This study aimed to develop instructional materials for interactive learning. Specifically, the study sought to:

1. identify the language needs of second year high school students

2. prepare a blueprint for an instructional set of the materials

3. develop instructional materials for the identified language needs

4. determine the appropriateness of the materials

         The study is on the Development of Instructional Materials for Interactive Learning in English for Second Year High School. In the process, the following phases evolved:

Phase 1 – The Design Phase

Phase 2 – The development Phase

Phase 3 – The Evaluation Phase

         Needs analysis through Teacher’s Assessment Checklists adopted on the Learning Competencies in Interactive Secondary English Language Curriculum 2002 in Second Year was the first step made by the researchers in the study. Perceptions of thirty (30) English, Science and Mathematics teachers in Agusan del Sur National High School, Bayugan National Comprehensive National High School, Trento National High School, Lapinigan National High School, and selected teachers from small or satellite schools regarding student’s needs were gathered and analyzed.

         Making the blueprint based on the result of the needs assessment followed. The second phase involved the actual preparation of the first draft of the materials followed by the evaluation of the initial draft of the materials that was done by the adviser, English In-Service Facilitator (ISF) and English Master Teachers (MT). The modification of the first draft was done based on the comments and suggestions. The try out of the materials followed.Eight try-out language teachers agreed to use the materials in their classes. They related the materials through the Teachers – Experts’ Education Checklist. Their comments and suggestions were solicited for the improvement of the said instruments.

        Three hundred students (300) participated in the try-out conducted at Agusan del Sur National High School. After the three-week trial-run, students’ reports and comments about their learning experiences with the materials were solicited through the Students’ Evaluation Checklist.

        Based on the students’ Evaluation and Teachers’ Evaluation with the materials, the final preparation of materials followed.

         The study revealed that second year students have difficulties in expressing themselves using the target language in all macro skills. They have low proficiency level in listening, speaking, reading and writing.

         The summary of thirty teachers on students’ needs assessment with the overall mean of the six-term of LISTENING SKILLS for English, Science and Mathematics was 3.59, which meant often. The result implied that students find listening skills difficult to master.

         The over-all mean of six-item SPEAKING SKILLS for English, Science and Mathematics was 3.61, which meant often. This implied that students find speaking skills difficult. It was also revealed in the over-all mean of seven-item of READING SKILLS for English, Science and Mathematics was 3.58, which meant often that students lack mastery of reading skills except item no. 17 (distinguishing fact from opinion) which had the mean of 3.30 – sometimes, 3.40 – sometimes, and 3.40 – sometimes in English, Science, and Math respectively.

          The over-all mean of six-item WRITING SKILLS for English, Science and Mathematics was 3.60, which meant often. This implied that students feel difficulty in mastering writing skills. The instructional materials for interactive learning in English II developed in the study can aid the teachers helping and teaching students improve their communication skills in listening, speaking, reading and writing through cooperative learning, as evidenced by the very satisfactory rating that pasted grand mean scores of 4.46 and 4.22 in the evaluation done by students and teachers respectively.

          The grand mean of 4.46 (very satisfactory) from the students’ evaluation of the materials meant that students found the materials useful and beneficial. The students discovered that they know how to compose jingles and script through the activities provided by the materials. They also learned to relate what happens in the real world through some activities.

The grand mean of 4.22, which meant very satisfactory, was revealed in the try-out language teacher’s evaluation of the materials. One evaluator said that the materials supplemented the students’ knowledge while one e valuator suggested that the time element of some materials be adjusted to suit to students’ level.

The study revealed the following:

1. That second year school students have low performance in listening, speaking, reading and writing based on the results o f the teacher-experts needs analysis.
2. That the developed instructional materials for interactive learning are useful and beneficial for the improvement of the students’ communication skills.
3. That the instructional materials provide content which are suitable, effective and which cater to different learning styles and preferences and which promote cooperative learning as perceived by the teacher experts who tried out the materials and number of students who used the materials.

RECOMMENDATIONS

         On the ground of the findings and conclusions of this study, the following are hereby recommended:

1. Language teachers are free to use and to modify the instructional materials based on the needs of the students. 
2. Language teachers should give emphasis to the improvement of four macro-skills- listening, speaking, reading and writing. 
3. Further studies are encouraged on the use of these materials and may be validated by other researchers to confirm the result of the evaluation.
4. A longer time for try out is recommended to measure students’ communicative competence before and after the treatment.
5. Language teachers need to expose themselves in carrying out the materials particularly in facilitating cooperative learning.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allwright, Dick and Bailey, Kathleen M. Focus on the Language Classroom – An Introduction to Classroom Research for language Teachers, Cambridge University. Press. 1966

Brindley, Geoff. Master of Applied Linguistics, Linguistic 906 Course Note, School of English, Linguistics and Media, Macquarie University

__ Basic Principles 2,Language and language Learning.

Hermosa, Eleonor Eme E. Creative Writing, Young Filipino Writers for Young Filipinos, 2002

Lynch, Tony. Communication in the Language Classroom. Oxford University Press, 1996

__. Graduate Diploma in Language and literacy Education LNED 802 Readings, Macquarie University.

Ora’a, Rosalinda J. (editor) The dynamics of Significant Human Experiences in Classroom Teaching, A Teacher’s Resource, Vol. 1. 1995.

Sevilla, Consuelo G. ET. Al. Research Methods, May 2002. SEDP Text English II

Sinclaar, Barbara and Hoehner, Gregory. Activate your English, Cambridge University Press,, 1996

Spratt, Mary. English for the Teachers, A Language Development Course, Cambridge University Press, 1994

Swarbrick, Ann. Teaching Modern Language, New Fetter Lane, London, 1994.

Tschner, Jeff. Texts and Task, a resource for Filipino teachers of English and English Language Materials Developers, 1994

Ulit, Enriquita V. Teaching he Elementary School Subjects, “Teaching English in the Elementary Grades”, Rex Printing Company. Inc., 1995

Widdowson, H.G. Aspects of Heritage Teaching, Oxford University Press, 1990

Caceres, Desiree B. ET. Al. “ Supplementary Materials in Reading on Visayan Culture”, 1994.

Dimatulac, Zenaia D. “Development and Validation of Prototype lesson I reading Utilizing Cooperative Learning Approach,” Master’s Thesis, PNU-Manila, 1999.

Guilot, Conception D. “Development of ERICA (Effective Reading in content Areas) Based Prototype Materials .”Master’s Thesis, PNU-Manila, 2000

Lagradilla, Ma. Theresa L. “The Preparation of Instructional materials in Communication Arts I