Exploring Factors Associated with Teachers’ Research Competence in Talisayan District, Misamis Oriental: A Multiple Linear Regression Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21784522Keywords:
teacher research competence, institutional support, research training, research mentorship, professional development, multiple linear regressionAbstract
This study examined the factors associated with teachers’ research competence among secondary public-school teachers in the Talisayan District, Misamis Oriental. It employed a quantitative descriptive-correlational design and involved 105 teachers selected from a population of 145 through proportionate stratified sampling. A researcher-developed, multi-component instrument assessed demographic characteristics; perceived time, resources, research training, institutional support, mentorship, and technology; and research competence in terms of knowledge, skills, and attitude. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis H test, Spearman rank correlation, and multiple linear regression. The institutional factors were perceived at a moderate level overall (grand mean = 3.17), with institutional support rated highest (M = 3.37) and technology lowest (M = 2.99). Most respondents demonstrated advanced research knowledge (79.15%) and a high research attitude (M = 3.51), yet 76.19% were classified as novice in research skills. Perceptions of institutional factors differed significantly only by civil status, while research competence did not significantly differ across age, sex, civil status, or teaching experience. Institutional factors had a moderate positive relationship with research competence (r = 0.506, p < .001); however, no factor independently predicted competence in the regression model. The findings indicate that teacher research competence develops through the combined influence of time, resources, training, institutional support, mentorship, and enabling technology. A coordinated capability-building approach emphasizing hands-on research production, mentoring, resource access, and sustained institutional support is therefore recommended.
Downloads
References
Borg, S. (2010). Language teacher research engagement. Language Teaching, 43(4), 391-429.
Borg, S. (2013). Teacher research in language teaching: A critical analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Borg, S. (2021). The importance of research competence in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 95, 103134.
Creswell, J. W. (2020). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2023). Technology and teacher research productivity. Journal of Digital Learning, 10(1), 45-60.
Department of Education. (2016). Adoption of the Basic Education Research Agenda (DepEd Order No. 39, s. 2016). Department of Education, Philippines.
Department of Education. (2016). The Learning Action Cell as a K-12 basic education program (DepEd Order No. 35, s. 2016). Department of Education, Philippines.
Department of Education. (2017). Research management guidelines (DepEd Order No. 16, s. 2017). Department of Education, Philippines.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2023). Mentorship and research proficiency in teachers. Educational Psychology Review, 35, 189-210.
Insorio, A. (2024). Teachers’ confidence and research competence in Philippine public schools. Philippine Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 55-70.
Jomuad, P. D., et al. (2021). Teachers’ workload in relation to burnout and work performance. International Journal of Educational Policy Research and Review, 8(2), 48-53.
Lopez, M., Reyes, J., & Cruz, A. (2022). Family responsibilities and teachers’ research engagement. Philippine Educational Review, 14(1), 77-91.
Matjašič, M., & Vogrinc, J. (2025). The role of structured research training in teacher development. Journal of Teacher Education, 78(2), 155-170.
OECD. (2021). Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2022). Digital education outlook 2022. OECD Publishing.
Omar, M. (2022). Administrative support and research productivity in Malaysian schools. Asian Journal of Education, 8(2), 91-105.
Republic of the Philippines. (2001). Republic Act No. 9155: An act instituting a framework of governance for basic education. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.
Republic of the Philippines. (2013). Republic Act No. 10533: An act enhancing the Philippine basic education system (Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013). Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.
Republic of the Philippines. (2016). Republic Act No. 10912: Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Act of 2016. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.
Salazar-Clemeña, C., & Almonte-Acosta, E. (2021). Institutional factors affecting teacher research engagement. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(3), 621-636.
Smith, J., & Lee, K. (2018). Perceptions of research value and teacher involvement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 1-9.
Teig, M., et al. (2019). Teacher workload and research engagement: A cross-national study. International Journal of Educational Research, 95, 84-95.
Tingabngab, J., & Binayao, J. (2023). Barriers to research participation among teachers in Misamis Oriental. Philippine Journal of Educational Psychology, 38(1), 78-92.
UNESCO. (2021). Teachers and technology integration in developing countries. UNESCO Publishing.
UNESCO. (2022). Teacher professional development and institutional culture. UNESCO Publishing.
Willison, J. (2018). Research skills development framework. University of Adelaide.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
