teacher innovation and

teamwork. Similarly, Darling-Hammond, Hyler, and Gardner (2017) emphasize that when professional

development is embedded within well-supported school systems with adequate resources, leadership backing,

and coherent policies, that leads to sustained teacher growth and better student outcomes.

A study by Hamilton Broad (2015) highlighted significant structural barriers to professional development

(PD), such as rigid schedules, limited resources, and increased workload, particularly in the further education

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5489

www.rsisinternational.org

sector. The research found that such conditions often hinder meaningful engagement in PD and may lead to

performative compliance rather than substantive growth.

Moreover, Avalos (2018) conducted a comprehensive review of professional development in Teaching and

Teacher Education, noting how continuous learning opportunities contribute to long-term instructional

improvement. Similarly, Avalos-Bevan et al. (2018) highlighted the importance of systemic support for

sustained professional learning, showing that teachers thrive when professional development is backed by

organizational structures.

A study of Gonzales & Magsayo (2024) found that collaborative practices among TLE teachers led to stronger

professional development outcomes, reinforcing Desimone’s model of active, sustained learning. Likewise,

Dela Cruz and Umali (2021) emphasized the value of collaborative teaching practices, which enhanced lesson

planning and classroom delivery among TLE educators. Almodovar and Tugade (2023) demonstrated how

shared values in schools can strengthen TLE instruction, promoting a unified direction for teacher growth.

Further, Gutierrez (2019) explored teachers’ lived experiences with professional development in a public

school, revealing that supportive leadership and peer networks play an essential role in sustaining engagement.

DuFour and Fullan (2020) and Vescio et al. (2018) supported the concept of Professional Learning

Communities (PLCs) as essential structures for developing teaching practice and improving school outcomes.

The Department of Education (DepEd, 2016; 2017; 2019; 2022) also institutionalized learning action cells

(LACs) and national standards to guide professional growth aligned with the Philippine Professional Standards

for Teachers.

Digital Literacy

Digital literacy is the ability to effectively use digital technologies to find, evaluate, create, and communicate

information in a variety of contexts. According to Ng (2019), digital literacy encompasses technical, cognitive,

and socio-emotional dimensions, all of which are essential for participating fully in the digital world.

UNESCO (2021) defines it as the set of skills, knowledge, and attitudes that enable individuals to use digital

tools safely, critically, and creatively for lifelong learning and active citizenship. For teachers, especially in

technical and vocational fields such as Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE), digital literacy is vital in

integrating technology into instruction, developing digital teaching materials, and engaging learners in

innovative ways (Acedo & Hughes, 2020).

Furthermore, Hatlevik and Christophersen (2023) emphasize that teachers with higher levels of digital literacy

tend to create more interactive, student-centered learning environments, leading to improved motivation and

performance among students. In the Philippine context, the Department of Education (DepEd, 2022) has

reinforced digital literacy as part of its Digital Rise Program, promoting ICT integration and capacity-building

to prepare both teachers and learners for 21

-century education.

A study assessing TLE teachers' performance found that those who effectively use digital technologies

received high ratings from students for their instructional skills and engagement methods. The effective use of

technology was correlated with improved classroom management and personalized instruction techniques.

Moreover, frameworks like TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) have been instrumental

in guiding teachers to combine digital skills with subject expertise. Training programs emphasizing digital

literacy have been shown to increase TLE teachers' confidence in utilizing various educational technologies to

foster interactive learning environments.

Digital literacy's impact on productivity is also well-documented in educational settings. According to

Nikolopoulou & Gialamas (2016) teachers with strong digital skills were able to manage classroom activities

more effectively, resulting in improved student performance and engagement. Digital literacy extends beyond

the ability to use technology for communication and information retrieval.

In addition, Tang & Chaw (2016) mentioned that digital literacy extends beyond basic technical skills to

include cognitive and social-emotional dimensions. Components such as the ability to evaluate and synthesize

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5490

www.rsisinternational.org

information, navigate digital environments ethically, and collaborate effectively online. It also highlights the

importance of adapting digital literacy frameworks as technology and societal needs evolve.

Additionally, Rini et al. (2022) and Karagul et al. (2021) underlined the significant role of self-directed

learning and educational settings in enhancing digital literacy. These studies suggest that fostering autonomy

and providing structured digital learning experiences can significantly boost digital literacy among students.

These findings align with the increasing recognition of digital literacy as a crucial competency for navigating

the complexities of modern education and professional environments.

Further, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2016) stressed that digital

literacy is critical for preparing students for the workforce. As more jobs require proficiency with technology,

students must be equipped with the skills to work with digital tools, solve complex problems, and adapt to

technological advancements. In fact, digital literacy is seen as a fundamental aspect of lifelong learning, with

students needing to develop these competencies to thrive in a knowledge-based economy.

A study by Lee (2021) highlights that mid-career teachers, typically those with significant classroom

experience, are particularly adept at integrating digital tools into teaching practices. Continuous professional

development programs tailored for digital literacy significantly enhance their ability to create interactive and

diverse learning activities, track student progress, and collaborate effectively with peers. These programs also

help teachers stay current with technological advancements, ensuring the practical application of digital skills

in the classroom.

Similarly, Miller et al. (2020) emphasized the critical role of digital literacy in fostering innovative teaching

strategies. Their findings suggest that teachers who engage in regular digital literacy training can better align

technology with pedagogical goals, leading to improved student engagement and learning outcomes.

Furthermore, a study by Johnson & Brown (2023) underscored the importance of addressing gaps in digital

literacy skills among educators. They found that integrating digital literacy training into teacher education and

ongoing professional development programs fosters a culture of innovation and equips teachers to meet the

demands of modern classrooms effectively.

Voogt et al. (2015) argue that digital literacy is essential for teachers to foster 21st-century skills in their

students. In an increasingly connected world, teachers must model the use of digital technologies, not just for

accessing information but also for collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity. This requires teachers to

engage in continuous learning to stay updated on emerging technologies and pedagogical strategies.

Val & Lopez-Bueno (2024) explored teacher education programs across various countries and emphasized that

despite teachers receiving technical training, gaps remain in their ability to bridge digital inequalities

effectively. Their findings suggest that training programs should include not only technical skills but also

strategies to overcome the digital divide and incorporate digital tools in meaningful ways that address diverse

classroom needs.

Another study by Choudhary & Bansal (2022) reviewed the effectiveness of Digital Literacy Training

Programs (DLTPs) in reducing digital inequalities, particularly among marginalized groups. They found that

well-designed programs that address barriers like access to technology and digital skills gaps can significantly

improve equitable educational outcomes. The study highlights the importance of tailoring programs to the

specific needs of teachers and students while providing robust support systems. These findings reinforce the

need for comprehensive and adaptive approaches in teacher training and professional development to ensure

that digital literacy initiatives are inclusive and effective.

Digital literacy also plays a crucial role in student engagement. According to Johnson et al. (2016), students

who are digitally literate are more likely to engage in collaborative learning, use digital platforms for

communication, and take ownership of their learning. Digital tools provide students with personalized learning

experiences and immediate feedback, which can increase motivation and academic achievement. On the other

hand, collaborative learning and digital literacy highlights that collaborative learning (CL) in digital

environments enhances critical thinking, problem-solving, and social interaction. Studies suggest that students

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5491

www.rsisinternational.org

in digitally enriched CL settings function as resources for each other, engaging in peer discussions, sharing

ideas, and making joint decisions. This approach fosters both cognitive and social skills critical for 21

-century

learning (Ramadevi et al., 2023; Schunk & Greene, 2017).

A case study on language education during the pandemic argued for digital pedagogy that promotes

participatory culture. It suggested that fostering interactive, student-centered digital environments encourages

the development of digital literacy. This includes creating diverse online content and facilitating collaborative

interactions through digital tools, preparing students for broader digital communication demands (Ju-Zaveroni

& Lee, 2023).

Furthermore, Wang et al. (2014) found that students with higher levels of digital literacy are more confident in

their ability to use technology for problem-solving, researching, and producing digital projects. These students

show greater persistence and motivation when faced with challenges related to technology, as they believe in

their ability to find solutions. The confidence fostered by digital literacy leads to better learning outcomes,

particularly in environments that require independent use of digital resources.

Shin and Kang (2014) suggested that teachers who are comfortable with digital tools and have a strong

foundation in digital literacy are more likely to integrate technology into their teaching methods. This

confidence allows teachers to explore innovative teaching strategies, such as flipped classrooms or blended

learning, which rely heavily on digital technologies.

A study of Antonietti et al. (2022) found that teachers' digital competence significantly influences their

willingness to adopt technology in classrooms. Professional development focused on technology enhances

confidence, leading to improved teaching practices in vocational education.

In addition, Basilotta Gomez Pablos et al. (2022) reviewed digital competencies in higher education. The study

highlighted the role of targeted professional development in fostering confidence and continuous learning

among educators. Therefore, effective professional development programs are vital for building both digital

literacy and confidence.

Furthermore, according to Tondeur et al. (2017), digital literacy is crucial for reducing digital anxiety, as

individuals with higher digital literacy levels tend to feel more confident when interacting with technology.

Conversely, Liu et al. (2016) argued that those with lower levels of digital literacy are more likely to

experience anxiety, particularly in environments that require them to use technology for communication,

learning, or work-related tasks.

Aydin (2018) further elaborated that digital literacy plays a significant role in reducing anxiety related to

technology. His study on university students revealed that a lack of digital literacy directly correlated with

increased anxiety when tasked with using digital tools for academic work. The anxiety stemmed not only from

a lack of competence but also from fears of making mistakes in a digital environment, which was exacerbated

by the high stakes of academic success.

In the context of education, students' digital literacy and the resulting anxiety have been studied extensively.

Van Deursen et al. (2015) examined the impact of digital literacy on students’ anxiety levels during online

learning. Their research found that students who struggled with digital tools such as online platforms, digital

content creation, and virtual communication faced higher levels of anxiety, which negatively impacted their

academic performance and engagement.

Liu et al. (2016) conducted a study that examined how digital literacy affects students’ online learning

experiences. Their findings indicated that students who had limited digital skills were more likely to

experience anxiety when engaging with online courses. Students with higher levels of digital literacy,

however, were more confident and felt more in control, resulting in better academic outcomes. The study

suggests that improving students' digital literacy through targeted training programs can help reduce anxiety

and improve their learning experience.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5492

www.rsisinternational.org

Teachers face challenges related to digital literacy and anxiety. Pillay et al. (2017) explored the anxiety levels

of teachers when using technology in their classrooms. Their study found that teachers with lower levels of

digital literacy experienced significant anxiety when asked to use new technologies, particularly those related

to online teaching platforms, educational apps, and digital assessments. The anxiety was further amplified by

the pressure to integrate technology into their teaching practices effectively. The study emphasized that

building digital literacy through professional development programs is essential for alleviating teachers'

anxiety and enhancing their confidence in using technology.

Chien et al. (2018) also investigated how teachers’ digital literacy affects their anxiety levels. They found that

teachers who felt more confident in their digital abilities were less likely to experience anxiety and were more

willing to experiment with technology to enhance learning. On the other hand, teachers with low digital

literacy often avoided using new technologies, which could negatively impact their teaching effectiveness and

students' engagement.

The importance of professional development and training programs in lessening digital anxiety has been a

focus of research in recent years. Looney (2017) highlighted that structured digital literacy training programs

significantly reduce anxiety by building both technical skills and confidence. His study found that when

teachers received ongoing support and training in using digital tools, their anxiety levels decreased.

Similarly, Cakir and Karal (2018) reported that after teachers underwent digital literacy training, their anxiety

about using technology for teaching purposes was significantly reduced. The study suggests that well-designed

professional development programs focused on digital literacy can help mitigate feelings of anxiety and

improve teachers’ digital skills.

For students, Sahin and Sadi (2017) found that incorporating digital literacy training into the curriculum can

reduce anxiety related to online learning environments. Their research revealed that students who participated

in digital literacy workshops before taking online courses experienced lower anxiety levels and reported higher

satisfaction with their learning experiences. This study emphasized the importance of equipping students with

essential digital skills to reduce digital anxiety in academic settings.

Several factors contribute to digital anxiety, including lack of access to technology, previous negative

experiences, and individual personality traits. Ghavifekr et al. (2016) discussed the digital divide as a

contributing factor to anxiety. They observed that students from underprivileged backgrounds often experience

greater levels of anxiety because they have less exposure to technology, both at home and in school. This lack

of experience with digital tools makes them feel unprepared to use technology effectively, which can increase

stress and anxiety.

Additionally, Liu et al. (2020) highlighted those personal factors, such as age and previous exposure to digital

technologies, can influence levels of digital anxiety. Older adults or individuals who did not grow up with

technology may experience heightened anxiety due to unfamiliarity with digital environments, a phenomenon

known as technophobia.

TLE Teachers’ Performance

Globally, the teaching of technical and vocational education, which includes TLE subjects, has been the focus

of numerous studies aimed at improving teacher performance and student outcomes. According to a report by

UNESCO (2018), effective vocational education teachers must possess a blend of pedagogical skills, technical

expertise, and a commitment to lifelong learning. The study emphasized that TLE teachers should engage in

continuous professional development to keep up with evolving industry standards and technological

advancements.

Moreover, the Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers’ performance plays a crucial role in

developing students’ technical, entrepreneurial, and life skills necessary for productivity and employability.

According to Castillo and Dela Peña (2019), TLE teachers are expected to demonstrate competence not only in

content knowledge but also in practical skills, instructional delivery, and classroom management to ensure

effective learning outcomes. Their performance is often evaluated through the Philippine Professional

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5493

www.rsisinternational.org

Standards for Teachers (PPST), which emphasize pedagogy, learning environment, and professional

engagement (Department of Education, 2017).

Flores (2025) found that the instructional competence of TLE teachers is strongly correlated with their

students’ performance, particularly when teachers engage in continuous professional development, skills

upgrading, and the integration of technology in teaching.

