EFFECTIVENESS OF FLEXIBLE LEARNING STRATEGIES IN THE ACADEMIC

PERFORMANCE OF THE PRESERVICE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS

A Research Proposal

Presented to the Faculty of the

Elementary and Early Childhood Education Department

College of Teacher Education

NUEVA VIZCAYA STATE UNIVERSITY

Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya

In Partial fulfilment of the Requirements

For the Degree

BACHELOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

JULIEN MANUEL

ANTHONY BONDOL

ZAIRA MAE HABUNGAN

JULIVA OYAGON

MARJORIE SALDIVAR

2nd semester 2022-2023

 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

According to HEA (2015), flexible learning empowers learners and offers them a choice in how,

what, where, and when they learn. Educators in the 21 centuries realize that students entering the

classroom today are much different from those who have come before. Today's students are demanding a

change in the classroom because of their ability to gather information faster than any other generation. To

make authentic connections with students, we must change our strategies to fit this new age of students.

With the resources available today for use in the classroom, such as interactive software, digital imaging,

audio and video creation tools, on-demand video libraries, computers and LCD projectors, and Web 2.0

tools, the hardest job may be choosing which tool to use and how to integrate it into the classroom. It is

the greatest time in history to be in a classroom because learning technology is changing at an exponential

rate, and our students can thrive with it.

Based from CHED Memorandum Order No. 06 s of 2022, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) may

continue to implement flexible learning as provide under CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 4,

series of 2020 and other applicable Commission on Higher Education (CHED) guidelines on flexible

learning for specific disciplines/programs. HEIs shall likewise observe existing guidelines in the conduct

of face-to-face classes.

Gordon (2014), states that the key elements of flexible learning are pace, such as accelerated learning,

part-time learning, or credit for prior learning; place, which may include classroom, home, and mobile

learning as well as work-based and experiential learning; and mode, which refers to a delivery method.

Flexible learning has shifted the entire focus of education from the instructor’s teaching onto the

student’s learning. Students were previously required to simply listen in class and then memorize

information for a final exam. However, flexible learning is forcing institutions to re-think how students

are being taught and whether this traditional method of teaching is ultimately beneficial. Every student

has a different learning style but traditional education does not cater to them all. Therefore, by changing

the teaching styles and the way that students are being presented with information, institutions are able to

measure its overall impact and outcome. By providing students with the liberty to teach themselves and

experiment with various learning methods, the student not only becomes more accountable for the way
that they are digesting information but it also helps to shift the responsibility onto the student. When

students feel more responsible for their learning, they are more likely to be dedicated and therefore work

harder. As state from the Sustainable Goals Development (SDG) Goal 4 Quality education to ensure

inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. It ensures

that all girls and boys complete free primary and secondary schooling 2030. The goal is to provide equal

access to affordable vocational training and eliminate gender and wealth disparities with the aim of

achieving universal access to quality higher education.

Studying seems hard but it leads every people on their dreams and goals. In order to acquire more

knowledge, the school and universities implement flexible learning and full face-to-face classes.

However, there’s and event happened last November 23, 2022 entitled Tungtungan : A public forum on

the future of General Education , of Multiculturalism and Diversity , Citizenship , and Basic and Tertiary

Education held at the Nueva Vizcaya State University according to our University President , Dr.

Wilfredo A. Dumale Jr. he states that, this upcoming second semester the university is going to have a

face-to-face class.

This study can be a great help especially for the university students for them to be aware upon the

implementation of face-to-face class. Respondents can contribute to this research because it can provide

them with ideas, knowledge, and information that they can use and that will benefit them because of the

information that the researchers can gather about the connection between flexible learning and academic

performance and how students can improve themselves.

The aforementioned issue can be resolved by researchers by gathering data on it, as well as by

assisting and advising students who are participating in flexible learning in their classes to manage their

time because their choices may have an impact on their academic achievement.

In this connection, the researchers conducted this study to understand the effectiveness of flexible

learning strategies in their academic performance of 2 nd and 3rd year Preservice Elementary Teachers of

Nueva Vizcaya State University, Bayombong during the first semester of school year 2022-2023.

Statement of the Problem

Flexible Learning has been applied in this country since the pandemic started. Hence, this study

endeavored what flexible learning do to help the teachers in teaching strategies for the students and also

the effectiveness of flexible learning for the students’ academic performance while it is pandemic.
 Specifically, this study aimed to answer the following:

The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of flexible learning for the students’

academic performance of the preservice elementary teachers.

More specifically, it aims to answer the following questions:

1) What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1 sex

1.2 age

1.3 year level

2) What is the effectiveness of flexible learning strategies?

3) What is the academic performance of the Preservice Elementary Teachers?

4) Is there a significant difference between the demographic profile and academic performance?

5) Is there a significant difference between difference between the demographic profile and flexible

learning strategies?

6) Is there a significant relationship between flexible learning strategies and academic performance?

Objectives of the Study

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of flexible learning strategies and the academic

performance of elementary preservice teachers of Nueva Vizcaya State University.

Specifically, this research seeks to determine;

1. the demographic profile of Preservice Elementary Teachers in terms of age, sex, and year level.

