Development of Simredity: An Interactive Strategic Intervention Material in Teaching Non-Mendelian Genetics to Grade 9 Learners

Genetics, particularly Non-Mendelian Patterns of Inheritance, remains one of the most difficult topics for secondary learners due to its abstract nature and the higher-order reasoning it requires. This challenge is more evident in rural Philippine schools where access to interactive learning resources is limited. This study developed and evaluated SIMredity, an Interactive Strategic Intervention Material designed to enhance Grade 9 learners’ conceptual understanding of non-Mendelian inheritance through print-based, visually enriched, and story-integrated activities. Guided by the 4D Model (Define, Design, Develop, Disseminate) and grounded in Constructivist Theory, Cognitive Load Theory, and Self-Directed Learning Theory, the study employed a mixed-methods design incorporating needs assessment, expert evaluation, quantitative testing, and qualitative feedback. Results from the needs assessment with six Science 9 teachers identified persistent learning difficulties in incomplete dominance, codominance, multiple alleles, and sex-linked traits, along with a lack of engaging instructional materials. SIMredity was subjected to expert evaluation using the Department of Education’s LRMDS evaluation tool for print resources and received a Very Satisfactory rating across all components, with a 72.2% percentage agreement among evaluators, confirming its quality, clarity, and content accuracy. Implementation with 35 Grade 9 learners further demonstrated its effectiveness, as shown by a significant increase in mean scores from 9 in the pre-test to 21 in the post-test (t = –22.21, p < 0.001). Learners described the material as colorful, interactive, easy to follow, and helpful in supporting independent and self-paced learning. Overall, the findings indicate that SIMredity is a valid, usable, and effective instructional tool for improving learners’ comprehension of non-Mendelian genetics, especially in resource-constrained educational settings.

Strategic Intervention Material, Science Education

1. Acedillo, R., Lagahit, J., Macusang, A. J., & Bacatan, J. (2022). Students and teacher’s perception on the effectiveness of using strategic intervention material in science. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 06(03), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2022.6304 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Anwar, S., et al. (2022). Enhancing Science Learning through Interactive Tools and Visual Aids: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Educational Technology and Learning. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Balan, H. (2018). Use Of Study Guide As Intervention Tool In Enhanc?ng Students’ Mot?vation In Grade 8 Genetics Concepts. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 6(2), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.17220/mojet.2018.02.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Cabildo, L. (2024). Construction of the “Mission POCELLBLE” -Cellular Structure and Function: A Strategic Intervention Material (SIM) for Grade 7 Biology. IJCER (International Journal of Chemistry Education Research), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.20885/ijcer.vol8.iss2.art1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cordova, R. C., Medina, J. G. D., Ramos, T. R., & Alejo, A. R. (2019). The development of strategic intervention materials in teaching mathematics. In Proceedings of the 2019 DLSU Research Congress (pp. 101-110). De La Salle University. https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/pdf/conferences/research-congress-proceedings/2019/lli-II-019.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. De Jesus, R. G. (2019). Improving the Least Mastered Competencies in Science 9 Using “Pump It Up!” Electronic Strategic Intervention Material. De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Eviota, M., & Boyles, L. (2022). Least Learned Competencies in Grade 9 Biology: Basis for Development of Strategic Intervention Material (SIM). Asian Journal of Research In Education And Social Sciences, 4(1), 53-70. Retrievedfrom https://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ajress/article/view/17402 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Fasasi, Rofiat & Oladejo, Adekunle. (2022). Genetics as a difficult concept: exploring the efficacy of culturo-techno-conceptual approach (ctca) in improving secondary school students. [thesis, lagos state university]. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360071518 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Herrera, M. P., & Soriano, M. A. (2016). Development and effectiveness of strategic intervention materials (SIMs) in Physics. Journal of Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences, 2(1), 1–14. https://journals.carsu.edu.ph/jASSH/article/view/98 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Kılıç Mocan, D. (2021). What do students really understand? Secondary education students’conceptions of genetics. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 10(2):1405-1422. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15354/sief.21.or061 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Knippels, M. C. P. J. (2002). Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education. The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy. Utrecht: CD-ß Press. (www.library.uu.nl/digiarchief/dip/diss/2002-0930-094820/inhoud.htm). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kumar, P., et al. (2020). Overcoming Time Constraints in Science Education: Strategies for Effective Curriculum Delivery. International Journal of Educational Research. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Limbago-Bastida, M. T., & Bastida, J. L. (2020). Effectiveness of strategic intervention materials in teaching science among senior high school students. European Journal of Social Sciences Studies, 5(6), 1–17. https://oapub.org/soc/index.php/EJSSS/article/view/1249 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Liu, M., & Lee, J. (2018). "The effects of an online learning environment on the 6 attitudes, engagement, and achievement of middle school science students." International Journal of Science Education, 38(8), 1274-1294. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mussard, J., & Reiss, M. (2022, March). Why is genetics so hard to learn? Insights from examiner reports for 16- to 18-year-olds in England. School Science Review, 103 (384) pp. 32-40. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10146651/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Pacala, F. A., & Cabrales, P. (2023). Science education in the philippine countryside:a phenomenologi (1) (pdf) science education in the philippine countryside: a phenomenological study. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371043522 [accessed Feb 01 2025]. Indonesian Journal of Education Teaching and Learning, 3(1), E-ISSN.2798-642X. https://doi.org/10.33222/ijetl.v3il.2677 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Pasion, C. A. (2019). The efficacy of strategic intervention materials (SIMs) in teaching Social Studies among third-year high school students. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/335497326_The_Efficacy_of_Strategic_Intervention_Materials_SIMS_in_Teaching_Social_Studies_Among_Third_Year_High_School_Students [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Samosa, R. (2021). CoSIM (Comics cum SIM): An Innovative Material in Teaching Biology. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies, Volume 1(Issue 2), ISSN: 2782-893X. https://www.ijams- bbp.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/RESTY-C.-SAMOSA.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Santos, J. T. D., Lim, R., & Rogayan, D. V. J. (2021). Least mastered competencies in biology: Basis for instructional intervention. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 7(3), 208 221. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v7i3.17106 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Thiagarajan, S., Semmel, D., & Semmel, M. (1974). Instructional development for training teachers of exceptional children: A sourcebook. Indiana University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Upu, I., & Bustang, R. (2016). Constructivism versus cognitive load theory: In search for an effective mathematics teaching. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299391269 Constructivism versus Cognitive Load Theory In Search for an Effective Mathematics Teaching [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Villonez, G. L. (2018). Use of SIM (Strategic Intervention Material) as Strategy and the Academic Achievement of Grade 7 students on Selected Topic in Earth Science pupil: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 2(3), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2018.23.7888 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar