IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

A Perception-Based Curricular Review on the K to 12 HUMSS Strand Curriculum
Edwin B. Estrera
University of the Philippines Cebu
Philippines

25

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Abstract
This study examines the perception of Humanities and Social Science teachers among public
Senior High Schools in the Department of Education’s Humanities and Social Sciences strand
in the Philippines. It uses Erden’s element-based model of evaluation by considering thealignment to the goals of the Humanities and Social Sciences disciplines, the purpose, and core
courses of the program, and the teaching-learning process. It also uses Tyler’s Rationale asframeworks in assessing the curriculum. Likewise, the study examines the problems anddifficulties in curricular implementation. Upon administering a survey to 25 Humanities andSocial Science teachers among four public senior high schools, data revealed that the
respondents perceived the curriculum goals, and the purpose of the program as highly
observed, while the core courses of the program and teaching-learning process weresatisfactorily observed in the curriculum. Also, sex and age were not factors in their level ofassessment of Humanities and Social Science goals. The problems and difficulties encounteredby teachers included unbalanced time allocation of learning competencies, lack of available
learning materials, and lack of specialized teachers. Based on the findings, it is suggested thatthe government provide stronger teacher support programs to address the gap in curriculum
implementation. The K to 12 program also needs a full review, as the study only provides apresurvey to more significant institutional issues. While the Humanities and Social Sciencecurriculum appears aligned with the goals of their disciplines, and to the country’s educational
goals, its realization still depends upon the teachers’ implementation in the classroom level.
Keywords: basic education, HUMSS, basic education, educational reform, teacher perception

26

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Introduction
The Philippines overhauled its 10-year basic education curriculum following theimplementation of the Republic Act 10533 or “The Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013”.
The said law aimed at improving the curriculum and raising the number of years of basic
education. This educational reform resulted in the addition of the two-year Senior High School(SHS) program and the mandatory kindergarten year. The new curriculum generally aimed atproviding Filipino students with enough time to master the skills and concepts for a college
education with the addition of two exit points: work and entrepreneurship (International
Consultants for Education and Fairs Monitor, 2013).
These two years of SHS encompass Specialized and Applied Subjects for skills development
and Core Subjects for college readiness. It also facilitates four career paths which are theAcademic, Technical-Vocational Livelihood, Sports, and Arts and Design Tracks (Shahani,2015). Among the strands under the Academic Track is the Humanities and Social Sciences(HUMSS). This curriculum generally seeks to produce critical thinking, socially responsible,and globally aware citizens. These include skills development on logical reasoning, creativity,
appreciation of one’s culture, research and communication skills, responsibility, productivity,
environmental consciousness, and global visioning (Southeast Asian Minister of Education,
Organization, Innovation and Technology, 2012).
While the goals of the new curriculum are promising, the K to 12 program allegedly lacks
systematic conceptualization and implementation (Umil, 2014). Ridon, the nationalist
Kabataan party-list representative, viewed the K to 12 program as haphazardly implemented(Umil, 2014). While teachers are always ready to teach the students, the curriculum support is
not sufficient to equip them with K to 12 competencies. Additionally, the League of Filipino
Students, a progressive youth group, viewed the new curriculum to be not for the Filipinos, but
for the capitalists who need already-trained workers for their companies. They saw it as only
producing semi-skilled laborers and peddling graduates to foreign capitalists, and suggest thatthe whole education sector is fast becoming a large exploitative machine (Umil, 2014).
Anakbayan, another progressive youth activist group, has affirmed this issue by highlighting
the flawed, problematic framework of the K to 12 program. Crisostomo, the group chairperson,
said that this will only create cheaper, more exploitative labor and will only further subject
Filipino youths to foreign monopolies. Thus, the K to 12 program may well be problem-ridden
rather than solution-oriented (Education Crisis Worsened Under Aquino, 2012, as cited in
Calderon, 2014, p. 546).
Additionally, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT), a nationalist organization ofteachers, has also expressed the need to suspend the K to 12 program, citing its lack of
preparation for classroom facilities and qualified teachers. Valbuena, the ACT chairperson,
identified a backlog in the construction of classrooms and laboratories, in the deliveries ofreferences, and in the hiring of competitive and qualified teachers to teach SHS (Human Rights
Philippines, 2015, as cited in Abulencia, 2015, p. 234).
Teacher-interest lobbyists such as the Teachers’ Dignity Coalition (TDC) and Ating Guro
Partylist affirm these concerns. They rated the Department of Education (DepEd) with a B(74%-below) regarding its K to 12 program implementation. Basas, the TDC chairperson,
similarly cited a shortage of essential resources such as seats, classrooms, learning and teaching

27

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

materials, and other facilities, and teacher readiness (Malipot, 2014, as cited in Abulencia,
2015, p. 233).
Senator Cayetano and Senator Gatchalian’s positions confirm these issues further. Senator
Cayetano, who is the current Lower House Speaker, recently asked the Legislative Branch toreview the K to 12 program as it is not fulfilling its purpose in preparing the SHS graduates forcollege and work (Diaz, 2019). Graduates of the new curriculum cannot find jobs nor exhibit
college readiness skills. These problems add to the existing institutional issues on the lack ofclassrooms, facilities, and teaching personnel. Senator Gatchalian, who leads the committee on
K to 12 program implementation, even expressed the need to assess the government’s readinessin implementing the K to 12 program citing insufficient preparation and declining student
performance (Terrazola, 2019).
Thus, it has become essential to evaluate the K to 12 program, especially the SHS curriculum
implementation. In particular, the HUMSS strand needs curricular assessment if the curriculum
is to comply with the goals of the Humanities and Social Sciences disciplines, which are thedevelopment of critical thinking skills, and the development of socially responsible andglobally aware citizens (Kallendorf, 2002; Southeast Asian Minister of Education,
Organization, Innovation and Technology, 2012). These are the same skills needed for one to
examine the perceived problem-ridden nature of the K to 12 program.
Literature Review
Tyler (1949) stated that a curriculum should be a program of constant evaluation and revision.
A good curriculum must be dynamic as it looks into the nature and structure of knowledge, thelearners’ needs, and the society’s needs. Referred to as Tyler’s Rationale, it explores
curriculum perspectives such as educational objectives, selection of learning experiences andits organization, and method of assessment. Thus, most curricular reviews employ thisparadigm. For Tyler, the identification of educational objectives will set the content and typeof student learning. It will be the basis for the selection and organization of contents andmaterials, the development of instructional procedures, and the preparation of tests andexaminations. More importantly, the curriculum must adhere to the philosophy of the discipline
and the country’s educational system. Lastly, the results of the evaluation will be the basis for
improving or adjusting the curriculum to attain the educational objectives. However, Tyler’s
Rationale is a linear model and lacks a feedback mechanism that could place importance on
the opinions of teachers.
Erden (1998) developed the element-based model of evaluation, by looking into the opinions
and viewpoints of participants regarding program components. With specific curriculum
elements set, fundamental flaws and deficiencies in the curriculum quickly emerge. This model
explicitly seeks to evaluate the extent of meeting the objectives and the underlying defects andproblems of a curriculum. Erden (1998), as cited in Aslan and Günay (2016), said this modelanswers evaluations on general and specific objectives, conditions of learning and testing, andrelationships between curricular elements. The said curricular elements help in identifying
potential problems that may emerge during the design and implementation. Thus, byconsidering program components on targets, content, education, contexts, and evaluation as
curricular elements, Erden’s element-based model allows for a holistic approach in curriculum
evaluation (Aslan & Günay, 2016). This model is also best evaluated using teachers’ andstudents’ opinions, who are the interpreters and receivers of the curriculum.

28

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

While the two curricular evaluation models allow for a broader perspective of the curriculum,
Bilbao et al. (2015) highlighted the principles of scope, sequence, continuity, integration,
articulation, and balance as specific elements of a good curriculum. By considering thesecurricular principles, the educational system would respond to the goals of the discipline, theneeds of the students and teachers, and the goals of education.
Generally, curriculum evaluation occurs via four different phases: curriculum planning, which
considers the school’s vision-mission and goals; curriculum designing, which includes theselection and organization of learning activities; curriculum implementation, which is theactual application of the design or plan in the classroom to produce the intended learning
outcomes; and curriculum evaluation, which determines the extent of achievement ofeducational goals (Bilbao et al., 2015; Erden, 1998; Tyler, 1949). Thus, the analysis of data forthe current study will revolve around these theories.
Related Studies
Curriculum reviews aim to evaluate academic programs by highlighting its processes,
effectivity, relevance, and deficiencies (Erden, 1998; Tyler, 1949). It is a critical examination
involving curriculum implementers and receivers. Results and recommendations of different
curriculum reviews are thematically grouped, based on the following problem areas:
Problem of Educational Goals and Purpose. The study of Muhammad et al. (2019)suggested a need to review curricular outcomes to align the country’s demand towards
Education 5.0, Industry 4.0, and Sustainable Development Goals. Similarly, Gallagher et al.
(2013) saw a need to revisit Westwood Public Schools’ mission-vision statements and the needfor content and skills continuity. On the other hand, Leduc (2010) observed the alignment of
Natick Public Schools’ K-12 Social Studies curriculum to the Massachusetts Department ofElementary and Secondary Social Studies Frameworks. However, the development of sharedresources was still needed.
Problem of Content and Continuity. Aside from Gallagher et al. (2013), this is also sharedby Shin (2017), citing insufficient theoretical grounds and unclear achievement standards, aswell as a gap between classroom and practical learnings. Similarly, Khoza (2015) revealed thatin-service teachers’ lack of familiarity with learning theories underpinning curriculum resulted
in implementation problems. Using Tyler’s Rationale, Fozoni et al. (2016) showed the need toemphasize the concepts and skills of citizenship learning and the creation of appropriate
activities. Jaca et al. (2018) also saw the difficulty in actual classroom implementation, which
was partly caused by a lack of specific criteria brought by a poorly articulated content standard.
Correspondingly, the absence of a proper framework defining the inclusion and organizationof learning competencies was shown by Bernardo and Mendoza (2009), following the 2002
Philippine Basic Education reform. This reform included problems with unsuitable suggested
time allotment, lack of teaching-learning materials, and creation of additional tasks forteachers. Additionally, the curriculum review by Roy (2015) highlighted a “loaded
curriculum”, where the emphasis on state standards resulted in the inclusion of an
overwhelming number of subject content areas. There was also a need for integration between
the classroom and external realities.
Problem of Moderate to Negative Perception. Aside from the issue of content due tounbalanced curriculum courses and undefined content standards, Alghazo (2015) determinedthat respondents only had positive regard on core courses but not on majors. Using the elementbased model of evaluation, Aslan and Günay (2016) revealed the moderate opinions of teachers

29

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020and students on curricular elements. However, respondents were more likely to answer the“disagree” choices. Correspondingly, a negative teachers’ view was seen by Taole (2013)
following a curricular change, and highlighted that teacher support was still the basis for every
curricular reform. Teacher support is an essential component as teachers’ presumptions affectcurriculum interpretation and implementation.
Problem of Implementation. The need for teacher support is most common in different
curricular reviews. Yusof et al. (2017) showed teachers’ positive regard on curricular change.
However, there were problems such as inappropriate competencies on modules, time
constraints, lack of teacher training, and extra efforts leading to teacher burden. Similarly,
Thompson et al. (2011) revealed a lack of teaching-learning resources and unfamiliarity withthe topics as problems; and Kilinc (2016) on curriculum deficiencies such as lack of learningmaterials and insufficient curriculum content though there was generally a positive view. In
the local study of Rivera (2017), there seems to be complacency of Filipino teachers in the K
to 12 program implementation. This study revealed that teachers’ pedagogy deviates from thelearner-centered aims of the program. Additionally, the study of Calderon (2014) emphasized
the critical role of teachers, given that the curriculum is new but old problems such as the lackof facilities and declining performance still exist.
Focusing on the ideas and issues discussed about curriculum, this study identifies the gap
between standard classroom education and actual classroom implementation. It will do this byassessing the alignment of the K to 12 HUMSS curriculum, based on the identified curricularelements and the problems and difficulties encountered by the teachers of this curriculum.
Methodology
Research Questions
This study aimed to answer the following research questions:
1. What is the respondents’ level of perception on the Humanities and Social Science
goals as observed in the HUMSS curriculum?
2. Is there a significant relationship between the overall level of perception of the
Humanities and Social Sciences Goals, and the respondents’ sex and age?
3. What is the respondents’ level of perception on the HUMSS curriculum regarding:
3.1 Purposes of the Program;
3.2 Core Courses of the Program; and3.3 Teaching-Learning Processes?
4. What problems and difficulties do teachers encounter in the implementation of the
HUMSS curriculum?
Research Locale, Research Design, Respondents
This study focused on determining the perception of SHS teachers among four public HighSchools offering the HUMSS strand in Mandaue City, Cebu, Philippines. This study followed
the descriptive research design. It aimed at gaining the respondents’ perceptions on how well
were the curricular elements namely, the alignment to (1) Humanities goals, and (2) Social
Sciences goals; (3) purpose of the program; (4) core courses of the program; and the (5)teaching-learning process, were observed in the HUMSS curriculum. Each of the sub-questions
therein was rated using a five-point scale where 1 was Not Observed at All (NO), 2 was Fairly
Observed (FO), 3 was Satisfactorily Observed (SO), 4 was Highly Observed (HO), and 5 was30

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Very Highly Observed (VHO). The last part of the questionnaire contained three semi-open
ended questions, asking the respondents to provide additional information on the problems anddifficulties they had identified.
The respondents were chosen based on their teaching positions and subjects handled. First, therespondent must be an appointed Senior High School teacher from the Civil Service
Commission. Second, the respondent has taught any of the Specialized HUMSS subjects:
Community Engagement, Solidarity and Citizenship;, Creative Non-fiction; Creative Writing;Disciplines and Ideas in the Social Sciences; Disciplines and Ideas in the Applied Social
Sciences; Introduction to World Religions and Belief Systems; Philippine Politics andGovernance; and Trends, Networks, and Critical Thinking in the 21st Century (Academic
Track, n.d.). A total of 25 teachers qualified, which represented the respondents’ entire
population.
Limitations
The study focused on the first two years of SHS program implementation (2016-2017; 20172018). It considered all four public schools offering the HUMSS strand in Mandaue City,
assuming that private schools have substantial administrative support while public schools do
not because they depend on government support. More importantly, the study examinedteachers’ perceptions of their curriculum-related experiences, therefore providing primarily aqualitative description of these experiences.
Data Gathering Procedure
Data were collected using a structured survey questionnaire composed of 44 questions
including the profile in terms of age, sex, and educational background; the curriculum; and the
problems and difficulties. The sets of questions considered the available literature and thecurricular elements previously studied. The instrument was pilot-tested with a Cronbach alphareliability of 0.945. The study complied with ethical research standards by getting permission
from the Schools Division Superintendent and the school principals, ensuring respondents’
confidentiality, and getting the respondents’ consent before survey administration.
For the descriptive measures, the study used descriptive statistical treatments, such as
frequency and percentage distribution, mean, and standard deviation, in presenting andanalyzing the data. For correlational statistical treatment, a chi-square test determined the
independence of the level of assessment concerning gender. In contrast, a Pearson-r test
determined the level of significance of the level of assessment concerning age.
Findings
On the Goals of the Humanities and Social Sciences Disciplines
Generally, respondents viewed the goals of the Humanities and Social Sciences disciplines as
highly observed in the HUMSS curriculum. As to the Humanities goals, respondents highly
observed “tolerance” while “sense of local and national history” was least observed. Thisdifference in perception means that some components of the Humanities goals require greater
emphasis. However, the respondents generally perceived this curricular element as highly
observed.