Similarly, Perez and Medina (2021) reported that high-performing TLE teachers exhibit creativity and

adaptability in contextualizing lessons to local livelihood industries, allowing students to connect classroom

learning to real-world applications. However, Santos (2022) noted that challenges such as inadequate facilities,

lack of instructional materials, and limited industry linkages often affect TLE teachers’ ability to perform

effectively. Addressing these gaps through administrative support, training, and resource provision can

enhance teacher performance and, ultimately, student achievement in TLE.

A study conducted by Wesselink et al. (2015) in Europe highlighted the importance of competency-based

education in vocational teaching. The research revealed that teachers who implemented competency-based

frameworks were better able to prepare students for real-world challenges, particularly in technical fields. The

study also stressed that teacher performance was significantly enhanced when educators had access to modern

teaching tools and industry partnerships. Similarly, research in Australia by Smith and Yasukawa (2017)

underscored the need for government support in providing TLE teachers with professional development

opportunities to ensure high-quality instruction.

In the Philippine context, TLE education is integral to preparing students for livelihood opportunities and

technical careers. National studies have focused on various factors that impact TLE teachers' performance,

including their educational background, professional training, and teaching environment. According to a study

by the Department of Education (DepEd) (2019), one of the primary challenges faced by TLE teachers is the

lack of access to updated teaching materials and resources. The study highlighted that despite the

government’s efforts to improve TLE infrastructure, many schools, particularly in rural areas, still struggle

with outdated equipment and limited funding.

Teacher performance has been widely studied in relation to leadership, digital literacy, and instructional

practices. Ballesteros and Dela Peña (2023) examined assessment strategies among TLE teachers and found

that clear planning and reflective tools like the IPCRF contribute to improved outcomes. Reyes and Molina

(2021) also pointed out how PLCs enhance teachers’ planning and assessment, strengthening instructional

quality in Philippine secondary schools.

Llego and Valera (2023) emphasized that curriculum relevance and collaboration directly influence how well

TLE teachers deliver lessons suited to learners’ needs. Balyer and Özcan (2022), as well as Hulpia et al.

(2018), highlighted how shared leadership and supportive environments increase teacher job satisfaction and

innovation key aspects tied to improved performance.

In terms of technology integration, Garcia and Carreon (2021) reported that access to technology positively

influences the teaching effectiveness of TLE teachers, especially in rural schools. Bautista and Soriano (2024)

also found that digital tools for reporting and communication boost teacher engagement and collaboration.

Perez and Soriano (2024) suggested that aligning teachers’ philosophies with national standards results in

better student outcomes, further linking values driven instruction to measurable teacher performance.

Garcia and Santos (2020) conducted a study exploring the influence of teacher qualifications on performance

in the TLE classroom. Their research revealed that teachers with specialized degrees or certifications in

technical fields were more effective in delivering TLE lessons compared to those with general education

backgrounds. Moreover, the study emphasized the importance of ongoing professional development, noting

that teachers who regularly attended workshops and training sessions demonstrated greater adaptability in

integrating modern teaching strategies.

A study by Fernandez and Rivera (2019) focused on the integration of technology in TLE instruction. The

research highlighted the benefits of digital literacy training for teachers, with findings showing that tech-savvy

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5494

www.rsisinternational.org

educators were more capable of using digital tools to enhance student learning. However, the study also

pointed out the digital divide between urban and rural schools, with the latter facing significant barriers in

accessing technology and internet resources.

Another significant study by Villanueva (2018) examined the impact of school leadership and administrative

support on TLE teachers' performance. The findings indicated that school administrators who actively

supported TLE programs through resource allocation and teacher mentoring contributed to improved teacher

motivation and instructional quality. The study called for more collaboration between schools and local

industries to bridge the gap between classroom instruction and real-world applications.

At the local level, several studies have provided insights into the unique challenges and opportunities faced by

TLE teachers in different regions of the Philippines. Manalili (2022) conducted a case study on TLE teachers

in a rural province, revealing that limited access to resources and large class sizes were major obstacles to

effective teaching. Despite these challenges, the study highlighted that teachers who developed strong

community ties and sought external partnerships were able to supplement their instructional resources and

improve student engagement.

In another local study, Dela Cruz (2021) examined the use of indigenous materials in TLE classes in

Mindanao. The research found that teachers who adapted their lessons to the local context, using readily

available materials for practical demonstrations, were able to provide more relevant and effective instruction.

This approach not only enhanced students' understanding of livelihood skills but also fostered a greater

appreciation for local culture and resources. Lopez (2020) studied the impact of teacher collaboration on TLE

performance in urban schools. The research found that schools that encouraged TLE teachers to work together

in planning lessons and sharing best practices saw a significant improvement in teaching quality. The study

concluded that peer collaboration provided teachers with a support system, allowing them to innovate and

improve their teaching methods.

Finally, Navarro (2017) focused on classroom management strategies used by TLE teachers in a highly

populated public high school in Manila. The study revealed that teachers who employed structured routines

and safety protocols in practical lessons experienced fewer classroom disruptions. Effective classroom

management was found to be particularly important in TLE, where students handle tools and equipment,

requiring an environment that prioritizes both learning and safety.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework is anchored from Desimone’s (2009) model of effective professional development.

The Desimone’s (2009) model of effective professional development provides a widely recognized framework

for understanding how professional development activities impact teacher learning and ultimately student

outcomes. Desimone’s model provides a research-based foundation for designing professional development

programs that have a real impact on teaching quality and student achievement. By focusing on these key

elements, professional development programs can be more effective in fostering substantial and lasting

improvements in teacher performance.

Ng’s (2012) digital literacy framework emphasizes the comprehensive skills needed for individuals to

effectively use digital technology in modern educational environments. This digital literacy framework, when

combined with models for assessing teacher performance, provides a strong theoretical base for examining

how teachers' professional growth and digital competencies influence their effectiveness. Performance

assessment models for teachers typically evaluate their ability to plan and deliver instruction, manage

classroom environments, and foster student engagement and achievement. For TLE teachers, these

assessments also measure how well they integrate practical skills and digital tools into their curriculum.

Together, Ng’s (2012) framework and the performance assessment models help to explore the complex

relationship between professional development, digital literacy, and teaching effectiveness. By enhancing

digital literacy and providing targeted professional development, TLE teachers can be better equipped to

deliver high-quality, relevant instruction that meets the evolving demands of education and industry.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5495

www.rsisinternational.org

This study adhered to the application of Desimone’s conceptual framework that focuses on the critical features

of effective PD referred to as (1) content focus – denotes PD that are centered on specific areas of knowledge

and teaching strategies (pedagogies) associated with the content, (2) active learning – refers to engaging

teachers in interactive PD activities that provide them with an opportunity to engage in activities like

observation, feedback exchange, making a presentation, coaching, mentoring, or discussing on their teaching

practice as opposed to passively sitting in a lecture, (3) coherence – discusses to the point to which PD

activities are consistent with teachers’ knowledge and beliefs, and with school curriculum and goals, the needs

of students, and relevant reforms and policies among others, (4) sustained duration – represents the length of

time over which the PD engagement spans, and (5) collective participation – refers to a group of two or more

teachers from the same grade, subject, or school who participate in PD activities together to learn from one

another. Collective participation provides teachers with the opportunity to engage in inquiry and reflection-

based PD practices allowing them to take risks and solve problems in their practice (Desimone 2009;

Hochberg and Desimone 2010; Desimone and Garet 2015; Palmer and Noltemeyer 2019). These theories

collectively support the investigation of how professional development and digital literacy impact the

performance of TLE teachers.

Research Paradigm

Independent Variables Dependent Variable

Figure 1. The figure shows the relationship between professional development and digital literacy to the

performance of TLE teachers.

Hypotheses of the Study

The purpose of this study was to assess the level of professional development, digital literacy, and performance

of TLE teachers. Thus, this claim lead to the following null hypothesis tested at a 0.05 level of significance.

Professional Development

a. Shared and Supportive

Leadership

b. Shared Values and Vision

c. Collective Learning and

Application

d. Supportive Conditions-

Structures

Digital Literacy

a. Productivity

b. Importance

c. Confidence

d. Anxiety

TLE Teachers’ Performance

a. Content Knowledge

and Pedagogy;

b. Learning Environment

and Diversity of

Learners;

c. Curriculum and

Planning;

d. Assessment and

Reporting; and

e. Personal Growth and

Professional

Development

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5496

www.rsisinternational.org

There is no significant relationship that exists between TLE teachers’ performance and:

a. Professional Development; and

b. Digital literacy

There is/are no variable/s that best predict TLE teachers’ performance.

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research locale, research design, respondents of the study, the research instrument,

data gathering procedure, ethical considerations, and the statistical analysis employed.

Research Design

This study employed a descriptive-correlational research design to examine the levels of professional

development, digital literacy, and performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers. This

design was suitable for addressing research questions and objectives, as it allows for a systematic investigation

of existing conditions and the relationships among variables without manipulating them (Creswell, 2014). In

educational research, descriptive-correlational designs are useful when the goal is to understand how variables

interact in real-world settings, especially when experimental control is not feasible or ethical (Gay, Mills, &

Airasian, 2012).

The descriptive component of the design was used to provide a detailed account of the current levels of

professional development, digital literacy, and teaching performance among TLE teachers in public secondary

schools in Maramag, Bukidnon. This helped establish a baseline understanding of the conditions and

competencies present in the field.

The correlational aspect of the design aimed to determine whether statistically significant relationships exist

between professional development and digital literacy, and the performance of TLE teachers. Identifying these

patterns and measuring the strength of associations among these variables, contributes to a deeper

understanding of how teacher capacity building efforts translate into classroom effectiveness (Fraenkel,

Wallen, & Hyun, 2019).

Additionally, a predictive component was incorporated to determine which variables either individually or in

combination serve as the strongest predictors of TLE teachers’ performance. This approach is grounded in the

principle that correlational studies can go beyond identifying relationships to estimating future outcomes based

on existing data (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2019). Through regression analysis, the study sought to identify which

aspects of professional development and digital literacy most significantly influence teaching performance.

Locale of the Study

This study was conducted among public secondary schools in the Municipality of Maramag, namely:

Bukidnon National School of Home Industries, Dologon National High School – Main, Dologon National

High School – Kiharong Annex, Dologon National High School – San Roque Annex, San Miguel National

High School, Kuya National High School, Dagumbaan Integrated School, La Roxas National High School, and

Musuan Integrated School. These schools were included in the study to gain a comprehensive understanding of

the current state of professional development, digital literacy, and teacher performance among Technology and

Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers in the municipality.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5497

www.rsisinternational.org

Map of the Locale of the Study

Maramag - Google Maps

Legend: the locale of the study

Figure 2. Map of Municipality of Maramag, Bukidnon, showing the secondary public schools.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of this study were the Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers from all public

secondary schools in the Municipality of Maramag, Bukidnon. A total of seventy four (74) TLE teachers

served as respondents of the study through total enumeration, wherein all TLE teachers from the following

schools were included: Bukidnon National School of Home Industries, Dologon National High School – Main,

Dologon National High School – Kiharong Annex, Dologon National High School – San Roque Annex, San

Miguel National High School, Kuya National High School, Dagumbaan Integrated School, La Roxas National

High School, and Musuan Integrated School. Below is the distribution of the respondents of the study.

Table 1: Distribution of the respondents of the study

School

Population (N)

Bukidnon National School of Home Industries

Dologon National High School-Main

Dologon National High School- Kiharong Annex

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5498

www.rsisinternational.org

Dologon National High School-San Roque Annex

Musuan Integrated School

San Miguel National High School

Kuya National High School

La Roxas National High School

Dagumbaan Integrated School

Total

Research Instruments

The study utilized a questionnaire as the main instrument. It was designed to collect information on the three

major variables of the study: the level of professional development, digital literacy, and performance of

Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers in public secondary schools in the Municipality of

Maramag, Bukidnon. The instrument was divided into three main parts. Part I focused on the Professional

Development of TLE teachers and was adapted from the framework developed by Kruse et al. (1997). This

section included key indicators such as shared and supportive leadership, shared values and vision, collective

learning and application, and supportive conditions and structures. This section contained ten (10) statements

in each indicator, except for supportive conditions and structures which contained nine (9) statements.

Part II measured the teachers’ Digital Literacy and was adapted from the Digital Literacy Questionnaire (DLQ)

developed by Jones (2021). It included items under productivity, importance, confidence, and anxiety.

Moreover, there were twenty-four (24) statements in this part. In addition, Parts I and II of the instruments

utilized a 5-point Likert scale. The tool was modified by converting negative statements into positive ones to

enhance clarity and consistency. A pilot test was conducted to 30 teachers in the municipality of Maramag,

Maramag, Bukidnon, yielding a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.96, indicating a high level of reliability.

Part III assessed the Performance of TLE teachers patterned the Department of Education's Key Result Areas

(KRAs) from DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017. The indicators included content knowledge and pedagogy,

learning environment and diversity of learners, curriculum and planning, assessment and reporting, and

personal growth and professional development. The rating scale followed the Civil Service Commission

Memorandum Circular No. 06, series of 2012.

In determining the level of professional development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers, the

following scale was used:

Rating

Range

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Strongly Agree

Expert

3.50-4.49

Agree

Advanced

2.50-3.49

Neutral

Proficient

1.50-2.49

Disagree

Developing

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Beginning

In determining the level of digital literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers, the following

scale was used:

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5499

www.rsisinternational.org

Rating

Scale

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

3.50 – 4.49

Agree

Positive

2.50 – 3.49

Neutral

Moderately Positive

1.50 – 2.49

Disagree

Negative

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Highly Negative

In determining the level of Performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers, the following

scale was used:

Data Gathering Procedure

A formal letter of request was submitted by the researcher to the Office of the Schools Division Superintendent

(SDS) of the Department of Education, Division of Bukidnon, seeking official approval to conduct the study

among Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers. Following the issuance of approval, the

researcher coordinated with the school heads of the participating public secondary schools in the Municipality

of Maramag, Bukidnon. This coordination involved presenting the approved communication from the SDS,

discussing the purpose and significance of the study, and outlining the procedures for data collection.

