PEACOCK MODEL PEDAGOGY: INTERVENTION AND INNOVATIVE CATALYST IN THE NEW NORMAL PERSPECTIVE OF TEACHING AND LEARNING
Keywords:Peacock model pedagogy, Intervention and innovation of teaching, Catalyst of teaching, Peacock model, Participation of learning, Empathy and cooperation, Aesthetic and creative expression of knowledge
The study aims to analyze and identify how peacock model pedagogy improves the intervention and innovation catalyst in the new normal perspective of teaching and learning among the respondents. The study employs both a descriptive quantitative and qualitative research approach and design because it is used in analysing the intervention and innovative catalyst in the new normal perspective of teaching and learning. Purposive sampling is utilized in gathering the sample size of the study. It is a selection of intentional formats based on the concept that elucidates the specific theme or phenomenon of the study. This study comprised thirty six (36) respondents. Results show that students are actively participating and developing quality of leadership and initiative and are actively participating through exchange of ideas and interactions in the peacock model pedagogy on innovation of teaching and learning, participation, with a weighted mean of 4.06 or Agree which shows that students are actively participating and developing quality of leadership and initiative and are participating actively through exchange of ideas and interactions, questioning and experimentation, with a weighted mean of 3.66 or Agree which shows that students are able to frame learning related questions and inquisitive lessons for discussion and are able to frame learning related questions but have difficulties in exploring to answer the question raised among them, empathy and cooperation, with a weighted mean of 3.75 or Agree which shows that students are empathetic towards both the known and unknown persons in the pedagogy of learning in the new normal and are actively empathetic towards the known but only sympathetic towards the unknown process of learning, aesthetic and creative expression of knowledge, with a weighted mean of 3.75 or Agree which shows that students are aesthetic and creative in their new normal learning perspective pedagogy and are aesthetic and creative in their online classes as part of their innovative learning perspective. Findings show that there is a significant difference in the peacock model pedagogy that improves the intervention and innovation catalyst in the new normal perspective of teaching and learning as observed by the respondents.
• Avgerinou, M. D. (2021). The i2flex evolution: From learning methodology to school culture embracing the new normal. In Handbook of research on k-12 blended and virtual learning through the i2flex classroom model (pp. 216–236). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-7760-8.ch013
• Barak, M., & Yuan, S. (2021). A cultural perspective to project-based learning and the cultivation of innovative thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39(1), 100766. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100766
• Bolkan, S., & Goodboy, A. K. (2019). Examples and the facilitation of student learning: Should instructors provide examples or should students generate their own?. Communication Education, 68(3), 287–307. doi:10.1080/03634523.2019.1602275
• Brisk, M. E., Tian, Z., & Ballard, E. (2021). Autobiography writing instruction: The journey of a teacher participating in a systemic functional linguistics genre pedagogy professional development. (2021). System, 97, 102429. doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102429
• Brosowsky, N. P., Murray, S., Schooler, J. W., & Seli, P. (2021). Attention need not always apply: Mind wandering impedes explicit but not implicit sequence learning. Cognition, 209, 104530. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104530
• Burk-Rafel, J., Harris, K. B., Heath, J., Milliron, A., Savage, D. J., & Skochelak, S. E. (2020). Students as catalysts for curricular innovation: A change management framework. Medical Teacher, 42(5), 572–577. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2020.1718070
• Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., & Walker, K. (2020). Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652-661. doi:10.1177/1744987120927206
• Djamas, D., Tinedi, V., & Yohandri (2021). Development of interactive multimedia learning materials for improving critical thinking skills. Research anthology on developing critical thinking skills in students (pp. 507-525). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-3022-1.ch026
• Ellis, R. A., & Goodyear, P. (2019). The education ecology of universities: Integrating learning, strategy and the academy. UK: Routledge.
