Volume 8, Issue 5, May – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Effectiveness of Flexible Learning on the Academic

Performance of Students
Jehan Mae D. Libato1, Jerrad D. Magno2, Jamie Renee T. Rogando3, Shiori C. Tagami4, Mae C. Naynes5, Elisa F. Grampil6
Philippine State College of Aeronautics, Pasay City, Philippines

Abstract:- The study was undertaken to assess the transition to the new learning set up from being accustomed to
effectiveness of flexible learning on the academic the traditional set up brought a challenge to the pedagogy of
performance of the students. The goal was to determine learning of the students to their academic performance. The
the significant difference on the academic performance of objective of the study is to identify the effectiveness of the
the students between the traditional and flexible learning flexible learning on the academic performance of the students
and to determine if there is a significant difference on the with opposed to the traditional learning; as stated in the
characteristics of the learning tool they used. The findings instructional design theory, one method may work best in one
of the study showed that there is a significant difference on situation while another may work best in a different situation.
the academic performance of the students during flexible
learning. Their GWA increased as opposed to traditional Schools all over the globe have been closed due to the
learning. However, there is no significant difference when outbreak of COVID-19. 1.3 billion students around the world
it comes to the characteristic of the learning tool in have been affected by the rapid change of the learning set up,
thoughtful practice. The students may have out form their wherein the students were left with no choice but to adopt the
GWA, but the internal learning was not there. new learning set up which is the online learning(UNESCO,
2020). The unplanned transition to online learning along with
Keywords:- Flexible Learning, Traditional Learning, the internet connection issues, no proper preparation and the
Synchronous, Asynchronous. lack of equipment needed would lead to poor effectiveness
that may hinder the development of the students’ academic
I. INTRODUCTION performance. Whereas the other starts to believe that modern
level of education will arise soon because of its benefits.
The traditional learning is the accustomed method of
learning and a well- established modality that has been refine II. PURPOSE
over the years in the Philippines. It is a learning method where
there is a face-to-face interaction of the learning process The study is primarily focused on the effectiveness of
between the students and teacher that takes place physically in flexible learning on the academic performance of the 2nd Year
a classroom setting. The flexible learning is a form of distance and 3rd Year students Batch 2020-2021. The study aims to
learning method being offered as the current modality due to determine the effectiveness of flexible learning by analyzing
pandemic restrictions, whereas there are no physical face-to- their academic performance during the traditional learning vs.
face interactions between the students and teacher. The flexible learning and their evaluation on the characteristics of
learning process of the student in flexible learning takes place the learning tool used in the traditional and flexible.
in two methods: synchronous and asynchronous. The sudden

IJISRT23MAY822 www.ijisrt.com 1529

Volume 8, Issue 5, May – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

The system approach used is the Flow Chart System in  Research Questions
describing the conceptual framework of the study. As shown  What is the demographic profile of the students in
in Figure 1, the participants of the study are studied according Aviation Electronics Technology in terms of: Year Level;
to their academic performance in the 2nd semester 2019 Gender; Age; Residence Location; Socioeconomic Status?
(Traditional) and 1st semester 2020 (Flexible) and their  What is the academic performance of the students on 2nd
evaluation on the characteristics of the learning tool used in semester 2019 and 1st semester 2020 in terms of: GWA?
the traditional learning and flexible learning to know on what  Is there a significant difference on the academic
part does the learning tools lacking on a specific area. Signed performance of the students between 2nd semester 2019
consent letters permitting the researchers to collect their data (Traditional) and 1st semester 2020 (Flexible) in terms of:
through registrar are collected from the participants. After GWA?
collecting the consent letters, the letter of request is sent to the  What is the characteristics of the learning tool used of the
school registrar to collect the data. The academic performance students in terms of: Traditional; Synchronous;
of the participants in 2nd semester 2019 and 1st semester in Asynchronous?
2020 is then collected from the school registrar. The  Is there a significant difference between the characteristics
evaluation of the participants on the characteristics of the of the learning tool used on academic performance of the
learning tool used on the clear information, thoughtful students in terms of: Traditional vs Synchronous;
practice, informative feedback, strong intrinsic, and extrinsic  What implications may be drawn from the result of the
motivation during their traditional and flexible learning study on the effectiveness of Flexible learning on the
(synchronous and asynchronous) is considered to find on academic performance of the students in terms of:
where the learning tool lack on the effectiveness of the Instructional Tools;
learning process of the participants does the process of  Instructional Outcomes?
collecting the data on this is through survey questionnaire.

IJISRT23MAY822 www.ijisrt.com 1530

Volume 8, Issue 5, May – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
III. METHODOLOGY the participants belongs to the bracket of 10,000 to 20,000 or
low-income class and least on 70,000 to 100,000 or upper
The method of collecting the primary data is on two middle class.
parts. First, the letter of consent was collected from the
participants and second, the list of GWA was collected from B. The academic performance of the students on 2nd semester
the school registrar. The researchers collected the signed letter 2019 and 1st semester 2020 was taken according to:
of consent from the participants, compiled in it a tabulated
form together with their student ID in a PDF form and a letter  GWA
of request to collect the data (GWA) of the participants Finding shows that the academic performance of the 2nd
together with the signed letter of consent in a PDF form was year students in terms of GWA on 2nd semester 2019 or on
sent to the school registrar by the researchers. The researchers the traditional learning was 2.14 and on 1st semester 2020 or
received the list of GWA sent by the school registrar in an on the flexible learning was 1.47; 3rd year students in terms of
Excel Form. The secondary data, demographic profile of the GWA on 2nd semester 2019 or on the traditional learning was
participants and their evaluation on the characteristics of the 1.47 and on 1st semester 2020 or on the flexible learning was
learning tool used in Traditional and Flexible learning was 1.37.
collected through survey questionnaire via Google forms. The
collected data was treated with utmost privacy and was used C. The significant difference on the academic performance of
with the solely purpose of the research. the students on 2nd semester 2019 and 1st semester 2020
was taken according to:
IV. RESULTS
 GWA
A. The demographic profile of the participants were taken Finding shows that there is a significant difference on the
according to: academic performance of the students for both year levels in
the flexible learning with mean of 0.67 and 0.10. The learning
 Year Level outcome of the participants or the GWA in the flexible
Finding shows that there are 50 students (50%) from the learning has found an increase as opposed to the traditional
2nd year level and 50 students (50%) from the 3rd year level. learning outcome.
The total participant of the study is 100 with a percentage of
100%.All acquired participants was surveyed and their GWA D. The characteristics of the learning tool used of the students
was collected. were taken according to:

 Gender  Traditional
Finding shows that from the total number of 100 Finding shows that the characteristics of the learning tool
participants, there are 57 male students with(57%) and 43 used in the traditional was attained in terms of clear
female students with (43%). Majority of the participants are information with mean of 3.31; thoughtful practice with mean
dominated by male and least dominated by female. of 3.36; informative feedback with mean of 3.20; intrinsic
motivation with mean of 3.75; extrinsic motivation with mean
 Age of 3.71.The traditional has attained the characteristics of an
Finding shows that from the total number of the effective learning tool as it was the accustomed and well-
participants of 100, there are 58 students belongs to the age shaped learning modality.
bracket of 21 to 23 (58%); 41 students belong to the age
bracket of 18 to 20 (41%) and 1 student belongs to the age  Synchronous
bracket of 24 to 26 (1%). Majority age bracket of the Finding shows that the characteristics of the learning tool
participants is 21 to 23 and least on 24 to 26. used in the synchronous was attained in terms of clear
information with mean of 2.78; thoughtful practice with mean
 Residence Location of 3.03; informative feedback with mean of 2.78; intrinsic
Finding shows that from the total number of the motivation with mean of 2.97; extrinsic motivation with mean
participants of 100, there are 53 students that lives in the Rural of 3.27. The synchronous has attained the characteristics of an
(53%); 30 students that live in the Urban (30%) and 17 effective learning tool as it has real time interaction the
students that live in suburban (17%). Majority of the student, like traditional by virtually.
participants lives in the Rural and least on Suburban.
 Asynchronous
 Socioeconomic Status Finding shows that the characteristics of the learning tool
Finding shows that in terms of socioeconomic status used in the traditional was attained in terms of clear
there are 28 students with 10,000 to 20,000 monthly (28%) information with mean of 2.74; thoughtful practice with mean
followed by 26 students with 20,000 to 40,000 monthly (26%) of 3.38; intrinsic motivation with mean of 2.96; extrinsic
and least 4 students with 70,000 to 100,000 (4%). Majority of motivation with mean of 3.34. The informative feedback was