2. the level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategies.

3. the academic performance of the Preservice Elementary Teachers.

4. the significant difference between demographic profile and academic performance.

5. the significant difference between demographic profile and flexible learning strategies.

6. the relationship between flexible learning strategies and academic performance

Null Hypotheses of the Study

Here are some examples of null hypotheses for the study on the effectiveness of flexible learning

strategies and academic performance of pre-service elementary teachers:

1. There is no significant relationship between demographic profile and flexible learning strategies
 2. There is no significant relationship between demographic profile and academic performance

3. There is no significant relationship between the flexible learning strategies and the academic

performance.

Significance of the Study

Study will be beneficial to the following;

Student. The student can be benefited from this study because it will determine what are the pros and

cons of flexible learning strategies and if it is effective enough to help them excel academically and if it is

kind of set up

Teachers. This study will help the teachers of the school to have a deeper understanding to the

flexible learning and will help them deal with students better.

Parents. The parents will have an understanding regarding to their child’s academic performance

when there’s a sudden change of learning such as the flexible learning.

Office of the Students Affairs. Results of this study help the office of the student affair to guide their

performance of the students engaged in flexible learning

Future Researchers. To the future researchers, the proposed study will benefit and help the future

researchers as their guide or their basis. The study can also open in developing and improvement of this

study.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study aims to look into the effectiveness of flexible learning strategies in their academic

performance of 2nd and 3rd year Preservice elementary teachers. The respondents were limited for all

enrolled Preservice elementary teachers during the first semester of school year 2022-2023.

Theoretical Framework of the Study

Academic performance described as an “perform” is an ability to produce a valued result and

“performer” as an individual or a group that engages in collaboration while the level of performance as

the location in an academic journey Elger (2007). Flexible Learning is a form of distance learning method

offered as a current modality due to pandemic restrictions. This can include online-learning, self-paced,

and other blended learning opportunities.

 In this study, researchers focus on the flexible learning strategies that affects the academic

performance of 2nd and 3rd year BEED students. It is further assumed that flexible learning is connected in

their academic performance.

The following figure represents the relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

Flexible Learning Strategies

- Technological
resources
- Time management
Demographic Profile
a.) sex
b.) age
c.) year level

Academic Performance

- General Weight
average (GWA)

Figure 1. Relationship between the demographic profile, flexible learning strategies and academic

performance.

Operational Definition of Terms

The following were operationally defined to facilitate understanding of the study.

Sex. It is their identification whether male or female

Age. It is the period of time that a person has existed.

Year Level. The specific grade or academic year that a student is enrolled within an educational

institution

Flexible Learning Strategies. this is the main focus of the researchers to find out how effective

the flexible learning in terms of their academic performance.

Academic Performance. The average grade obtained by the students who were currently

enrolled in BEED.
Technological resources. This is the available resources and accessibility of the students in the

university.

Time management. The availability of the student time to consume in engaging the flexible

learning.

General Weight average (GWA). The average of the students that is needed in this study.
 Chapter II

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

The teaching and learning in the new normal

The CHED memorandum order no. 04 series of 2020 emphasizes the need for flexible learning in

higher education institutions due to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Transitioning to

online instruction has been difficult for these institutions. Gope et al. (2021) highlight the importance of

addressing the issues caused by the pandemic, given the inexperience and vulnerability of the education

sector. When implementing new educational strategies in the Philippines, various factors should be

considered, such as E-learning resources, online learning systems, teachers' competence, learners'

circumstances, learning environment efficacy, and skills required for the "new normal" (Joaquin et al.,

2020). To ensure student engagement, educational tools and instruments used by teachers and students

must be accessible, inclusive, interactive, observable, and sustainable. Technology, when used

appropriately, promotes communication and collaboration between students and teachers (Bower, 2019).

The user's level of acceptance and affirmation significantly affects the effectiveness of online learning

(Tarhini et al., 2016). It's important to recognize that online learning is just one form of remote learning

and that its implementation during periods of quarantines and outbreaks is based on certain assumptions.

However, the sudden shift to online learning has been challenging for teachers and students who prefer

in-person instruction. Online learning is sometimes seen as inferior and offering a lower quality education

compared to face-to-face learning (Hodges et al., 2020). A survey by Pomerantz and Brooks (2017)

revealed negative opinions about fully online learning, with only 9% of professors preferring to teach

exclusively online. Similarly, a significant number of students (up to 70%) in a survey conducted by

Gierdowski (2019) expressed a preference for face-to-face learning environments.

Flexible learning strategies

The effectiveness of a flexible learning environment depends on carefully examined design

components and learner characteristics. Gender statistics indicate no performance differences between

men and women. However, there are statistically significant age differences, with 62% of respondents in

the 20-30 age range and 67% in the 31-39 age range. Learners demonstrate proficiency in word

processing, email, spreadsheets, and web browsers, but they struggle with HTML tools. The proportion of

family and social support is 61% and 75%, respectively, while job and education support is at 60%.
According to Mugenyi Justice Kintu, Chan Zhu, and Edmond Kaambe (2017), learners' computer

confidence is at 75.3%.

