Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 34 no. 1 (2025)

Aligning Grade 10 Science Teaching and Learning Styles: Basis for Pisa-Based Enriched Lesson Plans

Keyneth Jay Jaleco | Christine P. Abo

Discipline: others in psychology

 

Abstract:

This study explored the relationship between the dominant teaching styles of Grade 10 Science teachers and the preferred learning styles of students to develop a PISA-based enriched lesson plan. Employing descriptive and correlational research methods, the study identified common teaching styles—Expert, Formal Authority, Personal Model, Facilitator, and Delegator—and prevalent learning styles—Independent, Dependent, Avoidant, Participant, Competitive, and Collaborative. Findings revealed that the Facilitator teaching style was most frequently used, while students predominantly exhibited a Dependent learning style. Pearson correlation analysis confirmed significant associations between teaching and learning styles, highlighting the need for instructional alignment. Based on these results, a PISA-based lesson plan was developed using the 7Es instructional framework, integrating interactive and real-world applications through the LUMI platform. This lesson plan was designed to support both Facilitator and Dependent learning approaches, ensuring adaptability to diverse educational needs. Expert evaluation affirmed its quality and relevance. The study underscores the importance of aligning teaching methods with student learning preferences to enhance engagement and academic performance. It also emphasizes the potential of PISA-based strategies in improving instructional practices, offering insights for educators, administrators, and curriculum developers in advancing science education.



References:

  1. Bautista, R., & Ocampo, D. (2021). The impact of teaching and learning styles on student engagement and academic performance. Philippine Journal of Education, 42(3), 45- 67.
  2. Biggs, J. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  3. Blumberg, P. (2009). Developing learner-centered teaching: A practical guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
  4. Bonner, S. M. (2018). Transforming science education through student-centered teaching approaches. Science Education Review, 22(4), 309-326.
  5. Cabansag, J. N. (2014). Differentiated instruction: An approach for teaching diverse learners in the 21st century classroom. Journal of Education and Learning, 8(2), 78-90.
  6. Chi, M. T. H., Roy, M., & Hausmann, R. G. M. (2008). Observing tutorial dialogues collaboratively: Insights on learning effectiveness. Cognitive Science, 32(2), 301-341.
  7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  8. Cruz, J., & Gozun, B. (2022). Challenges in implementing student-centered learning in Philippine high schools. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 15(2), 112-130.
  9. Dela Cruz, M., & Villanueva, L. (2023). The role of expert validation in instructional material development for heterogeneous classrooms. Philippine Educational Review, 40(1), 89- 104.
  10. Delos Santos, M. (2019). The shift to learner-centered education in the Philippines: Implications and challenges. Journal of Philippine Education, 37(2), 56-72.
  11. Dunn, R., & Griggs, S. A. (2007). Synthesis of the Dunn and Dunn learning styles model research: Who, what, when, where, and so what? St. John’s University Press.
  12. Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (2015). Understanding student learning. Routledge.
  13. Felder, R. M., & Soloman, B. A. (1993). Learning styles and strategies. North Carolina State University.
  14. Garcia, M., & Mendoza, A. (2021). Integrating PISA-based instructional approaches in science education: A framework for improving student achievement. Journal of Science Education Research, 18(3), 214-230.
  15. Grasha, A. F. (1996). Teaching with style: A practical guide to enhancing learning by understanding teaching and learning styles. Alliance Publishers.
  16. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.
  17. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
  18. Kember, D., & Kwan, K. P. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28(5), 469-490.
  19. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., Schmeck, R. R., & Avdic, A. (2011). The big five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(4), 472-477.
  20. Liew, S. C., Sidhu, G. K., & Barua, A. (2015). The 7E instructional model: An innovative approach to enhance engagement and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 65-78.
  21. Mendoza, A., & Garcia, P. (2023). Challenges of learner-centered teaching in large science classrooms. Philippine Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 134-151.
  22. Morris, C., Collins, J., & Green, P. (2005). Scaffolding dependent learners: Strategies for structured instruction in science education. Cambridge University Press.
  23. Newton, P., & Miah, A. (2017). Evidence-based education: Beyond randomized controlled trials. Educational Research Review, 22, 71-81.
  24. Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119.
  25. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
  26. Reyes, J. M. (2015). The role of technology-enhanced learning in improving student achievement in science education. Philippine Journal of Educational Technology, 22(3), 56-74.
  27. Romanelli, F., Bird, E., & Ryan, M. (2009). Learning styles: A review of theory, application, and best practices. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(1), 09.
  28. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
  29. San Juan, R., & Reig, A. (2020). Student engagement in science education: The impact of interactive teaching methods on motivation and learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 18(2), 192-207.
  30. Schunk, D. H. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson.
  31. Soriano, E. P. (2016). Technology-enhanced science education: A framework for improving student engagement and learning outcomes. Philippine Journal of Science Education, 14(3), 123-140.
  32. Tanner, K., & Allen, D. (2004). Approaches to biology teaching and learning: Learning styles and the problem of instructional selection. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 3(4), 197- 201.
  33. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  34. Villaverde, J. (2017). Differentiated instruction in diverse classrooms: Strategies for enhancing student engagement and achievement. Journal of Educational Leadership, 21(2), 89-104.

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic