28, January 2026

Students’ Evaluation of Instructional Materials with 7Es Inquiry-Based, Blended, and Flexible Learning Designs in Science and Research Subjects

VOLUME-10; ISSUE-1; JAN-2026

Author(s): Ma. Socorro G. Leong-on,  Jose G. Perez, Jr.,  Ferly V. Penaverde, and  Rhodora A. Cartagena

Authors Affiliations:

1 College of Pharmacy and Medical Technology, University of San Agustin, Iloilo City, Philippines

2 College of Liberal Arts, Sciences, and Education, University of San Agustin, Iloilo City, Philippines

DOIs:10.2017/IJRCS/202601004     |     Paper ID: IJRCS202601004


Abstract
Keywords
Cite this Article/Paper as
References

Abstract:    Worksheets and a module were created with 7Es inquiry-based, blended, flexible learning designs. There were 8 worksheets for Teaching Elementary Science 1 and Science 2, 4 worksheets for MLS16 and MLS16a, and a module for MLS16A and MLS16Aa. However, these had not yet been evaluated by the users, the students. This study was conducted to evaluate the worksheets and a module in terms of structure, content, processes, and outcomes.  Using the descriptive, purposive sampling research design, 78 students completely answered the evaluation of MLS16 and MLS16a, and 93 students in the MLS16A and MLS16Aa module for the second semester 2024-25. While 4 BEEd students answered Sci.1 worksheets, and 3 students evaluated the Sci. 2 worksheets.  An evaluation tool with a reliability of 0.96 using Cronbach’s alpha was used. The evaluation form was sent to the students via a Google link after the approval of the Academic Supervisors, and the students were asked to agree to the informed consent. The students’ evaluation results were presented using the mean and standard deviation and were interpreted as: 0-0.75 unsatisfactory; 0.76-1.5 less satisfactory; 1.51-2.25 satisfactory; 2.26-3.00 very satisfactory. The evaluation of worksheets for Elementary Science 1 and Elementary Science 2 (mean = 3.00, sd = 0.00) was very satisfactory, the highest rating. The 4 worksheets for MLS 16 and MLS16a, (mean = 2.74, sd = 0.07), and a module in MLS16A and MLS16Aa, (mean = 2.76, sd = 0.06),   were also rated very satisfactory. The foundation for creating the worksheets and a module that can serve as a supplemental curriculum and be copyrighted was laid out by this study.

   
Key Words:  evaluation, worksheets, module

Ma. Socorro G. Leong-on,  Jose G. Perez, Jr.,  Ferly V. Penaverde, and  Rhodora A. Cartagena (2026);  Students’ Evaluation of Instructional Materials with 7Es Inquiry-Based, Blended, and Flexible Learning Designs in Science and Research Subjects, International Journal of Research Culture Society,    ISSN(O): 2456-6683,  Volume – 10,   Issue –  1,  Pp.19-24.        Available on – https://ijrcs.org/

  1. Bambang Riadi, Muhammad Fuad, Rangga Firdaus, and Dwi Yulianti (2024). Blended inquiry learning: an LMS-based learning model to improve students’ higher-order thinking skills in higher education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 14 (12).
  2. Dapat, L., Alda,R. & Bacus, R. (2023). Evaluation of a flexible learning module on new Literacies for preservice teachers. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, (13) 3. 587-596.
  3. Graham, C. R. (2020). Blended Learning Systems: Definitions, current trends, and future directions. In R. West & L. English (Eds.), Technology and Education: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications 1-20. IGI Global.
  4. Leong-on, M. S. Implementation and evaluation of 7es scientific inquiry through plant essay guide manualamong grade Science, technology, and engineering (STE) junior high school students.Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8 (8), 3496- 3501.
  5. Leong-on, M.S.G., Penaverde, F., Perez, J.G. Jr.,  Santiago, K.L.,    Caras, J.F.,  Marquez, J.A., Gelle, Z.G.,  Tubola, M., Guerrero, C.R.,  Jamili, J.J.  Palec, M.B.,  Esteva, S.G.,  Abila, C.P., & Daguay, A., 2022. Design, Development, and evaluation of a module in writing sections of a quantitative health research paper for flexible learning. International Journal of Research Culture Society, 2022, 6(7). 110-115.
  6. Lumabit, A. M. C., & Sagge, Jr., R. G. (1). An inquiry-based learning module for general mathematics: Its’ development and evaluation. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(8), 2749-2756. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.08.08
  7. Osgerby, Julia. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the introduction of a blended learning environment: An exploratory case study. Accounting Education. 22. 10.1080/09639284.2012.729341.
  8. Silm, G., Tiitsaar, K., Pedaste, M., Zacharia, Z.C., & Papaevripidou, M. (2017). Teachers’ readiness to use inquiry-based learning: an investigation of teachers’ sense of efficacy and attitudes toward inquiry-based learning. Science Education International, 28, 315-325.
  9. Suwananphan, U. & Sonsupap, K. (2017). Comparison of 7Es of inquiry-based learning and problem-based learning in learning achievement, problem solving, and learning attitude toward science study of secondary school students (grade 8). Journal of Education, Mahasarakham University, 11(3), 220-230.
  10. Thorne, K. (2021). Blended Learning: How to Integrate Online Classroom Strategies with Traditional Learning Models. Corwin.
  11. Thorne, K. (2022). Designing Effective Blended Learning Courses: A Framework for Distance and Classroom Instruction. Routledge.
  12. Thorne, K. (2023). Blended Learning for Educators: Applying a Transformative Approach to Teaching and Learning. Routledge.
  13. Tong, D.H., Bui Phuong Uyen, P.B., & Ngan, L.K. 2022.The effectiveness of blended learning on students’ academic achievement, self-study skills, and learning attitudes: A quasi-experiment study in teaching the conventions for coordinates in the plane, Heliyon, 8(12). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12657.
  14. Vaughan, N. D. (2021). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. Jossey-Bass.
  15. Vaughan, N. D. (2022). Blended Learning Benefits for K-12 Students and Teachers: Faculty Development, Instructional Design, and Learning Styles Differentiation. IGI Global.
  16. Wolf, S.J., Fraser, B.J. (2008). Learning environment, attitudes, and achievement among middle-school science students using inquiry-based laboratory activities. Fraser Research in Science Education, 38(3), 321-334.
  17. Wulandari, Dynna Sri; Prayitno, Baskoro Adi; Marid, M. Developing the Guided Inquiry-Based Module on the Circulatory System to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. 2022. Journal of Biological Education Indonesia (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), (8)1, 77- 85.
Post Views: 73

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads:10 | No. of Views: 69