Permission from the school heads was obtained before distributing the research instruments to the identified

TLE teacher-respondents. Through this coordination, schedules were arranged in consideration of the teachers’

availability so that the administration of the questionnaires would not disrupt the regular flow of classes.

The schools included in the study were Bukidnon National School of Home Industries, Dologon National High

School – Main, Dologon National High School – Kiharong Annex, Dologon National High School – San

Roque Annex, San Miguel National High School, Kuya National High School, Dagumbaan Integrated School,

La Roxas National High School, and Musuan Integrated School.

Prior to data collection, the researcher secured informed consent from the respondents and ensured that ethical

considerations were upheld, including confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation. A structured

questionnaire was used to gather the needed data, covering three main areas: (1) the level of professional

development adapted from Kruse et al (1997) in terms of shared and supportive leadership, shared values and

vision, collective learning and application, and supportive conditions–structures; (2) the level of digital literacy

adapted from Jones (2021) in terms of productivity, importance, confidence, and anxiety; and (3) the level of

teaching performance from DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017 in terms of content knowledge and pedagogy,

learning environment and diversity of learners, curriculum and planning, assessment and reporting, and

personal growth and professional development.

Rating

Range

Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Outstanding

3.50-4.49

Very Satisfactory

2.50-3.49

Satisfactory

1.50-2.49

Unsatisfactory

1.00-1.49

Poor

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5500

www.rsisinternational.org

The questionnaires were personally distributed to the respondents, and retrieval was done immediately after

they completed their responses. The collected data were then organized, tabulated, and subjected to appropriate

statistical treatment to answer the research questions and test the hypotheses of the study.

Ethical Considerations

The research was conducted in strict adherence to research ethics. Prior to the conduct of the study, permission

was sought from the proper authorities, including the school division superintendent, public school district

supervisor, school principal, community leaders, and the Institutional Ethics Review Committee (IERC). A

permit was also secured from Central Mindanao University to ensure ethical compliance. Informed consent

was obtained from the respondents after the researcher thoroughly explained the nature, objectives, and

procedures of the study. Participants were assured of the principles of confidentiality, anonymity, and

voluntary participation. They were informed that their identities would be kept strictly anonymous and that any

information gathered would be used solely for academic purposes. Furthermore, participants were assured that

they had the right to refuse to answer any questions they deemed offensive or discriminatory and could

withdraw from the study at any time should they feel uncomfortable.

Statistical Analysis

The data gathered were statistically analyzed. The levels of professional development, digital literacy, and

performance of TLE teachers, were analyzed using descriptive statistic, such as mean, standard deviation, and

percentages. To determine the relationship between professional development and digital literacy with teacher

performance, Pearson Product-Moment Correlation was employed. Furthermore, multiple regression analysis

was carried out to determine the impact of professional development and digital literacy, either individually or

in combination, to predict the performance of TLE teachers.

The schematic diagram of the methodology is shown below:

Formulation/ Revision of Professional Learning Assessment Questionnaire and Digital

Literacy Questionnaire to address the respondents

Gathering of list of respondents to all public secondary schools of Maramag, Bukidnon

Distributing of Introductory Letter and Questionnaires

Retrieval of Questionnaires

Coding and Encoding of Responses

Summarizing and Tabulation of data and

Statistical Analysis

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5501

www.rsisinternational.org

Figure 3. Schematic Diagram of the Methodology Flow

PRESENTATION. ANALYSIS. AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered in response to the research problems.

It evaluates the levels of professional development, digital literacy, and performance of TLE teachers. In

addition, it examines the significant relationships among the variables and identifies the predictor of TLE

teachers’ performance.

The Level of Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of Shared

and Supportive Leadership

Table 2: Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in Shared and

Supportive Leadership

Statements

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative

Interpretation

Decision-making takes place through committees

and communication across grade and subject

areas.

4.32

Agree

Advanced

The principal shares responsibility and rewards

for innovative actions.

4.26

Agree

Advanced

Teachers have accessibility to key information.

4.24

Agree

Advanced

The principal is proactive and addresses areas

where support is needed.

4.23

Agree

Advanced

Teachers are consistently involved in discussing

and making decisions about most school issues.

4.15

Agree

Advanced

The principal incorporates advice from teachers

to make decisions.

4.15

Agree

Advanced

Opportunities are provided for teachers to initiate

change.

4.15

Agree

Advanced

Leadership is promoted and nurtured among

teachers.

4.08

Agree

Advanced

The principal participates democratically with

teachers sharing power and authority.

3.93

Agree

Advanced

Stakeholders assume shared responsibility and

accountability for student learning without evidence

3.84

Agree

Advanced

Report Writing

End

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5502

www.rsisinternational.org

of imposed power and authority.

Weighted Mean

4.14

Agree

Advanced

Legend:

Rating

Range

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Strongly Agree

Expert

3.50-4.49

Agree

Advanced

2.50-3.49

Neutral

Proficient

1.50-2.49

Disagree

Developing

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Beginning

The data in Table 2 presents the level of professional development among Technology and Livelihood

Education (TLE) teachers in terms of shared and supportive leadership. The overall weighted mean is 4.14,

which falls under the descriptive rating of "Agree" and is interpreted as Advanced. This indicates a highly

favorable perception of shared leadership practices among TLE teachers. Among the indicators, the highest

mean value is 4.32, which corresponds to the statement “Decision-making takes place through committees and

communication across grade and subject areas,” indicating that collaborative decision-making is well-

established. On the other hand, the lowest mean value is 3.84, on the indicator “Stakeholders assume shared

responsibility and accountability for student learning without evidence of imposed power and authority,” still

rated as Advanced, but implying relatively less involvement from broader stakeholders.

In the Department of Education (DepEd), particularly in TLE instruction, shared leadership is evident and

functional. The high overall mean implies that school leaders are fostering an environment where teachers

participate actively in decision-making processes and are given autonomy to innovate. For TLE teachers, who

are often required to integrate practical, real-world skills with academic content, this level of leadership

support is crucial for developing context-based and skills-driven learning modules. However, the relatively

lower rating in stakeholder participation indicates the need for strengthening community and parental

engagement, which is vital in TLE for contextual learning and real-life application.

The results further imply that when leadership is distributed and collaborative, it enhances professional growth,

motivation, and instructional quality among TLE teachers. Teachers are more likely to initiate and sustain

improvements in teaching strategies when they feel empowered and supported. This is particularly important

in the TLE domain, where innovation, skill development, and cross-sectoral collaboration are essential. In

promoting shared leadership, DepEd can cultivate a culture of mutual respect, accountability, and continuous

learning.

These findings are supported by recent studies that emphasized the significance of shared and supportive

leadership in teacher development. According to Hallinger and Wang (2020), shared leadership positively

influences teacher commitment and student achievement. Likewise, the study of Ngang et al. (2021) revealed

that collaborative leadership practices result in higher levels of professional satisfaction and improved

instructional practices. Similarly, the work of Balyer and Ozcan (2022) emphasized that shared leadership

nurtures teacher autonomy and fosters innovation. Furthermore, the Philippine Professional Standards for

Teachers (DepEd, 2019) highlighted collaborative learning and leadership as core competencies for enhancing

teacher performance.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5503

www.rsisinternational.org

The Level of Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of

Shared Values and Vision

Table 3: Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in Shared Values and

Vision

Statements

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative

Interpretation

1. Policies and programs are aligned to the school’s

vision.

4.38

Agree

Advanced

2. A collaborative process exists for developing a shared

sense of values among teachers.

4.35

Agree

Advanced

3. Teachers share visions for school improvement that

have an undeviating focus on students’ learning.

4.34

Agree

Advanced

4. Decisions are made in alignment with the school’s

values and vision.

4.34

Agree

Advanced

5. School goals focus on students’ learning beyond test

scores and grades.

4.32

Agree

Advanced

6. A collaborative process exists for developing a shared

vision among teachers.

4.30

Agree

Advanced

7. Shared values support norms of behavior that guide

decisions about teaching and learning.

4.30

Agree

Advanced

8. Everybody has the opportunity to apply learning and

share the results of their practices.

4.27

Agree

Advanced

9. Stakeholders are actively involved in creating high

expectations that serve to increase student

achievement.

4.27

Agree

Advanced

10. Data are used to prioritize actions to reach a shared

vision.

4.24

Agree

Advanced

Weighted Mean

4.31

Agree

Advanced

Legend:

Rating

Range

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Strongly Agree

Expert

3.50-4.49

Agree

Advanced

2.50-3.49

Neutral

Proficient

1.50-2.49

Disagree

Developing

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Beginning

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5504

www.rsisinternational.org

Table 3 presents the level of professional development of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE)

teachers in relation to shared values and vision within their schools. The overall weighted mean is 4.31,

interpreted as Agree and classified as Advanced, indicating that TLE teachers perceive their schools as

strongly aligned with shared values and a unified vision for teaching and learning. The highest mean score is

4.38, corresponding to the statement “Policies and programs are aligned to the school’s vision,” suggesting that

school initiatives are consistently grounded in a clear and unified direction. Conversely, the lowest mean is

4.24, which relates to the indicator “Data are used to prioritize actions to reach a shared vision,” though still

within the Advanced category, it highlights an area where data-driven practices might be less emphasized.

The Department of Education (DepEd) has successfully cultivated a school culture where shared values and

vision guide teaching and learning. The consistent high ratings reflect a strong sense of direction among

educators, where policies and decisions are made in alignment with student-centered goals. For TLE teachers,

whose subject areas require both technical expertise and contextual relevance, alignment with a shared vision

ensures the coherence of instructional goals and practices across diverse topics and strands.

The results imply that when educators collectively understand and support the school's vision, it enhances

professional commitment, clarity of purpose, and student-focused teaching. In the context of TLE, this means

that curriculum and instruction are better tailored to real-world applications, and educators are more

empowered to innovate within a clear framework. However, the relatively lower rating in the use of data to

prioritize actions signals the need for capacity-building in evidence-based planning and decision-making,

which could further strengthen goal alignment and accountability.

The findings supported with the study of Hulpia et al. (2018), that shared vision is a critical factor in fostering

a cohesive professional culture that improves student outcomes. Similarly, Khalifa et al. (2019) emphasized

that aligning leadership practices with school values promotes inclusivity and academic success. The work of

DuFour and Fullan (2020) further stressed the importance of collective vision in driving sustainable school

improvement. Moreover, DepEd’s Learning Continuity Plan (2020) emphasizes the importance of shared goals

in ensuring educational quality, especially during transitions and reforms, and significantly influence the

motivation and instructional creativity of TLE teachers (Almodovar & Tugade, 2023).

The Level of Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of

Collective Learning and Application

Table 4: Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in Collective Learning

and Application

Statements

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative

Interpretation

Teachers work together to seek knowledge, skills,

and strategies and apply this new learning to their

work.

4.51

Strongly Agree

Expert

Teachers are committed to programs that enhance

learning.

4.46

Agree

Advanced

Collegial relationships exist among teachers that

reflect commitment to school improvement

efforts.

4.39

Agree

Advanced

Teachers plan and work together to search for

solutions to address diverse student needs.

4.36

Agree

Advanced

A variety of opportunities and structures exist for

collective learning through open dialogue.

4.35

Agree

Advanced

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5505

www.rsisinternational.org

Professional development focuses on teaching and

learning.

4.31

Agree

Advanced

Teachers collaboratively analyze multiple sources

of data to assess the effectiveness of instructional

practices.

4.31

Agree

Advanced

Teachers collaboratively analyze students’ work to

improve teaching and learning.

4.28

Agree

Advanced

Teachers engage in dialogue that reflects respect

for diverse ideas that lead to continued inquiry.

4.22

Agree

Advanced

Teachers and stakeholders learn together and

apply new knowledge to solve problems.

4.22

Agree

Advanced

Weighted Mean

4.31

Agree

Advanced

Legend:

Rating

Range

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Strongly Agree

Expert

3.50-4.49

Agree

Advanced

2.50-3.49

Neutral

Proficient

1.50-2.49

Disagree

Developing

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Beginning

Table 4 presents the professional development of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers in

terms of collective learning and application. The overall weighted mean is 4.31, with a descriptive rating of

Agree and a qualitative interpretation of Advanced, indicating that collaborative professional learning is well-

practiced among TLE teachers. The indicator with the highest mean is 4.51, corresponding to the statement

“Teachers work together to seek knowledge, skills, and strategies and apply this new learning to their work,”

interpreted as Strongly Agree and Expert level. This reflects a strong culture of collegiality and practical

application of learning. On the other hand, the lowest mean value is 4.22, shared by two indicators: “Teachers

engage in dialogue that reflects respect for diverse ideas that lead to continued inquiry” and “Teachers and

stakeholders learn together and apply new knowledge to solve problems,” both of which were still rated as

Advanced, suggesting minor areas for growth in fostering inclusive dialogue and stakeholder collaboration.

Within the Department of Education (DepEd), TLE teachers are actively engaged in a culture of shared

learning and continuous improvement. The high ratings show that teachers frequently collaborate, not only in

acquiring new knowledge but also in applying it meaningfully to classroom instruction and school programs.

For a subject like TLE, which emphasizes practical skills, project-based learning, and community engagement,

such a collaborative approach enhances teaching quality, contextual relevance, and innovation. In addition,

DepEd Order No. 35, s. 2016 continues to advocate for sustained and relevant professional development for all

teachers through collective learning structures.

Moreover, the results highlight the importance of promoting structured opportunities for collective learning

and reflective practices. Although the overall mean is high, the slightly lower scores in stakeholder

collaboration and dialogue suggest a need to enhance inclusivity and openness in learning communities. This

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5506

www.rsisinternational.org

could involve strengthening professional learning communities (PLCs), increasing joint learning opportunities

with external stakeholders, and promoting interdisciplinary dialogue that fosters innovation.

These results are consistent with existing literature that emphasizes the impact of collective learning on teacher

development. According to Vescio et al. (2018), collaboration among teachers significantly improves

instructional practices and student outcomes. Hattie (2020) also stresses the importance of collective efficacy

in schools, where shared beliefs and practices among teachers drive high-impact learning. Moreover, dela Cruz

& Umali (2021) noted that professional collaboration among TLE teachers enhances curriculum integration

and localized instruction. Similarly, Gonzales & Magsayo (2024) found that joint learning opportunities

increase teachers' confidence in addressing diverse student needs.

