Authors : Floren Rose D. Badar

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 4 - April

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/d5r9u8k8

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/mnvd3kpd

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26apr907

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

Abstract : This action research examined the teaching and learning of Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) within an Indigenous Peoples Education (IPED) context at Villar Integrated School. Specifically, the study investigated the challenges encountered by teachers and Indigenous Peoples (IPED) students in the delivery and acquisition of TLE subjects—Information and Communications Technology (ICT), Agri-Fishery Arts (AFA), Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS), and Industrial Arts (IA)—as well as the coping strategies they employed to address these challenges. Grounded in experiential learning theory, sociocultural theory, and the Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSP) framework, the study utilized a qualitative action research design following the Plan–Act–Observe–Reflect (PAOR) cycle. Data were gathered through researcher-made questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with purposively selected TLE teachers and IPED students. The findings revealed that teachers faced significant challenges related to inadequate instructional materials, limited access to electricity and technology, difficulty in contextualizing lessons, language barriers, and irregular student attendance. Similarly, students experienced difficulties in understanding abstract lessons, limited opportunities for hands-on activities, and challenges in balancing school tasks with community and household responsibilities. Despite these constraints, both teachers and students demonstrated adaptive coping strategies, including lesson contextualization using indigenous practices, improvisation of materials, peer-assisted learning, observation-based learning, and strong community support. Based on these findings, action research–based intervention emphasizing culturally responsive instruction, integration of IKSPs, community collaboration, and flexible teaching strategies was developed and implemented. Initial results indicated improved student engagement, participation, and teacher confidence. The study concludes that culturally grounded action research interventions are effective in addressing instructional challenges and enhancing the relevance and quality of TLE instruction in IPED settings.

Keywords : Technology and Livelihood Education, Indigenous Peoples Education, Action Research, Coping Strategies, Culturally Responsive Teaching.

References :

1. Alangui, W. V., Buendia, R. L., & Dizon, M. F. (2024). Integrating Indigenous Knowledge     Systems and Practices in basic education: Implications for culturally responsive pedagogy. Philippine Journal of Education, 103(1), 45–62.
2. Banks, J. A. (2015). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
3. Buendia, R. L. (2024). Culturally grounded curriculum implementation in Indigenous Peoples Education schools in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Indigenous Education, 5(2), 77–95.
4. Caresosa, J. P., Dela Cruz, M. A., & Santos, R. D. (2025). Academic resilience and coping strategies of Indigenous Peoples students in skill-based programs. International Journal of Indigenous Studies, 12(1), 30–48.
5. Department of Education. (2011). DepEd Order No. 62, s. 2011: Adopting the National Indigenous Peoples Education (IPED) Policy Framework. DepEd Philippines.
6. Department of Education. (2016). Indigenous Peoples Education (IPED) Curriculum Framework. DepEd Philippines.
7. Department of Education. (2016). K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum: Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) Curriculum Guide. DepEd Philippines.
8. Dulay, R. M., & David, A. P. (2020). Challenges in implementing Indigenous Peoples Education in geographically isolated schools. The Normal Lights, 14(2), 112–130.
9. Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.
10. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Springer.
11. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
12. Miole, J. P. (2023). Bridging policy and practice in IPED implementation: Experiences from public schools. Philippine Social Science Review, 75(2), 89–108.
13. Monday, A. C. (2024). Teachers’ coping mechanisms and adaptive practices in Technology and Livelihood Education. Journal of Technical and Vocational Education Research, 9(1), 21–38.
14. Pamor, R. G., Legarda, M. J., & Bauyot, F. A. (2024). Challenges of Technology and Livelihood Education teachers in resource-limited schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 12(3), 56–68.
15. UNESCO. (2017). Education for Indigenous Peoples: Learning and teaching for the future. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
16. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
17. World Bank. (2024). Indigenous Peoples and education in the Philippines: Addressing inequality and access. World Bank Group.