IJISRT23MAY822 www.ijisrt.com 1531

Volume 8, Issue 5, May – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
not attained with mean of 2.41. The asynchronous has not V. CONCLUSION
attained the informative feedback on the characteristics of an
effective learning tool as the instructors might be late in Based on the indicated findings, the following
releasing the grades of the students or the students might be conclusions were drawn:
late in passing their requirements. There might be a lack of  The flexible learning has a significant difference on the
instructors which results to work overload for them to handle. academic performance of the 2nd year and 3rd year
students. The GWA of the students during the flexible
E. The significant relationship between the characteristics of learning was higher as opposed to traditional learning.
the learning tool used on the academic performance of the  The learning tools characteristics in terms of clear
students were taken according to: information, thoughtful practice informative feedback,
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation has a significant
 Traditional vs. Synchronous difference on the academic performance in traditional and
There was a significant difference on their mean for the synchronous of the students. However, in terms of the
given categories in the learning such as the clear information, thoughtful practice on asynchronous, there was no
thoughtful practice, information feedback, intrinsic and significant difference on the mean for the traditional and
extrinsic motivation with a mean difference of .533, .327, asynchronous learning. The students might have higher
.420, .780 and .435 respectively. It also shows that the mean GWA on the flexible learning but do not really
of the traditional learning has a greater mean against the understand/learn well as opposed to traditional learning
synchronous learning. Both traditional and synchronous has a that they might have lower GWA, but they do really
visual and real time interaction that helps the student on their understand/learn the lesson.
learning process. The differences are on the part of physical
interaction and online interaction between the students and the RECOMMENDATION
instructors.
The effectiveness of flexible learning on the academic
 Traditional vs. Asynchronous performance of the students was revealed. Thus, the following
There was a significant difference on their mean for the recommendations are hereby presented:
given categories in the learning such as the clear information,  In terms of not attaining the informative feedback in the
informative feedback, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation with a asynchronous, the researchers recommend the future
mean difference of .573, .790, .790, and .365 respectively. It researcher interested to conduct a study on where the
also shows that the mean of the traditional learning has a discrepancy exists between the students and the instructors.
greater mean against the asynchronous learning. While in The informative feedback may not be attained due to the
terms of the thoughtful practice, there was no significant late releasing of grades by the instructors but also it may
difference on the mean for the traditional and asynchronous not be attained due to the late submissions of the
learning. The thoughtful practice was found no significant requirements by the students. There might be also a
difference as the modules contains activities on the last part of shortage in instructors to handle the class efficiently as
the lesson. there might be a work overload to the instructors.
 The basis of this study was based on the GWA of the
F. The implications drawn from the result of the study on the students by general. The researchers recommend to the
effectiveness of Flexible learning on the academic future researchers interested in continuing this study to
performance of the students in terms of: modify further the learning outcome of the students by
their academic performance in terms of examination,
 Instructional Tools quizzes, activities etc. as the discrepancy can also be seen
Flexible learning can be prolonged due to the intermittent in these parts to further modify the effectiveness.
condition or situation of the Philippines, school/instructors
should maintain the current quality and only improve the REFERENCES
virtual laboratory activities for the learning process of the
students. [1]. Blake, C. (2021, January 3). Resilient Educator.
Retrieved July 2, 2021, from Cultivating Motivation:
 Instructional Outcomes How to Help Students Love Learning:
Since, the effectiveness of flexible learning has been https://resilienteducator.com/classroom-
proved; school/instructors should look upon further on finding resources/cultivating-student- motivation/
if the students really understand well the lesson such as [2]. Brown, B., Schroeder, M., & Eaton, S. (2016). Institute
improving of the students especially on laboratory activities of Education Sciences. Retrieved July 2, 2021, from
that can be found as the main lacking needs of the students Designing Synchronous Online Interactions and
due to the pandemic limitations. Discussions:
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED573166.pdf