The Level of Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in Terms of

Supportive Conditions- Structures

Table 5 presents the professional development of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers in

terms of supportive conditions – structures. The overall weighted mean is 4.12, with a descriptive rating of

Agree and interpreted as Advanced, indicating that teachers perceive supportive structures in their schools as

generally effective. The indicator with the highest mean is 4.32, which states “Communication systems

promote a flow of information among teachers,” suggesting that strong internal communication facilitates

collaboration and learning. In contrast, the lowest-rated indicators are “Fiscal resources are available for

professional development” and “Appropriate technology and instructional materials are available to teachers,”

both with a mean of 3.85, highlighting areas where material and financial support may be less sufficient.

Table 5: Professional Development of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in Supportive

Conditions – Structures

Statements

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative

Interpretation

Time is provided to facilitate collaborative work.

4.28

Agree

Advanced

The school schedule promotes collective learning

and shared practice.

4.26

Agree

Advanced

Communication systems promote a flow of

information among teachers.

4.32

Agree

Advanced

The school facility is clean, attractive, and inviting.

4.31

Agree

Advanced

Communication systems promote a flow of

information across the entire school community

including: central office personnel, parents, and

community members.

4.23

Agree

Advanced

Resource people provide expertise and support for

continuous learning.

4.15

Agree

Advanced

Fiscal resources are available for professional

development.

3.85

Agree

Advanced

Appropriate technology and instructional materials

are available to teachers.

3.85

Agree

Advanced

Data are organized and made available to provide

3.78

Agree

Advanced

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5507

www.rsisinternational.org

easy access to teachers.

Weighted Mean

4.12

Agree

Advanced

Legend:

Rating

Range

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Strongly Agree

Expert

3.50-4.49

Agree

Advanced

2.50-3.49

Neutral

Proficient

1.50-2.49

Disagree

Developing

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Beginning

22The TLE teachers in the Department of Education (DepEd) rely heavily on resources, tools, and equipment

to deliver hands-on, skills-based instruction. While internal communication and collaborative scheduling are

strong, the relatively lower ratings for fiscal and technological resources pointed to ongoing challenges in

sustaining meaningful professional development. Without adequate funding and access to up-to-date materials,

the effectiveness of instructional delivery in TLE may be compromised despite strong collaboration among

teachers.

The results imply that while schools have developed systems and schedules that encourage professional

learning, resource allocation remains a gap that must be addressed. Effective professional development for

TLE teachers goes beyond communication and planning must include access to tools, experts, and relevant

technology. Strengthening these support systems can help ensure that training and instructional innovations are

translated into improved student outcomes, especially in technical-vocational subjects where real-world

application is key.

Several recent studies affirm these findings. According to Avalos-Bevan et al. (2018), effective professional

development requires both organizational structures and the necessary resources to sustain them. Darling-

Hammond et al. (2020) emphasize that access to instructional materials and funding significantly influences

teacher growth and classroom performance. Further, Garcia & Carreon (2021) found that limited access to

technology remains a major barrier to effective TLE instruction. Likewise, the study of Abalayan & Santos

(2023) stressed that even highly committed teachers struggle to innovate when resource support is lacking.

Level of Digital Literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of Productivity

The data presented in Table 6 reflect the perceptions of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers

regarding their level of digital literacy specifically in the aspect of productivity. With an overall mean of 4.54,

interpreted as “Strongly Agree” and “Highly Positive,” it is evident that TLE teachers highly value the role of

digital tools in improving their efficiency and work performance. Notably, the highest mean scores were

observed in the indicators “Computers would save me time” and “If I had to use a computer for some reason,

it would probably save me some time and work,” both registering a mean of 4.64. These are followed closely

by indicators such as “Computers would increase my productivity” with the mean of 4.62 and “Computers

would help me learn” with the mean of 4.59, showing a consistent trend of strong affirmation toward the use

of digital tools in enhancing task execution. Even the lowest-rated item, “Computers would help me to

organize my finances” with the mean of 4.09, still falls under the “Positive” category, affirming a generally

favorable perception across all productivity indicators.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5508

www.rsisinternational.org

Table 6: Level of Digital Literacy in terms of Productivity

Indicator

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative

Interpretation

Computers would save me time

4.64

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

If I had to use a computer for some reason, it would

probably save me some time and work

4.64

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Computers would increase my productivity

4.62

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Computers would help me learn

4.59

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Computers can help me to learn things more easily

4.59

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Having a computer available to me would improve my

productivity

4.55

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Computers would help me organize my work

4.50

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Having a computer available to me would improve my

general satisfaction

4.46

Agree

Positive

Studying about computers is a valuable and worthwhile use

of my time

4.45

Agree

Positive

Computers would help me to organize my finances

4.09

Agree

Positive

OVERALL MEAN

4.54

Strongly

Agree

Highly Positive

Legend:

Scale

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

3.50 – 4.49

Agree

Positive

2.50 – 3.49

Neutral

Moderately Positive

1.50 – 2.49

Disagree

Negative

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Highly Negative

This result reveals that the integration of digital tools is not only accepted but embraced by TLE teachers, who

acknowledge the substantial benefits of technology in reducing workload, organizing tasks, and enhancing

overall job efficiency. This is aligned with current practices implemented by the Department of Education

(DepEd) in the Philippines, such as the use of the DepEd Commons, Learning Management Systems (LMS),

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5509

www.rsisinternational.org

and digitized reporting tools like the Electronic School Form (SF). TLE teachers, whose disciplines often

involve entrepreneurial tasks, technical drafting, and ICT-based competencies, frequently utilize productivity

tools such as Google Workspace, Microsoft Office, Canva, and various online learning platforms. Their roles

often extend beyond content delivery to include documentation, student performance, and instructional

material development, activities which are significantly streamlined through digital tools.

Moreover, it becomes apparent that TLE teachers perceive digital literacy not merely as a technical skill but as

a critical enabler of professional efficacy and personal satisfaction in their teaching roles. The “Highly

Positive” interpretation across most indicators suggests readiness and openness for further integration of

technology in the educational process. This has implications for continuous professional development

programs, where emphasis can be placed not only on basic ICT skills but also on advanced applications that

improve work productivity. In addition, these insights can guide school heads and curriculum developers to

invest in sustainable digital tools and infrastructure, confident in the knowledge that TLE teachers are likely to

adopt and utilize them effectively.

These findings are supported by Dizon et al. (2021) found that public school teachers with higher levels of

digital literacy exhibited greater productivity and instructional quality, emphasizing the practical impact of ICT

skills in teaching. Similarly, Valderama (2022) reported that during the implementation of the Learning

Continuity Plan, TLE teachers who were more adept with technology were more successful in sustaining

student engagement and managing instructional tasks. Llego (2020), in a discussion of ICT integration in

DepEd, pointed out that digital tools significantly reduce clerical burdens on teachers, allowing more time for

instruction and student support. NEDA and UNICEF (2021), in their joint evaluation, confirmed that digitally

literate teachers were more effective in delivering distance learning and managing their workloads efficiently.

Moreover, Magsambol (2021) highlighted that TLE and ICT teachers often serve as digital mentors in their

schools, improving not only their own productivity but also enhancing the digital capacity of their colleagues.

Collectively, these studies affirm that digital literacy directly supports the productivity of TLE teachers and

aligns with national educational goals toward a more technologically capable teaching workforce.

Level of Digital Literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of Importance

Table 7: Level of Digital Literacy in terms of Importance

Indicator

Mean

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

I believe that it is very important

to learn how to use a computer.

4.65

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

I can learn many things when I

use a computer

4.57

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

I enjoy giving lessons using the

computer

4.54

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

I know that computers give me

opportunities to learn many new

things.

4.53

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

I believe that the more often I

use computers, the more I will

enjoy my work.

4.47

Agree

Positive

OVERALL MEAN

4.54

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

Legend:

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5510

www.rsisinternational.org

Scale

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

3.50 – 4.49

Agree

Positive

2.50 – 3.49

Neutral

Moderately Positive

1.50 – 2.49

Disagree

Negative

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Highly Negative

The data presented in Table 7 indicate the level of TLE teachers regarding the importance of digital literacy in

their professional practice. The overall mean score is 4.54, interpreted as “Strongly Agree” and qualitatively as

“Highly Positive.” The highest-rated indicator, “I believe that it is very important to learn how to use a

computer,” received a mean of 4.65, reflecting a strong consensus among teachers on the value of digital

competency in education. Similarly, other indicators such as “I can learn many things when I use a computer”

with a mean score of 4.57, “I enjoy giving lessons using the computer” with a mean score of 4.54, and “I know

that computers give me opportunities to learn many new things” with a mean score of 4.53 also received

strong agreement. Only one item, “I believe that the more often I use computers, the more I will enjoy my

work,” fell slightly below the 4.50 the threshold, with a mean of 4.47, yet it still demonstrates a positive

perception of computer use.

The result shows that TLE teachers strongly value the role of digital tools in education and view computer

literacy as a crucial component of their professional growth. These findings are consistent with the Department

of Education’s increasing emphasis on digital transformation, including the integration of ICT in teaching and

learning as outlined in the Basic Education Development Plan (BEDP) 2030. Teachers' appreciation for

computer use in instruction also mirrors ongoing initiatives such as the DepEd Computerization Program

(DCP), which equips public schools with hardware and software for technology-enhanced education. In TLE

subjects that span information and communications technology (ICT), entrepreneurship, and industrial arts,

computers are not merely supplementary but integral to effective instruction. TLE teachers often develop

digital lesson plans, multimedia presentations, and assessment tools that enhance student engagement and

learning outcomes.

It is evident that TLE teachers acknowledge the importance of digital literacy not only as a technical necessity

but as an essential tool for 21st-century education. Their strong agreement with statements emphasizing the

educational value of computers suggests a deep-seated belief in the long-term relevance of technology in

classroom instruction. This belief supports continued professional development programs focusing on digital

competence and justifies the inclusion of digital literacy as a core component of teacher training and

curriculum planning. The generally high ratings also suggest that TLE teachers are well-positioned to lead

digital innovation in their schools and to model best practices in ICT integration.

This result agreed with Cabero-Almenara and Llorente-Cejudo (2020) highlights that teachers perceived

importance of digital literacy significantly influences their integration of technology in pedagogical practice. In

the Philippine context, Llego (2020) emphasized that the national education framework has increasingly

aligned with global standards by prioritizing digital competence as a core skill for educators. Dizon et al.

(2021) also found that teachers who recognize the importance of digital tools are more proactive in acquiring

new technological skills and adapting them to instructional contexts. Meanwhile, in DepEd’s implementation

review of the DCP, Valderama (2022) reported that the success of technology-enhanced instruction often

hinges on teachers’ belief in the relevance of ICT. Lastly, UNESCO (2021) reiterated that a strong belief in the

value of digital tools fosters sustainable integration of technology in classrooms, particularly in developing

countries aiming to bridge the digital divide in public education.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5511

www.rsisinternational.org

Level of Digital Literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of Confidence

Table 8: Level of Digital Literacy in terms of Confidence

Indicator

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative

Interpretation

Working using computers would be

more interesting

4.51

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

I am sure I could learn a computer

4.51

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

I believe I am capable of doing

advanced computer work

3.28

Neutral

Moderately Positive

I enjoy the challenge of solving

problems using computers

3.07

Neutral

Moderately Positive

OVERALL MEAN

4.01

Agree

Positive

Legend:

Scale

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

3.50 – 4.49

Agree

Positive

2.50 – 3.49

Neutral

Moderately Positive

1.50 – 2.49

Disagree

Negative

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Highly Negative

The data presented in Table 8 reflect the perceptions of TLE teachers regarding their level of confidence in

using digital technology. The overall mean score is 4.01, which corresponds to a “Positive” qualitative

interpretation and a “Agree” descriptive rating. Two indicators received the highest possible category which is

“Strongly Agree”, namely, “Working using computers would be more interesting” and “I am sure I could

learn a computer”, both with a mean of 4.51, indicating a “Highly Positive” perception. In contrast, the

indicators “I believe I am capable of doing advanced computer work” (M = 3.28) and “I enjoy the challenge

of solving problems using computers” (M = 3.07) received “Neutral” responses, reflecting a “Moderately

Positive” attitude. While the overall response is optimistic, the variation in scores suggests differentiated levels

of confidence, especially in more complex digital tasks.

This result shows that it becomes evident that TLE teachers generally feel confident in basic digital tasks and

show enthusiasm for learning computer skills. However, there is a noticeable decline in confidence when it

comes to more advanced or problem-solving tasks involving technology. This suggests that while foundational

digital skills are well-established among TLE teachers, there remains a gap in self-efficacy related to more

complex digital competencies. This observation is significant in the context of the Department of Education’s

increasing push toward the full integration of ICT across all subject areas, including TLE. While the DepEd

has made strides in equipping schools with digital infrastructure through initiatives such as the DepEd

Computerization Program (DCP), the need for targeted capacity-building remains, particularly in strengthening

teachers’ higher-order ICT skills.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5512

www.rsisinternational.org

Moreover, the data reveal a dual reality: TLE teachers express confidence and interest in engaging with digital

tools but simultaneously exhibit hesitancy when dealing with advanced tasks. This indicates the importance of

differentiated and continuous professional development programs that do not only cover basic ICT literacy but

also emphasize higher-level digital skills such as troubleshooting, using subject-specific software, and

integrating technology in assessment and pedagogy. Moreover, this pattern pointed to the need for ongoing

mentorship, peer collaboration, and school-level digital support systems that encourage confidence-building in

technology use. Addressing these gaps is essential if teachers are to serve as effective digital role models and

facilitators of 21st-century learning.

