Authors : Dixie Grace F. Abanilla; Joji D. Linaugo

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 5 - May

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/495srra3

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/4hsvdxk4

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26May2190

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The rapid advancement of 21st -century technology highlights the importance of robotics and programming in Science, Technology, and Engineering (STE) education. In the Philippines, the Department of Education (DepEd) strengthens the K to 12 curriculum to prepare learners for a digital world. However, a critical gap remains; existing instructional materials for Grade 10 STE robotics are largely Western-centric and lack cultural contextualization. To address this, the study “Design and Development of Bits to Bots: A Contextualized Self-Learning Material in Robotics” was developed. It aims to provide culturally relevant, learner-centered materials that improve comprehension and engagement. Grounded in Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory, the study emphasizes the role of social interaction, scaffolding, and the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in facilitating learning. The study employed the Taba’s Curriculum Development Model, which emphasizes a grassroots inductive approach that prioritizes learners’ needs and experiences in curriculum design. Furthermore, the material was structured using the 4E’s Instructional Model to promote learning engagement and critical thinking skills. A needs analysis revealed that students struggled most with basic programming tools for microcontrollers. To address this need, the material titled “Bits to Bots” was developed and subjected to expert validation using standard DepEd Evaluation Rating Tool. The results indicate that the material effectively meets the required standards for instructional resources and has strong potential to enhance learners’ understanding of robotics. The study recommends its adoption and further uses to enhance robotics learning outcomes.

Keywords : Science Education, STEM, Robotics, Instructional Materials Development, Developmental Research, Central Philippines.

References :

