Sum-Vantes Poultry Farm: A Manipulative Drill Package for Addition

Foundational mathematical operations like addition are crucial for early learners, but most existing interventions target middle or upper primary learners. There remains a significant research gap in the localized development of manipulative tools for Grade 1 students. This study aimed to develop and validate a Manipulative Drill Package (MDP) to enhance the addition performance of Grade 1 learners at Cervantes Central School. Using a developmental research design guided by the Successive Approximation Model (SAM), the study identified that students struggle significantly with solving problems involving sums up to 100 without regrouping, which served as the primary basis for the MDP's content. The resulting MDP features concrete, interactive, and engaging materials such as counters and visual aids designed to target identified learning gaps. Validation results from experts indicated that the MDP is a valid instructional tool, receiving high ratings for content quality, format, presentation, and organization based on the LRMDS evaluation checklist. The study concludes that the developed MDP is an innovative and valid instructional material capable of improving learner engagement and strengthening foundational arithmetic skills. It is recommended that Grade 1 mathematics teachers utilize this package to enhance student performance and engagement, while future researchers may use the study’s methodologies as a reference for developing additional numeracy-focused instructional tools.

Mathematics Education, Manipulative Drill Package (MDP), Grade 1 Learners, Addition Operation, Early Numeracy

1. Abanum, C. I., & Akintula, E. O. (2022). Relative effect of games and simulation on primary school mathematics in Educational District V of Lagos State, Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alenezi, A. (2020). The role of interactive simulations in enhancing student achievement and attitudes toward mathematics. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(1), 104–118. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Anderson, S., Sommerhoff, D., Schurig, M., & Gebhardt, M. (2022). Developing learning progress monitoring tests using difficulty generating item characteristics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Andaya, K. O., & Cañedo, L. C. (2025). Numeracy Skills of Grade 1 Learners. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Research for Innovation, Sustainability, and Excellence (IMJRISE). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Aini, H., & Khuzaini, N. (2024). The influence of mathematical disposition on high school students’ understanding of mathematical concepts. Union: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Allen, M. W. (2012). Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An agile model for developing the best learning experiences. Association for Talent Development. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Almaki, R., Abukmail, A. H. H., & Aljowiser, M. (2023). A systematic review of the use of simulation games in K-12 education. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(1), [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Aqsha, A., & Saprin, S. (2026). Principles of Learning and Instruction. Journal of Economic and Social Science, 3(1), 309-317 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Batan, M. (2024). Project NICE: A remediation digital kit for improving the least mastered mathematics skills of Grade II learners. Journal of Education and Learning Advancements, 1(1), 55–68. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Bengmark, S., Thunberg, H., & Winberg, T. M. (2017). Success-factors in transition to university mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Buluran, G. S. (2020). Utilizing Decigrid in teaching addition of decimals to Grade 5 learners. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Chen, L., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Foundational numeracy: Assessing numeracy in early childhood. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2024). Learning and Teaching Early Math: The Learning Trajectories Approach. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Dharmas, R. L. (2023). The impact of manipulative instructional materials on learner participation and understanding in diverse classrooms. Journal of Educational Strategies and Innovation, 5(2), 67–75. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Department of Education. (2010, May 26). DepEd Memorandum No. 231, s. 2010 – The 2010 MTAP-DEPED Saturday Mathematics Programs. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wpcontent/uploads/2018/10/DM_s2010_231.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Department of Education. (2023, January 4). DA 001, s. 2023 – 2023 MTAP Saturday Programs in Mathematics for Regular and Talented Learners. https://www.deped.gov.ph/2023/01/04/january-4-2023-da-001-s-2023-2023-mtap-saturday-programs-in-mathematics-for-regular-and-talented-learners/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Department of Education. (2023, July 3). DepEd Order No. 014, s. 2023 – Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of the National Learning Camp (NLC). https://www.deped.gov.ph/2023/07/05/july-5-2023-do-014-s-2023-policy-guidelines-on-the-implementation-of-the-national-learning-camp/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Department of Education. (n.d.). MATATAG Mathematics CG Grades 1, 4, and 7. Republic of the Philippines: Department of Education. https://www.deped.gov.ph/matatag-curriculum/matatag-mathematics-cg-grades1-4-and-7/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Department of Education – Region VIII. (2024, March 14). Regional Memorandum No. 1547, s. 2024: Orientation on the utilization of the manipulative instructional materials. https://region8.deped.gov.ph/deped-regional-memoranda/regional-memorandum-no-1547-s-2024-orientation-on-the-utilization-of-the-manipulative-instructional-materials/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Erbilgin, E., & Macur, G. M. A. (2022). Addition game to scaffold primary students’ word problem-solving skills. Journal on Mathematics Education, 13(2), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i2.pp307-322 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Gagné, R. M. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Gill, A. (2024, January 29). 10 most important maths concepts for 2nd graders. SplashLearn. https://www.splashlearn.com/blog/second-grade-math [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Gottfried, M. A., Egalite, A. J., & Kirksey, J. J. (2022). Early math struggles: The role of literacy in students’ understanding of addition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(3), 456–472. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000589 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. GPE Secretariat, & Pinkett, R. (2020). Foundational learning: Improving education from the ground up. Global Partnership for Education. https://www.globalpartnership.org/content/foundational-learning-improving-education-ground [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Huang, Y., & Hua, J. (2025). Concrete to abstract: 21st-century mathematics education reforms in China and Singapore. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1234/ajer.v12i1.2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Istiyowati, R., Sugiman, S., & Jailani, J. (2020). The effectiveness of combining simulation and games to improve student motivation in mathematics learning. Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(2), 150–160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science. (2024). Mathematics education strategies in Asia: Insights from Singapore and China. IJRISS, 8(3), 112–118. https://www.rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Jalandoni, J. F., Futalan, M. C., & Score, G. (2024). Scaffolding students’ difficulties in addition of integers through game-based instruction. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2(7), 195-203. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Javillonar, R. M. (2024). Utilization of instructional materials in enhancing math performance among Filipino high school students. Philippine Journal of Educational Research, 19(2), 45–53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Knospe, H., Bicknell, B., Li, X., & Shinohara, A. (2023). Mathematics education and sustainable development: Empowering learners through numeracy. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Laidin, N. F., Yusoff, M. S. A., & Zakaria, E. (2021). Applying butterfly method in the learning of addition of fractions. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 15(2), 161-174. https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.v15i2.13788 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Layug, G., Velario, J., & Capones, J. (2021, March 26-27). Teachers’ intervention in improving numeracy skills of Grade 7 students in Baguio City National High School. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Advanced Research in Teaching and Education, Baguio City, Philippines. [If formally published in proceedings, please provide editors and publisher]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Magtolis, D. (2023). Effectiveness of Project Renrich in improving the numeracy skills of Grade 5 learners. PsychEduc, 9(8), 8-13. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7960684 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Memnun, D. S., & Hart, L. C. (2020). Elementary school mathematics teacher trainees metacognitive awareness levels: Turkey case. Journal of International Education Research, 8(2), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v8i2.6934 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Muhtadi, A., Pujiriyanto, P., Kaliky, S., Hukom, J., & Samal, D. (2022). A meta-analysis: Emotional intelligence and its effect on mathematics achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 15(4), 745–762. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15442a [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/international-results/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Murillo, J. C., & Tan, R. G. (2022). Design, development, and validation of humorous instructional videos for the least mastered competencies in mathematics. American Journal of Educational Research, 10(12), 654–662. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-10-12-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. NAEYC. (2024). Early Childhood Mathematics: Promoting Good Beginnings. https://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements/mathematics [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. OECD, & National Numeracy. (2024). Closing numeracy gaps: Equipping children for future success. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; National Numeracy. https://www.oecd.org/education/closing-numeracy-gaps-2024.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Pellissier, H. (2023, August 28). 2nd Grade Math. Great!Schools.org. https://www.greatschools.org/gk/2nd-grade-math/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child (H. Weaver, Trans.). Basic Books. (Original work published 1966). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Philippine News Agency. (2022, April 22). USAID hands over home learning resource kit. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1172813 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Portana, H. V., Fronda, J. G., Policarpio, D. G. T., Rigat, K. A. R., & Llames, G. (2021). Effectiveness and acceptability of instructional materials in the enhancement of students’ academic achievement. International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management, and Science, 7(1), 12–15. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijaems.71.2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Rappler. (2023, December 5). For the second time, PH ranks among lowest in PISA 2022. https://www.rappler.com/nation/philippines-ranks-lowest-pisa-2022-education-results-second-time/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Republic of the Philippines. (2013, May 15). Republic Act No. 10533: Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Reyes, L. O., Atienza, A. V., & Calayag, M. F. U. (2024). The use of Project BIBO in improving the numeracy rate of elementary schools in Candelaria East District. Industry and Academic Research Review, 5(1), 1-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Román-Mata, S. S., Puertas-Molero, P., Ubago-Jiménez, J. L., & González-Valero, G. (2020). Benefits of physical activity and its associations with resilience, emotional intelligence, and psychological distress in university students from southern Spain. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(12), 4317. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124317 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Saha, M., Mondal, P., Mondal, A., & Das, S. (2024). Factors affecting success and failure in higher education mathematics: Students' and teachers’perspectives. Heliyon, 10(7),e29173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29173 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. SEAMEO INNOTECH. (2023, December 19). Innotech notes progress on the country’s PISA 2022 results. https://www.seameo-innotech.org/news/innotech-notes-progress-on-the-countrys-pisa-2022-results/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Skinner, B. F. (1960). The use of teaching machines in college instruction. In A. A. Lumsdaine & R. Glaser (Eds.), Teaching machines and programmed learning: A source book (pp. 159–172). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045345 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Skovsmose, O. (2021). Mathematics and crises. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1), 369-383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10065-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Songkram, N. (2020). Enhancing mathematics learning through technology-integrated instructional packages. International Journal of Educational Technology, 15(2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1234/ijet.2020.152045 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Sooknanan, J., & Seemungal, T. (2023). Mathematics education in the time of COVID-19: A public health emergency exacerbated by misinterpretation of data. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, hrac025. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrac025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Tandika, P. B. (2022). Instructional materials and the development of young children’s 21st century skills: Perspectives from early educators in Ukerewe, Tanzania. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 36(1), [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Talan, T. (2021). The effect of simulation techniques on students’ academic achievement: A meta analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education & Science (IJTES), 5(1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.242 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Thorndike in the 20th century. Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72(3), 441–446. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1999.72-441 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. TIMSS 2023. International results in mathematics and science. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) & TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Ucang, J. T. (2022). Practices of the twenty-first century mathematics teachers. International Journal of Applied Science and Research, 5(3), 225-230. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. United Nations. (n.d.). Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Retrieved July 15, 2025, from https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. UNESCO, & UNICEF. (2024). Early childhood education and numeracy: Building strong foundations for all. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; United Nations Children’s Fund. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. UP NISMED. (2024, May 2). UNICEF Philippines and UP NISMED turn over digital science and mathematics stories and apps to Angeles City schools. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. U.S. Embassy in the Philippines. (2022, March 29). U.S. launches new initiative to help young learners build a strong foundation in numeracy. https://ph.usembassy.gov/u-s-launches-new-initiative-to-help-young-learners-build-a-strong-foundation-in-numeracy/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Verdeflor, R. N., & Pacadaljen, L. M. (2021). Outcomes of the course Mathematics in the Modern World. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology, 25(1), 2044-2061. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Xhomara, N. (2026). Learning Approaches: Critically Examining the Major Learning Theories. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Jesslyn Jane [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Yuliwijayanti, A. T., Ardiansyah, D., & Anggraini, D. A. (2021). Manipulative media technology for addition of integers in elementary schools. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1823, No. 1, p. 012096). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1823/1/012096 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study