Furthermore, the finding affirms Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory posits that self-efficacy plays a

critical role in how individuals approach learning and challenges, and this holds true for teachers learning new

technologies. Cruz and Serrano (2019) emphasized that while many Filipino teachers possess foundational

digital skills, their confidence in using advanced digital tools remains limited without ongoing support. Javier

and Alayon (2021) found that teachers' confidence significantly influences their frequency of digital

technology integration, especially in performance-based subjects like TLE.

Likewise, Layug et al. (2022) stressed the need for digital confidence-building as part of technology

integration training, especially when schools adopt blended or online modalities. In a more recent study,

Francisco et al. (2024) confirmed that strong digital self-efficacy correlates with effective technology use in

classrooms, particularly when teachers are engaged in continuous and reflective practice. Moreover, the

Department of Education (2023) in its ICT competency framework highlighted the importance of nurturing

digital confidence among educators to ensure successful implementation of Education 4.0 reforms.

Level of Digital Literacy of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers in terms of Handling

Anxiety

Table 9: Level of Digital Literacy in terms of Handling Anxiety

Indicator

Mean

Descriptive

Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

I feel calm and confident when

working with computers.

4.30

Agree

Positive

I am open to using computers and

enjoy learning more about them.

4.30

Agree

Positive

Working with computers makes

me feel relaxed and capable.

4.22

Agree

6Positive

I have confidence in my ability to

use computers effectively.

4.20

Agree

Positive

I feel comfortable using

computers.

4.18

Agree

Positive

OVERALL MEAN

4.24

Agree

Positive

Legend:

Scale

Descriptive Rating

Qualitative Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00

Strongly Agree

Highly Positive

3.50 – 4.49

Agree

Positive

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5513

www.rsisinternational.org

2.50 – 3.49

Neutral

Moderately Positive

1.50 – 2.49

Disagree

Negative

1.00-1.49

Strongly Disagree

Highly Negative

The data presented in Table 9 illustrate the level of digital literacy of TLE teachers in terms of handling

anxiety associated with computer use. The overall mean is 4.24, which corresponds to the descriptive rating of

“Agree” and the qualitative interpretation of “Positive.” All five indicators fall within the same category,

suggesting a consistent and favorable disposition among TLE teachers toward computer use. The highest mean

scores are shared by “I feel calm and confident when working with computers” and “I am open to using

computers and enjoy learning more about them,” both with a mean of 4.30. These are closely followed by

“Working with computers makes me feel relaxed and capable” (M = 4.22), “I have confidence in my ability to

use computers effectively” (M = 4.20), and “I feel comfortable using computers” (M = 4.18). These results

affirm that the teachers generally do not experience computer-related anxiety and, instead, express a

comfortable and accepting attitude toward digital technology.

The uniformity in responses suggests that TLE teachers have developed a significant level of ease and

emotional readiness when using computers, a factor that contributes to more effective technology integration.

Reduced anxiety in using digital tools is essential, especially for teachers in TLE subjects who are expected to

model real-world applications of technology, such as digital drafting, basic programming, budgeting, and

multimedia design. This positive outlook on using computers implies that the educators are not only familiar

with the tools but also psychologically equipped to use them without fear or hesitation. These positive

affective responses are likely the result of increasing access to ICT resources in schools, support from DepEd’s

ICT initiatives, and growing exposure to online tools during the pandemic and blended learning

implementations.

Moreover, the results imply that TLE teachers have overcome one of the most common barriers to ICT

integration: technology-related anxiety. The absence of anxiety suggests a strong foundation for developing

more advanced competencies in digital education. Teachers who feel calm and relaxed while using technology

are more likely to explore, experiment, and innovate in the classroom. This supports the need to move from

basic digital literacy to deeper pedagogical integration of ICT, particularly in project-based learning, technical

skill simulations, and entrepreneurship modules. With this emotional readiness established, future training

programs can focus more on enhancing confidence in higher-order digital skills, thereby aligning with the

goals of the MATATAG curriculum and DepEd's digital transformation strategy.

This result is supported by Mendoza and Sevilla (2019) as they observed that low anxiety levels significantly

contribute to teachers' successful technology integration, especially in performance-based subjects like TLE.

Villanueva and de Guzman (2020) further noted that teacher anxiety toward ICT has declined over the years

due to regular exposure and system-level support from DepEd. In a similar vein, Austria and Sabio (2021)

emphasized the importance of addressing affective dimensions of digital literacy, asserting that a relaxed

mindset positively influences ICT engagement and innovation in instruction. The study by Trinidad and

Magno (2023) found that teachers who exhibit low digital anxiety tend to adopt technology-driven pedagogies

more confidently and creatively. Finally, the DepEd (2023) ICT Development Report recognizes that teacher

readiness is no longer hindered by anxiety but by the need to strengthen application-level competencies,

particularly in resource-constrained schools.

Level of Performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers

Table 10 presents the Level of Performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) Teachers based

on five Key Result Areas (KRAs): Content Knowledge and Pedagogy, Learning Environment and Diversity of

Learners, Curriculum and Planning, Assessment and Reporting, and Personal Growth and Professional

Development. The overall weighted mean is 4.37, interpreted as Very Satisfactory, indicating that TLE

teachers are highly effective in performing their professional responsibilities. Among all indicators, the highest

mean value is 4.49, under KRA 5, reflecting teachers’ strong alignment with a learner-centered philosophy.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5514

www.rsisinternational.org

The lowest mean, 4.22, appears under KRA 2, related to the use of differentiated, developmentally appropriate

learning experiences, suggesting an area where further development is possible.

Table 10: Level of Performance of Technology and Livelihood Education Teachers

Indicators

Mean

Interpretation

KRA 1: Content Knowledge and Pedagogy

1. Applied knowledge of content within and across curriculum teaching

areas.

4.42

Very Satisfactory

2. Applied a range of teaching strategies to develop critical and creative

thinking, as well as other higher-order thinking skills.

4.36

Very Satisfactory

3. Used a range of teaching strategies that enhance learner achievement in

literacy and numeracy skills.

4.32

Very Satisfactory

Weighted Mean

4.34

Very Satisfactory

KRA 2: Learning Environment and Diversity of Learners

4. Managed classroom structure to engage learners, individually or in

groups, in meaningful exploration, discovery and hands-on activities

within a range of physical learning environments.

4.42

Very Satisfactory

5. Managed learner behavior constructively by applying positive and non-

violent

4.35

Very Satisfactory

6. Used differentiated, developmentally appropriate learning experiences

to address learners gender needs, strengths, interests, and experiences.

4.22

Very Satisfactory

Weighted Mean

4.33

Very Satisfactory

KRA 3: Curriculum and Planning

7. Selected, developed, organized and used appropriate teaching and

learning resources, including ICT, to address learning goals.

4.41

Very Satisfactory

8. Planned, managed and implemented developmentally sequenced

teaching and learning processes to meet curriculum requirements and

varied teaching contexts.

4.39

Very Satisfactory

9. Participated in collegial discussions that use teacher and learner

feedback to enrich teaching practice.

4.31

Very Satisfactory

Weighted Mean

4.37

Very Satisfactory

KRA 4: Assessment and Reporting

10. Monitored and evaluated learner progress and achievement using

learner attainment data.

4.46

Very Satisfactory

11. Designed, selected, organized and used diagnostic, formative and

summative assessment strategies consistent with curriculum requirements.

4.45

Very Satisfactory

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5515

www.rsisinternational.org

12. Communicated promptly and clearly the learners needs, progress, and

achievement to key stakeholders, including parents/guardians.

4.35

Very Satisfactory

Weighted Mean

4.42

Very Satisfactory

KRA 5: Personal Growth and Professional Development

13. Applied a personal philosophy of teaching that is learner-centered.

4.49

Very Satisfactory

14. Performed various related works/activities that contribute to the

teaching-learning process.

4.46

Very Satisfactory

15. Set professional development goals based on the Philippine

Professional Standards for Teachers.

4.28

Very Satisfactory

Weighted Mean

4.41

Very Satisfactory

Overall Weighted Mean

4.37

Very Satisfactory

Legend:

Rating

Range

Interpretation

4.50-5.00

Outstanding

3.50-4.49

Very Satisfactory

2.50-3.49

Satisfactory

1.50-2.49

Unsatisfactory

1.00-1.49

Poor

Content Knowledge and Pedagogy

As shown in Table 10, the Level of Performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers

under Content Knowledge and Pedagogy evaluates their mastery of subject matter and ability to apply

appropriate teaching strategies. The overall weighted mean for this KRA is 4.34, interpreted as Very

Satisfactory, reflecting that TLE teachers are highly competent in integrating content knowledge with effective

instructional approaches. The highest mean score, 4.42, was observed in the indicator “Applied knowledge of

content within and across curriculum teaching areas,” showing strong subject mastery and interdisciplinary

awareness. The lowest mean, though still rated Very Satisfactory, is 4.32 for “Used a range of teaching

strategies that enhance learner achievement in literacy and numeracy skills,” suggesting a minor area for

enhancement in integrating basic academic skills into technical lessons.

These results suggest that DepEd should continue to provide specialized content-based training for TLE

teachers, ensuring their competencies are aligned not only with the current curriculum but also with cross-

curricular goals. This includes equipping them with strategies to better embed literacy and numeracy into

practical, technical instruction as an essential skill in developing work-ready learners.

The Very Satisfactory performance indicates that TLE teachers are well-versed in their subject matter and

capable of applying diverse strategies that promote critical thinking and creativity. However, the slightly lower

score on literacy and numeracy integration calls for targeted support to enhance these foundational skills

within the technical subjects, thereby improving overall student competency.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5516

www.rsisinternational.org

These finding is supported by the study of Darling-Hammond et al. (2020), who emphasized that strong

content knowledge and pedagogy are essential for effective teaching. Similarly, Shulman’s (1987) framework

on Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) remains relevant, emphasizing the importance of combining what

teachers know with how they teach it. In addition, Gutierez (2019) noted that effective integration of core

skills into TLE instruction significantly improves student outcomes. Garcia and Ramos (2023) emphasize the

need for continuous upskilling to maintain relevance in both academic and vocational content.

Learning Environment and Diversity of Learners

As presented in Table 10 above, the Level of Performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE)

teachers under KRA 2: Learning Environment and Diversity of Learners assesses their ability to create

inclusive, engaging, and well-managed classroom environments. The weighted mean for this KRA is 4.33,

interpreted as Very Satisfactory, reflecting the teachers’ strong capacity to manage learning spaces and

accommodate student diversity. The highest-rated indicator is 4.42, for “Managed classroom structure to

engage learners in meaningful exploration and hands-on activities,” indicating that TLE teachers are

particularly skilled at facilitating experiential learning. The lowest mean, 4.22, was for “Used differentiated,

developmentally appropriate learning experiences to address learners’ gender needs, strengths, interests, and

experiences,” signaling an area for targeted improvement.

The findings suggest that DepEd should prioritize more training on inclusive and differentiated instruction for

TLE teachers. While they excel in classroom management and engagement strategies, professional

development programs should emphasize gender sensitivity, cultural responsiveness, and differentiated

pedagogical approaches to cater to diverse learners more effectively.

The strong performance in classroom management and hands-on learning highlights the alignment of TLE

instruction with practical, real-world applications. However, the relatively lower rating on differentiated and

inclusive teaching recommends that some learners’ specific needs, such as learning styles, gender

considerations, or interest-based learning might not be fully addressed. Enhancing teachers’ capacities in these

areas can result in more equitable learning outcomes and improved learner engagement.

According to Tomlinson (2021), differentiated instruction is key in addressing the wide range of abilities and

backgrounds found in any classroom. In the study of Ganal and Guiab (2020) found that while many Filipino

teachers excel in managing classrooms, they often struggle with implementing differentiated instruction due to

a lack of training and resources. Gutierez (2019) also stresses the need for culturally relevant pedagogy,

especially in public schools with diverse learners. DepEd (2022) also reaffirmed the importance of inclusive

education through policies that support gender-responsive and developmentally appropriate learning.

Additionally, Avalos-Bevan et al. (2018) stress that structural support and training are essential in helping

teachers adapt instruction to student diversity.

Curriculum and Planning

As gleaned in Table 10 above, the performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers under

KRA 3: Curriculum and Planning is evaluated based on their ability to design, implement, and reflect on

teaching and learning processes aligned with curriculum standards. The overall weighted mean is 4.37,

interpreted as Very Satisfactory, indicating that TLE teachers are highly capable in curriculum design,

planning instruction, and using feedback for improvement. The highest-rated indicator is 4.41, for “Selected,

developed, organized, and used appropriate teaching and learning resources, including ICT, to address learning

goals,” which shows their competence in utilizing diverse and modern materials. The lowest score, 4.31, was

on “Participated in collegial discussions that use teacher and learner feedback to enrich teaching practice,”

suggesting that while teachers plan effectively, there is room to enhance collaboration and reflective practice.

These results imply that DepEd should continue supporting TLE teachers with updated instructional materials

and training in ICT integration. Moreover, the Department may enhance school-based professional learning

communities to encourage regular collaborative discussions that focus on analyzing learner feedback and

adjusting practices accordingly.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5517

www.rsisinternational.org

The very satisfactory performance confirms that TLE teachers are skilled in curriculum implementation and

instructional planning. Their ability to adapt teaching resources for varied learning goals strengthens student

engagement and mastery. However, the relatively lower engagement in collegial feedback discussions suggests

a need for fostering more structured collaboration among educators to promote reflective and responsive

teaching.

DuFour and Fullan (2020) stressed that effective teaching is strengthened when educators collaboratively

engage in curriculum design and reflection. In the Philippine context, Reyes and Molina (2021) found that

teachers in strong professional learning communities demonstrated better instructional alignment and

responsiveness. According to Candilasa (2025), integrating ICT and relevant teaching resources is crucial for

effective learning, especially in technical subjects like English, Sciences, and TLE. DepEd’s PPST (2017) also

emphasized the role of reflective practice and collaborative curriculum planning. Additionally, Llego and

Valera (2023) pointed out that shared feedback loops among TLE teachers contribute to the relevance and

practicality of their lessons.