31

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Table 1. Respondents’ Perception of the Goals of Humanities in the HUMSS Curriculum
HUMANITIES GOALS

Weighted Average

Qualitative Description*

3.48

HO

3.52

HO

3.50

HO

3.48

HO

3.48

HO

3.40

SO

3.45

HO

3.88

HO

4.04

HO

3.72

HO

3.88

HO

3.72

HO

3.40

SO

3.56

HO

1.1 An inquiring mind:
a. The HUMSS curriculum allows
students to think uniquely.
b. The HUMSS curriculum allows
students to think logically.
Mean
1.2 A sense of history - local and national:
a. The HUMSS curriculum promotes local
history.
b. The HUMSS curriculum promotes
national history from the perspective of
one’s locality.
c. The HUMSS curriculum promotes
understanding of world history from theperspective of local/national history.
Mean
1.3 Tolerance:a. The HUMSS curriculum helps students
to respect others’ points of view.
b. The HUMSS curriculum promotes
appreciation and recognition of humandiversity.
c. The HUMSS curriculum provides anavenue for inclusivity.
Mean
1.4 A sense of internationalism:
a. The HUMSS curriculum recognizes the
emerging world community to whichpeople can identify.
b. The HUMSS curriculum advocates for
greater cooperation among nations.
Mean*Legend used in subsequent tables:
4.21-5.00 - Very Highly Observed (VHO)
3.41-4.20 - Highly Observed (HO)2.61-3.40 - Satisfactorily Observed (SO)1.81-2.60 - Fairly Observed (FO)1.00-1.80 - Not Observed At All (NO)In relation to the Social Sciences goals, respondents highly observed “integrating ideas andmaking connections from other disciplines” while “civic responsibility and active civic
participation” were least observed. These differences in perception means that there arecomponents of the Social Science goals that also need greater emphasis. However, therespondents generally perceived this curricular element as highly observed.

32

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Table 2. Respondents’ Perception of the Goals of Social Sciences in the HUMSS Curriculum
SOCIAL SCIENCES GOALS

Weighted Average

Qualitative Description*

2.1 Civic responsibility and active civic participation:a. The HUMSS curriculum promotes
attitudes needed in nation-building.
3.80
b. The HUMSS curriculum provides
avenues for students to participate in civic
3.72
work.
Mean
3.76
2.2 Critical thinking skills:
a. The HUMSS curriculum promotes
3.92
reflective and reasonable thinking.
b. The HUMSS curriculum helps students
in problem-solving or decision-making.
3.72
c. The HUMSS curriculum develops
students’ strategies and skills in decision3.76
making.
Mean
3.80
2.3 Integrating ideas and making connections from other disciplines:
a. The HUMSS curriculum promotes aninterdisciplinary understanding of human
4.00
society and the natural world.
b. The HUMSS curriculum helps students
4.08
connect ideas from various disciplines.
Mean
4.04
2.4 Developing awareness and understanding of contemporary social issues:a. The HUMSS curriculum promotes
awareness of different social issues.
3.84
b. The HUMSS curriculum promotes aholistic understanding of different social
3.92
issues facing the world today.
Mean
3.88

HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO
HO

On the Respondents’ Age and Sex and their Perception of HUMSS Goals
Generally, the respondents’ sex and age were not factors in their perception of the alignmentof the HUMSS curriculum with the Humanities and Social Sciences Goals. The computed chisquare of 1.85 and a p-value of 0.1736, which was greater than α=.05, means that sex was not
related to their perception of Humanities goals. Similarly, the computed chi-square of 1.10 anda p-value of 0.2936, which was greater than α=.05, means that sex was also not a factor towards
their perception of the Social Science goals.

33

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Table 3. Relationship between Respondents’ Sex and their Perception of the Humanities andSocial Sciences Goals

Group
Humanities
Goals
Social Sciences
Goals

Male
FemaleMale
FemaleTeachers’ Perception
Not Observed at All/
HighlyFairly Observed/
Observed/ Very
Satisfactorily Observed Highly Observed
2
8
7
8
2
8
6
9

c2

p

1.85ns0.1736

1.10ns0.2936*ns = not significant
Age was not a factor in their perception of the Humanities as indicated by the computed
Pearson r of 0.056 and a p-value of 0.78, which was greater than α=.05. Similarly, age was nota determinant towards their perception of the Social Science goals with the computed Pearsonr of 0.305 and a p-value of 0.14, which was greater than α=.05. As to the Social Sciences, thecalculated r-value of 0.056, which was <0.2, means that there was a very weak relationshipbetween age and their perception, thus, a negligible correlation exited for this relationship.
Table 4. Relationship between Respondents’ Age and their Perception of the Humanities andSocial Sciences Goals

Humanities
Goals
Social Sciences
Goals

Variables
Age
Level of
Assessment
Age
Level of
Assessment

N
25
25

Mean
37.48

SD
8.25

3.61

0.67

37.48

8.25

3.73

0.68

r

p

0.056ns0.78

0.305ns0.14*ns = not significant
On the Purpose of the Program
Generally, respondents perceived the purpose of the program as highly observed with a generalweighted average of 4.01. Respondents highly observed that the curriculum “prepares students
for a college education” while “promotion of the country’s national interest” as the least.
However, the respondents perceived all elements as highly observed. This high perceptionmeans that respondents viewed the educational goals to be well-articulated in the HUMSS
curriculum.

34

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Table 5. Respondents’ Perception of the HUMSS Curriculum’s Purpose of the Program
PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM
Weighted Average
Qualitative Description*
3.1 Adherence to the Department of Education’s Mission and Vision
a. The HUMSS curriculum follows
DepEd’s Vision to “create Filipinos who
passionately love their country and whose
4.04
HO
values and competencies enable them torealize their full potential and contributemeaningfully to nation-building”(Department of Education, n.d.).
b. The HUMSS curriculum follows
DepEd’s Mission to “protect and promote
4.04
HO
the right of every Filipino to quality,
equitable, culture-based, and complete
basic education” (Department of
Education, n.d.).
Mean
4.04
HO
3.2 Promotion of the country’s national interest:
a. The HUMSS curriculum adheres tonational state policies such as pursuing theright to self-determination, social justice,
the dignity of every human person and3.92
HO
guarantees full respect for human rights,
etc.
b. The HUMSS curriculum discusses
contemporary international issues that are
3.80
HO
significant to the country.
Mean
3.86
HO
3.3 Preparation of students for college education:a. The HUMSS curriculum prepares
students with needed knowledge for a
4.16
HO
college education.
b. The HUMSS curriculum prepares
students with the required skills needed
4.08
HO
for a college education.
Mean
4.12
HO
General Weighted Mean
4.01
HO
On the Core Courses of the Program
Generally, respondents perceived the core courses of the program as only satisfactorily
observed, with a general weighted mean of 3.35. Interestingly, respondents perceived thesequence of contents and theories as highly observed. At the same time, they only had
satisfactory observation of the number of subjects that were either over-represented or underrepresented. This difference means that while the HUMSS curriculum contains enough content
and theories, there is a problem with the allotted time.

35

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Table 6. Respondents’ Perception of the Core Courses of the HUMSS Curriculum
CORE COURSES OF THE PROGRAM
Weighted Average
4.1 The sequence of contents and theories in core courses:
a. The HUMSS curriculum contains the
3.60
right content needed for Humanities.
b. The HUMSS curriculum contains the
3.56
right content needed for Social Sciences.
c. The curricular design for HUMSS
subjects is progressive such that one
3.44
subject becomes a prerequisite to a higher
subject.
Mean
3.53
4.2 The number of over-represented subjects:
a. The HUMSS curriculum contains topics
with too much number of hours required
per curriculum guide (CG). For example, a
3.08
topic has two-week coverage in CG, but
the topic should only be for one week.
4.3 The number of under-represented subjects:
a. The HUMSS curriculum contains topics
with less number of hours required per
curriculum guide (CG). For example, a
3.08
topic only has one-week coverage in CG,
but the topic should go for two weeks.
General Weighted Mean
3.35

Qualitative Description*
HO
HO
HO
HO

SO

SO
SO

On the Teaching-Learning Process
Generally, respondents perceived the teaching-learning process as satisfactorily observed witha general weighted average of 2.96. Respondents had a moderate opinion on teacher readinessand availability of teaching-learning resources. However, respondents assessed “the manner of
implementation” as highly observed while the “availability of teaching guides and references”
as fairly observed. These differences in perception mean that while teachers are ready to teach,they lack the tools needed to deliver the curriculum.

36

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Table 7. Respondents’ Perception of the Teaching-Learning Process of the HUMSSCurriculum
TEACHING-LEARNING PROCESS
Weighted Average
5.1 The manner of implementation by teachers of the curriculum:a. HUMSS teachers are equipped withthe knowledge and skills to teach the
3.72
curriculum.
b. HUMSS teachers use various
strategies that resulted in higher student
3.68
performance.
Mean
3.70
5.2 The availability of teaching guides and references:a. DepEd teaching guides available forteachers’ use.
2.92
b. DepEd learning materials are available
for students’ use.
2.28
c. DepEd books, references, and otherresources are available for teachers’ and2.20
students’ use.
Mean
2.47
2.96
General Weighted Mean

Qualitative Description*

HO
HO
HO
SO
FO
FO
FO
SO

On Problems and Difficulties in the Implementation
Table 8 confirms the results in the core courses and teaching-learning process. Fourteen (14)respondents said that there were too many learning competencies for a short period. Seventeen(17) respondents also identified the lack of books or references, which forced them to use theirmoney to purchase resource materials. Additionally, three respondents said that there was alack of specialized teachers to teach HUMSS. On the other hand, respondents identified least
on learning competency being too general, lack of teaching equipment, non-cooperation of
external stakeholders, and excessive extra-curricular activities. These issues only mean that
there is a problem in the implementation of the HUMSS curriculum in the actual classroom
setting.
Table 8. Respondents’ Opinions on the Problems and Difficulties in the Implementation of
the HUMSS Curriculum
Problems and Difficulties
1. HUMSS Curriculum• there are too many learning competencies for a shortperiod• the topics are repetitive/overlapping• the curriculum is too crowded• the sequence is disorganized• learning competencies are too general
2. Resource Materials• there are no DepEd books or references provided

37

f

Rank

14
8
4
4
3

1
2
3
4
5

17

1

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020•

the teacher uses personal money to purchase resource
materials• the school does not have the equipment needed for21st-century learning
3. Others• lack of specialized teachers in HUMSS• extra-curricular activities affect classes• non-cooperation of external stakeholders