Despite challenges in finding required readings, completing assignments, and staying focused

when studying online, learner satisfaction with the online system and its resources indicates the potential

effectiveness of blended learning. Monthly face-to-face assistance sessions are recommended to ensure

the quality of technology, and positive exam outcomes, intrinsic motivation, contentment, and knowledge

acquisition are commonly observed.

A study found that flexible learning had minimal impact on the academic growth and

achievement of secondary school students. Regardless of the learning environment, students' MAP RIT

gain scores in winter math from 7th to 8th grade remained the same. This supports previous research by

Chang et al. and Siko (2014), which concluded that the instructional learning environment does not affect

students' academic growth or achievement.

Regarding the impact on academic performance, one respondent highlighted that the teacher's

reduced presence in class compared to a traditional setting has consequences. The respondent expressed

that the modular learning strategy is ineffective since students require explanations of the lessons beyond

reading them. It can be challenging to reach teachers, especially when many students are waiting in line

with questions.

Another respondent mentioned the overwhelming amount of homework and assignments

required, emphasizing that recitation or performance tasks are mandatory for passing the class. Blended

learning was praised for its convenience, allowing students to study and learn without leaving their

homes. However, the lack of a stable internet connection can hinder participation in online classes and

pose difficulties in asking questions or engaging with classmates and instructors. This problem can also

impact students if they fail to meet deadlines set by their teachers.

The respondent emphasized the simplicity of blended learning, combining online classes with

instructor-led discussions and modules for independent reading. This flexibility accommodates diverse

learning styles and preferences. Blended learning's success lies in its ability to facilitate learning

whenever, wherever, and however students prefer.

Based on the findings, several recommendations are proposed:

 1. Teachers should find alternative methods for assigning homework and exercises, considering the

burden of solitary activities. Students need to manage their time effectively to meet the requirements,

whether in online classes or modular learning.

2. To enhance students' academic performance, instructors should employ a variety of teaching

techniques.

The pre-unit survey revealed that 87% of respondents considered flexible learning a successful

teaching/learning method, while 13% did not. In the post-unit review, 89% of students believed that

blended learning was an effective learning method, with 11% expressing disagreement. Tables 4.10 and

4.11 display students' responses regarding whether blended learning improved their interactions with

teachers. Results indicate that 46% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their relationship with

the teacher had improved, while 9% disagreed or strongly disagreed. Christopher Michael (2018) found

similar results in a student opinion survey regarding the effectiveness of the flexible learning unit in

facilitating peer communication.

The pre-unit survey showed that 45% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that their

connections with peers had improved, while 13% were unconvinced or dissatisfied. In the post-unit

survey, 58% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that blended learning had increased their

interaction, with only 3% expressing disagreement.

Flexible learning

According to Shurville et al. (2008), flexible learning refers to a set of educational theories and

strategies aimed at providing students with greater freedom, flexibility, and customization to meet their

individual needs. It empowers students to choose when, where, and how they learn. Cassidy et al. (2016)

further support this notion, stating that flexible learning encompasses both technological and non-

technological factors and is an instructional approach that allows individuals to be flexible in terms of

time, location, and audience. The research conducted by Morris and Tucker (2012) suggests that

professionals from various fields can incorporate flexible education into their teaching models, offering a

starting point to overcome the challenges associated with flexibility in today's technology-driven world.

However, there is some confusion surrounding the definition and application of flexible learning, often

leading to the conflation of terms like blended learning, online learning, and flexible learning. It is

important to exercise caution when using the term "flexibility" and to differentiate between flexible

delivery and flexible learning, as emphasized by Palmer (2011) and Hart (2000). The latter outlines
guiding principles for implementing flexible learning, such as flexible access, recognition of prior

learning, flexible resources, flexible teaching and learning methods, and flexible assessment. Flexible

learning is not always synonymous with adaptability, but rather it involves adapting to students' needs

while maintaining the educator's role in guiding and managing the learning process. Bergamin et al.

(2012) conducted a study that demonstrated the positive impact of flexible learning on self-regulated

learning practices, showing that groups with high levels of learning flexibility employ more learning

strategies. Furthermore, the study categorized flexible learning into three fixed factors: flexibility of time

management, teacher contact, and content. Another study by Polhun et al. (2021) compared blended

learning with distance learning during the lockdown phase and found that blended learning consistently

outperformed traditional methods in test scores, particularly for subgroups like girls. However, there were

limitations in the study, such as a small sample size and limited experience in implementing blended

learning. Blended learning, as described by Becker (2020), combines the benefits of face-to-face

instruction with the personalized and collaborative aspects of digital technologies. It offers various

approaches to accommodate different instructional needs and has shown success in improving academic

performance, closing achievement gaps, and personalizing learning for all students. Additionally,

specialized statistical software like Microsoft Excel can be used to study topics like probability theory and

mathematical statistics and generate graphical representations. Bakhmat et al. (2021) suggest that access

to exam data for statistical analysis should be integrated into the educational process. Moodle's electronic

testing feature can be utilized to track academic progress, evaluate test authenticity, and receive positive

feedback from both teachers and students. However, challenges related to administering final exams in

distance learning during quarantine periods still persist. Graham et al. (N.Y.) conducted a study that

compared attendance, online participation, and academic achievement, revealing positive associations

between academic success and both in-person and online class participation. Similarly, another study

found no significant impact of social media usage on academic achievement among university students.