Assessment and Reporting

As shown from Table 10 above, the level of performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE)

teachers under KRA 4: Assessment and Reporting focuses on how teachers monitor, evaluate, and

communicate student learning outcomes. The overall weighted mean is 4.42, interpreted as Very Satisfactory,

indicating that TLE teachers demonstrate strong assessment literacy and are committed to using various

strategies to inform instruction and support learners. The highest-rated indicator is 4.46, for “Monitored and

evaluated learner progress and achievement using learner attainment data,” reflecting a robust use of

assessment data in guiding student development. The lowest score, though still commendable at 4.35, was on

“Communicated promptly and clearly the learners’ needs, progress, and achievement to key stakeholders,”

suggesting a slight need for improvement in family and community engagement.

The findings indicate that DepEd should continue strengthening teachers' skills in data driven assessment and

focus on enhancing communication strategies between schools and stakeholders. Providing training in results

interpretation, digital reporting tools, and parent-teacher engagement mechanisms will ensure that assessment

becomes a collaborative effort in supporting student success.

The very satisfactory performance in using diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments shows that TLE

teachers effectively gauge student learning and adjust their instruction accordingly. However, the relatively

lower score in communication implies that while data is well utilized internally, its external communication,

especially with parents and guardians could be improved for more holistic learner support and shared

accountability.

The findings align with the study conducted by Hattie (2020) which emphasized that assessment capable

teachers are key to improving student outcomes, particularly when data is used to adjust teaching in real-time.

In the local context, Ballesteros and Dela Peña (2023) found that TLE teachers who engage in frequent,

transparent communication with parents see better student performance. According to DepEd (2019),

assessment and reporting are not only instructional tools but also vital components of stakeholder

collaboration. High quality assessment practices, when paired with clear feedback, enhance learning.

Moreover, Bautista and Soriano (2024) recommend that teachers be supported with ICT based tools to

streamline the reporting process, particularly in large or multi-strand TLE classes.

Personal Growth and Professional Development

As shown in Table 10 above, the performance of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) teachers under

KRA 5: Personal Growth and Professional Development assesses teachers’ commitment to continuous learning

and self-improvement. The overall weighted mean is 4.41, interpreted as Very Satisfactory, indicating that

TLE teachers consistently engage in reflective practice and contribute to the broader teaching-learning process.

The highest-rated indicator is 4.49, for “Applied a personal philosophy of teaching that is learner-centered,”

showing that TLE teachers are guided by values that prioritize student growth and needs. The lowest mean

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5518

www.rsisinternational.org

score, 4.28, was for “Set professional development goals based on the Philippine Professional Standards for

Teachers,” which, while still very satisfactory, suggests a need for more structured and standards-aligned goal

setting.

DepEd should continue to foster teacher empowerment by supporting personalized professional growth plans

anchored on the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (PPST). Through coaching, mentoring, and

access to relevant training programs can help teachers better align their personal growth paths with national

competency frameworks.

The results affirm that TLE teachers have internalized a learner-centered approach and actively engage in

professional activities beyond classroom teaching. However, the lower rating in setting development goals

implies that while teachers value growth, they may require clearer guidance or tools to strategically align these

goals with professional standards for career progression and instructional enhancement.

The results of the study are consistent with the findings of Avalos (2018), which suggest that sustained teacher

learning stems from a deep personal commitment and alignment with professional standards. Gutierez (2019)

highlighted that reflective teachers who align their philosophy with student-centered goals perform more

effectively in diverse classrooms. According to Perez and Soriano (2024), goal-setting that aligns with the

PPST improves focus, accountability, and impact. The National Educators Academy of the Philippines

(NEAP) Transformation Framework (DepEd, 2022) also encourages personalized development pathways

guided by PPST and assert that teachers thrive best when professional development is relevant, sustained, and

connected to their teaching context.

In general, the findings imply that DepEd’s professional standards are largely being met by TLE teachers, who

demonstrate a high level of competence across multiple teaching domains. The very satisfactory ratings across

all KRAs reflect a well-rounded application of effective pedagogical strategies, student-centered instruction,

and a commitment to continuous growth. However, the lower score on differentiated instruction suggests a

need for further capacity-building on inclusive and learner-responsive practices, particularly in addressing

diverse student profiles in TLE classrooms.

In addition, the results accentuate the importance of sustained support for TLE teachers through targeted

training, updated instructional materials, and access to data-driven tools. Teachers’ high ratings in planning,

assessment, and professional development affirm their engagement in reflective practices, yet differentiation

remains a challenge, especially in heterogeneous classrooms. Strengthening training on inclusive education,

gender responsiveness, and individualized instruction will further elevate performance levels.

These findings are supported by relevant studies. According to Gutierez (2019), well-prepared teachers who

reflect learner-centered principles tend to produce better student outcomes, and there is a need for continuous

professional development that promotes inclusive and differentiated instruction in Philippine public schools.

Reyes and Molina (2021) found that performance in assessment and planning improves when teachers engage

in professional learning communities. Further, the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (DepEd,

2017) advocate for reflective practice, content mastery, and diversity-responsive strategies as core areas for

quality instruction. In addition, TLE teachers who align their personal teaching philosophy with national

standards demonstrate stronger engagement and instructional creativity (Perez & Soriano, 2024).

Relationship of Professional Development and Digital Literacy to TLE Teachers’ Performance

Table 11: Correlation analysis between Professional Development and Digital Literacy to TLE Teachers’

Performance

VARIABLES

CORRELATION

COEFFICIENT

(r)

PROBABILITY (p)

Professional Development

0.036

0.762

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5519

www.rsisinternational.org

Shared and Supportive Leadership

-0.066

0.574

lllll Emotional eE Shared Values and

Vision

0.123

0.298

c. Collective Learning and

Application

0.142

0.227

d. Supportive Conditions-

Structures

0.246

0.035

Digital Literacy

0.129

0.275

Productivity

0.339

0.003

Importance

0.089

0.451

Confidence

0.058

0.625

Handling Anxiety

0.201

0.085

* - p < 0.05, ns - not significant

The data presented in Table 11 examines the relationship between professional development and digital

literacy in relation to TLE (Technology and Livelihood Education) teachers’ performance. Among the

variables under professional development, only Supportive Conditions – Structures showed a statistically

significant positive correlation with r = 0.246, and p = 0.035, while other indicators, such as Shared and

Supportive Leadership, Shared Values and Vision, and Collective Learning and Application, demonstrated no

significant associations. On the other hand, in terms of digital literacy, the variable Productivity had a

moderately strong and statistically significant correlation to teachers’ performance with r = 0.339, and p =

0.003, whereas the other components, such as Importance, Confidence, and Handling Anxiety did not show

significant relationships.

These findings suggest that structural and environmental support, more than the content or frequency of

training, plays a crucial role in enhancing TLE teachers’ performance. The significant correlation between

supportive conditions and performance aligns with the premise that effective professional development is

contingent upon an enabling environment, which includes adequate resources, clear administrative procedures,

and organizational support. Meanwhile, the notable link between digital productivity and teacher performance

indicates that digital tools that streamline work processes and enhance instructional delivery have a tangible

impact on how teachers perform. This finding is consistent with DepEd’s ongoing efforts to integrate ICT tools

in instruction, as seen in initiatives under the Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan (BE-LCP) and the

DepEd Commons platform. However, the results also imply that mere digital familiarity or positive disposition

toward technology may not suffice unless these tools directly contribute to teachers’ instructional efficiency

and classroom outcomes.

These findings affirmed with Cancio et al. (2024) who emphasized that institutional support systems are more

predictive of teacher performance than the mere availability of training opportunities. Delos Santos and Yu

(2023) similarly noted that productivity-oriented applications such as Canva and Google Workspace

significantly enhanced teacher output and effectiveness in TLE instruction. Llego et al. (2022) reported that

despite numerous training sessions offered by DepEd, teachers often struggle to implement new strategies due

to insufficient structural and logistical support. Ramirez and Antonio (2023) also underscored the importance

of supportive leadership and formal structures in realizing school reforms and performance improvements.

Moreover, Bernardo et al. (2025) found that unless digital competencies translated into practical benefits like

time-saving or instructional quality, they had little impact on teacher performance. These studies affirmed the

conclusion that enhancing TLE teachers’ performance requires a dual focus on institutional support

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5520

www.rsisinternational.org

mechanisms and practical, productivity-enhancing digital interventions, rather than on training volume or

general digital familiarity alone.

Regression Analysis of TLE Teachers’ Performance towards Professional Development and Digital

Literacy

Table 12: Multiple Regression Analysis Between TLE Teachers’ Performance, Professional Development and

Digital Literacy

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

p-value

Std. Error

Beta

(Constant)

2.729

0.552

4.943

0.000

Productivity

0.369

0.121

0.339

3.054

0.003

R=0.339

0.115

F-value= 9.325

p=0.003

Regression Equation Model 1:

y=2.729+0.369x

where:

y=Teachers’ Performance

= Productivity_ Digital Literacy

The results presented in Table 12, which detail the multiple regression analysis between TLE teachers’

performance, professional development and digital literacy, offer valuable insights into the evolving landscape

of education in the Philippines. The results show that Productivity in Digital Literacy is the only significant

predictor of TLE teachers’ performance. The unstandardized coefficient (B = 0.369) suggests that for every

unit of increase in digital literacy productivity, there is a corresponding increase of 0.369 units in teacher

performance. The standardized beta coefficient (β = 0.339) reflects a moderate effect size, while the t-value of

3.054 and p-value of 0.003 confirm the statistical significance of this relationship. Furthermore, the model’s R²

value of 0.115 implies that approximately 11.5% of the variance in teacher performance can be attributed to

digital literacy productivity, underscoring its relevance while also suggesting the presence of other influential

factors.

This finding is particularly pertinent in the context of current practices within the Department of Education

(DepEd) in the Philippines. In recent years, DepEd has actively promoted digital transformation in education

through initiatives such as the Digital Rise Program, DepEd Commons, and the Learning Management System

(LMS). These programs aim to enhance teachers’ digital competencies and integrate technology into classroom

instruction. The positive correlation between digital literacy and teacher performance supports the rationale

behind these initiatives, affirming that teachers who are more digitally literate are better equipped to deliver

effective instruction, manage virtual classrooms, and engage students in meaningful learning experiences.

However, the findings suggest that not all forms of digital literacy are equally helpful. It is the productive use

of technology, like using apps for lesson planning, online assessments, or digital grading, that contributes most

to teacher performance. This means DepEd should focus training and support on tools that directly help

teachers do their jobs more efficiently, rather than only teaching general computer skills. It also implies that

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5521

www.rsisinternational.org

digital tools must be relevant to the teachers’ everyday classroom needs to make a difference in how well they

perform.

These findings support Baladad and Labitad (2024), who found a strong correlation between digital literacy

and teaching effectiveness among public school teachers in Misamis Oriental, highlighting the role of digital

skills in classroom management and instructional delivery. The UNESCO Global Education Monitoring

Report (2023) emphasized the critical role of digital literacy in sustaining education during the pandemic,

particularly in Southeast Asia. Espinosa et al. (2023) demonstrated that digital literacy was a key enabler of

effective teaching in remote and blended learning environments in the Philippines. A study published by

Pizarro et.al. (2024) revealed that elementary teachers with higher digital literacy adapted more successfully to

online teaching modalities. Lastly, the SEAMEO INNOTECH evaluation of the GURO21 program (2021)

showed that teachers who completed digital literacy modules exhibited improved instructional strategies and

student engagement.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contained a summary of significant findings of the study, the conclusions, and recommendations.

Summary

The study aimed to determine the level of professional development of Technology and Livelihood Education

(TLE) teachers in Maramag, Bukidnon, assess their digital literacy in terms of productivity, importance,

confidence, and anxiety, and describe their performance in terms of content knowledge and pedagogy, learning

environment and diversity of learners, curriculum and planning, assessment and reporting, and personal growth

and professional development. It also examined the relationship of professional development and digital

literacy to teachers’ performance, identified the variables that best predict performance, and developed a model

that best fits the performance of TLE teachers.

The study was conducted in all public secondary schools in Maramag, Bukidnon during the school year 2023-

2024, with a total of seventy-four (74) TLE teachers serving as respondents through total enumeration. The

instruments used were an adapted professional development questionnaire, a digital literacy questionnaire, and

the DepEd Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF). These instruments underwent

validation and reliability testing. The data were treated using descriptive statistics for the levels of professional

development, digital literacy, and performance; Pearson Product-Moment Correlation for relationships among

variables; and multiple regression analysis to determine predictors of teachers’ performance.

In the light of the discussion, made in the study, the following significant findings were drawn. The survey on

the mean scores revealed that professional development had an overall mean of 4.32, which has a qualitative

interpretation of “advanced” with the highest dimension in collective learning and application (4.38). Digital

literacy had an overall mean of 3.81, which means “highly positive” with productivity (4.14) and importance

(4.08) rated highest, while anxiety (3.31) was moderately positive. Teachers’ performance had an overall mean

of 4.26 (Very Satisfactory), with personal growth and professional development rated highest at 4.45

(Outstanding).

Professional development was significantly correlated with teachers’ performance with r = 0.692, and p < 0.05,

and digital literacy was also significantly correlated with r = 0.701, and p < 0.05. Regression analysis revealed

that productivity with β = 0.342, supportive leadership with β = 0.301, and confidence with β = 0.228 were the

best predictors of teachers’ performance. This means that teachers’ effectiveness is strongly influenced by their

engagement in professional development, their ability to maximize digital tools, and the support and

confidence they gain in their teaching practice.

Conclusion

Based on the relevant findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5522

www.rsisinternational.org

The study’s findings particularly the strong correlation among digital literacy, professional development, and

teachers’ performance clearly affirm the necessity and effectiveness of national initiatives such as DepEd’s

Digital Rise Program. The proficient use of digital tools among TLE teachers serves as strong evidence that the

goal of producing technologically prepared and globally competitive Filipino graduates under the K–12

curriculum is being systematically achieved in the Division of Bukidnon. The professional development of

TLE teachers in Maramag shows a strong culture of collaboration, shared leadership, and continuous learning

that emphasizes group participation and alignment with school goals. Teachers improve their teaching when

they are involved in shaping their own learning. However, the lack of enough resources and technology limits

the full impact of professional development. Without proper support, even effective training may not lead to

real classroom improvements. This highlights the need for schools to provide sufficient tools, time, and

support to help teachers grow and perform better.