16

2

4

3

3
1
1

1
2
3

Discussion
The results of these analyses suggest that, overall, teachers had high perceptions of the HUMSS
curriculum. This level of perception means that, generally, teachers have a favorable view ofthe K to 12 program. This positive view is in contrast to Taole (2013), where teachers had anegative view following a curricular change. However, a detailed analysis of the curricularelements also revealed flaws and deficiencies of the HUMSS curriculum of the K to 12
program.
Alignment to Humanities and Social Sciences Disciplines
The teachers highly observed the alignment of the HUMSS curriculum to the goals of the
Humanities and Social Sciences disciplines. This high perception means that the specific goalsof these disciplines were well-articulated and well-observed in the curriculum. In contrast toAslan and Günay (2016), teachers only had a moderate level of opinions on curricular elements.
For Kallendorf (2002), this alignment of the HUMSS curriculum may produce literate citizens
who can speak and write with clarity, who are active in the community, and who can makesensible decisions. Thus, the HUMSS curriculum is viewed as an effective curriculum inmolding and delivering the social skills and values needed to create socially responsible andglobally aware Filipinos.
Factors of Perception. The respondents’ age and sex were not factors in their perception of
the HUMSS curriculum. These two variables were likely not associated because teachers,
regardless of sex and age, freely determine the content of learning and the manner of classroom
delivery. The National Research Council (2012) also supports the view that the teacher
ultimately decides how and what to teach in the classroom. Correspondingly, teachers are theones who finally decide the fate of any educational enterprise (Ndlovu, 2017). Thus, the
HUMSS teachers’ perception of the HUMSS curriculum is not affected by their sex and age.
Purposes of the Program
Results indicated that teachers highly observed the integration of national goals and the
DepEd’s Mission and Vision in the HUMSS curriculum. This result is consistent with Leduc(2010), however it was again in contrast to Aslan and Günay (2016), where teachers only
viewed these elements as moderately observed. Similarly, Gallagher et al. (2013) and
Muhammad et al. (2019) also saw the need to reassess prescribed educational goals with thecurrent needs of their countries. The recent implementation of the SHS program in 2016
probably explains this contrasting view. Thus, the revised HUMSS curriculum remains
relevant to the needs of society.
The highly observed perception on the adherence of the HUMSS curriculum to the DepEd’s
Mission and Vision, and the promotion of the country’s national interest, means that theeducational philosophy and the goals of the nation were well-represented in the HUMSS38

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

curriculum and its teaching-learning process. Using Tyler’s Rationale, the educational purposeof the school to create nationalistic, law-abiding, and productive citizens was well-articulated
in the curriculum, and the ability of these goals to produce educational experiences thatstudents need to undertake was evident. Thus, the perceived strong relevance of the HUMSS
curriculum contrasts with the perception of many youth activists, who suggest that the K to 12
program only produces semi-skilled laborers.
Core Courses of the Program
Results also indicated that teachers only viewed the sequence and organization of thecurriculum as satisfactorily observed. The moderate observation of curricular elements is
consistent with Aslan and Günay (2016). Alghazo (2015) had the same results where core
courses were positively regarded but still needs additional resources to other subject areas.
Balantic (2014), Fozoni et al. (2016), Gallagher et al. (2013), and Roy (2015) also had similar
results where they identified problems on clear scope and sequence; concepts, skills, andlearning activities; and curriculum continuity. However, teachers highly observed the sequenceof contents and theories. As per Bilbao et al. (2015), an effective curriculum follows theprinciples of scope, sequence, continuity, integration, articulation, and balance, and these wereperceived as well-articulated in the HUMSS curriculum.
Conversely, respondents only satisfactorily observed the number of subjects that were either
over-represented or under-represented. Following the suggested time allocation in the
curriculum guide, there are topics that “take more time” to discuss while some are “toodragging.” This unbalanced time allocation was also consistent with the studies of Balantic(2014), Bernardo and Mendoza (2009), Gallagher et al. (2013), Jaca et al. (2018), Roy (2015),
and Shin (2017), which identified curricular problems in criteria, scope, and continuity. Thus,
although the HUMSS curriculum contains the right topics, its existing suggested time allotment
and topic organization appear problematic.
Teaching-Learning Process
Results also indicated that teachers viewed the HUMSS curriculum as only satisfactorily
observed. While teachers had the required knowledge and skills to be able to teach thecurriculum, it missed out on teaching tools. As to the manner of implementation, the readinessof teachers to teach HUMSS subjects was probably because of the series of regional training
before the SHS implementation (Department of Education Region VII, 2016). This readinessto teach contrasts with the lack of teaching guides and learning materials, which only had afairly observed rating. Perhaps this was due to the tight implementation timeline of the K to 12
program which left the government with a limited period to acquire learning materials (Umil,2014). These problems echo the concerns of Anakbayan (Calderon, 2014), ACT, TDC, andAting Guro Partylist (Abulencia, 2015). These same issues were also identified in the studies
of Bernardo and Mendoza (2009), Kilinc (2016), Thompson et al. (2013), and Yusof et al.
(2017), where there is a lack of materials and teaching tools to attain the learning competencies.
Using Tyler’s Rationale, the lack of learning resources and teaching guides were indicatorsthat there is a problem in meeting the educational purpose of the HUMSS curriculum.
Problems and Difficulties
The responses to the problems and difficulties provide a better understanding of the teachers’
perceptions. Generally, the number of learning competencies and time allocation were
problems encountered by teachers. This concern is consistent in the studies of Balantic (2014),
Bernardo and Mendoza (2009), Kilinc (2016), Roy (2015), and Yusof et al. (2017) of a loaded
curriculum, and where subjects were either dragged or contracted.

