Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives

ISSN Print: 2984-8288, ISSN Online: 2984-8385

Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 220-229, May 2024

Issues, Challenges, and Coping Mechanisms of Out-of-Field

Physical Education Teachers in Subject Delivery
Josua A. Rivero
Teacher III, San Pascual National High School, San Pascual, Masbate, Philippines
PhD Student, Naga College Foundation Inc., Naga City, Camarines Sur, Philippines

Author email: josua.rivero@deped.gov.ph

Dated received: March 31, 2024 Originality: 85%

Date revised: April 10, 2024 Grammarly Score: 99%
Date accepted: April 14, 2024 Similarity: 15%

Recommended citation:
Rivero, J. (2024). Issues, challenges, and coping mechanisms of out-of-field physical education teachers in subject
delivery. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 2, Number 5, pp. 220-229.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10968576

Abstract. This study explored the challenges and coping mechanisms of out-of-field Physical Education
(PE) teachers. A descriptive-correlational design was employed with 30 out-of-field PE teachers as
respondents. Data gathering tools included a survey questionnaire, while statistical treatments comprised
Weighted Mean, Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient, and Determination of Coefficient. It
was found that most respondents encountered issues, with the learning environment being less of a
concern. Additionally, most respondents disagreed that supervisory assistance was evident in the
curriculum, posing a challenge for out-of-field PE teachers. Seeking support from colleagues was identified
as the most prominent coping mechanism, indicating a strong need for collaboration. However, other
coping mechanisms were not strongly utilized by teachers. The influence of coping mechanisms varied
across different issues and challenges. Finally, policy recommendations were developed based on the
study's findings to support out-of-field PE teachers.

Keywords: Physical education; Out-of-field teachers; Challenges; Coping mechanisms.

1.0 Introduction
The Philippine educational system has proactively incorporated a wide range of tactics and methods to help
teachers fulfill their roles as knowledge providers. However, due to poor preparation in their respective fields,
many teachers in our educational system today struggle with teaching and dealing with challenging situations.
The demand for teachers underscores the significance of the teaching profession, which many educators
embrace with love and commitment. Nevertheless, particularly among newly hired teachers, there are
significant levels of stress experienced.

Teaching Physical Education (PE) is particularly crucial as it pertains to improving the physical health of
students. Therefore, various methods and strategies should be adopted in teaching PE. Physical education
stands out as the only subject in schools that directly contributes to the physical and emotional well-being of
students, underscoring the necessity for teachers to be well-equipped with knowledge and expertise in the field.
However, some schools, especially in rural areas, face challenges in hiring PE major teachers, leading to
situations where teachers instruct students in areas or grade levels for which they have not received official
training, known as "out-of-field teaching."

The phenomenon of teaching outside of one’s profession often stems from structural problems related to teacher
availability and demand. deCourcy et al. (2022) have attributed the insufficient number of teachers in the
Philippines to various factors, including the stressful work environment and inadequate compensation.
According to Hobbs et al. (2019), addressing the challenges of initial teacher preparation is crucial to equipping
educators with the skills, coping strategies, and personal resources needed to manage teaching outside of one’s
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
field. Ahmad (2016) has highlighted several difficulties in teaching physical education, including diminishing
teaching time, curriculum constraints, lack of equipment, and disapproval from students, parents, and even
teachers themselves regarding the importance of physical education.

Support for physical education is enshrined in the Philippine Constitution, particularly in Article XIV Section 19,
which emphasizes the promotion of physical education and sports programs to foster discipline, teamwork, and
excellence among citizens. Furthermore, the Department of Education (DepEd) has established minimum
qualifications for teachers, ensuring that school personnel possess appropriate educational qualifications and
pass the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). Memos released by DepEd, such as No. 76 s. 2022 and No.
019 s. 2022, emphasize the importance of merit-based selection and competency in the recruitment and retention
of teachers.

Given the importance of physical education in promoting holistic development, the study aimed to assess the
issues and challenges encountered by out-of-field Physical Education teachers, as well as their teaching
methods. Conducted in San Pascual North, where instances of PE subjects being taught by non-PE majors are
observed, the research seeks to determine the impact of this phenomenon on teaching effectiveness in the subject
area.