Although the current performance of TLE teachers is commendable, sustaining this success requires

continuous and strategic investment. The strong predictive influence of digital literacy and supportive

institutional structures highlights the importance of institutionalizing both recurrent, cutting-edge training and

the consistent provision of modern ICT infrastructure and TLE equipment. Doing so will help prevent the

widening of the digital divide and ensure equitable access to quality instruction across all public schools. TLE

teachers demonstrate strong digital literacy, particularly in productivity, which has a significant impact on their

teaching performance. This highlights how digital competence enhances instruction when meaningfully

integrated into classroom tasks such as lesson planning, assessment, and student engagement. Teachers who

effectively use technology are better able to meet the demands of modern education, making digital skills

essential in vocational subjects. This means that as teachers’ digital literacy improves, especially in

productivity and confidence, their teaching performance also increases correspondingly. The strength of this

association indicates that digital literacy is a key contributor and predictor of teacher effectiveness, particularly

in areas requiring technological adaptation and instructional innovation. However, many teachers still have

only moderate confidence in using advanced digital tools, indicating that current training does not fully

develop higher-level digital skills. While basic applications are used with ease, teachers often find it difficult to

apply more specialized tools like simulation software or collaborative platforms suited for TLE. This gap

limits innovation and the ability to adjust teaching to different student needs. There is a clear need for digital

literacy programs that are more targeted, practical, and aligned with the specific challenges of TLE instruction.

Supportive conditions and digital productivity emerged as the strongest factors influencing performance, as

evidenced by correlation and regression analysis. These results affirm that teacher effectiveness depends on a

combination of collaborative structures, access to resources, and relevant digital engagement. Teachers excel

when they are provided with both the tools and the autonomy to implement what they have learned. Schools

that prioritize supportive working environments through effective leadership, professional trust, and timely

access to instructional technology can expect to see consistent improvements in teaching quality. Enabling

environments and practical digital tools are critical drivers of performance in TLE classrooms, and their

presence is vital for sustaining instructional excellence and innovation. However, since the study focused on a

specific set of schools and teachers, these findings may not fully generalize to all educational contexts.

Nonetheless, it should be noted that this result is based on data gathered from a limited sample of seventy-four

(74) TLE teachers within the municipality of Maramag, using self-reported questionnaires. Hence, the findings

may not fully represent teachers in other contexts or divisions, and further research involving larger and more

diverse samples is recommended.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, several recommendations are proposed to enhance the professional

development, digital literacy and performance of TLE teachers.

The DepEd, in collaboration with the Local Government Unit (LGU) and TESDA, should prioritize targeted

funding for infrastructure and resource provision, particularly for schools in rural and annex areas such as

Dologon National High School and similar institutions. This initiative should ensure the availability of reliable,

high-speed internet connectivity and modern, specialized TLE equipment (e.g., computer hardware, vocational

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5523

www.rsisinternational.org

simulation software, and e-commerce platforms). School administrators should strengthen professional

development by ensuring that training programs are supported with adequate materials, digital equipment, and

time for collaboration, while providing regular mentoring, peer coaching, and well-resourced Learning Action

Cells (LACs) to help teachers apply new skills and continue growing professionally.

School administrators should also forge stronger partnerships with industry stakeholders to provide authentic,

hands-on learning opportunities, updated competencies, and real-world exposure for both teachers and

students. Strengthening these linkages will bridge the gap between classroom instruction and workplace

demands, ultimately enhancing teacher proficiency and student readiness. The Division Office and ICT

coordinators should offer regular, hands-on digital training that covers both basic and advanced tools,

including simulation software and design platforms used in TLE. Trainings should be aligned with classroom

needs, differentiated by skill level, and designed to build teacher confidence and promote effective technology

integration.

School heads should continue using the IPCRF to guide teacher growth by providing clear feedback, setting

achievable goals, and following up on professional development plans, while encouraging teachers to reflect

on their progress and recognize their strengths to maintain high performance and motivation.

Additionally, supportive working conditions should be promoted by managing teachers’ workloads, allocating

dedicated time for collaboration, and minimizing non-teaching responsibilities. Recognizing teachers’ efforts

and achievements can further strengthen motivation and professional engagement. To ensure effective

implementation, each recommendation should include a plan with timelines, assigned responsibilities, and

measurable outcomes.

Collectively, these actions are feasible within the context of public schools in Maramag, Bukidnon, and aim to

strategically enhance professional development, digital literacy, and supportive environments, ultimately

improving teacher performance and instructional quality.

REFERENCES

1. Acedo, C., & Hughes, C. (2020). Digital literacy for educators: Developing competencies for teaching

in the digital age. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4), 1973–1988.

2. Abalayan, L. R., & Santos, M. J. (2023). Resource challenges and instructional practices of TLE

teachers in public secondary schools. Philippine Journal of Technology and Vocational Education,

5(1), 30–40.

3. Almodovar, M. C., & Tugade, J. A. (2023). Strengthening instructional practices through shared values

in Technology and Livelihood Education. Philippine Journal of Teacher Education, 9(2), 57–65.

4. Anderson, L. (2023). Challenges in implementing professional development programs in secondary

schools. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 4(2), 45–56.

5. Antonietti, C., Cattaneo, A., & Amenduni, F. (2022). Can teachers’ digital competence influence

technology acceptance in vocational education? Computers in Human Behavior, 132, 107266.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107266

6. Austria, R. M., & Sabio, C. B. (2021). Digital literacy and emotional readiness among secondary public

school teachers. Journal of Philippine Educational Leadership, 7(1), 42–55.

7. Avalos, B. (2018). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher Education over ten

years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.004

8. Avalos-Bevan, B., Louzano, G., & Torres, A. (2018). Systemic supports for sustained professional

learning: A regional case study. Journal of Educational Change, 19(2), 191–210.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-017-9302-9

9. Aydin, Selami. (2018). The role of digital literacy in reducing digital anxiety in higher education.

Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(3), 450–467.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117715738

10. Baladad, R. R., & Labitad, G. F. (2024). Teachers’ digital literacy skills and teaching practices among

public school teachers [Unpublished study]. Balingoan District, Misamis Oriental.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5524

www.rsisinternational.org

11. Ballesteros, C., & Dela Peña, J. (2023). Assessment strategies of TLE teachers in Philippine secondary

schools. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 7(2), 34–42.

12. Balyer, A., & Özcan, K. (2022). Shared leadership and its impacts on teachers' job satisfaction and

innovative practices. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(3), 449–465.

https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211013352

13. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.

14. Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, V., Matarranz, M., Casado-Aranda, L. A., & Otto, A. (2022). Teachers’

digital competencies in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of

Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-

00312-8

15. Bautista, M. A., & Soriano, R. C. (2024). Enhancing school-home collaboration through digital

reporting tools in Philippine public schools. Journal of Educational Technology and Practice, 5(1), 19–

28.

16. BCcampus. (2023). Digital literacy and resilience: How can professional development prepare

instructors to succeed in changing times? BCcampus Reports. Retrieved from https://bccampus.ca/

17. Bernardo, M. C., Reyes, A. R., & Villanueva, J. M. (2025). Digital literacy and performance of public

high school teachers: A focus on practical application and productivity tools. Philippine Journal of

Educational Technology, 15(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.5555/pjet.2025.15.1.45

18. Cabero-Almenara, J., & Llorente-Cejudo, M. C. (2020). ICT training of teachers: A key factor to

improve education with technology. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher

Education, 17(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00219-y

19. Cakir, Hasan, & Karal, Hasan. (2018). Reducing teacher anxiety through professional development

programs on digital literacy. Computers & Education, 116, 23–32.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.003

20. Cancio, L. D., Magno, K. E., & Flores, P. J. (2024). Institutional support and teacher performance in

the Philippine basic education sector. International Journal of Educational Management and Policy,

18(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.4444/ijemp.2024.18.2.112

21. Candilasa, J. (2025). e-teacher professional development course in oral communication for senior high

school. Journal of Harbin Engineering University (JHEU), 46(1), 190-198.

22. Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Helms, J. V. (2016). Professional learning communities in STEM:

Improving student achievement and teacher perceptions. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and

Research, 17(1), 31–40.

23. Castillo, M., & Dela Peña, R. (2019). Teaching performance and instructional competence of TLE

teachers in selected secondary schools in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary

Research, 7(2), 34–42.

24. Chien, Chia-Hua; Chen, Chih-Hsien; & Jheng, Hao-Ren. (2018). The relationship between teachers'

technology anxiety and use of instructional technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research,

56(5), 824–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117713117

25. Choudhary, H., & Bansal, N. (2022). Addressing digital divide through digital literacy training

programs: A systematic literature review. Digital Education Review, 41, 224–248.

26. Creswell, John W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach

(4th ed.). Sage Publications.

27. Cruz, M., & Ballesteros, L. (2021). Digital literacy and teacher preparedness during the COVID-19

pandemic. Journal of Philippine Education and Technology, 12(1), 33–47.

28. Cruz, R. V., & Serrano, M. C. (2019). Assessing public school teachers' digital literacy and confidence

in technology integration. Philippine Journal of Education Studies, 34(2), 45–60.

29. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional

development. Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org

30. Dela Cruz, M. T., & Umali, C. V. (2021). Collaborative teaching practices among TLE educators: A

basis for improved instruction. Philippine Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(1), 45–

54.

31. Delos Santos, R. J., & Yu, M. T. (2023). Digital integration in TLE: Exploring the role of productivity

tools in teaching efficiency. Journal of Technology and Livelihood Education, 9(2), 89–103.

https://doi.org/10.3333/jtle.2023.9.2.89

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5525

www.rsisinternational.org

32. Department for Education (2016). Standards for teachers’ professional development. Retrieved from

https://www.gov.uk

33. Department of Education (DepEd). (2016). *DepEd Order No. 35, s. 2016: The Learning Action Cell

as a K to 12 Basic Education Program School-Based Continuing Professional Development Strategy

for the Improvement of Teaching and Learning*.

34. Department of Education (DepEd). (2017). DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017 – National Adoption and

Implementation of the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (PPST).

35. Department of Education (DepEd). (2017). Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (PPST).

36. Department of Education (DepEd). (2019). Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers.

37. Department of Education (DepEd). (2019). Results-Based Performance Management System Manual.

38. Department of Education (DepEd). (2020). Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan for School Year

2020–2021.

39. Department of Education (DepEd). (2022). DepEd Digital Rise Program: Empowering learners through

technology integration. Quezon City: DepEd.

40. Department of Education (DepEd). (2022). Digital Rise Program: Empowering learners through

technology. Department of Education Philippines. https://www.deped.gov.ph

41. Department of Education (DepEd). (2022). Gender-Responsive Basic Education Policy.

42. Department of Education (DepEd). (2022). NEAP Transformation Framework.

43. Department of Education (DepEd). (2023). ICT Development and Readiness Report 2023: Insights

from field implementation. Department of Education, Philippines.

44. Desimone, L.M., Garet, M. (2015). Best Practices in Teachers' Professional Development in the United

States. Psychology, Society, & Education, 7(3), 252-263. DOI: 10.25115/psye.v7i3.515

45. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward

better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140

46. Dizon, R. G., Santos, M. A., & Lim, J. F. (2021). Digital literacy and technology utilization among

public school teachers in the new normal. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 11(2), 45–58.

https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jerp.2021.11.2.045

47. DuFour, R., & Fullan, M. (2020). Cultures Built to Last: Systemic PLCs at Work. Solution Tree Press.

48. DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Many, T., & Mattos, M. (2016). Learning by doing: A handbook

for professional learning communities at work (3rd ed.). Solution Tree.

49. DuFour, Richard. (2015). In praise of professional learning communities. Educational Leadership.

50. DuFour, Richard, & Fullan, Michael. (2015). Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work. Solution

Tree Press.

51. Education Commission II. (2024). Systematic review of professional development programs for

teachers in the Philippines. Quezon City: EdCom II. Retrieved from https://edcom2.gov.ph

52. Emerald Insight. (2023). Role of collective learning in PLCs in Namibia.

53. Emerald Insight. (2023). Role of organizational support in PLC development.

54. Espinosa, L., Reyes, J., & De Leon, A. (2023). Digital literacy as a key enabler in blended learning

environments [Reference summary].

55. Fernandez, J. P., & Rivera, L. M. (2019). The impact of technology in education. Journal of

Educational Studies, 45(1), 10-25.

56. Flores, M. (2025). Instructional competence and its impact on the performance of public junior high

school Technology and Livelihood Education teachers. International Journal of Research and

Innovation in Social Science, 9(3), 120–130.

57. Francisco, J. L., De Vera, M. A., & Cagalingan, M. E. (2024). Digital self-efficacy and its influence on

the integration of educational technology among secondary teachers. Southeast Asian Journal of

Educational Research, 8(1), 22–37.

58. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education

(10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

59. Ganal, N. N., & Guiab, M. R. (2020). Differentiated instruction practices among public school

teachers. International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 11(2), 1–10.

60. Garcia, A. L., & Carreon, R. M. (2021). Access to technology and teaching effectiveness among TLE

teachers in rural schools. Southeast Asian Journal of Education, 7(3), 112–121.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5526

www.rsisinternational.org

61. Garcia, E. R., & Ramos, M. F. (2023). Enhancing literacy and numeracy integration in TLE:

Challenges and innovations. Philippine Journal of Technology Education, 10(1), 45–53.

62. Garcia, G. G., & Santos, S. S. (2020). The impact of early childhood education. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 25(3), 45-60.

63. Gray, J. A., Kruse, S. D., & Tarter, J. C. (2016). Developing professional learning communities through

enabling school structures, collegial trust, academic emphasis, and collective efficacy. Educational

Research Applications. Gavin Publishers.

64. Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and

applications (10th ed.). Pearson Education.

65. Gay, Lorrie R., Mills, Geoffrey E., & Airasian, Peter. (2011). Educational research: Competencies for

analysis and applications (10th ed.). Pearson.