These findings suggest the potential benefits of blended learning, but further research is needed to explore

key factors that contribute to student satisfaction and better learning outcomes. Overall, blending

traditional and digital teaching methods can enhance student engagement, academic performance, and the

management of classes for both educators and students.

Academic performance

According to the study of Sheard M. (2010) who aimed to examined whether age, gender, and

hardiness differentiate university grade point average (GPA). The result of the study revealed that mature-
age students achieved higher degree GPA compared to young undergraduates. Female students

outperformed male in the measurement criteria. Also, the result of the study showed that female was

reported a significantly higher mean score on hardiness commitment compared to male students. The

study also identified commitment as the most significant factor related to academic performance. The

findings of his study have implications for universities aiming to enhance academic support services and

maximize students’ academic potential.

The ability of students to perform at the desired level is enhanced by a multifaceted phenomenon that

is influenced by a variety of factors, including meta-reflective learning and cognition, interest, motivation

for learning, skills, engagement, teaching quality, and socioeconomic status (Lewin & Mawoyo, 2014;

Moseki & Schulze, 2010). According to Tinto (1987), a student's academic performance is a long-term

process that involves interactions between the resources, intentions, temperaments, and commitments of

the student as well as attributes of the academic institution. Positive student experiences that change their

commitments and intents to positive interactions improve academic success.

Academic success is crucial for an institution to achieve successful outcomes that translate into future

job performance (Kuncel et al., 2005). Age, gender, and place of residence have no bearing on academic

achievement, according to Hijazi & Naqvi (2006), but they also asserted that individuals who live close to

a university can perform significantly better than those who do not. According to (Hijazi & Naqvi, 2006),

weak pupils would also perform better academically if they are grouped with good students. This will

help students graduate on schedule. The truth is that pupils can improve their academic performance with

effort from themselves (Zajonc, 1980). Additionally, bad study habits can cause study delays (McKenzie

& Schweitzer, 2001) and have an impact on students' cumulative grade point averages (CGPAs) (Chapell

et al., 2005). According to (Alimi, Ehinola, & Alabi, 2012), the nation's economy can suffer from the low

rate of academic performance.

(2010) Moseki & Schulze). According to Tinto (1987), a student's academic performance is a long-

term process that involves interactions between the resources, intentions, temperaments, and

commitments of the student as well as attributes of the academic institution. Positive student experiences

that change their commitments and intents to positive interactions improve academic success.

Effectiveness of flexible learning strategies to the academic performance

Despite limited online learning resources, the researcher recognizes the benefits of flexible

learning. Gayeta's study (2020) shows that teachers at State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and Private
Universities and Colleges (PUCs) maintain a positive attitude towards education despite the global

pandemic. They take responsibility seriously, working hard to implement interactive learning in rural

areas. Utilizing computer technology proves to be highly beneficial. The case study also highlights how

the Higher Education of the Philippines responded to the COVID-19 pandemic, providing students with

an excellent education through the Higher Education Commission. However, learners facing issues with

flexible learning's hardware, software, or both are the most impacted. According to Lazaga and

Madrigal's study (2021), online learning leads to student demotivation due to poor internet connections,

confusion, and difficulties adapting to the online platform.

 Chapter III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research will follow the guidelines for research methodology wherein, this chapter, it

showcases the research design, research environment, respondents and sampling procedure, research

instrument, data gathering procedure and statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

This study used the descriptive – inferential research method. It is a qualitative approach and

simply survey questionnaire. The survey questionnaire dealt with the determination of effectiveness of

flexible learning strategies and academic performance of all enrolled preservice elementary teachers.

Descriptive research was used to utilized to describe the profiles of the Preservice Elementary Teachers

and their Academic Performance. Whereas inferential research design is utilized to determine the

significant difference between the demographic profile and the level of effectiveness of flexible learning

strategies and academic performance and significant relationship between the level of effectiveness of

flexible learning strategies and academic performance.

Research Environment

The locale of this study is in Nueva Vizcaya State University which is located in Barangay. Don

Mariano Perez, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya.

The map of Nueva Vizcaya State University of Bayombong shows the locale of the study

Respondents and Sampling Procedure

 The respondents of this study are the 2 nd and 3rd year BEED of NVSU who are enrolled this year

and semester. Stratified-random sampling is used in choosing the 2 nd and 3rd year BEED students.

Research Instrument

The main instrument used is a survey questionnaire. The responses of the respondents will be

gathered through questionnaire. A questionnaire uses in gathering data wherein the questionnaire has two

parts. Part 1 consist of demographic profile, part2 consist of questionnaires about the flexible learning

strategies.

In this study, the instrument use is research-made questionnaire of the researchers with 10 items

of question that provides qualitative description to gather the data needed. It will undergo expert

validation.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers will ask permission from the College Dean of Teacher Education and the

Department Chair of Bachelor of Elementary Education to float the questionnaire. The researchers will

also ask permission to the office of the registrar for the records of General Weight Average of students.