2.0 Methodology
2.1 Research Design
This study employed a descriptive-correlational design. The descriptive method was utilized to identify the
issues that arise in teaching PE subjects for out-of-field PE teachers. Additionally, it was used to assess the
challenges faced in teaching PE subjects and the coping mechanisms applied to address them. The correlational
design was employed to determine and evaluate the relationship between coping mechanisms and their
influence on the issues and challenges faced by both non-PE and PE teachers.

2.2 Research Participants

The respondents of the study are the out-of-field PE teachers of secondary schools in San Pascual North District,
Masbate, Philippines. This study employed total enumeration, meaning all eligible individuals within the
population were included as respondents. The demographic profile of the respondents was also assessed by
identifying their educational attainment, subjects taught, length of years teaching PE, and relevant PE training
attended. Purposive sampling was utilized in the study to select respondents who fit the established criteria.

2.3 Research Instrument

The researcher utilized a survey questionnaire to collect data from the respondents. The questionnaire consisted
of three parts: the first part addressed the issues, the second part tackled the challenges, and the third part
focused on coping mechanisms. The questionnaire underwent validation by experts. After validation, it
underwent a dry run to determine the clarity of the included items. The results from the dry run were analyzed
using Cronbach’s alpha to assess the reliability of the instrument.

2.4 Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher secured permission from the school heads of San Pascual North District to conduct the survey.
The survey questionnaires were administered face-to-face to the respondents. Upon completion, the
questionnaires were retrieved, coded, tallied, and tabulated for statistical treatment.

2.5 Data Analysis

The collected data was processed using appropriate statistical tools to facilitate accurate analysis and
interpretation. After analyzing the results, the researcher interpreted them in the context of the initial research
problem, contributing to knowledge in the field.

2.6 Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations, such as obtaining informed consent from participants, ensuring confidentiality and
anonymity, and adhering to ethical guidelines for research involving human subjects, were followed throughout
the study.

221
3.0 Results and Discussion
3.1 Issues Encountered in Teaching Physical Education Subject
Issues in terms of learning environment, student assessment, mastery of content, and pedagogy are encountered
by out-of-field physical education teachers in teaching Physical Education subjects.

Learning Environment
Table 1 presents the results of the issues encountered in teaching PE subjects in terms of the learning
environment. It also includes the weighted means and the corresponding ranks of the statements given.

Table 1. Issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of the learning environment
INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. The teacher provides support to the students and makes them feel comfortable. 3.97 Disagree 1
2. Teachers provide positive social values. 3.57 Disagree 2.5
3. Administration provides a climate of support. 3.57 Disagree 2.5
4. The classroom is large enough to fit all students. 3.37 Moderately Agree 4
5. The classroom environment is appropriate to the subject (MAPEH) taught. 2.93 Moderately Agree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 3.48 Disagree
Legend: 5.00-4.21- SD, 4.20-3.41 D, 3.40-2.61 MA, 2.60-1.81 A, 1.80-1.00 SA

As per the results, the first indicator, which is "the teacher provides support to the students and makes them feel
comfortable," was ranked first with a weighted mean of 3.97, interpreted as disagree. Two indicators, "teachers
provide social values" and "administration provides climates of support," both ranked 2.5, with a weighted
mean of 3.57, interpreted as “disagree.” This was followed by the indicator that "classroom is somehow large
enough to fit all the students," with a weighted mean of 3.37, interpreted as moderately disagree. The lowest
rank was "classroom environment is somehow appropriate to the subject taught," which obtained a weighted
mean of 2.93, interpreted as moderately disagree.

Overall, in terms of the learning environment, the average weighted mean was 3.48, interpreted as disagree. This
indicates that the majority of the respondents regarded most of the statements on issues negatively and
disagreed with the indicators given in terms of the learning environment. The discussion of the result in the
learning environment is also reflected in the study of Bucholz and Sheffler (2017), which states that one of the
most significant aspects influencing a student's learning is the classroom atmosphere. In essence, when students
perceive the learning environment as encouraging and positive, they perform better academically. Students who
experience a sense of community, trust in others and are inspired to take on challenges, take risks, and ask
questions thrive in a positive atmosphere.