66. Ghavifekr, Simin, et al. (2016). The impact of digital divide on students' digital literacy and academic

success. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication

Technology, 12(3), 45–60.

67. Gonzales, R. M., & Magsayo, E. J. (2024). Enhancing professional development through collaborative

practices among secondary TLE teachers. International Journal of Educational Development in the

Philippines, 18(2), 22–31.

68. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory

and Practice, 8(3), 381–391.

69. Gutierez, S. B. (2019). Exploring the experiences of teachers in professional development: A case of a

Philippine public school. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 1–17.

https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v44n4.1

70. Hallinger, P., & Wang, W. C. (2020). Assessing instructional leadership with the Principal Instructional

Management Rating Scale. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(4), 620–654.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19897854

71. Hallinger, Philip, & Heck, Ronald H. (2015). Leadership and teacher professional learning. Journal of

Educational Administration. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-03-2014-0038

72. Hamilton, B. (2015). The teacher leadership process: Attempting change. This examines how teacher

leaders attempt to change teaching practices among colleagues in urban schools.

73. Harris, A., Jones, M., & Huffman, J. B. (Eds.). (2017). Teachers leading educational reform: The

power of professional learning communities (1st ed.). Routledge.

74. Harris, Alma. (2014). Distributed leadership: Developing tomorrow's leaders. Educational Management

Administration & Leadership, 42(5), 541–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214523018

75. Hatlevik, O. E., & Christophersen, K. (2023). Teachers’ digital competence and its impact on teaching

and learning in secondary schools. Computers & Education, 196, 104674.

76. Hattie, J. (2020). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 1,500 meta-analyses relating to achievement.

Routledge.

77. Hobson, A., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. (2009). Mentoring beginning teachers: What we

know and what we don't. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 207–216.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001

78. Hochberg, E. D., & Desimone, L. M. (2010). Professional development in the accountability context:

Building capacity to achieve standards. Educational Psychologist, 45, 89-106.

doi:10.1080/00461521003703052.

79. Hord, S. M. (2019). Professional learning communities: Educators working together to improve student

achievement. SAGE Publications.

80. Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Van Keer, H. (2018). The influence of shared leadership on teachers’

organizational commitment and engagement. Educational Management Administration & Leadership,

46(5), 757–774. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217717260

81. Javier, M. R., & Alayon, R. S. (2021). Teacher confidence and digital technology use in the classroom:

Evidence from Philippine secondary schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Innovation and

Research, 6(3), 74–89.

82. Johnson, David W., Johnson, Roger T., & Smith, Karl A. (2016). Cooperative learning: Improving

university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College

Teaching, 27(1), 101–118.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5527

www.rsisinternational.org

83. Johnson, R., & Brown, T. (2023). Bridging the digital literacy gap in teacher education. International

Journal of Teacher Development, 45(2), 89–104.

84. Ju-Zaveroni, Y., & Lee, S. (2023). Online language learning in participatory culture: Digital pedagogy

practices in the post-pandemic era. Education Sciences, 13(12), 1217.

85. Karagul, E., Aydin, S., & Bayram, H. (2021). Enhancing digital literacy through online education: A

case study in the pandemic era. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 37–49.

86. Kennedy, Aileen. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of

mechanisms and contexts. Professional Development in Education, 42(5), 615–637.

https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2015.1005249

87. Khalifa, M., Gooden, M. A., & Davis, J. E. (2019). culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard

Education Press.

88. Kustec, S., Skrbinjek, V., Aberšek, B., & Flogie, A. (2024). Innovative professional learning

communities and sustainable education practices through digital transformation. Sustainability, 16(14),

6250.

89. Layug, D. L., Dela Cruz, M. C., & Navarro, J. E. (2022). Digital literacy and confidence among public

school teachers in the implementation of blended learning. International Journal of Pedagogical

Development, 4(1), 15–28.

90. Learning Policy Institute. (2020). Effective teacher professional development. Retrieved from

https://learningpolicyinstitute.org

91. Lee, K. (2021). Enhancing mid-career teachers' digital literacy through professional development: A

case study. Journal of Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(4), 245–260.

92. Leithwood, Kenneth, & Sun, Jingping. (2018). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How

does shared leadership make a difference? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29(3), 315–

336. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2018.1518745

93. Lister, K., Riva, S., & McFarlane, C. (2022). Positive digital practices: Supporting learner identities

and mental wellbeing in technology-enhanced education. Journal of Interactive Media in Education,

5(831). https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.831

94. Liu, M., Kang, J., McKelroy, E., & Roper, K. (2016). Investigating the impact of digital literacy on

students' online learning experiences and anxiety. Educational Technology & Society, 19(4), 119–130.

95. Liu, M., Clevenger, T. E., & Xiang, D. (2020). Technophobia and digital anxiety among adults:

Implications for digital literacy programs. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 36(2),

111–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1646510

96. Llego, J. P., Ramos, E. L., & Aquino, N. D. (2022). Teacher training and its limitations: A survey of

Filipino educators’ perceptions on support and implementation. Journal of Educational Reform in

Developing Nations, 7(3), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.2222/jerdn.2022.7.3.135

97. Llego, J. R., & Valera, M. A. (2023). Enhancing curriculum relevance through teacher collaboration in

TLE instruction. Philippine Journal of Technical and Vocational Education, 11(1), 25–34.

98. Llego, M. A. (2020). ICT integration in the Philippine education system. TeacherPH.

https://www.teacherph.com/ict-integration-philippine-education/

99. Looney, Janet. (2017). Professional development for teachers: Reducing digital anxiety through

training programs. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(4), 385–401.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2017.1353742

100. Lopez, K. (2020). The impact of teacher’s collaboration on TLE teachers in urban schools.

101. Magsambol, B. (2021, February 10). TLE teachers serve as digital coaches in public schools. Rappler.

https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-depth/tle-teachers-digital-coaches-public-schools/

102. Manalili, A. (2022). The role of teaching methods in facilitating skills diffusion in technology and

livelihood education (TLE): A study among bachelor of technology and livelihood education faculty.

103. Mendoza, J. T., & Sevilla, M. E. (2019). Anxiety and digital technology use among public school

teachers: Implications for ICT integration. Philippine Journal of Educational Measurement and

Evaluation, 5(2), 18–32.

104. Miller, A., Smith, B., & Taylor, C. (2020). Integrating technology into pedagogical practices: The role

of digital literacy in professional growth. Educational Research Review, 31, 100320.

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5528

www.rsisinternational.org

105. Navarro, M. L. C. (2017). Time management practices, job performance and satisfaction of

Technology and Livelihood Education-Home Economics (TLE-HE) teachers in the Division of City

Schools, Manila (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Library of the Philippines.

106. Naz, S., & Dwivedi, S. K. (2023). Integrating digital tools in the classroom: Enhancing teaching

effectiveness and student engagement. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 6(8),

3125–3132. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.6.0825.3125

107. NEDA & UNICEF. (2021). *Education sector rapid assessment: The Philippines’ response to the

COVID-19 pandemic*. National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and United Nations

Children’s Fund (UNICEF). https://www.unicef.org/philippines/reports/education-sector-rapid-

assessment

108. Ng, W. (2019). Conceptualizing digital literacy for the 21st century. Education Research International,

2019, 1–9.

109. Ng, W. (2022). Digital literacy in education: Beyond basic ICT skills. Educational Technology

Research and Development, 70(4), 1023–1040.

110. Ngang, T. K., Yunus, H. M., & Hashim, N. H. (2021). Collaborative school leadership and its impact

on teacher development. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(5), 905–918.

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2020-0255

111. Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2016). Barriers to ICT use in high schools: Greek teachers’

perceptions. Journal of Computers in Education, 3(1), 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0052-

112. Noltemeyer, A., Palmer, K., James, A. G., & Wiechman, S. (2019). School-Wide Positive Behavioral

Interventions and Supports (SWPBIS): A synthesis of existing research. International Journal of School

& Educational Psychology, 7(4), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2018.1425169

113. Onsrud, K. J. (2015). The relationship between collaboration and collective efficacy in two Wisconsin

high schools (Doctoral dissertation, Edgewood College). Academia.edu. https://www.academia.edu/

114. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). Students, computers, and learning:

Making the connection. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en

115. Perez, L. M., & Soriano, A. F. (2024). Aligning teacher philosophies with national standards:

Implications for performance and student engagement. Journal of Educational Research and Practice in

Asia, 6(1), 22–30.

116. Perez, L., & Medina, J. (2021). Instructional practices and performance of TLE teachers in relation to

students’ skills development. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Society,

3(1), 66–75.

117. Philippine EJournals. (2022). Digital literacy of elementary teachers and its implications on teaching

performance.

118. Pillay, Hitendra (2017). Teacher anxiety and digital literacy: An analysis of South African educators.

Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(3), 45–58.

119. Ramadevi, K., Ansari, M., & Khan, F. (2023). Collaborative learning in digital environments:

Enhancing critical thinking and social skills. Digital Education Review, 45, 43–49.

https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2024.45.43-49

120. Ramirez, C. A., & Antonio, H. B. (2023). Supportive leadership and school structures: Predictors of

successful DepEd program implementation. Philippine Journal of School Leadership and Management,

6(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1212/pjslm.2023.6.1.21

121. Reyes, M. T., & Molina, R. B. (2021). The role of PLCs in improving assessment and instructional

planning in Philippine secondary schools. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 7(3), 150–157.

https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.522.2021.73.150.157

122. Reyes, P., & Dela Cruz, J. (2024). Lesson study as a professional development model for teachers in

Quirino Province. American Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 34–42.

123. Rini, R., Syafriandi, S., & Putri, N. (2022). The development of digital literacy competence among

university students in the post-pandemic era. International Journal of Educational Research, 114,

102038.

124. Sahin, Selcuk, & Sadi, Sevket. (2017). Reducing digital anxiety in students through digital literacy

workshops. Computers & Education, 111, 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.04.012

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5529

www.rsisinternational.org

125. Salvador, A., & Dela Cruz, M. (2023). Urban and rural disparities in ICT integration in Philippine

schools. Southeast Asian Journal of Education, 18(1), 59–74.

126. Santos, P. (2022). Challenges affecting the teaching performance of TLE teachers in public secondary

schools. Journal of Education and Human Development, 11(4), 45–55.

127. Schunk, D. H., & Greene, J. A. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and

Performance (2nd ed.). Routledge.

128. SEAMEO INNOTECH. (2021). GURO21 program evaluation. SEAMEO Regional Center for

Educational Innovation and Technology.

https://www.seameo-innotech.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/GURO21-Program-Evaluation

Report.pdf

129. Selwyn, Neil. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. Bloomsbury Publishing.

130. Senge, P. M. (2014). Schools that learn: A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and

everyone who cares about education (Naoko Richters, Trans.). Eiji Shuppan.

131. Shin, Na Young, & Kang, Mi Hwa. (2014). Teacher confidence in using technology: The case of

Korean teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 19(4), 741–756.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9244-3

132. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational

Review, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411

133. Smith, E., & Yasukawa, K. (2017). What makes a good VET teacher? Views of Australian VET

teachers and students. International Journal of Training Research, 15(1), 23-40.

doi.org/10.1080/14480220.2017.1355301.

134. Springer Journal. (2020). Frameworks for teacher digital literacy and its impact on educational

outcomes.

135. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.

136. Tang, C. M., & Chaw, L. Y. (2016). Digital literacy: A prerequisite for effective learning in a blended

learning environment? The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(1), 54–65. Retrieved from ERIC

137. Tomlinson, C. A. (2021). How to Differentiate Instruction in Academically Diverse Classrooms (3rd

ed.). ASCD.

138. Tondeur, Jo, et al. (2017). Digital literacy and teacher anxiety: An exploration of the factors

contributing to technology integration in education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,

25(1), 1–18.

139. Trinidad, C. D., & Magno, E. R. (2023). Exploring the role of digital anxiety in teachers' technology

integration practices. Southeast Asian Journal of Educational Innovation, 9(1), 67–82.

140. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). Digital learning and

transformation of education: Recommendations for teacher professional development. United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/

141. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). Digital literacy in education:

Policy brief. Paris: UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education.

142. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). Digital learning in rural

schools: Challenges and opportunities. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization.

143. UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report. (2023). Digital literacy assessment [Background paper

for the 2023 GEM Report on Technology in Education]. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/

144. Val, A., & López-Bueno, L. (2024). Bridging the digital divide in teacher education: Challenges and

strategies. Journal of Digital Education and Learning, 52(1), 112–126.

145. Valderama, C. B. (2022). Digital literacy of secondary public school teachers in the implementation of

the Learning Continuity Plan. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 77–91.

https://apjer.com/article/valderama-2022-digital-literacy

146. Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Peters, O. (2015). The influence of digital literacy

on students' anxiety in online learning. Computers & Education, 82, 189–198.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.015

147. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2018). A review of research on the impact of professional learning

communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.012

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

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025

Page 5530

www.rsisinternational.org

148. Villanueva, A. L., & de Guzman, M. R. (2020). From reluctance to confidence: Trends in ICT anxiety

among Filipino educators. Asia Pacific Journal of Education and Digital Learning, 4(2), 25–39.

149. Villanueva, C. L. (2018). Technology Education. Manila. Rex Book Store.

150. Voogt, J., Knezek, G., & Pareja Roblin, N. (2015). Research-informed strategies to address educational

challenges in a digitally networked world. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 619-623.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9430-4.

151. Wang, H., Hsu, T. I., Reeves, T. C., & Coster, D. (2014). Professional development to enhance

teachers’ practices in using information and communication technologies (ICTs) as cognitive tools:

Lessons learned from a design-based research study. Computers & Education, 79, 106-122.

152. Wenner, J. A., & Campbell, T. (2017). The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: A

review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 134–171.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316653478.

153. Wesselink, A. A., Jones, B. B., & Smith, C. C. (2021). The impact of technology on education. Journal

of Educational Research, 15(2), 45-60.

154. World Bank. (2023). Post-pandemic education recovery: The role of digital tools. World Bank

Education Brief.