1. Samiur Rahman Khan, Nadeem Hossain, and Zahid Karim Ullah, “The Role of Robotics in Enhancing STEM Learning for Young Learners,” Proceeding Int. Conf. Inov. Sci. Technol. Educ. Child., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 321–324, 2024, doi: 10.62951/icistech.v4i2.131.
2. M. M. Maruf, T. Bhuiyan, E. J. Eshita, M. S. Hossen, and M. H. Imran, “An IoT-based smart home automation system: Enhancing security, energy efficiency, and remote accessibility,” Multidiscip. Sci. J., vol. 8, no. 7, 2026, doi: 10.31893/multiscience.2026262.
3. C. Jackson et al., “Equity-Oriented Conceptual Framework for K-12 STEM literacy,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 8, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s40594-021-00294-z.
4. R. Kelly and M. Allen, Exploring Engagement and Self-Efficacy in an Introductory Computer Science Course, vol. 1, no. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. doi: 10.1145/3622780.3623649.
5. M. Ryalat, N. Almtireen, G. Al-refai, H. Elmoaqet, and N. Rawashdeh, “Research and Education in Robotics: A Comprehensive Review, Trends, Challenges, and Future Directions,” J. Sens. Actuator Networks, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1–40, 2025, doi: 10.3390/jsan14040076.
6. UNESCO, “Education for sustainable development | UNESCO,” Education for sustainable development, 2023. https://www.unesco.org/en/sustainable-development/education (accessed May 30, 2026).
7. J. D. B. Llabore, “Readiness of the Public Junior High Schools in the Province of Albay Offering Robotics: An Assessment,” Int. J. Sustain. Adv. Integr. Res., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 200–207, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.65339/IJSAIR.V2.I2.179.
8. Y. Assefa, S. A. Tilwani, B. T. Moges, H. Majeed, and A. A. Alhur, “Bridging the gaps: Addressing challenges of student learning outcomes through innovative and culturally relevant approaches in pastoral areas,” Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open, vol. 12, p. 101822, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1016/J.SSAHO.2025.101822.
9. R. A. Bantigue and L. G. Baraquia, “Coping with the Challenges of the Integration of Robotics in the Science, Technology, and Engineering Program and Influences to Students’ Multiple Intelligences,” Int. J. Acad. Multidiscip. Res., vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 85–95, 2023, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4832701.
10. M. J. A. Santiago and V. C. Naval, “Evaluation of Robotics Education Program among Private Secondary Schools in Region IV-A CALABARZON,” Int. J. Sustain. Adv. Integr. Res., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 721–729, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.65339/IJSAIR.V2.I1.89.
11. E. L. Wang et al., “Teachers’ Perceptions of What Makes Instructional Materials Engaging, Appropriately Challenging, and Usable: A Survey and Interview Study,” RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, Jan. 2021. doi: 10.7249/RRA134-2.
12. J. Dohinog et al., “Utilization of Contextualized Instructional Materials in Education: A Systematic Review,” Psychol. Educ. A Multidiscip. J., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 203–214, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.70838/PEMJ.440203.
13. J. B. Jalon and L. S. Roleda, “Building beyond the robot: Disciplinary integration in challenge-based learning,” J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res., vol. 25, p. 10, 2026, doi: 10.28945/5747.
14. E. A. Trif-Boia, “INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS FOR TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION IN THE CLASSROOM,” in Proceedings of ADVED 2023- 9th International Conference on Advances in Education, Oct. 2023, pp. 25–31. Accessed: May 30, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.ocerints.org/adved23_e-publication/papers/Elena Andreea Trif-Boia.pdf
15. A. Özkan, İ. Çevik, E. Saylan, and Ü. Çakıroğlu, “The Past and Present of Instructional Design in Online Learning: Trends and Emerging Directions,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 26, no. 3, Aug. 2025, Accessed: May 30, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/8507/6287
16. N. Islam, G. Shafi Sheikh, R. Fatima, and F. Alvi, “A Study of Difficulties of Students in Learning Programming,” J. Educ. Soc. Sci., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 38–46, 2019, doi: 10.20547/jess0721907203.
17. S. Orhani and S. Alija, “Using diagnostic testing to build effective teaching strategies in mathematics,” Int. J. Didact. Stud., vol. 7, no. 3, p. e39019, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.33902/IJODS.202639019.
18. G. Laña, “Least Learned Competencies in Mathematics 8: Basis in Crafting Strategic Intervention Materials,” J. Res. Investig. Educ. , pp. 75–81, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.37034/RESIDU.V1I3.158.
19. R. Pascual, N. Bravo, and C. Quiñones, “FLEXIBLE TACTICS TO FACE COVID-19 AND SOCIAL OUTBREAK IN CHILE,” Jun. 2021. Accessed: May 30, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.cdio.org/sites/default/files/documents/138..pdf
20. M. Tlale-Mkhize, “Challenges Experienced by First-Year Students in the Programming Module-A Literature Review,” J. Educ. Learn. Technol., vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 2025–1555, 2025, doi: 10.38159/jelt.202561224.
21. H. Tanjung and A. Ramli, “Curriculum Development Model,” Mudarris J. Islam. Teach. Learn., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 23–32, 2025, Accessed: May 30, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://ejournal.stit-syekhburhanuddin.ac.id/index.php/mudarris/article/view/134
22. L. Wahyuni, W. Warsiman, S. S. Adi, and W. Goeyardi, “Redesigning Taba’s model in learning literature based on learning freedom principle to improve the ability to appreciate poetry,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2485527.
23. L. Hatch and S. K. Clark, “A study of the instructional decisions and lesson planning strategies of highly effective rural elementary school teachers,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 108, p. 103505, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/J.TATE.2021.103505.
24. R. Videla and T. Veloz, “The 4E Approach Applied to Education in the 21st Century,” Constr. Found., vol. 18, no. 2, 2023, Accessed: May 30, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://constructivist.info/18/2/153
25. T. Scheiner, E. Aspbury-Miyanishi, and D. Jazby, “Beyond traditional cognitivist boundaries: Reconceptualizing teacher noticing through 4E cognition,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 180, p. 105606, Oct. 2026, doi: 10.1016/J.TATE.2026.105606.
26. S. Kurt, “How Can We Align Learning Objectives, Instructional Strategies, and Assessments?,” Educational Technology, Nov. 2020. https://educationaltechnology.net/how-can-we-align-learning-objectives-instructional-strategies-and-assessments/ (accessed May 30, 2026).
27. R. Enciso and D. C. Bueno, “Upholding Academic Integrity: Strategies for Fostering Plagiarism Awareness and Prevention among MAEd Science Education Students,” Institutional Multidiscip. Res. Dev. J., vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 440–455, 2024.
28. Zainurrahman, F. N. Yusuf, and D. Sukyadi, “Text readability: its impact on reading comprehension and reading time,” J. Educ. Learn., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1422–1432, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.11591/EDULEARN.V18I4.21724.
29. S. L. Day, N. Atilgan, A. E. Giroux, and B. D. Sawyer, “The Influence of Format Readability on Children’s Reading Speed and Comprehension,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 8, p. 854, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.3390/EDUCSCI14080854/S1.
30. J. Regondola and J. M. Astorga, “Effect of Implementing Visual Learning Materials on Academic Engagement Among Grade 6 Students,” J. Arts, Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 256–264, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.69739/JAHSS.V2I2.767.
31. N. J. Hunsu, O. Adesope, and M. T. McCrudden, “The effects of text structure on students’ use of comprehension strategies and cognitive outcomes during science text processing,” Front. Educ., vol. 8, p. 1112804, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.3389/FEDUC.2023.1112804/TEXT.
32. M. P. Eviota, M. L. Estoque, E. A. Borja, E. P. Patulin, C. P. Mosa, and K. M. Ngilangil, “Development of Least Learned Competencies-Based Intervention Materials for Elementary,” Int. J. Innov. Sci. Res. Technol., p. 2173, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.38124/IJISRT/26JAN684.
33. S. McKenney and T. C. Reeves, “Educational design research: Portraying, conducting, and enhancing productive scholarship,” Med. Educ., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 82–92, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1111/MEDU.14280;REQUESTEDJOURNAL:JOURNAL:13652923.
34. P. M., Almerino, J. G. F., Mamites, I. O., Pinili, L. C., Tenerife, J. J. L., Sitoy, R. E., Abelgas, L. J., & Peteros, E. D. “Evaluating the Academic Performance of K-12 Students in the Philippines: A Standardized Evaluation Approach,” Education Research International, 2020(8877712),.1–8. Oct. 2020, doi:10.1155/2020/8877712