Student Assessment
Table 2 shows the results of issues encountered by out-of-field physical education teachers teaching physical
education in terms of student assessment.

Table 2. Issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of student assessment

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. The chosen assessment process helps the students to learn. 4.13 Disagree 1
2. Assessment criteria are all set on a clear basis. 4.03 Disagree 2
3. The assessment process through physical education is done. 4.00 Disagree 3
4. Chosen assessments are communicated clearly. 3.97 Disagree 4
5. Teacher facilitates practical assessments in the classroom. 3.80 Disagree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 3.99 Disagree

The results revealed that the highest-ranked indicator was "chosen assessment process helps the students to
learn," with a weighted mean of 4.13, interpreted as disagree. It was followed by "assessment criteria are all set
for clear basis," which obtained a weighted mean of 4.03. Moreover, "assessment process through physical
education" was next with a weighted mean of 4.00, interpreted as disagree. Two more indicators that ranked
lower were "chosen assessments are communicated clearly" and "teacher facilitates practical assessment in the
classroom," with obtained weighted means of 3.97 and 3.80, respectively. Both were interpreted as disagreeing.

Overall, issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of student assessment gained an average
weighted mean of 3.99, which is interpreted as disagree. This suggests that the respondents were not in favor of
222
all the student assessments currently practiced. This finding is supported by the study of Subang (2022), which
states that the level of education, how students are taught, their willingness to study, and how teachers teach are
all significantly influenced by assessment practices.

Mastery of Content
Table 3 presents the issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of mastery of the content. Based
on the results, the highest was on providing learning and complete activities to the students with a weighted
mean of 4.03 interpreted as disagree. This was followed by gauging student comprehension of what had been
taught with a weighted mean of 3.93 interpreted as disagree.

Table 3. Issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of mastery of content

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Providing learning and complete activities to the students. 4.03 Disagree 1
2. Gauging student comprehension of what had been taught. 3.93 Disagree 2
3. Provide an example or explanation whenever a student has questions. 3.80 Disagree 3
4. Knowing the necessary steps in teaching the concepts. 3.67 Disagree 4
5. Having enough training to deal with almost any learning problems. 3.23 Moderately Agree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 3.73 Disagree

Moreover, providing an example or explanation wherever a student has questions obtained a weighted mean of
3.80, also interpreted as disagree. Two more indicators that ranked lower were "knowing the necessary steps in
teaching the concepts" and "having enough training to deal with almost any learning problems," with obtained
weighted means of 3.67 and 3.23, respectively. The former was interpreted as disagreeing, while the latter was
interpreted as moderately disagreeing.

Overall, the average weighted mean was 3.73, interpreted as disagree. This indicates that most respondents
encountered issues in terms of mastery of the content. This finding is supported by the article of Silvestre et al.
(2020), which states that instructors must use a variety of teaching techniques, educational tools, mastery of
content knowledge, and evaluation methods by various MAPEH components. Additionally, teachers must
possess the background knowledge required to successfully administer the K–12 Curriculum.

Pedagogy
Table 4 presents the issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of pedagogy.

Table 4. Issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of pedagogy

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Encouraging learning through group interaction. 4.23 Strongly Disagree 1
2. Providing student-centered lessons. 4.17 Disagree 2.5
3. Using different approaches based on students’ characteristics. 4.17 Disagree 2.5
4. Using effective strategies and techniques that actively engage students. 4.13 Disagree 4
5. Providing timely constructive feedback to the students. 4.03 Disagree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 4.15 Disagree

It can be gleaned from the table that the highest-ranked indicator was "encouraging learning through group
interaction," with a weighted mean of 4.23, interpreted as strongly disagree. It was followed by "providing
student-centered lessons" and "using different approaches based on students’ characteristics," both obtaining a
weighted mean of 4.17, interpreted as disagree. Two more indicators ranked lower: "using effective strategies
and techniques to actively engage students" and "providing timely constructive feedback to the students," with
weighted means of 4.13 and 4.03, respectively. Both were interpreted as disagreeing.

