Instructional Recovery Mapping and Learner Support Agility in Public Elementary Classrooms
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22922922Keywords:
competency prioritization, instructional recovery mapping, intervention matching, learner support agility, learning-gap diagnosis, progress trackingAbstract
This study focused on how instructional recovery mapping shaped learner support agility among public elementary school teachers in Solana, Cagayan. Using a predictive explanatory survey design, data were gathered from 85 teachers selected through proportionate stratified random sampling. The 32-item Instructional Recovery Mapping and Learner Support Agility Scale demonstrated strong internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of .92 for instructional recovery mapping and .94 for learner support agility. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, bootstrapped multiple regression, and relative weight analysis were employed. Results showed high levels of instructional recovery mapping and learner support agility, although intervention matching, support coordination, and resource flexibility emerged as comparatively weaker areas. Instructional recovery mapping significantly predicted learner support agility and explained 59.0% of its variance. Among the recovery dimensions, intervention matching was the strongest predictor, followed by progress tracking, learning-gap diagnosis, and competency prioritization. The findings indicate that effective recovery depends not only on identifying learning deficiencies but also on aligning interventions with diagnosed needs and continuously monitoring learner progress. Strengthening intervention matching, support coordination, and access to adaptable instructional resources is therefore recommended to improve responsive learner assistance in public elementary classrooms.
Downloads
References
Department of Education. (2023). Adoption of the National Learning Recovery Program in the Department of Education (DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2023).
Gelderblom, G., Schildkamp, K., Pieters, J. M., & Ehren, M. C. M. (2016). Data-based decision making for instructional improvement in primary education. International Journal of Educational Research, 80, 1–14.
Kärner, T., Warwas, J., & Schumann, S. (2021). A learning analytics approach to address heterogeneity in the classroom: The teachers’ diagnostic support system. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 26, 31–52.
Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2016). Every teacher should succeed with data literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(8), 43–46.
Nitz, J., Brack, F., Hertel, S., Krull, J., Stephan, H., Hennemann, T., & Hanisch, C. (2023). Multi-tiered systems of support with focus on behavioral modification in elementary schools: A systematic review. Heliyon, 9(6), e17506.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results, Volumes I and II: Country note, Philippines. OECD Publishing.
Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M., Scales, R. Q., Gallagher, M. A., Parsons, A. W., Davis, S. G., Pierczynski, M., & Allen, M. (2018). Teachers' instructional adaptations: A research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 88(2), 205–242.
Schellekens, L. H., Bok, H. G. J., de Jong, L. H., van der Schaaf, M. F., Kremer, W. D. J., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2021). A scoping review on the notions of Assessment as Learning (AaL), Assessment for Learning (AfL), and Assessment of Learning (AoL). Studies in Educational Evaluation, 71, 101094.
Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020). Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 101602.
van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Frèrejean, J., Dolmans, D., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Visscher, A. J. (2019). Capturing the complexity of differentiated instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(1), 51–67.
World Bank, UNESCO, UNICEF, FCDO, USAID, & Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2022). The state of global learning poverty: 2022 update. World Bank.
Yao, Y., Amos, M., Snider, K., & Brown, T. (2024). The impact of formative assessment on K-12 learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research and Evaluation, 29(7–8), 452–475.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