IJISRT23MAY822 www.ijisrt.com 1532

Volume 8, Issue 5, May – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[3]. Buenaventura, R. D., Ho, J. B., & Lapid, M. I. (2020, [12]. Laguador, J. (2021, August 8). Challenges Encountered
April 30). Cambridge University Press. Retrieved June during Pandemic in Flexible Learning Among College
20, 2021, from COVID-19 and mental health of older Students Living in Urban, Rural, and Suburban Areas in
adults in the Philippines: a perspective from a developing the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational
country: Perspectives, 8(1), 10. Retrieved May 30, 2021, from
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international- https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/66286591/APJEA
psychogeriatrics/article/covid19-and-mental-health-of- S_2021.8.1.02- with-cover-page-
older-adults-in-the- philippines-a-perspective-from-a- v2.pdf?Expires=1626019663&Signature=E441rZ9TTzD
developing- 0DbTVl7lINsNeUk
country/CE99711179336AD47C3BDA6C981BEAB4?fb hPgnX8uUs2SN12Jydiopck0q5TthRILlH0cwaJzNa9nlk
clid=IwAR2AOC9k p9kYuqvTpP6lLhOLbR17tV2nX GzW58RgRIEP1a7
[4]. Calhoun, C., Sahay, S., & Wilson, M. (2020). Design for shsseRWt4kTmRlP5iyM8MdSxQ0L2UemMO59i3qbgi
Learning. Retrieved May 4, 2021, from Instructional XcQHfWCKAep
Design Evaluation: [13]. Markovic, I. (2020, September 30). Edume. Retrieved
https://edtechbooks.org/id/instructional_design_evaluatio from Why Giving Instant Feedback is Important for
n Effective Learning: https://edume.com/blog/role- of-
[5]. CHED. (2020, May 21). Retrieved May 3, 2021, from feedback-in-improving-learning
Guidelines on the Implementation of Flexible Learning: [14]. Mathewson, T. G. (2019, March 27). The Hechinger
https://ched.gov.ph/wp- content/uploads/CMO-No.-4-s.- Report. Retrieved July 2, 2021, from How to unlock
2020-Guidelines-on-the-Implementation- of-Flexible- students’ internal drive for learning:
Learning.pdf https://hechingerreport.org/intrinsic-motivation-is-key-
[6]. Culatta, R. (2018, May 11). Instructional Design. to-student- achievement-but-schools-kill-it/
Retrieved May 19, 2021, from History of Instructional [15]. Mehrbach, L., & Beingessner, C. (2018, August 8).
Design: During World War II, when the US military Getting Smart. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from Why
needed to quickly train vast numbers of people to Flexible Learning Environments?:
perform complex technological tasks, the groundwork https://www.gettingsmart.com/2018/08/why-flexible-
for instructional design was laid (Culatta learning- environments/
[7]. Delas Peñas, E. (2020, August 19). SDSN Youth. [16]. Meşe, E., & Sevilen, Ç. (2021). Factors influencing EFL
Retrieved April 30, 2021, from Challenges of Online students’ motivation in online learning: A qualitative .
Learning vs Traditional Learning for Students: Journal of Educational Technology and Online
https://covid19.sdsnyouthph.org/article.php?id=51 Learning, 12. Retrieved July 2, 2021, from
[8]. Domingo, K. (2020, September 17). ABS-CBN News. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1286748.pdf
Retrieved July 1, 2021, from Who are identified rich, [17]. Neubauer, A. B., Smyth, J. M., & Sliwinski, M. J. (2019,
poor? Gov't shows income class brackets in PH: January 1). The Journals of Gerontology. Retrieved July
https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/17/20/who-are- 1, 2021, from Age Differences in Proactive Coping With
identified-rich-poor- govt-shows-income-class-brackets- Minor Hassles in Daily Life:
in-ph https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology/article/7
[9]. Finol, M. O. (2020, March 26). Bryn Mawr College. 4/1/7/5042148?lo gin=true
Retrieved May 3, 2021, from Asynchronous vs. [18]. Obeidat, A., Obeidat, R., & Al-Shalabi, M. (2020). The
Synchronous Learning: A Quick Overview: Effectiveness of Adopting e-Learning during COVID-19
https://www.brynmawr.edu/blendedlearning/asynchrono at Hashemite University. International Journal of
us-vs- synchronous-learning-quick-overview Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11, 9.
[10]. Ibyatova, L., Oparina, K., & Rakova, E. (2018, May 25). Retrieved May 30, 2021, from
Modular Approach to Teaching and Learning English https://thesai.org/Downloads/Volume11No12/Paper_12-
Grammar in Technical Universities. Proceedings of the The_Effectiveness_of_Adopting_e_Learning.pdf
International Scientific Conference, I, 11. Retrieved July [19]. Parajuli, M., & Thapa, A. (2017). Gender Differences in
2, 2021, from the Academic Performance of Students. Journal of
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325368627_M Development and Social Engineering, 9. Retrieved July
ODULAR_APPRO 1, 2021, from
ACH_TO_TEACHING_AND_LEARNING_ENGLISH https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/014920630
_GRAMMAR_IN_TEC HNICAL_UNIVERSITIES 202800504?jour nalCode=joma
[11]. Kent State University. (2021, June 28). Retrieved July 1, [20]. Paul, J., & Jefferson, F. (2019, November 12). A
2021, from SPSS TUTORIALS: PAIRED SAMPLES T Comparative Analysis of Student Performance in an
TEST: Online vs. Face-to-Face Environmental Science Course
https://libguides.library.kent.edu/SPSS/PairedSamplestT From 2009 to 2016. Original Research, 9.
est doi:10.3389/fcomp.2019.00007