Overall, the issues encountered in teaching physical education in terms of pedagogy gained an average
weighted mean of 4.15, interpreted as disagree. This indicates that the majority of respondents regarded the
issues negatively. This finding is supported by the study of Daga (2021), which claimed that the availability of
teaching materials and teachers' lack of pedagogical content expertise were the main issues in teaching Physical
Education.

223
Table 5 presents the summary of the issues encountered by Physical Education Teachers in terms of Pedagogy,
Student Assessment, Mastery of Content, and Learning Environment.

Table 5. Summary of the issues encountered

DIMENSION MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1 Pedagogy 4.15 Disagree 1
2 Student Assessment 3.99 Disagree 2
3 Mastery of Content 3.73 Disagree 3
4 Learning Environment 3.48 Disagree 4
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 3.83 Disagree

The results revealed that Pedagogy gained the highest average weighted mean of 4.15, which was interpreted as
disagreeing. The lowest average weighted mean was for learning environment, with a score of 3.48. Overall, the
average weighted mean of the four dimensions under issues encountered by the physical education teachers
was 3.83, interpreted as disagree. This indicates that teachers who encountered issues in all four dimensions
were regarded negatively by themselves.

3.2 Challenges Faced by Out-of-Field Physical Education Teachers

The most important problems that out-of-field physical education teachers face may be listed as follows: school
administration's underestimation of the physical education course, lack of the qualifications needed to instruct
this course, parents' focus on academic achievement, and therefore their underestimation towards the physical
education course, as well as competence level, student learning outcomes, activities, and student assistance.

Competence Level
One of the challenges encountered by out-of-field physical education teachers is competency level. Competency
level refers to the combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, and personal characteristics that enable the
teacher to act professionally and appropriately in each situation. Table 6 illustrates competence level as a
challenge faced by out-of-field physical education teachers.

Table 6. Competence level as challenges faced

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Accessibility can be communicated with. 4.37 Strongly disagree 1
2. Allowing and encouraging student participation. 4.23 Strongly disagree 2
3. Giving appropriate solutions to conflicts that arise in the classroom. 4.17 Disagree 3
4. Presenting the minimum content of the subject matter. 3.97 Disagree 4
5. Providing scientific information that allows students to gain better comprehension. 3.93 Disagree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 4.13 Disagree

It can be gleaned from the table that the highest-ranked indicator was "accessibility," with a weighted mean of
4.37, interpreted as strongly disagree. This was followed by "allowing or encouraging student participation,"
with a weighted mean of 4.23, also interpreted as strongly disagree. Moreover, giving appropriate solutions to
conflicts that arise in the classroom came next with a weighted mean of 4.17, interpreted as disagree. Two
indicators ranked lower: "presenting the minimum content of the subject matter" and "providing scientific
information that allows students to gain better comprehension," with obtained weighted means of 3.97 and 3.93,
respectively, both interpreted as disagree. The average weighted mean was 4.13, also interpreted as disagree.
This means that the teachers disagreed with the indicators on the challenges faced in teaching the subject
content, as the competence level was proven to be high. This finding is supported by the study of Augusto
(2019), which claimed that teachers' assertions that they lack the knowledge and competence necessary for the
given subject contribute to the difficulties faced by out-of-field mentors.

Student Learning Outcomes

It is a statement that describes what a student should know or be able to do at the end of a general education
course. Table 7 presents the student learning outcomes as challenges faced by out-of-field physical education
teachers.

224
 Table 7. Student learning outcomes as challenges faced
INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Giving feedback on student assessment. 4.27 Strongly disagree 1
2. Informing students how they will be assessed. 4.23 Strongly disagree 2
3. Nurturing the knowledge of the students through assessment. 4.13 Disagree 3
4. Being able to develop student skills. 4.10 Disagree 4
5. Having a thorough knowledge of the subject content. 3.97 Disagree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 4.14 Disagree

As per the results, the highest-ranked indicator was "giving feedback on student assessment," with a weighted
mean of 4.27, interpreted as strongly disagree. This was followed by "informing students how they will be
assessed," with a weighted mean of 4.23, also interpreted as strongly disagree. Moreover, nurturing the
knowledge of the students through assessment came next with a weighted mean of 4.13, interpreted as disagree.
Two indicators were found at the bottom: "being able to develop student skills" and "having a thorough
knowledge of the subject content," with obtained means of 4.10 and 3.97, respectively, both interpreted as
disagree. The average weighted mean was 4.14, also interpreted as disagree.