• Franklin, D., Coenraad, M., Palmer, J., Eatinger, D., Zipp, A., Anaya, M., … Weintrop, D. (2020). An analysis of use-modify-create pedagogical approach’s success in balancing structure and student agency. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 14-24), Dunedin, New Zealand: Association for Computing Machinery New York NY United States. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3372782.3406256
• Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E., & Wilson, C. (2021). Immersive virtual reality as a pedagogical tool in education: A systematic literature review of quantitative learning outcomes and experimental design. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(1), 1-32. doi:10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2
• Hau, N. H., Cuong, T. V., & Tinh, T. T. (2020). Students and teachers ‘perspective of the importance of arts in steam education in Vietnam. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(11), 666-671. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.11.121 Hays, D. G., & McKibben, W. B. (2021). Promoting rigorous research: Generalizability and qualitative research. Journal of Counseling & Development, 99(2), 178-188. doi:10.1002/jcad.12365
• Hector, P., & Kohtala, C. (2021). Experimenting with sustainability education: the case of a student-driven campus initiative in Finland. Local Environment, 1-16. doi:10.1080/13549839.2021.1891033
• Hongyan, Z. H. O. U. (2018). Management of university factors to support lifelong learning of faculty members (Doctoral thesis, Dhurakij Pundit University, Bangkok, Thailand). Retrieved from http://libdoc.dpu.ac.th/thesis/Hongyan.Zho.pdf
• Kulik, N. L., Moore, E. W., Centeio, E. E., Garn, A. C., Martin, J. J., Shen, B., ... & McCaughtry, N. (2019). Knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and healthy eating behavior among children: Results from the Building Healthy Communities trial. Health Education & Behavior, 46(4), 602-611. doi:10.1177/1090198119826298
• Mallillin, L. L. D. (2020). Different domains in learning and the academic performance of the students. Journal of Educational System, 4(1), 1-11. Retrieved from https://www.sryahwapublications.com/journal-of-educational-system/pdf/v4-i1/1.pdf
• Mallillin, L. L. D., Carag, E. A., Mallillin, J. B., & Laurel, R. D. (2020). Integration of knowledge through online classes in the learning enhancement of students. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(1), 19-34. doi:10.46827/ejoe.v5i1.3117
• Mallillin, L. L. D., Mallillin, J. B., Carag, E. A., Collado, J. B., & Largo, M. G. D. (2020). A framework in online learning process: A guide to educational teaching during COVID 19 pandemic. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(2), 1-15. doi:10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3274.
• Mallillin, L. L. D., Mendoza, L. C., Mallillin, J. B., Felix, R. C., & Lipayon, I. C. (2020). Implementation and readiness of online learning pedagogy: A transition to COVID 19 pandemic. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(2), 71-90. doi:10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3321
• McPartlan, P., Rutherford, T., Rodriguez, F., Shaffer, J. F., & Holton, A. (2021). Modality motivation: Selection effects and motivational differences in students who choose to take courses online. The Internet and Higher Education, 49, 100793. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100793
• Mondal, G. C. (2018). Reflection of Gandhian thoughts in the peacock model of continuous and comprehensive evaluation adopted in West Bengal. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 5(4), 219-233. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329628800_REFLECTION_OF_GANDHIAN_THOUGHTS_IN_THE_PEACOCK_MODEL_OF_CONTINUOUS_AND_COMPREHENSIVE_EVALUATION_ADOPTED_IN_WEST_BENGAL
• Mousavinasab, E., Zarifsanaiey, N., Niakan Kalhori, S. R., Rakhshan, M., Keikha, L., & Saeedi, G. M. (2021). Intelligent tutoring systems: A systematic review of characteristics, applications, and evaluation methods. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(1), 142-163. doi:10.1080/10494820.2018.1558257
• Muñoz-Martínez, Y., Gárate-Vergara, F., & Marambio-Carrasco, C. (2021). Training and Support for Inclusive Practices: Transformation from Cooperation in Teaching and Learning. Sustainability, 13(5), 1-17. https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i5p2583-d507695.html
• Pinho, C., Franco, M., & Mendes, L. (2021). Application of innovation diffusion theory to the E-learning process: higher education context. Education and Information Technologies, 26(1), 421-440. doi:10.1007/s10639-020-10269-2
• Rodriguez, S., Monreal, T., & Howard, J. (2020). “It’s about hearing and understanding their stories”: Teacher empathy and socio-political awareness toward newcomer undocumented students in the New Latino South. Journal of Latinos and Education, 19(2), 181-198. doi:10.1080/15348431.2018.1489812
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
• Stahnke, R., & Blömeke, S. (2021). Novice and expert teachers’ situation-specific skills regarding classroom management: What do they perceive, interpret and suggest? Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, 103243. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2020.103243
• Tan, O. S. (2021). Problem-based learning innovation: Using problems to power learning in the 21st century. Singapore: Thomson Learning Asia.
• Tria, J. Z. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of education in the Philippines: The new normal. International Journal of Pedagogical Development and Lifelong Learning, 1(1), 2-4. doi:10.30935/ijpdll/8311
• Warrier, U., John, M., & Warrier, S. (2021). Leveraging emotional intelligence competencies for sustainable development of higher education institutions in the new normal. FIIB Business Review, 10(1), 62-73. doi:10.1177/2319714521992032
• Wieselmann, J. R., Dare, E. A., Ring‐Whalen, E. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2020). “I just do what the boys tell me”: Exploring small group student interactions in an integrated STEM unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(1), 112-144. doi:10.1002/tea.21587
• Willingham, D. T. (2021). Why don’t students like school?: A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. John Wiley & Sons.
• Yeh, Y. C., Hsu, W. C., & Yastrubinskiy, E. (2021). Decomposing the influences of aesthetic experience processes on creativity learning through various consciousness interventions. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100756. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100756
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 LEOVIGILDO LITO D. MALLILLIN, REGILITO D. LAUREL, PILIPINAS AMERICA C. ARROYO, JOCELYN B. MALLILLIN
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.