After securing the permission, population sampling was done. All enrolled BEED students of NVSU

School will be randomly selected to answer the survey questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered

among the Bachelor in Elementary Education. The respondents are BEED students. After gathering the

data, the data was coded, organized, and interpreted to determine the effectiveness of flexible learning

strategies and academic performance of all enrolled preservice elementary teachers of NVSU.

Statistical Treatment of Data

Data is collected from students through questionnaires and were subjected to descriptive statistics

such as frequency counts, averages and percentages. Independent sample t-test was used to determine the

difference between level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategy; level of academic performance of

the students and the demographic profile. Pearson correlation was used to determine the relationship

between the academic performance and level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategy. Statistical

analysis was done using the Statistical Package for Social Science Research (SPSS).

The responses to questions in the given variables were scaled using the “five-point-scale” or likert scale

system and given weight as follows:

Rate Verbal interpretation Range

5 Strongly Agree 4.6-5.0

4 Agree 3.6-4.5

3 Neutral 2.6-3.5

2 Disagree 1.6-2.5

1 Strongly Disagree 1.0-1.5

Academic Performance of the General Weight Average

Percentage Rate Description

1.00 – 1.24 Outstanding

1.25 – 1.74 Very Satisfactory

1.75 – 2.24 Satisfactory

2.25 – 3.00 Fair

 Chapter IV

RESULT and DISCUSSION

Demographic Profile

Table 1 shows the demographic profile of the respondents; age, sex and the year level.

Table 1: Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Frequency Percentage (%)

Age

18 1 1.11

19 4 4.44

20 36 40

21 26 28.89

22 12 13.33

23 6 6.67

24 and above 5 5.56

Total 90 100

Sex

Male 16 17.78

Female 74 82.22

Total 90 100

Year Level

Second Year 45 50

Third Year 45 50

Total 90 100

Among the surveyed respondents, there were only 1 (1.11%) whose age is 18 years old, 4

(4.44%) respondents whose age is 19, 36 (40%) aged 20 years old, 26 (28.89%) respondents whose age is

21 years old, 12 (13.33%) respondents whose age is 23 years old, and 5 (5.56%) respondents whose age is

24 and above. The average age of the surveyed respondents was 21 years old.
 In terms of sex, there were 74 (82.22%) surveyed female respondents and 16 (17.78%) surveyed

male respondents. This implied that the teaching profession is prevalent by female. Lastly, in terms of

respondents’ year level, there were 45 (50%) in each year level from second – third year. Respondents

were equally chosen from each year level.

Level of Effectiveness of Flexible Learning

Table 2 shows the respondents level of effectiveness of flexible learning in the 3 factors namely;

flexible learning strategies, the use of technological resources, and the use of time management.

Table 2: Level of Effectiveness of Flexible Learning

Description Mean Standard Deviation Qualitative

Description

Flexible Strategy

FS1 3.07 0.64 Neutral

FS2 3.12 0.58 Neutral

FS3 3.03 0.68 Neutral

FS4 3.02 0.60 Neutral

FS5 3.06 0.71 Neutral

FS6 3.11 0.71 Neutral

FS7 3.08 0.67 Neutral

FS8 3.29 0.60 Neutral

FS9 3.51 3.19 Neutral

FS10 3.16 0.65 Neutral

Average 3.14 0.90 Neutral

Technological Resources

TR1 3.02 0.56 Neutral

TR2 2.99 0.55 Neutral

TR3 3.16 0.63 Neutral

TR4 3.23 0.60 Neutral

TR5 3.02 0.65 Neutral

TR6 3.06 0.65 Neutral

 TR7 3.09 0.44 Neutral

TR8 3.01 0.59 Neutral

TR9 3.08 0.62 Neutral

TR10 2.90 0.67 Neutral

Average 3.06 0.60 Neutral

Time Management

TM1 2.93 0.63 Neutral

TM2 2.89 0.68 Neutral

TM3 2.81 0.75 Neutral

TM4 2.72 0.69 Neutral

TM5 2.91 0.61 Neutral

TM6 2.89 0.59 Neutral

TM7 3.04 0.70 Neutral

TM8 2.80 0.74 Neutral

TM9 2.84 0.69 Neutral

TM10 2.84 0.70 Neutral

Average 2.87 0.68 Neutral

Grand Mean 3.02 0.73 Neutral

For the use of flexible learning strategy, the indicator with the lowest rating was FS4 – “Flexible

learning strategies have provided me with greater access to learning resources and materials.” with a

mean rating of 3.02 (Nuetral) and standard deviation of 0.60. While the indicator with the highest rating

was FS9 – “Flexible learning strategies have helped me to develop better critical thinking skills.” with a

mean rating of 3.51 (Nuetral) and standard deviation of 3.19. The use of flexible learning strategy had an

average rating of 3.14 (A). This implies that on the average, students were neutral to all the indicators

regarding the flexible learning strategy. Students do not agree or dis-agree in this factor as Kintu M. J. et.

al (2017) stated on their study that flexible learning had little to no effect on students’ academic

performance or accomplishments.