This indicates that the respondents disagreed that the following statements were done regularly, hence, it has
been considered challenging to teach the subject matter. This is in contrast to the study of Paolini (2015), which
has claimed that successful teachers vary instruction for a range of student learning styles by utilizing a variety
of learning modalities. The ability of the instructor to communicate course expectations, design assignments that
support student learning, plan lessons that show content knowledge, and emphasize pertinent course concepts.

Activities
A learning activity poses a challenge for out-of-field physical education teachers in terms of methods and
strategies. Classroom activities entail tasks performed by students inside the classroom as part of applying or
practicing the practical aspects of a lesson following the theoretical instruction provided by the teacher. Table 8
displays the activities considered as challenges faced by out-of-field physical education teachers.

The table reveals that the highest-ranked indicator was "students work with other students for interaction," with
a weighted mean of 4.13, interpreted as disagree. This was followed by "students can perform well due to proper
learning of the activities," with a weighted mean of 4.03, also interpreted as disagree. Moreover, "students can
work with other classmates for the activities" had a weighted mean of 3.97, interpreted as disagree. Two
indicators were found at the bottom. These were "students have reached the standards for the activities to be
done after the lectures" and "students were not able to gauge the activity and instructions on how to do it," with
obtained weighted means of 3.80 and 2.73, interpreted as disagree and moderately disagree, respectively. The
average weighted mean was 3.73, interpreted as disagree.

Table 8. Activities as challenges faced

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Students work with other students for interaction. 4.13 Disagree 1
2. Students can perform well due to proper learning of the activities. 4.03 Disagree 2
3. Students can work with other classmates on the activities. 3.97 Disagree 3
4. Students have reached the standards for the activities to be done after the lectures. 3.80 Disagree 4
5. Students were not able to gauge the activity and instructions on how to do it. 2.73 Moderately Agree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 3.73 Disagree

The average weight mean indicates that the respondents disagreed that the students were truly engaged in the
activities, thereby posing challenges in teaching the subject matter. This contrasts with the claim of Hobbs (2013),
who conducted a study where respondents felt less out of their element because there was a curriculum or
syllabus outlining what needed to be taught, along with suggested teaching methods and exercises. This
suggests that conducting activities is not a challenge for out-of-field teachers, as it helps in learning the subject
content and facilitates knowledge transfer.

225
Student Assistance
Table 9 presents the challenges faced by out-of-field physical education teachers in terms of student assistance.

Table 9. Student assistance as challenges faced

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Encouraging interaction with students. 4.40 Strongly disagree 1
2. Explaining the importance of each topic. 4.33 Strongly disagree 2
3. Interacting with students actively. 4.23 Strongly disagree 3
4. Demonstrating and teaching well the activities to students. 4.03 Disagree 4
5. Being able to exhibit the instructions for physical activities. 3.87 Disagree 5
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 4.17 Disagree

As reflected in the table, the highest-ranked indicator was "encouraging interaction with students," with a
weighted mean of 4.40, interpreted as strongly disagree. It was followed by "explaining the importance of each
topic," with a weighted mean of 4.33, also interpreted as strongly disagree. Moreover, "interacting with students
actively" came next with a weighted mean of 4.23, also interpreted as strongly disagree. Two indicators found at
the bottom were "demonstrating and teaching activities to students" and "being able to exhibit instructions for
physical activities," with weighted means of 4.03 and 3.87, respectively, both interpreted as disagree.