IJISRT23MAY822 www.ijisrt.com 1533

Volume 8, Issue 5, May – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[21]. Perkins, D. N. (1992). Smart schools : better thinking [31]. UNESCO. (2020, April 29). UNESCO. Retrieved April
and learning for every child. New York: The Free Press. 25, 2021, from 1.3 billion learners are still affected by
Retrieved May 4, 2021 school or university closures, as educational institutions
[22]. Rahman, I., Kabir, R., & Al-Bashir, M. (2016). The start reopening around the world, says UNESCO:
Value and Effectiveness of Feedback in Improving https://en.unesco.org/news/13-billion-learners-are-still-
Students’. Journal of Education and Practice, 4. affected-school- university-closures-educational-
Retrieved July 2, 2021, from institutions
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1105282.pdf [32]. Villanueva, M., & Núñez, J. (2020, July 25). Institute of
[23]. Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). Instructional Design Theory Education Sciences. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from A
(Vol. II). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Study on the Impact of Socioeconomic Status on
Associates, Inc., Publishers. Retrieved May 20, 2021, Emergency Electronic Learning:
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED607644.pdf
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=OUq5 [33]. Weaver, B. (2021). Scholastic. Retrieved July 2, 2021,
5prZIMEC&oi=fnd from The Importance of Assessment:
&pg=PT18&dq=instructional+design+theory&ots=1MvB https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-
SGUskv&sig=u6kd content/importance-assessment/
SfMIpd06hOrCSA7fokH4iZk&redir_esc=y#v=onepage [34]. Wind, D. K. (2020, November 2). Eduflow. Retrieved
&q&f=false from Synchronous vs Asynchronous Learning: What's
[24]. Rohani, L., & Francescucci, A. (2018, December 13). More Effective?:
Exclusively Synchronous Online (VIRI) Learning: The https://www.eduflow.com/blog/synchronous-vs-
Impact on Student Performance and Engagement asynchronous-learning- whats-more-effective
Outcomes. Journal of Marketing Education, 16.
Retrieved July 2, 2021, from
[25]. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/027347531
8818864?fbclid=IwAR1a
i3kJQuut9Quz_LvLcu7lwkPxVl9iYpdhMcNjZ42ITjLLv
ZdBSpoUCNs
[26]. Scheiderer, J. (2021, March 24). The Ohio State
University. Retrieved May 3, 2021, from What's the
Difference Between Asynchronous and Synchronous
Learning?: https://online.osu.edu/resources/learn/whats-
difference-between-asynchronous-and-synchronous-
learning
[27]. Shivaramaiah, G. (2018, June 1). Xavier University
School of Medecine. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from
Teaching Learning Methods: Traditional vs. Modern vs.
Peer-Assisted Learning:
https://xusom.com/uncategorized/teaching-learning-
methods-traditional- vs-modern-vs-peer-assisted-
learning/
[28]. Taneja, V. (2020, May 8). India Today. Retrieved July 1,
2021, from What makes traditional learning or offline
learning so important and why it cannot be completely
eliminated?: https://www.indiatoday.in/education-
today/featurephilia/story/traditional-learning-will-
always-have-a-place-in- our-classrooms-1675692-2020-
05-08
[29]. Uenishi, K. (2019, March 27). The Usefulness of
Original Teaching Materials for Motivation.
doi:10.5772/intechopen.85440
[30]. UNESCO. (2020, May 11). Retrieved April 29, 2021,
from Education: From disruption to recovery:
https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse

IJISRT23MAY822 www.ijisrt.com 1534