In terms of technological resources, the indicators with the lowest rating was TR10 – “Becomes

more important to me if the student does not have access to a computer at home.” with a mean rating of
2.90 (Neutral) and standard deviation of 0.67. While the indicator with the highest rating was TR4 – “Is a

valuable instructional tool.” with a mean rating of 3.23 (Neutral) and standard deviation of 0.60. The use

of technological resources factor had an average rating of 3.06 (Neutral). This indicates that respondents

do not agree or disagree in the use of technological resources.

In terms of the use of time management factor, the indicators with the lowest and highest rating

were TM4 – “I effectively manage workload.” and TM7 – “I always manage time to those activities.”

with a mean rating of 2.72 (Neutral) and 3.04 (Neutral), respectively. And a standard deviation of 0.69

and 0.0.70, respectively. The factor time management had an average rating of 2.87 (Neutral). This

implies that students were also neutral with regards to all the indicators of the use of time management.

The level of effectiveness of flexible learning with the following factors; flexible learning,

technological resources, and time management had a grand mean of 3.02 and a qualitative description of

“Neutral”. This indicates that students do not agree or disagree to all the indicators of effectiveness of

flexible learning.

Academic Performance of the Respondents

Table 3 shows the level of academic performance of the respondents.

Table3. Level of Academic Performance

GPA Frequency Percentage Qualitative Description

1.00 – 1.24 0 0 Outstanding

1.25 – 1.74 8 8.89 Very Satisfactory

1.75 – 2.24 65 72.22 Satisfactory

2.26 – 3.00 17 18.89 Fair

Total 90 100

As shown on the table, there is none respondent whose GPA ranges from 1.00 – 1.24 with an

outstanding academic performance. 8 (8.89%) respondents have a GPA range from 1.25 – 1.74. this

indicates a very satisfactory performance. There were 65 (72.22%) respondents who have a GPA range

from 1.75 – 2.24 with a satisfactory academic performance. And lastly, there were 17 (18.89%)

respondents with a fair academic performance with a GPA ranges from 2.26 – 3.00. The level of
academic performance of the 90 respondents have an average GPA of 2.00 This value indicates a

satisfactory academic performance.

Comparison on the Level of Academic Performance of the Respondents when Grouped

According to their Demographics

Table 4 shows the f-value and significant value of the difference among the demographic profile

of the respondents and the level of academic performance.

Table 4: Difference Between the Demographic Profile and Level of Academic Performance

Demographic Profile F-value Significant value

Age 0.899 0.346

Sex 1.536 0.218

Year Level 0.760 0.386

*significant at p<0.05

It was shown that the demographic profile age has a computed f-value and significant value of

0.899 and 0.346, respectively. In terms of sex, the computed f-value and significant value of 1.536 and

0.218, respectively. And lastly, the year level has a f-value of 0.560 and a significant value of 0.386.

Since the computed significant value is greater than the significant level at 5% or 0.05, the demographic

profile and the level of academic performance of the respondents has no statistically significant

difference. This implied that male or female, younger or older, lower or higher year level students

perform similarly in their academics. The finding was opposite on the study of Sheard M. (2010) which

resulted to the existence of significantly different of the demographic profile, specifically, age and gender

to their academic performance.

Comparison on the Level of Flexible Learning Strategies of the Respondents when Grouped

According to their Demographics

Table 5 shows the f-value and significant value of the difference among the demographic profile

of the respondents and the level of flexible learning strategies.

Table 5: Difference Between the Demographic Profile and Level of Flexible Learning Strategy

Demographic Profile F-value Significant value

Age 4.066 0.047*

 Sex 1.044 0.310

Year Level 4.381 0.039*

*significant at p<0.05

It was shown that the demographic profile variable age has a computed f-value and significant

value of 4.066 and 0.047, respectively. In terms of sex, the computed f-value and significant value of

1.044 and 0.310, respectively. And lastly, the year level has a f-value of 4.381 and a significant value of

0.039. Since the computed significant value of the variables age and year level were less than the

significant level at 5% or 0.005, there exist a significant difference among the demographic variable and

the level of flexible learning strategy. It can be inferred from this finding that younger age or older age

has different perception with regards to flexible learning strategy and also the lower year or higher year

has different insight. But the computed significant value of the variable sex is higher than the significant

value, there is no significant difference among male and female between their extent of flexible learning

strategy. This implied that male or female has a similar perception on the flexible learning strategy. These

findings were similar to the result of the study of Kintu M. J. et. al. (2017) that statistically no differences

in performance between men and women base on gender but statistically significant different with regards

to age.

Relationship Between Flexible Learning Strategies and Academic Performance

Table 6 shows the Pearson correlation and significant value of the relationship between the level

of flexible learning strategies and the academic performance of the respondents.