Overall, the average weighted mean obtained was 4.17, interpreted as disagree. This indicates that most
respondents disagreed that student assistance is evident in the curriculum employed by out-of-field teachers
and thus, it has been a subject of challenges faced by out-of-field teachers. This finding is also related to the
study of Du Plessis et al. (2015), which claimed that the principal acknowledged that four of the new teachers
were placed in positions outside of their areas of expertise while still expressing concern about "the
unpreparedness" of new teachers. "Our young teachers do not know how to manage and control pupils," he
says, expressing his worries about behavioral issues and poor classroom management in these settings. Student
assistance has indeed been a challenge for out-of-field teachers.

Overall, table 10 summarizes the challenges faced by out-of-field teachers in terms of the following indicators:
student assistance, student learning outcomes, competence level, and activities.

Table 10. Summary of the challenges encountered

ASPECTS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Student Assistance 4.17 Disagree 1
2. Student Learning Outcomes 4.14 Disagree 2
3. Competence Level 4.13 Disagree 3
4. Activities 3.73 Disagree 4
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 4.04 Disagree

Among the aspects, the highest was on student assistance with an average weighted mean of 4.30 while the
lowest was on activities with an average weighted mean of 3.73. The former was interpreted as disagree while
the latter was interpreted as disagree. Its overall weighted mean was 4.23 which was interpreted as strongly
disagree.

3.3 Coping Mechanism

Table 11 presents different coping mechanisms used to lessen the issues and challenges encountered by out-of-
field physical education teachers.

Table 11. Coping mechanisms

INDICATORS MEAN INTERPRETATION RANK
1. Asking for support from colleagues to teach efficiently. 4.30 SA 1
2. Managing time efficiently for learning subject contents and teaching. 4.27 SA 2
3. Assessing students to develop skills. 4.23 SA 3
4. Staying optimistic throughout teaching. 4.23 SA 4
5. Giving time to gauge all needed improvements and 4.10 A 5
take constructive criticisms positively.
AVERAGE WEIGHTED MEAN 4.23 Strongly Agree

226
It was revealed in the table that the highest-ranked indicator was "asking support from colleagues to teach
efficiently," which obtained a weighted mean of 4.30, interpreted as strongly agree. It was followed by
"managing time efficiently for learning subject contents and teaching," with a weighted mean of 4.27, also
interpreted as strongly agree. Moreover, "giving assessment to students to develop skills" came next with a
weighted mean of 4.23, interpreted as strongly agree. Two indicators found at the bottom were "staying positive
and optimistic throughout teaching" and "giving time to gauge all needed improvements and take constructive
criticisms positively," with weighted means of 4.23 and 4.10, interpreted as strongly agree and agree,
respectively.

Overall, the average weighted mean is 4.23, which was interpreted as strongly agree. Although previous results
indicated that little to no challenges were experienced, out-of-field physical education teachers still employed
coping mechanisms in various scenarios. This finding was supported by the study of Lagria (2021), which stated
that some coping mechanisms include (1) training to become competent, (2) seeking support from fellow
teachers, and (3) self-learning/motivating. The ability to manage stress is a crucial skill that should be
incorporated into all teacher education programs as it is key to professional competency, given that teaching is a
challenging job. All of these mechanisms are utilized as coping mechanisms, and hence, the out-of-field teachers
exhibited similar responses and actions for their coping mechanisms amidst the issues and challenges
experienced.

3.4 Influence of Coping Mechanism on the Issues Encountered by Out-of-Field Physical Education Teachers
Table 12 shows the significant relationship between coping mechanisms and the issues encountered by the
respondents. According to the results of the Pearson correlation coefficient, coping mechanisms and the learning
environment have a high positive relationship, as revealed by its r-value of 0.98 and a p-value of 0.013. This
implies that a genuine relationship exists between the two variables. Further, it suggests that when the level of
coping mechanism of teachers is high, issues in terms of learning are addressed.

Table 12. Influence of coping mechanism on the issues encountered

DIMENSIONS R-VALUE P-VALUE R2-VALUE INTERPRETATION

Learning Environment 0.98 0.013 0.90 Strong
Student Assessment 0.98 0.003 0.96 Very Strong
Coping Mechanisms
Mastery of Content 0.99 0.001 0.98 Very Strong
Pedagogy 0.57 0.317 0.33 Weak

As per the results of the Pearson correlation, coping mechanism and learning environment exhibit a positive
relationship, with an r-value of 0.98 and a p-value of 0.013. This implies a genuine relationship between the two
variables, suggesting that higher levels of coping mechanisms among teachers correspond to better addressing
of issues in the learning environment. Similarly, when the level of coping mechanism was correlated with
student assessment, it yielded an r-value of 0.98 and a p-value of 0.003, indicating a very high positive
relationship. With a p-value less than 0.05, this suggests a genuine relationship between coping mechanisms and
student assessment.

