T&L Processes, Theories, and Concepts Leading to a Proposed Enhanced Instructional Design
[1]
Camilo Apita Tabinas, College of Graduate Studies (CGS), Palompon Institute of Technology (PIT), Palompon, Philippines.
Poor performance of the students in their courses may be due to instructions that are not carefully planned. This study aimed to develop a proposed enhanced instructional design (I.D) for chemistry course after assessing the teaching and learning (T &L) processes particularly, the congruency of the syllabus to the program outcomes set by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), the level of performance of the students in the final summative examination, the learning styles of the students, and the teaching styles actually catered in teaching; and in consideration of the teaching and learning theories and concepts. The study made use of QUAL-quan mixed research design in order to evaluate the teaching and learning processes. Comparative analysis was used to assess the congruency of the syllabus to the program outcomes set by CHED. The Index of learning styles instrument developed by Felder and Soloman was used to profile the learning styles of the students, and classroom observations were conducted to describe the actual teaching styles catered in delivering the select topics in general chemistry. Item analysis was used to select the topics for classroom observations. The scores of the summative examination were used to determine the level of performance of the students. The performance of the students was found to be poor and the teaching styles do not match with the learning styles of the students. Review on the educational theories, concepts, and designs on teaching and learning; and the evaluation results, became the foundation for the proposed enhanced instructional design called FIER, which stands for formulation, implementation, evaluation, and review-revision. FIER promotes a learning styles-based education.
Engineering Chemistry, Learning Styles, Teaching Styles, Syllabus, CHED, Educational Theories and Concepts, Departmental Examination
[1]
Smith and Ragan. (1999). Instructional design, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, p. 11 & p. 385.
[2]
Pritchard, Alan. (2005). Ways of learning: Learning theories and learning styles in the classroom. Great Britain: David Fulton Publishers.
[3]
Altbach, P., Reisberg, L, & Rumbley, L (2009). Trends in global higher education tracking an academic revolution: A report prepared for UNESCO 2009 World Conference on Higher Education. Retrieved on May 26.2012 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001831/183168e.pd framework
[4]
Tabinas, Derecho, and Icay (2016). Achievement in chemistry departmental examination (d.e): A diagnostic tool for learning. Open Science Journal of Education 2 (4), 1-15.
[5]
Tabinas, Camilo (2012). Congruency of a course syllabus with program intended outcomes (PILO’s): Teachers’ Perception and Scientific Literacy. University of San Carlos graduate journal 28 (2), p. 10-21.
[6]
Smith and Ragan. (1999). Instructional design, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, p. 7.
[7]
Felder, R. M. Silverman, L. K. (1988). learning and teaching Styles in Engineering Education. Engineering Education Journal 78 (7), 674-681. Retrieved May 26, 2012 from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS-1988.pdf
[8]
Popham, James W. (1999). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know, 2nd ed. 160 Gould Street, Needham Heights, MA 02194: Allyn & Bacon A Viacom, p. 238.
[9]
Leahy, Lyan Thompsaon, & William. (2005). Classroom assessment minute by minute, Day by Day. Educational Leadership. 63 (3) p. 23.
[10]
Tomlinson, C. A. (2008). Learning to love assessment. Educational Leadership, 65 (4), 8-13.
[11]
Fink, Dee (2003). A self-directed guide to designing courses for significant learning. Retrieved on June 02, 2012 from http://trc.virginia.edu/Workshops/2004/Fink_Designing_Courses_2004.pdf
[12]
LiXun, Wang (n.d.). Adaptation of outcome-based learning in undergraduate English education programme. Research in Higher Education, pp. 1-17. Retrieved on May 08, 2012 from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11850.pdf
[13]
Anderson, et al. (2005). Student learning outcomes assessment: A component of program assessment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69 (2) article 39, pp 256-268.
[14]
LiXun, Wang (n.d.). Adaptation of outcome-based learning in undergraduate English education programme. Research in Higher Education, p. 4. Retrieved on May 08, 2012 from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11850.pdf
[15]
LiXun, Wang (n.d.). Adaptation of outcome-based learning in undergraduate English education programme. Research in Higher Education, p. 7 Retrieved on May 08, 2012 from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11850.pdf
[16]
Gronlund, Norman E. (1974). Individualizing Classroom Instruction. New York: Mcmillan Publishing.
[17]
Aquino G. V. (1988). Principles and Methods of Effective Teaching. Manila: National Book Store. P. 720
[18]
Aquino, G. V. (1988). Principles and Methods of Effective Teaching. Manila: National Book Store p. 498.
[19]
Aquino, G. V. (1988). Principles and Methods of Effective Teaching. Manila: National Book Store p. 550
[20]
Ornstein, A. (1990). Strategies of Effective Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall.
[21]
Tabinas, Camilo (2004). Chemistry Teaching in Public High Schools in Leyte, Fourth District. USC Graduate Journal, (2), 37-45.
[22]
Estabillo, Wagayway (1997). Learning Styles of High School Students in Selected Private Schools of Cebu City and Their Relationship to Academic Achievement. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy in Education Dissertation, University of San Carlos, Cebu City, Philippines.
[23]
LiXun, Wang (n.d.). Adaptation of outcome-based learning in undergraduate English education programme. Research in Higher Education, p. 3. Retrieved on May 08, 2012 from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11850.pdf
[24]
LiXun, Wang (n.d.). Adaptation of outcome-based learning in undergraduate English education programme. Research in Higher Education, p. 4. Retrieved on May 08, 2012 from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11850.pdf
[25]
Anderson, et al (2005). Student learning outcomes assessment: A component of program assessment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69 (2) article 39 p. 257.
[26]
Felder and Silverman (1988). learning and teaching Styles in Engineering Education. Engineering Education Journal 78 (7), p. 675. Retrieved May 26, 2012 from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ Papers /LS-1988.pdf
