School Readiness on The Implementation of Learning Delivery Modalities (LDM’s) in The City Schools Division Province of Laguna: An Input to Curriculum Policy Brief and Intervention Program
Keywords:new normal, school readiness, 7s Mckinsey model, learning delivery modalities (LDM’s)
This study aimed to determine the relationship between the level of implementation of learning delivery modalities (LDMs) and School Readiness using 7s Model for its implementation in the City Schools Division, Province of Laguna. This study employs the descriptive method of research, specifically the descriptive correlation. It is intended to investigate the correlation between the variables. A stratified sampling method was utilized to select the respondents from the population of teachers and school heads. A survey questionnaire was the primary data gathering instrument of the study. Results of the study show that there is a significant relationship between the post-implementation of the three different distance learning delivery modalities to the 7S McKinsey organizational tools. The results entail that prior to the implementation of the different learning delivery modalities, the schools have provided professional development training that will improve and maximize the competencies and skills of the teachers. It means that the teachers at present were also equipped with the necessary skills needed to face the challenges brought by this pandemic. On the other hand, it also shows that there are teachers who observed that some of the assignments/tasks given to them are not appropriate in some other aspects. The school may provide a copy of teachers' job descriptions for them to be well-informed about their duties and responsibilities. The researcher recommended that the Division Office may conduct training that will further explain the process of utilizing 7S McKinsey Organizational Tools so that the school may enhance and maximize the use of this organizational tool to strengthen the implementation of the different learning delivery modalities. It was also suggested that the school heads, together with the teachers, may carefully plan and implement strategy that will give them ease in the implementation of LDM regardless of the size of the school.
Allen, M., Mabry, E., Mattrey, M. & Burrell, N. A. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of distance learning: A Comparison Using Meta?Analysis. Journal of Communication, 54(3), 402–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02636.x
American Council on Education (2005). To touch the future: Transforming the way teachers are taught. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/resources/presnet/teacher-ed-rpt.pdf
Almpanis T. (2015). Staff Development and Institutional Support for TechnologyEnhanced Learning in UK Universities. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning. Volume 13 Issue 5 2015, (pp366-375)
Amrein-Beardsley, A., Foulger, T .S., & Toth, M. (2007). Examining the development of a hybrid degree program: Using student and instructor data to inform decision-making. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39, 331-357.
Arain, S. S., & Munshi, P. (2017). Problems of distance learners in Province of Sindh, Pakistan. Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 6(3), 139-147.
Baran, E., Correia, A. P., & Thompson, A. (2013). Tracing successful online teaching in higher education: Voices of exemplary online teachers. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1-41.
Benton, S.J. (2015) Parent Stories of Struggling Readers. Columbus City Schools
Beyth–Marom, R., Saporta, K., & Caspi, A. (2005). Synchronous vs. asynchronous tutorials: Factors affecting students’ preferences and choices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37, 245-262.
Blank, J., Dumaij, A., & Urlings, T. (2011). Naar een optimale schaal van publieke voorzieningen. Delft: IPSE Studies.
Bonk, C., Olson, T., Wisher, R., & Orvis, K. (2002). Learning from focus groups: An examination of blended learning. Journal of Distance Education, 17, 97-118
Buckman & Tran (2015). The Relationship Between School Size and High School Completion: A Wisconsin Study. JEPPA. Volume 5, Issue 7. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315610644
Burgess, O. (2015). Cyborg teaching: The transferable benefits of teaching online for the face-to face classroom. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 136-144.
Carstens, R. W., & Worsfold, V. L. (2000). Epilogue: A cautionary note about online classrooms. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 83-87.
Chivu, R.-G., Turlacu, L.-M., Stoica, I., Radu, A. V. (2018). Identifying the effectiveness of e-learning platforms among students using Eye-Tracking technology. 4th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’18) Universitat Politecnica de Val`encia. 621-628. http://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd18.2018.8046
Cho, K., & Berge, Z. L. (2002). Overcoming barriers to distance training and education. USDLA Journal, 16.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). E-learning and the science of instruction (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Department of Education (2020). The Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan in the Time of COVID-19. Attached in DepEd Order No. 12, s. 2020. “Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan (BE-LCP) for School Year 2020-2021 in the Light of Public Health emergency.” 2020
Dey, E., Burn, H., & Gerdes, D. (2009). Bringing the classroom to the Web: Effects of using new technologies to capture and deliver lectures. Research in Higher Education, 50, 377-393. doi: 10.1007/s11162-009-9124-0.
Doering, A., Hughes, J., & Huffman, D. (2003). Preservice teachers: Are we thinking with technology? Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 35(3), 342-361.
El Mansour, B., & Mupinga, D. M. (2007). Students’ positive and negative experiences in hybrid and online classes. College Student Journal, 41(1), 242-248.
Falkirk SIPP report 2015. Falkirk School Improvement Partnership Programme (SIPP). Falkirk High School.