The same trend was observed between the level of coping mechanism and the mastery of content, resulting in an
R-value of 0.99 and a p-value of 0.001. This indicates a very high positive relationship, with a significant
correlation between the two variables. However, coping mechanisms and pedagogy yielded an r-value of 0.57
with a p-value of 0.317. Although the computed r-value indicates a low positive relationship, the p-value, which
is greater than 0.05, suggests a relationship that is not significant.

Regarding the influence of coping mechanisms on the issues encountered by out-of-field physical education
teachers, it was found that coping mechanism has a strong influence on the learning environment, with an r^2-
value of 0.90. Similarly, coping mechanisms have a very strong influence on student assessment, with an r^2-
value of 0.96, and on the mastery of content, yielding an r^2-value of 0.98, interpreted as a very strong influence.
However, when the coping mechanism was correlated with pedagogy and an r^2-value was computed, it
yielded 0.33, indicating a weak influence. This finding aligns with the research of Kebbi (2018), which found that

227
most stress sources had weak positive correlations with coping mechanisms, while most stress impacts had
weak negative correlations with coping mechanisms, according to Pearson's correlation coefficient (r).

3.5 Influence of Coping Mechanism on the Challenges Encountered by Out-of-Field Physical Education Teachers
Table 13 illustrates the significant relationship between coping mechanisms and the challenges encountered by
these teachers. When coping mechanisms were correlated with the level of competence, it yielded an r-value of
0.51 with a p-value of 0.381. The r-value indicates a low positive correlation. However, with a p-value greater
than 0.05, it suggests that there is no significant relationship between the two variables correlated.

Table 13. Influence of coping mechanism on the challenges encountered

DIMENSIONS R-VALUE P-VALUE R2-VALUE INTERPRETATION

Competence Level 0.51 0.381 0.26 Very Weak
Student Learning Outcomes 0.97 0.007 0.93 Very Strong
Coping Mechanisms
Activities 0.97 0.006 0.94 Very Strong
Student Assistance 0.92 0.026 0.85 Strong

On the contrary, when the level of coping mechanisms was correlated with student learning outcomes, it
resulted in an r-value of 0.97 with a p-value of 0.007. This indicated a very high positive correlation between the
variables, with the p-value being less than 0.05, signifying a significant relationship. Similar patterns emerged
when the level of coping mechanisms was correlated with activities and student assistance. The computed r-
values were 0.97 and 0.92, with p-values of 0.006 and 0.026, respectively. These r-values indicated very high
positive correlations, and the p-values, both less than 0.05, suggested a genuine correlation between the
variables.

Regarding the influence of coping mechanisms on the challenges encountered by out-of-field physical education
teachers, it was revealed that coping mechanisms had a very weak influence on competence level, with an r^2-
value of 0.26. However, coping mechanisms exhibited a very strong influence on student learning outcomes, as
indicated by an r^2-value of 0.93. The same trend was observed with coping mechanisms and activities, with an
r^2-value of 0.94 signifying a very strong influence. Finally, coping mechanisms showed a strong relationship
with student assistance, yielding an r^2-value of 0.85.

The weak relationship between coping mechanisms and competence level may suggest a potential weakness
among out-of-field teachers. This finding aligns with the results of Honra's (2022) study, which indicated no
significant connection between perceived challenges and total coping mechanisms. However, when examining
the subcomponents of coping strategies, perceived difficulties were positively correlated with problem-focused
coping.