39

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

As to the learning competencies, one teacher noted that the learning contents and skills were“very heavy” yet teachers have only one semester to deliver it. This same teacher said that somesubjects must be implemented for one year to be “fully internalized by the students whileemphasizing the practical application”. Another respondent also noted that the content
standard did not relate to the learning competencies, for example, on the topic of migration.
As to the time allocation, topics were repetitive or overlapping such that there were topics thatcan go with another subject. Teachers also highlighted the problem of a disorganized sequenceof subjects with prerequisites yet were offered in the same semester. Perhaps this was becauseof the limited number of HUMSS teachers in each school, which forced them to provide
cognate subjects at the same time.
As to the resource materials, DepEd did not provide books and learning materials. Thus,
teachers had to use their money to buy teaching resources in addition to more preparation time.
Another problem was the lack of qualified teachers handling HUMSS subjects wherein three
respondents were Mathematics teachers yet were assigned to teach HUMSS subjects. Anotherissue involved work immersion as students were still underage, and the excessive number ofextra-curricular activities that affected the delivery of instruction.
These were the same issues highlighted by Bernardo and Mendoza (2009), Taole (2013), andThompson et al. (2013) where major educational reforms resulted in problems in content,
implementation, and support. Though the respondents perceived the HUMSS curriculum as
highly aligned to the Humanities and Social Sciences goals, it still had issues in the actual
implementation by the teachers.
Overall, it seems evident that, regardless of country and type of curriculum, teacher support isstill the basis for every curricular reform (Calderon, 2014; Taole, 2013), which the Philippines
falls short in its implementation of the HUMSS strand of the K to 12 program. The concerns
expressed by different activist groups and government officials confirm that the K to 12
program needs an institutional review following a lack of support at the classroom
implementation level.
Recommendations
The national government is advised to take a more proactive role in the monitoring andimplementation of the K to 12 program. Years after the law’s passage, it still needs strong
support at the grassroots level. The government should establish strong teacher support
programs to address the problems encountered by the primary implementers of the curriculum.
This program refers to creating feedback mechanisms where teachers can voice their ideas, andwhere they can participate in the decision-making process. Also, the Department of Educationneeds provision to address the backlog of school buildings, teaching equipment, and facilities.
The hiring of more qualified teachers would fundamentally address the issue of teachers
teaching subjects outside their field of expertise. Lastly, there is a need for a curriculum reviewof the whole K to 12 program, aimed at investigating curriculum deficiencies and problems interms of content, target, context, time allocation, and evaluation. This study only provided a
glimpse of what could be more significant problems for the rest of the program.

40

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Conclusion
Generally, this study has revealed that the HUMSS curriculum of the K to 12 program provides
a systematic learning experience for the students to grow academically and socially competent.
The new curriculum embodied the principles of a good curriculum as it follows the principles
of scope, sequence, continuity, integration, articulation, and balance. Using Erden’s elementbased model of evaluation, the current study revealed that the respondents positively observed
the alignment of the Humanities and Social Sciences goals, the purpose of the curriculum, thecore courses, and the teaching-learning process of the HUMSS curriculum. By then using
Tyler’s Rationale, the study revealed that these teachers highly perceived the articulation of thecountry’s educational purpose and its organization in the HUMSS curriculum.
However, problems and difficulties in implementing the said curriculum appear to hinder theachievement of its educational purpose. Although the K to 12 program as associated with the
HUMSS curriculum remains a good concept, it still lacks sufficient support at the level ofclassroom implementation. This seems to stem from perennial problems involving the lack ofclassrooms and teaching-learning facilities, as well as inadequate government support for theteachers who ultimately decide the fate of all educational endeavors. In turn, this has created a
gap between the formal standards for classroom education and actual classroom
implementation. Thus, because of insufficient support being provided, the K to 12 program
appears unable to implement the country’s major educational reform at an adequate level.

41

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

References
Abulencia, A. (2015). The unraveling of K-12 program as an education reform in thePhilippines. Sipatahoenan. 229–240. https://doi.org/10.2121/sip.v1i2.689.g674
Academic Track. (n.d.). K to 12. https://www.deped.gov.ph/k-to-12/about/k-to-12-basiceducation-curriculum/academic-track/
Alghazo, A. (2015). Core curriculum and students perceptions: Approach to curriculum
review. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(8), 620–
624. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2015.V5.579
Aslan, D., & Günay, R. (2016). An evaluation of high school curricula employing using theelement-based curriculum development model. Journal of Education and Training
Studies. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i7.1477
Balantic, J. (2014). Social studies curriculum review. Garden City Public Schools. http://
https://www.slideserve.com/mliss/social-studies-curriculum-review-garden-citypublic-schools
Bernardo A., & Mendoza R. (2009). Makabayan in the Philippine basic education
curriculum: Problems and prospect for reforming student learning in the Philippines.
In: CH Ng, P.D. Renshaw (Eds.) Reforming learning: Issues, concerns and prospects
in the pacific region (pp. 181–197). Springer.
Bilbao, P., Lucido, P., Iringan, T., & Javier, R. (2015). Curriculum development. Lorimar
Publishing, Inc.
Calderon, M. (2014). A critique of k-12 Philippine education system. International Journal of
Education and Research, 541–550. https://www.ijern.com/October-2014.php
Department of Education. (n.d.). The deped vision, mission, core values, and mandate.
https://www.deped.gov.ph/about-deped/vision-mission-core-values-and-mandate/
Department of Education Region VII. (2016). Region VII–rm.0346 s.2016-senior high school
mass training of teachers for common/general topics.
http://www.deped.gov.ph/regions/region-vii/regional-memo/region-vii-rm-0346-s2016-senior-high-school-shs-mass-training
Diaz, J. (2019, October 21). House to review k-to-12. The Philippine Star.
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/10/21/1961981/house-review-k-12
Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde program değerlendirme [Program Evaluation in Education]. Anı
Publishing.
Fozoni, S., Piri, M., & Asadiyan, S. (2016). The challenges of social sciences curriculum inprimary schooling regarding citizenship-social education based on Tyler model.
Journal of Theory and Practice in Curriculum, 55–80.
Gallagher, D., Kyle, G., Parks, E., & Ricard, K. (2013). Westwood public schools social
studies curriculum review 20122013. Westwood Public Schools.
http://www.westwood.k12.ma.us/userfiles/files/SSCurriculumReviewReport.pdf
International Consultants for Education and Fairs Monitor. (2013, August 9). Philippines
creates opportunities in overhaul of k-12 education system.
http://monitor.icef.com/2013/08/philippines-creates-opportunities-in-overhaul-of-k12-education-system/