Table 6. Relationship between the Flexible Learning Strategies vs Academic Performance

Sig (2-tailed) Pearson correlation

Academic Performance

vs

Level of Flexible Learning 0.176 0.096

Strategy

*significant at p<0.05
 The computed correlation and significant value were 0.0.176 and 0.096, respectively. The

computed significant value is higher than the significant level at 5% or 0.05. This indicates that there is

no significant relationship between the level of flexible learning strategies and the academic performance

of the respondents. It means that, flexible learning strategy has no impact in a high or low academic

performance of a students. Becker J. L. (2020) claimed that flexible learning/ blended learning is a

productive method to improved students’ academic performance which is not supported by the findings of

this study.
 Chapter V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION and RECOMMENDATION

Summary

The demographic information of the 90 surveyed BEED students of Nueva Vizcaya were;

18 years old was the youngest age with 1 (1.11%) respondent while 24 years old and above was

the oldest with 5 (5.56%) respondents. The average age of the surveyed BEED students was 21

years old. There were more female than male respondent which was 74 (82.22%) and 16

(17.78%) respondents. There were equal respondents that were surveyed in term of their year

level with 45 (50%) respondents in each year level (Second year and Third year).

The level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategies has a grand mean of 3.02 and a

qualitative description of “Neutral”. Among the indicators per factor, the mean for the “Flexible

Strategy” was 3.14 (Neutral), the mean for the “Technological Resources” was 3.06 (Neutral),

and the mean for the “Time Management” was 3.02 (Agree). In the “Flexible strategy”, the

indicator with the highest mean was “Flexible learning strategies have helped me to develop better

critical thinking skills.” with a mean rating of 3.51 (Neutral). In the “Technological Resources” the

indicators with the highest mean were “Is a valuable instructional tool .” with a mean rating of 3.23

(Neutral). And for the “Time Management” the indicator with the highest mean was “I always

manage time to those activities.” with a mean rating 3.04 (Neutral). The factor with the highest

rating in the level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategies was “Flexible Strategy” with a

mean rating of 3.14.

In the level of academic performance of the respondents, there were 8 (8.89%)

respondents who perform very satiscfactory on their academics and 17 (18.89%) respondents

have a fair performance. The average GPA of the 90 respondents were 2.00 which has a

qualitative description of satisfactory.

 In terms of the difference among the demographic profile and the academic performance,

the computed significant value were 0.0.346 (Age), 0.218 (sex), 0.386 (year level) which is

higher than the significant level at p<5%. There was no significant difference among age, sex

and year level on their academic performance. Meanwhile, in the difference among the

demographic profile and the level of level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategies of the

respondents, the computed significant value were 0.047* (Age), 0.310 (sex), 0.039* (year level)

which is two variables was lower than the significant level at p<5% i.e. age and year level. There

was no significant difference among the demographic variable sex. But a significant difference

among age and year level was founded with regards to flexible learning strategy. Moreover, in

terms of the relationship between the academic performance and the level of effectiveness of

flexible learning strategy, the computed significant value was 0.096 which is also higher than the

significant level at p<5% which means that there is no significant relationship between the

variables.

Conclusion

The result of the research showed that average age of BEED students were 21 years old

and majority were female (82%). It also showed that on the average, the BEED students were

“Neutral” on the different indicators of the level of effectiveness of the flexible learning

strategies. Majority of the respondents perform “satisfactory” on their academics.

The researcher also found out that the BEED students’ demographic profile, specifically

their age, sex, and year level has no statistically significant differences to their academic

performance. But with regards to the level of effectiveness of the flexible learning strategies, age

and year level has statistically significant differences but no statistically significant difference in

sex where found. There also a no significant relationship between their level of academic

performance and the level of effectiveness of the flexible learning strategies.

Based on all the findings, the two null hypotheses “ There is no significant relationship between

demographic profile and academic performance ” and “There is no significant relationship between the

flexible learning strategies and the academic performance. ” were not rejected. Thus, the data provided

in this study provide little or no evidence that these hypotheses were false. While the null
hypothesis There is no significant relationship between demographic profile and flexible learning

strategies.” was rejected.

Recommendations

In order to come-up with a better and other results regarding academic performance of a

students and the effectiveness of flexible learning strategies, the following recommendations

were formed;

1. more respondents from the college of teacher education should be surveyed specifically

the whole BEED students from all year levels to include all the achiever and non-

achiever to better determine the significant difference of the academic performance.

2. Determining the factors affecting the BEED students’ academic performance should also

added to the objective. Factors like; students’ learning skill, parental background, peer

influence, teachers’ quality, and learning infrastructure.

3. For the better assessment on the level of effectiveness of flexible learning strategies,

responds should be in the time of different learning strategies like e-learning, modular

learning, or blended learning.

 LITERATURE CITED

Bergamin, P.B., Werlen, E.,Siegenthaler, E., & Zizka, S. (2012). The relationship between

flexible and self-regulated learning in open and distance universities. International Review of Research in

Open and Distance Learning. 13(2), 101-103.

Bower, M. (2019). Technology mediated learning theory. British Journal Education Technology,

50(3), 1035–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12771

Gope, P. C., Gope, D., & Gope, A. (2021). Higher education in India: Challenges and

opportunities of the COVID-19 pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), 54-73.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4643552

Joaquin, J.J.B., Biana, H.T., & Dacela, M.A. (2020). The Philippine higher education sector in

the time of COVID-19. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.576371

Palmer, S.R. (2011). The lived experience of flexible education –theory, policy and practice.

Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. 8(3), 16.

Shurville, S., O’Grady, T. and Mayall, P. (2008). Educational and institutional flexibility of

Australian Educational Software. Campus-Wide Information Systems, Emerald Group Publishing

Limited. 25(2), 74-84.

Tarhini, A., Hone, K., Liu, X., & Tarhini, T. (2016). Examining the moderating effect of

individual-level cultural values on users’ acceptance of E-learning in developing countries: A structural

equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Interactive Learning Environments,

3(25), 306–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1122635

Tucker, R. & Morris, G. (2012). By Design: Negotiating Flexible Learning in the Built

Environment. Discipline Research in Learning Technology, Co-Action Publishing. 20(1).

Lewin, T., & Mawoyo, M. (2014). Student access and success: Issues and interventions in South

African universities. Inyathelo: The South African Institute for Advancement. Li, K. C. (2018). The

evolution of open learning: A review of the transition from pre-elearning to the era of e-learning.

Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 10(4), 408– 425.

 Kuncel, N. R., Credé, M., & Thomas, L. L. (2005). The validity of self-reported grade point

averages, class ranks, and test scores: A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Review of educational

research, 75(1), 63-82.

Hijazi, S., & Naqvi, S. (2006). Factors Affecting Students Performnce. A case of Private

Colleges, Bangladesh. Journal of sociology, 3(1), 12-17.

Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American

psychologist, 35(2), 151.

McKenzie, K., & Schweitzer, R. (2001). Who succeeds at university? Factors predicting

academic performance in first year Australian university students. Higher education research &

development, 20(1), 21-33.

Alimi, O. S., Ehinola, G. B., & Alabi, F. O. (2012). School Types, Facilities and Academic

Performance of Students in Senior Secondary Schools in Ondo State, Nigeria. International Education

Studies, 5(3), 44-48.

Chapell, M. S., Blanding, Z. B., Silverstein, M. E., Takahashi, M., Newman, B., Gubi, A., &

McCann, N. (2005). Test anxiety and academic performance in undergraduate and graduate students.

Journal of educational Psychology, 97(2), 268.

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,

IL: University of Chicago Press.

Gayeta, M. G. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 Outbreak on Higher Education in the

Philippines: Obstacles, Opportunities, and Threats. PROCEEDINGS E-BOOK, 218.

Lazaga, T. B., & Madrigal, D. V. (2021). Challenges and Opportunities of Online

Learning Modality: Experiences of Social Science College Teachers in a Philippine Private

School. Technium Soc. Sci. J., 20, 255.

Gierdowski DC. 2019 study of undergraduate students and information technology. EDUCAUSE

Center for Analysis and Research. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2019/10/2019-study-of-

undergraduate-students-and-information-technology (2019)
Part 1. Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Name (Optional):_________________________Sex: _________Age : ________ Year Level :________

Part 2.1. Directions: Below is the Effectiveness of Flexible Learning Strategies in the Academic

Performance of Preservice Elementary Teachers. Please rate the following statements on a scale of 1-4,

where 4 represents “Strongly Disagree”, 3 represents “Agree”, 2 represents “Disagree”, and 1 represents

“Strongly Disagree”.

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree

4 3 2 1

1. Flexible learning strategies have

improved my ability to manage my time

effectively.

2. Flexible learning strategies have

helped me to learn at my own pace.

3. Flexible learning strategies have

improved my academic performance.

4. Flexible learning strategies have

provided me with greater access to

learning resources and materials.

5. Flexible learning strategies have

allowed me to collaborate more easily

with my peers and instructors.

6. Flexible learning strategies have

increased my motivation to learn.

 7. Flexible learning strategies have

provided me with opportunities to

receive immediate feedback on my work.

8. Flexible learning strategies have

helped me to develop independent

learning skills.

.9. Flexible learning strategies have

helped me to develop better critical

thinking skills.

10. Overall, I am satisfied with my

experience with flexible learning

strategies.

Part 2.2. The use of Technological Resources

INDICATORS 4 3 2 1

1. Increases academic achivement

2. Is effective Because I believe I can

implement it successfully.

3. Is too costly in terms of resources

time and effort.

4. Is a valuable instructional tool.

5. Demands that too much time spent on

the technical problems.

6. Is an effective tool for students of all

abilities.

7. Eases the pressure on men as a

student.

8. Requires software-skills training that

is too time consuming.

9. Is effective only when intensive

 computer resources are available.

10. Becomes more important to me if

the student does not have access to a

computer at home.

Part 2.3. The use of Time Management

INDICATORS 4 3 2 1

1. I spend anytime wisely and avoid

distractions.

2. I have enough time to complete my

task during the day.

3. I manage stress when handing

multiple conflicting duties.

4. I effectively manage workload.

5. I underestimate the time that it will

take to accomplish task.

6. I feel in control of my time.

7. I always manage time to those

activities.

8. I follow the daily schedule

9. I give each task a time limit

10. I effectively manage my time well.