4.0 Conclusion
The challenges faced by out-of-field PE teachers vary in their intensity. Firstly, the learning environment appears
to be less of an issue for these teachers. Secondly, a significant number of respondents disagreed that
supervisory assistance is readily available within the curriculum for out-of-field PE teachers, indicating a lack of
support in this regard. Despite these challenges, out-of-field physical education teachers have demonstrated the
presence of coping mechanisms to address various scenarios efficiently, with a focus on student needs.
Additionally, the influence of coping mechanisms on issues encountered ranges from weak to very strong,
suggesting varying degrees of effectiveness. Similarly, the influence of coping mechanisms on challenges faced
by out-of-field teachers spans from very weak to very strong, indicating their differential impact on addressing
these challenges.

5.0 Contributions of Authors

The author made the research from the beginning until it was defended. The author reviewed and approved the
final work.

6.0 Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.
228
7.0 Conflict of Interests
The author declared that he has no conflicts of interest as far as this study is concerned.

8.0 Acknowledgment
This thesis became a reality with the support and help of the people around him. He would like to extend his gratitude to all of them.
Foremost, he wants to offer this endeavor to GOD Almighty for the wisdom and guidance, for the peace of mind and good health that made
this research to be done possible.
To his beloved parents, Mama Helen and Papa Nestor, his siblings: Rocky, Jether, Nestor, Jhanelyn and Angelo, and to their respective
families, to whom he is forever indebted, and for the love, care and moral support given to him and in believing on his abili ty.
To Julie B. Polon, Rechyl M. Lusan, April Blesse M. Doblon, and Annie B. Verchez, who served as secretaries for encoding and preparing the
suggestions and corrections of the panel during defenses.
To Dr. Josephine Francia R. Villanueva, Dean, Graduate Studies, for her professional guidance, words of wisdom and wholeheart ed
suggestions in the completion of the study.
To Dr. Onward O Ognita, his thesis adviser, for his expertise, untiring support, and approachable gestures in giving scholarl y insights in the
realization of this study.
To Dr. Noel A. Balares, Chairman of the Panel of Examiners, statistician, Dr. Elizer R. Caculitan, and Prof. Sherryl A. Borja , the members of
the panel of examiners, for the valuable suggestions and inputs for this study to be accepted and realized.
To Maam Nene R. Merioles, CESO V, Schools Division Superintendent of Masbate Province for the approval of the letter to condu ct the
study and Dr. Maria Teresa Nicolasora, Public Schools District Supervisor of San Pascual North District, for her approval to conduct t he
survey in the chosen schools within the district.
School Heads and Teachers of Secondary School of San Pascual North District for the cooperation and by sharing the time as the respondents
of this study.
To his colleagues especially the Grade 9 teachers in San Pascual National High School headed by Mrs. Amelia N. Lequiron, for the
understanding and moral support they have extended in sharing their time and expertise in answering his queries related to this study.
To his friends, especially, the Team Walang Pahinga for always cheering him up, for sharing their knowledge and support throu ghout this
journey.
To Carlo Bluza, his favorite person, for always encouraging him to finish his thesis. Thank you for listening to his rants when he is feeling
drained and exhausted. Thank you for the love.
And to All the People, who in one way or another had lent their hands to make this research successful.

9.0 References
Ahmad Oudat, M. (2016). Challenges facing physical education teachers in Jordan from the perspective of the teachers themselv es. Advances
in Physical Education, 6, 43-51. https://doi.org/10.4236/ape.2016.62005
Augusto Jr, W. S. (2019). A phenomenological study on the lived experience of the out-of-field mentors. International Journal of Advanced
Research and Publications, 3(6).
Bucholz, D., & Sheffler, G. (2017). Approaches to school discipline: A selected review of the literature. European Journal for Educational
Research, 2.
Daga, C. T. (2021). The status of high school MAPEH teachers in Leyte Division, Philippines.
Hobbs, L., & Törner, G. (2019). The out-of-field phenomenon: Synthesis and taking action. In Examining the phenomenon of “Teaching Out-
of-Field” (pp. 309–322). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3366-8_12
Silvestre, M. D. P., & Itaas, E. C. (Year). Lived experiences of teachers teaching music, arts, physical education, and healt h: Implications for
graduate education.
Subang, A. (2022). Operationalization of summative assessment in MAPEH in the new normal: Its challenges, innovations, and
interventions.

229