42

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Jaca, C., Bacus, R., Anova, M., & Labarrete, R. (2018). Thematic analysis of selectedpublished researches in curriculum and instruction. International Journal of
Education and Research, 6(10), 31-36. https://www.ijern.com/October-2018.php
Kallendorf, C. (2002). Introduction. In C. W. Kallendorf (Ed.), Humanist educational
treatises (pp. vii-xvi), Harvard University Press.
Khoza, S. (2015). Student teachers’ reflections on their practices of the curriculum andassessment policy statement. South African Journal of Higher Education, 29(4), 179–
197. https://doi.org/10.20853/29-4-512
Kilinc, H. (2016). Teachers’ perception of 2nd grade english curriculum of primary school in
Turkey. Anthropologist, 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2016.11891949
LeDuc, K. (2010). Social studies curricula review report grades k-12. Natick Public Schools.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/29799992/k-12-social-studies-curriculareview-report-natick-public-schools
Malipot, M. (2017, June 8). Insufficient supply of qualified teachers remains deped’s
challenge. Manila Bulletin. https://news.mb.com.ph/2017/06/08/insufficient-supply-of
qualified-teachers-remains-depeds-challenge/
Muhammad, A., Kasim, A., Kamil, M., Ismail, M., Idris, N., Rathi, N., Buhari, T., & Kadir,Z. (2019). A preliminary study on the curriculum review of the English language
courses at Akademi Pengajian Bahasa, UiTM. American Journal of Education andLearning, 4(2), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.20448/804.4.2.263.271
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices,crosscutting and core ideas. The National Academies Press.
https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
Ndlovu, F. (2017). The teacher’s influence in curriculum policy implementation. IJRDOJournal of Educational Research, 2(3), 56–61.
Rivera, J. (2017). Articulating the foundations of Philippine K to 12 curriculum: Learnercenteredness. AsTEN Journal of Teacher Education, 59–70.
http://po.pnuresearchportal.org/ejournal/index.php/asten/article/view/554
Roy, M. (2015). Examination system & curriculum framework at secondary level schools inWest Bengal: A study. International Journal of Applied Research, 693–696.
http://www.allresearchjournal.com/archives/?year=2015&vol=1&issue=9&part=K&
ArticleId=659
Southeast Asian Minister of Education, Organization Regional Center for Educational
Innovation and Technology. (2012). K to 12 toolkit: Resource guide for teacher
educators, schools administrators and teachers. http://www.seameoinnotech.org/eNews/Kto12Toolkit_ao17july2012.pdf
Shahani, L. (2015, June 15). The challenges of basic education. The Philippine Star.
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2015/06/15/1466151/challenges-basic-educationdealing-k-12
Shin, S. (2017). Korea’s english curriculum: review, issues and future directions. Journal of
Research in Curriculum & Instruction, 206–215.
https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2017.21.3.206

43

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 8 – Issue 4 – 2020

Taole, M. (2013). Teachers’ conceptions of the curriculum review process. International
Journal of Science Education, 39–46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2013.11890059
Terrazola, V. (2019). Gatchalian calls for review of K-12 curriculum. Manila Bulletin.
https://news.mb.com.ph/2019/03/07/gatchalian-calls-for-review-of-k-12-curriculum/
The Enhanced Basic Education Act, RA 10533 (2013).
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2013/05/15/republic-act-no-10533
Thompson, D., Bell, T., Andreae, P., & Robins, A. (2013). Proceeding of the 44th ACM
technical symposium on computer science education. ACM Digital Library.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2445196.2445272
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. The University of
Chicago Press.
Umil, A. (2014, June 7). Four years into the K to12 program, implementation still haphazard- teachers. Bulatlat. https://www.bulatlat.com/2014/06/07/three-years-into-the-k-to12-program-implementation-still-haphazard-teachers/
Yusof, S., Zainuddin, D., & Hamdan, A. (2017). Teachers’ experience in curriculum
implementation: An investigation on english language teaching in vocational collegesin Malaysia. Sains Humanika, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n4-2.1359
Corresponding author: Edwin B. Estrera
Email: ebestrera@up.edu.ph44