Fetzner, M. (2003). Institutional support for online faculty: Expanding the model. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality in online education: Practice and direction (pp. 229–243). Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
Fish, W., & Wickersham, L. (2010). Best practices for online instructors. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(3), 279-284.
Fojtík, R. (2018). Problems of distance education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technologies in Education, 7(1), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.2478/ijicte-2018-0002
Fortune, M. F., Shifflett, B., & Sibley, R. E. (2006). A comparison of online (high-tech) and traditional (high touch) learning in business communication courses in Silicon Valley. Journal of Education for Business, 81, 210-214.
Goshen Oranit (2016) Collaboration between Parents and Kindergarten Teachers [Wspó?praca rodziców z nauczycielami w przedszkolach]. Studia Edukacyjne nr 39, 2016, Pozna? 2016, pp. 497-509. Adam Mickiewicz University Press. ISBN 978-83-232-3088-5. ISSN 1233-6688. DOI: 10.14746/ se.2016.38.27
Grabe, M., & Christopherson, K. (2008). Optional student use of online lecture resources: Resource preferences, performance and lecture attendance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 1-10.
Gupta, A., & Saks, N. S. (2013). Exploring medical student decisions regarding attending live lectures and using recorded lectures. Medical Teacher, 35(9), 767-771. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.801940
Hacker, D. J., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2000). Promoting deep and durable learning in the online classroom. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 53-64.
Ho, C. P., & Burniske, R. W. (2005). The evolution of a hybrid classroom: Introducing online learning to educators in American Samoa. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49, 24-29.
Irons, L. R., Keel, R., & Bielema, C. L. (2002). Blended learning and learner satisfaction: Keys to user acceptance? USDLA Journal, 16(12). Retrieved from http://usdla.org/html/journal/DEC02_Issue/article04.html.
Iruka I.U., Winn, D.M.C., Kingsley, S.J., Orthodoxou, Y.J. (2011) Links Between Parent-Teacher Relationships and Kindergartners' Social Skills: Do Child nicity and Family Income Matter? The Elementary School Journal, 2011, 111(3).
Jensen, S. A. (2011). In-class versus online video lectures: Similar learning outcomes, but a preference for in-class. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 298-302. doi: 10.1177-0098628311421336
Jonassen, D., Spector, M., Driscoll, M., Merrill, D., Van Merrienboer, J., & Driscoll, M. (2008). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge
Johnson, Daniel (2020). Upskilling and Reskilling for the ‘New Normal’ of Education. Education Elements. https://www.edelements.com/blog/upskilling-and-reskilling-for-the-new-normal-of-education
Lane, A., & Gregson, J. (2019). Fostering innovations in pedagogical practices: transforming distance education through a professional development programme using OERs. Retrieved from http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/3387/PCF9_Papers_paper_99.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Lehman, R., & Conceição, S. (2014). Motivating and retaining online students. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Rolando D. Dollente, Consorcia S. Tan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Content Licensing, Copyright, and Permissions
International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education has CC-BY NC or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work for non-commercial purpose. The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Creative Commons License
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author(s).
3. User Rights
International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education objective is to disseminate articles published are as free as possible. Under the Creative Commons license, this journal permits users to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work for non-commercial purposes only. Users will also need to attribute authors and this journal on distributing works in the journal.
4. Rights of Authors
Authors retain the following rights:
Copyright, and proprietary rights relating to the article, such as patent rights,
The right to use the substance of the article in future own works, including lectures and books, The right to reproduce the article for own purposes, The right to self-archive the article, the right to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article's published version (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal (International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education).
The author has a non-exclusive publishing contract with a publisher and the work is published with a more restrictive license, the author retains all the rights to publish the work elsewhere, including commercially, because she/he is not subject to the conditions of her / his own license, regardless of the type of CC license chosen.
If the article was jointly prepared by other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
This agreement can be terminated by the author or International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education upon two months’ notice where the other party has materially breached this agreement and failed to remedy such breach within a month of being given the terminating party’s notice requesting such breach to be remedied. No breach or violation of this agreement will cause this agreement or any license granted in it to terminate automatically or affect the definition of International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education.
This agreement entitles the author to no royalties or other fees. To such extent as legally permissible, the author waives his or her right to collect royalties relative to the article in respect of any use of the article by This agreement can be terminated by the author or International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education upon two months’ notice where the other party has materially breached this agreement and failed to remedy such breach within a month of being given the terminating party’s notice requesting such breach to be remedied. No breach or violation of this agreement will cause this agreement or any license granted in it to terminate automatically or affect the definition of International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education or its sublicensee.
International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education will publish the article (or have it published) in the journal if the article’s editorial process is successfully completed and International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education or its sublicensee has become obligated to have the article published. International Journal of Theory and Application in Elementary and Secondary School Education may conform the article to a style of punctuation, spelling, capitalization, referencing and usage that it deems appropriate. The author acknowledges that the article may be published so that it will be publicly accessible and such access will be free of charge for the readers