Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 43 no. 5 (2025)

Illuminating Teacher Lived Experiences in the New Revised Curriculum

Zyrra Jean Markham

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Amid global efforts to enhance educational systems, the Philippines education system has implemented major curriculum reforms aimed at improving instructional delivery and learner outcomes. This study explored the lived experiences of elementary school teachers in selected public schools within a division in Lapu-Lapu City during the implementation of the New Revised Curriculum for the 2024-2025 school year. The curriculum aimed to streamline content, strengthen foundational competencies, and foster learner-centered instruction across grade levels. Given the pace of its rollout, the study sought to understand how teachers adjusted their practices, responded to systemic challenges, and supported one another. As part of nationwide implementation, these insights provide timely evidence to inform broader policy refinement and implementation strategies. Using a qualitative descriptive phenomenology design, the researcher conducted in-depth interviews with twelve Kindergarten, Grade One, and Grade Four teachers. Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis guided the interpretation of data, allowing themes to emerge from participants’ lived experiences. Five major themes were identified: (1) Navigating the Curriculum Shift through Resourcefulness, Creativeness, and Resilience – teachers improvised materials and remained steadfast despite uncertainty; (2) Professional Growth and Enthusiasm – teachers exhibited willingness to learn but found training inadequate, emphasizing the need for ongoing development; (3) Learner Engagement Champion with Focused Content Delivery – streamlined competencies enhanced participation, inclusivity, and comprehension; (4) Growth Collaborator – teachers built informal support systems to extend assistance; and (5) Teaching-Learning Methodologist Amidst Systemic Change – educators reevaluated their teaching philosophies. The findings informed a policy brief recommending practical, school-based interventions, sustained support, and collaborative environments to ensure the success of curriculum reform.



References:

  1. Aldrich Urcia, I. (2021). Comparisons of adaptations in grounded theory and phenomenology (Vol. 20, 1–14). International Journal of Qualitative Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211045474
  2. Anderson, S. E. (1997). Understanding teacher change: Revisiting the Concerns-Based Adoption Model. Curriculum Inquiry, 27(3), 331–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1997.11075495
  3. Anyichie, A. C., & Butler, D. L. (2023). Examining culturally diverse learner’s motivation and engagement processes as situated in a context of a complex task. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1041946. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1041946
  4. Avalos, B. (2021). Teacher professional development and its effects on teaching practice: Revisiting critical issues. International Journal of Educational Research, 110, 101847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101847
  5. Barrot, J. S. (2021). K to 12 curriculum reform in the Philippines: Towards making students future ready. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 43(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2021.1954356
  6. Bautista, A., Toh, G., Wong, J. Y., & Quek, G. C. (2022). Localizing curriculum in diverse classrooms: Implications for learner engagement and equity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 110, 103580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103580
  7. Beltman, S., Mansfield, C. F., & Price, A. (2011). Thriving not just surviving: A review of research on teacher resilience. Educational Research Review, 6(3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.09.001
  8. Beltman, S., Mansfield, C. F., Broadley, T., & Weatherby Fell, N. (2016). Building resilience in teacher education: An evidence informed framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 54, 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.11.016
  9. Bray-Clark, N., & Bates, R. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development. The Professional Educator, 26, 13–22.
  10. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
  11. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021b). To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 13(2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846
  12. Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1206–1220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.07.009
  13. Court, D. J. (2018). A change of heart: An investigation of the role of moral purpose in teacher reflection. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(9), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n9.2
  14. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2021). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage. https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=DLbBDQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
  15. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report
  16. Day, C. (2004). A change of heart: Renewing the moral purposes of education? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 10(2), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/1354060042000187973
  17. de Jong, L., Meirink, J., & Admiraal, W. (2022). School-based collaboration as a learning context for teachers: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 112, 101927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101927
  18. Department of Education. (2024, July 23). DepEd Order No. 010, s. 2024: Policy guidelines on the implementation of the MATATAG Curriculum. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/DO_s2024_010.pdf
  19. Dizon, R. L. L., Calbi, J. S., Cuyos, J. S., & Miranda, M. (2019). Perspectives on the implementation of the K to 12 program in the Philippines: A research review. International Journal of Innovative Research in Education & Science, 6(6), 757–765.
  20. Finlay, L. (2021). Essentials of phenomenological research. Routledge. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285679194_Debating_Phenomenological_Research_Methods
  21. Flores, M. A., & Carvalho, A. (2021). Teacher agency in times of change: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Educational Change, 22, 311–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09413-z
  22. Fredricks, J. A., Parr, A. K., Amemiya, J. L., Wang, M.-T., & Brauer, S. (2019). What matters for urban adolescents’ engagement and disengagement in school: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Adolescent Research, 34(5), 491–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558419830638
  23. Gehrke, N. J. (1979). Renewing teachers’ enthusiasm: A professional dilemma. Theory Into Practice, 18(3), 188–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405847909542831
  24. Hopkins, D., Ainscow, M., & West, M. (2020). Teacher resilience through challenging times. Teaching and Teacher Education, 89, 103012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.103012
  25. Iñigo, N., & Gonzales, A. (2022). Philippine teachers’ concerns on K–12 implementation: A CBAM approach. Frontiers in Education, 7, 763991. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.763991
  26. IAFOR. (2023). Conceptualizing teacher agency in curriculum reform. The IAFOR Research Archive. https://papers.iafor.org/submission63451/
  27. Kallio, H., Pietilä, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a guide for semi-structured interviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031
  28. Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2023). The effects of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 93(1), 3–47. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221126525
  29. Magallanes, K., Chung, J. Y., & Lee, S. (2022). The Philippine teachers’ concerns on educational reform using the Concern-Based Adoption Model. Frontiers in Education, 7, 763991. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.763991
  30. Mockler, N. (2011). Beyond ‘what works’: Understanding teacher identity as a practical and political tool. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17(5), 517–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2011.602059
  31. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving for trustworthiness. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  32. Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401305
  33. OECD. (2020). Curriculum reform: Teacher agency in implementation (Education Working Papers No. 227). https://one.oecd.org/document/EDU/WKP(2020)27/en/pdf
  34. OECD. (2019). PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf
  35. Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2021). Continuing professional learning for teachers: A theory of teacher development. Teachers and Teaching, 27(5), 345–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2021.1901421
  36. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1915688
  37. Punongbayan, J. C. (2019, December 10). Dismal PISA rankings: A wake-up call for Filipinos. Rappler. https://www.rappler.com/voices/thought-leaders/246384-analysis-dismal-programme-international-student-assessment-rankings-wake-up-call-filipinos/
  38. Salandanan, G. G., & Santos, J. A. (2023). Teachers as partners in curriculum reform: Insights from the Philippine basic education sector. International Journal of Educational Reform, 32(2), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879231126547
  39. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201
  40. Stolz, S. A. (2023). The practice of phenomenology in educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 55(7), 822–834. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2022.2138745
  41. Suárez, V., & McGrath, J. (2022). Teacher professional identity: How to develop and support it in times of change. OECD Education Working Papers No. 267. https://doi.org/10.1787/6c5cf7f0-en
  42. UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707
  43. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002
  44. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004
  45. World Bank. (2022). The state of global learning poverty: 2022 update. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/729641654783491763
  46. World Health Organization. (2022). Standards and operational guidance for ethics review of health-related research with human participants. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241502948

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic