Predictive Modelling on Student Engagement: A Multiple Linear Regression Analysis

ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 Predictive Modelling on Student Engagement: A Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Alven B. Rivas Abstract. This study investigated the influence of classroom facilities on the level of student engagement in selected secondary schools in Sto. Tomas East District, Davao del Norte. Specifically, it aimed to assess the extent of classroom conditions, educational resources, sanitation facilities, and maintenance of safety infrastructure, and how these relate to students’ engagement in terms of classroom participation, attendance rate, and general scholastic average. A descriptive-correlational research design was employed, involving 108 student respondents. Data were collected through a validated survey instrument and analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and multiple regression analysis. Findings revealed that most classroom facility indicators were rated as less to moderately extensive, except for safety infrastructure, which was found to be extensive. In contrast, students’ engagement was rated as extensive to very extensive across all dimensions. A significant positive relationship was found between classroom facilities and student engagement. Moreover, regression analysis identified that infrastructure quality and facility use frequency significantly predicted student engagement. In light of these findings, the study recommends enhancing classroom conditions through improved lighting, ventilation, and ergonomic design; upgrading educational and sanitation resources; maintaining safety infrastructure through regular inspections; and prioritizing quality and functionality in future school projects. Further qualitative research is also encouraged to gain deeper insights into student perspectives on the role of school facilities in shaping academic behavior. KEY WORDS 1. classroom facilities 2. student engagement 3. classroom participation Date Received: August 15, 2025 — Date Reviewed: September 20, 2025 — Date Published: October 10, 2025 1. Introduction The condition of learning facilities in many schools, especially in under-resourced areas, significantly affects both teacher performance and student engagement. Overcrowded classrooms, deteriorating infrastructure, insufficient resources, and inadequate sanitation create suboptimal learning environments. These issues lead to increased stress for teachers and make it difficult for them to deliver effective instruction. Similarly, students face challenges that diminish their engagement, such as poor lighting, lack of technology, and uncomfortable seating. Additionally, the absence of basic amenities can lead to health issues that further detract from students’ ability to engage fully in their education. High-quality facilities inspire students to work NIJSE (2025) - hard and study effectively. As schools transition to in-person instruction, the importance of well-maintained facilities becomes even more apparent. However, establishing and maintaining school facilities comes with a considerable cost to the school system. If not managed properly, it can adversely affect students’ academic achievement and overall attitude towards learning (Claveria, et al., 2020). Ruhyana (2019) emphasized that the quality of school facilities significantly influences student learning and academic performance. Comfortable and well-maintained environments promote student focus, attendance, and health, reducing distractions and enhancing information retention. Similarly, favorable facility conditions support teacher effectiveness by minimizing environmental disruptions, which can lead to improved retention of experienced educators and attract qualified teaching staff—ultimately contributing to better educational outcomes. Hanaysha et al. (2023) found that classroom environments with proximity to nature can significantly enhance student learning. They observed that improved airflow in classrooms correlates with better student performance. Additionally, access to daylight and windows has been linked to higher test scores among students. Students require accommodation for various learning environments, including access to quiet and private spaces as well as social areas. Poorly maintained buildings are linked to lower student performance and higher absenteeism, and improving ventilation is essential for student health. In the Philippines, limited research has been conducted on the relationship between school facility satisfaction and student learning motivation. Livala et al. (2021) emphasize that school facilities including classroom size, libraries, instructional tools, and educational technology. These are vital to educational quality. The absence of inadequacy of these resources can negatively affect student achievement and overall academic outcomes. Studies have shown that inadequate provision of school support facilities, such as tables, chairs, libraries, and laboratories, hinders the learning process. Insufficient educational facilities and infrastructure, particularly classrooms, have been found to negatively affect students’ learning outcomes, leading to higher rates of grade repetition. Moreover, the physical environmental factors in classrooms, such as thermal, acoustical, and lighting conditions, are below recommended ergonomic standards, creating an unfavorable learning environment (David, 2019). Insufficient school facilities have a significant impact on student learning. Factors such as limited human resources, inadequate school funds, and poor maintenance awareness hinder effective learning. Research shows that the availability of facilities has a positive correlation with student learning motivation, highlighting the importance of adequate infrastructure for educational outcomes. Inadequate physical facilities create an unfavorable learning environment, which can negatively affect students’ academic performance and achievement levels (Bautistia, 2019). In Davao del Norte, like many rural and underserved regions within the Davao Region, educational institutions continue to contend with overcrowded classrooms, insufficient teaching resources, and inadequate sanitation facilities. These obstacles impede the quality of education and exacerbate educational inequalities, particularly among marginalized groups. While global research underscores similar infrastructural deficiencies in developing areas, the particular extent, repercussions, and regional characteristics of these challenges in Davao del Norte remain insufficiently explored. Furthermore, existing research frequently neglects to consider the intersectionality of infrastructural deficiencies alongside other socio-economic impediments, such as income disparities, access to quality learning resources, and limitations in governmental support for educational development. Absent localized, data-driven investiga2ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - tions, policymakers, school administrators, and educational stakeholders in Davao del Norte may lack the requisite evidence to effectively champion and execute targeted interventions that address these urgent issues. This study, therefore, possesses substantial social significance, as it endeavors to bridge this research gap and furnish empirical insights that can inform evidence-based policy decisions. By emphasizing the pressing necessity for infrastructural enhancements, to the overarching objective of promoting equitable, high-quality education for all students and educators in Davao del Norte, thereby ensuring that learning environments are conducive to academic achievement and comprehensive development. 1.1. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework of the Study —In analyzing the effects of varying levels of learning facilities on teacher performance and student engagement, several theoretical frameworks offer valuable insights. A particularly relevant model is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, which suggests that individuals must first satisfy basic physiological and safety needs before they can pursue higher-order needs such as esteem and self-actualization (Maslow, 1943, as cited in Abdullah et al., 2024). Within the educational setting, the availability and quality of learning facilities can be interpreted as fulfilling these foundational needs. Well-maintained, safe, and adequately equipped classrooms foster a secure and supportive environment for both teachers and learners, thereby enabling educators to concentrate on instructional delivery and students to actively participate in the learning process. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of motivation also offers a relevant lens through which to examine the influence of learning facilities. This theory differentiates between hygiene factors—such as working conditions—and motivators like achievement and recognition. As noted by Herzberg (1966, as cited in Wang Zhang, 2020), adequate and well-maintained learning facilities function as hygiene factors that help prevent teacher dissatisfaction. When such conditions are lacking, it may result in diminished motivation and reduced performance. Both Herzberg’s and Maslow’s theories highlight the critical role of a supportive and resourceequipped educational environment in promoting optimal performance and engagement among teachers and students alike. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study. In this diagram, the base represents learning facilities, which can be understood as the foundation upon which both teacher performance and student engagement are built. According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, learning facilities serve as a fundamental element that satisfies basic physiological and safety needs within the educational environment. 2. Methodology This document outlines the processes and steps involved in conducting the study. These steps include the selection of the study’s design, the identification of respondents and sampling method, the research instruments employed in data collection, the procedural framework, ethical considerations, and ultimately, the analysis of data. Each of these steps is essential to ensure appropriateness and accuracy, thereby facilitating robust data collection, analysis, and interpretation. 2.1. Research Design—Descriptivepredictive research design combines the exploration of existing phenomena with the aim of forecasting future trends or outcomes based on observed patterns. This design involves collecting detailed, descriptive data to understand current conditions and relationships and using statistical methods to predict future occurrences. 3ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Fig. 1. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework The descriptive component focuses on identifying variables and their interactions, while the predictive aspect applies these findings to anticipate outcomes, often through regression analysis or machine learning models. This approach is valuable in education, healthcare, and social sciences, where understanding current dynamics can inform proactive interventions. According to Smith and Brown (2024), descriptive-predictive designs are critical for addressing complex, real-world problems as they provide actionable insights by bridging current observations with future projections. The application of a descriptive-predictive research design in the study on Predictive Modelling on Student Engagement enables a robust understanding of current engagement levels while forecasting future patterns and outcomes. The descriptive phase involves collecting comprehensive data to identify and analyze variables that influence student engagement, such as instructional strategies, classroom dynamics, technology integration, and socio-emotional factors. This phase provides a clear picture of how these elements influence students’ participation, motivation, and overall involvement in the learning process. Building on these insights, the predictive phase uses advanced statistical and machine learning models to anticipate future engagement levels based on the identified variables. For instance, the study might predict how specific teaching interventions, like project-based learning or gamification, impact engagement across different student demographics. The predictive component can also help identify at-risk students who may require targeted support to improve their participation and learning outcomes. This dual approach ensures that the study is both diagnostic and proactive. While the descriptive phase sheds light on the current state of student engagement, the predictive phase provides actionable insights for educators and administrators to design strategies that foster greater involvement and success. By applying this research design, the study not only contributes to a deeper understanding of engagement dynamics but also equips stakeholders with data-driven tools to enhance educational practices, making it a valuable resource for fostering student-centered learning 4ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - environments. 2.2. Ethical Consideration—In predictive modeling of student engagement using multiple linear regression, ethical considerations are critical for responsible data use and student rights protection. This includes obtaining consent, ensuring confidentiality, and using information solely for educational purposes. Researchers must also consider bias and fairness in modeling to avoid reinforcing inequalities or disadvantaging specific student groups. Transparency in data collection, variable selection, and model interpretation is vital for research integrity and ethical use of findings to enhance student engagement strategies I aim to identify key factors influencing student engagement, allowing educators, policymakers, and school administrators to develop targeted interventions that improve learning experiences. This research is particularly valuable in promoting equity, as it ensures that engagement strategies are based on empirical evidence rather than assumptions, ultimately fostering inclusive and effective learning environments. Integrating ethical considerations in predictive modeling, I seek to ensure that student data is used responsibly and transparently, reinforcing trust in research while contributing to the broader goal of improving educational outcomes. In the context of this study, informed consent and assent serve as fundamental ethical considerations in ensuring that teacher participants fully understand their role, rights, and the implications of their involvement. As educators play a critical role in shaping student engagement, their participation in this research must be based on voluntary, well-informed decisions. I will provide teacher participants with clear and transparent information about the study’s objectives, methodology, potential risks, and anticipated benefits, allowing them to make autonomous choice regarding their participation. I will emphasize confidentiality measures to uphold ethical integrity, ensuring that all collected data remains anonymous and securely handled to protect their professional identity. Teachers will also be informed of their right to ask questions, seek clarifications, and withdraw at any point without any negative repercussions. Integrating these ethical safeguards, this study respects teacher participants’ dignity and autonomy and reinforces the credibility and reliability of research findings that aim to enhance student engagement and instructional effectiveness. 2.3. Research Respondents—The study’s respondents were the junior high school teachers and students in Sto Tomas East district, Davao del Norte. Using Slovin’s formula, the computed sample size for a population of 150 teachers, with a 5Junior high school teachers are the ideal respondents for this study due to three key inclusion criteria: (1) their direct interaction with students in a critical developmental stage, (2) their reliance on specialized learning facilities, and (3) their professional capacity to assess the impact of infrastructure on teaching and student engagement. First, junior high school represents a crucial transitional period, where students experience significant cognitive, emotional, and social changes as they move from childhood to adolescence. This phase is pivotal for fostering academic engagement and performance, making the quality of the learning environment particularly influential. As daily facilitators of learning, junior high school teachers closely observe how classroom conditions affect student behavior, participation, and overall academic outcomes, positioning them as valuable sources of insight. Second, junior high school curricula require diverse and specialized learning spaces, such as science laboratories, libraries, technology rooms, and other subjectspecific facilities. The availability, adequacy, and functionality directly impact teachers’ ability to implement engaging and effective instructional strategies. Teachers, therefore, experience firsthand how infrastructure constraints or enhancements affect their teaching practices 5ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - and student learning experiences. Third, as professionals tasked with both instruction and student development, junior high school teachers offer critical assessments of the interplay between facility quality, instructional efficacy, and student engagement. Their firsthand experiences and professional judgments provide empirical insights into how learning facilities shape academic outcomes, making their perspectives invaluable in identifying infrastructure-related challenges and recommending improvements that could enhance both teacher performance and student engagement. 2.4. Research Instrument—This study was specifically designed to determine the influence of classroom facilities on the level of student engagement. The survey instrument used in this research was adapted from a comprehensive review of related literature and empirical studies to ensure that all question items accurately reflected the indicators of both the independent and dependent variables. Each survey item was measured using a 5-point Likert scale reflecting the extent of implementation or experience, where a score of 5 represents ”Very Extensive” and 1 represents ”Not Extensive”. Descriptive Interpretation of Facility Indicators Score Scale Descriptive Interpretation 5 Very Extensive The facility indicator is fully present, regularly maintained, and consistently supports student learning without limitations. 4 Extensive The facility indicator is mostly present and functional, with minor issues that do not significantly hinder learning. 3 Moderately Extensive The facility indicator is somewhat present but shows notable inconsistencies or limitations affecting learning occasionally. 2 Less Extensive The facility indicator is rarely present or operational and often limits effective learning. 1 Not Extensive The facility indicator is entirely lacking or nonfunctional, severely affecting learning conditions. 2.5. Data Gathering Procedure—The guidelines for this process adhere to the policies of Rizal Memorial Colleges, Inc. As part of the formal request, researchers delineate their intentions regarding data collection, analysis, and dissemination, aligning these with the overarching research goals. This communication proactively addresses anticipated concerns or questions from recipients, providing assurances on ethical safeguards, confidentiality measures, and the potential benefits of the study. The formal permission request explicitly seeks authorization to proceed, emphasizing the pivotal role of their support in ensuring the research’s success. Permission to conduct the study In October 2024, before data collection, the researcher obtained necessary permissions from the relevant authorities, including the research adviser, the Dean of Rizal Memorial Colleges, Inc., and the top management of DepEd Davao del Norte Division through the appropriate chan6ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Descriptive Interpretation of Students’ Academic Engagement Score Scale Descriptive Interpretation 5 Very Extensive The student consistently exhibits strong engagement across all academic behaviors (e.g., active participation, excellent attendance, and high academic average). 4 Extensive The student frequently engages in academic activities with only minor lapses. 3 Moderately Extensive The student shows average engagement with some inconsistencies in participation or performance. 2 Less Extensive The student rarely engages in academic tasks and shows below-average attendance or performance. 1 Not Extensive The student shows minimal or no engagement in learning activities and exhibits poor academic outcomes. nels. This involved submitting a comprehensive research proposal outlining study design, procedures, and potential risks and benefits. The researcher provided detailed information about the study’s purpose, goals, and methods for data collection, analysis, and reporting. Furthermore, in December 2024, immediately after the conducted colloquium, the researcher took steps to ensure that all participants were fully informed about the study, their rights, and the nature of their involvement. Informed consent was obtained from each participant before they participated in the study. The researcher committed to data accuracy and completeness during the last week of January 2025. The distribution and retrieval of questionnaires were conducted using a standardized and systematic approach, ensuring reliability in collecting responses from participants. The researcher took time in data management. She ensured that accurate data gathered were sorted accordingly through Microsoft Excel and later transferred to JASP. All necessary information was collected. Consistency was also considered to make it relevant to the problem’s statement. Reliability and validity were reviewed to lessen the degree of error in the analysis. 2.6. Data Analysis—This study examined the impact of varying levels of learning facilities on teacher performance and student engagement in Sto. Tomas East District, Davao del Norte. To address the research objectives, the following statistical tools were employed: Descriptive Statistics (Mean and Standard Deviation) These were used to determine the levels of learning facilities and the extent of student engagement. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) This inferential test was employed to determine the significance and strength of the relationship between the extent of learning facilities and student engagement. Multiple Regression Analysis This was utilized to identify which specific types or aspects of learning facilities significantly influence student engagement. All data were processed and analyzed using Jeffrey’s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP), version 0.12.2.0. The resulting outputs were interpreted to the research questions, and findings were discussed accordingly. 7ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - 3. Results and Discussion This chapter presents the findings of the study based on the data gathered and analyzed using appropriate statistical tools. It discusses the results in relation to the stated research questions and objectives, specifically focusing on the extent of learning facilities, levels of teacher performance, and student engagement. Descriptive and inferential statistics, including mean, standard deviation, Pearson correlation, and multiple regression analysis, were employed to examine the relationships and predictive influences among the variables. The interpretation of results is supported by relevant literature and empirical studies to provide a comprehensive understanding of the implications of the findings. 3.1. Level of Classroom Facilities —Classroom facilities refer to the physical infrastructure and instructional resources within a learning environment that support teaching and learning processes. These include seating arrangements, lighting, ventilation, instructional technology, classroom size, and overall cleanliness and safety. Well-designed and adequately maintained classroom facilities contribute to better student engagement, teacher effectiveness, and academic achievement (Al-Hassan et al., 2021). Recent studies affirm that the quality of classroom facilities significantly influences student learning experiences and outcomes. For instance, Adeyemi and Adewale (2022) emphasized that spacious and properly ventilated classrooms facilitate concentration and reduce learner fatigue. Similarly, Magulod (2023) highlighted that classrooms with digital tools and ergonomic furniture positively impact instructional delivery and learner participation. Furthermore, classroom facility conditions are directly linked to teacher performance. Poor physical environments can decrease morale and instructional efficiency, whereas supportive and resource-rich classrooms promote professional satisfaction and pedagogical innovation (Santos Villaruel, 2024). Summary of the Level of Classroom Facilities Table 1 presents the consolidated results of the four significant classroom indicators facilities: classroom conditions, educational resources, sanitation facilities, and maintenance of safety infrastructure. The overall mean rating is 2.48, which falls under the category of “Less Extensive.” This suggests that while some provisions exist across the domains assessed, these are generally insufficient to fully support quality instruction and a safe, inclusive learning environment. Among the indicators, the highest mean score was recorded for “Maintenance of Safety Infrastructure” (M = 2.55), rated “Extensive”, indicating relatively better attention to school safety, emergency procedures, and maintenance of school grounds. Conversely, the lowest score was found in “Educational Resources” (M = 2.39), which was rated as “Moderately Extensive”, indicating a scarcity or limited access to critical learning materials such as textbooks, digital devices, library holdings, and science equipment. Classroom conditions (M = 2.54) and sanitation facilities (M = 2.44) were both rated “Less Extensive”, reflecting the continued challenges schools face in maintaining a conducive and hygienic physical environment. These results reinforce the findings of recent educational infrastructure studies in the Philippines. For instance, Orbeta et al. (2022) and Manlangit et al. (2023) found that while safety protocols and emergency preparedness have been emphasized in schools especially post-pandemic other critical facility aspects, such as the availability of educational resources 8ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Table 1. Level of Classroom Facilities Classroom Facilities n Mean Descriptive Interpretations Classroom Conditions 108 2.54 Less Extensive Educational Resources 108 2.39 Moderately Extensive Sanitation Facilities 108 2.44 Less Extensive Maintenance of Safety Infrastructure 108 2.55 Extensive Mean Average 108 2.48 Less Extensive and proper sanitation, continue to be neglected due to budgetary constraints and uneven implementation of national standards. Moreover, Santos and Villaruel (2024) emphasize that infrastructure disparities across public schools, particularly in remote or underserved areas, significantly affect both teacher performance and student learning engagement. Furthermore, Cabayan and Dela Cruz (2021) stressed that inadequately equipped classrooms hinder the delivery of differentiated and technologyintegrated instruction, further widening learning gaps. These findings affirm that while schools demonstrate effort in maintaining certain facility domains, a more holistic and equitable investment in physical learning environments remains essential for improved educational outcomes. 3.2. The Level of Students’ Engagement—Martin and Torres (2021) affirm that students more actively involved in classroom tasks tend to perform better academically and exhibit stronger motivation. Nguyen and Doan (2023) further argue that various contextual factors, including teaching quality, classroom environment, availability of learning resources, and school climate shape engagement. Moreover, Gonzales and Alvarado (2022) highlight that student engagement can be bolstered through inclusive and responsive pedagogies, supportive school infrastructure, and consistent teacherstudent interaction in resource-constrained settings. Therefore, understanding and improving student engagement is essential not only for enhancing academic outcomes but also for reducing dropout rates and promoting lifelong learning competencies. Summary of the Level of Students’ Engagement Table 2 summarizes the overall level of student engagement based on three key dimensions: classroom participation, attendance rate, and general scholastic average. The results reveal an overall mean score of 4.17, which is interpreted as “Extensive”, indicating that students demonstrate a high degree of engagement across behavioral and academic domains. Among the three indicators, attendance rate received the highest mean score (M = 4.24), followed closely by general scholastic average (M = 4.20), and classroom participation (M = 4.08). The “Very Extensive” interpretation for general scholastic average suggests that students are not only consistently attending and participating in class but are also setting academic goals and benefiting from teacher support, contributing to higher scholastic performance. These findings are supported by recent research. According to Reyes and Galvez (2022), regular attendance is a foundational component of student engagement and significantly correlates with improved academic outcomes. Similarly, Delos Santos and Ramirez (2021) 9ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Lazaro, C. G., & Dela Pe ˜ na, R. J. (2022). Safety first? an assessment of school infrastructure resilience and emergency protocols in public elementary schools. Asia-Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences,9(1), 59–68. Liu, [ N. M., & Fern ´ andez, [ N. M. (2023). Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis on virtual reality and education. Education and Information Technologies,28(1), 155–192. Livala, S. D., Livala, S. C., & et al. (2021). Effect of school facilities utilization on the academic performance of secondary school students in wukari metropolis, taraba state, nigeria. Journal of Advances in Education Research. Lopez, R. G., & Tanglao, M. D. (2021). The role of school climate in shaping students’ attendance behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Studies,8(2), 101–113. Ma, N., Zhao, F., Zhou, P. - Q., He, J. - J., & Du, L. (2023). Knowledge map-based online microlearning: Impacts on learning engagement, knowledge structure, and learning performance of in-service teachers. Interactive Learning Environments,31(5), 2751–2766. Magulod, G. C. J. (2023). Classroom environment and student engagement in blended learning: Insights from a philippine higher education institution. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research,11(1), 12–19. Manlangit, P. G., Garcia, M. T., & Dizon, M. R. (2023). Barriers to integrating ict in philippine basic education: Teachers’ perspectives and school realities. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences,10(1), 45. Marquez, K. L., & San Luis, F. M. (2024). Electrical and structural hazards in schools: A policy and practice gap in philippine basic education. Philippine Journal of Safety and Infrastructure,6(1), 74–89. Marquez, V. P., & Javier, E. B. (2024). Academic resilience and performance in public high schools: The role of student engagement and teacher feedback. Philippine Journal of Educational Advancement,9(1), 51–65. Martin, J. J., & Torres, A. P. (2021). Student engagement and academic success: Evidence from southeast asian secondary schools. International Journal of Educational Development, 84, 102424. Mealings, K., Maggs, L., & Buchholz, J. M. (2024). The effects of classroom acoustic conditions on teachers’ health and well-being: A scoping review. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,67(1), 346–367. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023 JSLHR-23-00256 Nguyen, H. T., & Doan, V. C. (2023). Contextual factors influencing student engagement in blended learning environments: A comparative analysis. Asia-Pacific Education Review, 24(1), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09700-3 Nguyen, T. M., & Tran, H. Q. (2022). Student satisfaction and academic achievement: A comparative study of engagement factors. Asia-Pacific Education Review,23(3), 317–329. Orbeta, A. C., Santos, A. P., & Lagrada, H. L. (2022). Learning environment and student wellbeing: Revisiting sanitation in philippine public schools (tech. rep. No. 12). Philippine Institute for Development Studies Policy Notes. Pangrazio, L., Selwyn, N., & Cumbo, B. (2023). A patchwork of platforms: Mapping data infrastructures in schools. Learning, Media and Technology,48(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/17439884.2022.2035395 16 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Qureshi, M. A., Khaskheli, A., Qureshi, J. A., Raza, S. A., & Yousufi, S. Q. (2023). Factors affecting students’ learning performance through collaborative learning and engagement. Interactive Learning Environments,31(4), 2371–2391. Ramos, M. J., & Esteban, C. L. (2024). An evaluation of the wash in schools (wins) implementation in public elementary schools in region xi. Philippine Journal of Educational Management, 19(1), 87–101. Reyes, D. P., & Galvez, N. B. (2022). School attendance and academic performance: A correlational analysis among filipino secondary students. International Journal of Educational Development in the Philippines,13(2), 33–47. Ruhyana, N. F. (2019). Effect of educational facilities and infrastructure in primary schools on students’ learning outcomes. International Journal of Educational Research Review,6(1), 43–54. Santos, J. D., & Villaruel, M. C. (2024). Reimagining classroom spaces: The role of learning environments in enhancing teaching performance. Philippine Journal of Educational Leadership,8(1), 45–59. Shanks, S., & Zhang, J. J. (2024). Disentangling perception and performance: A natural experiment on student engagement and learning in simulations. Journal of Political Science Education, 20(2), 292–317. Simmons, M. (2023). The association of open educational resources with short-term student outcomes [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Florida [ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global]. Smith, J., & Brown, L. (2024). Integrating descriptive and predictive research in applied settings. Journal of Research Methodology,15(2), 123–134. Torralba, J. P., & Ocampo, H. M. (2024). Student attendance as a predictor of academic resilience and cognitive engagement. Philippine Journal of Education and Development,18(1), 22–35. Torres, V. A., & Candelaria, A. A. (2023). Evaluating fire safety preparedness and equipment maintenance in philippine public schools. International Journal of School Facilities and Management,7(2), 21–34. Tosun, N., & Altintas, S. (2024). An evaluation of teachers’ views on open educational resources. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education,25(2), 59–75. Wang, S., & Zhang, D. (2020). Perceived teacher feedback and academic performance: The mediating effect of learning engagement and moderating effect of assessment characteristics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,45(7), 973–987. Widowati, E., Koesyanto, H., Istiono, W., Sutomo, A. H., & Sugiharto. (2023). Disaster preparedness and safety school as a conceptual framework of comprehensive school safety. SAGE Open,13(4). Yamazaki, J. S. (2022). The effects of effort feedback and l2 task attributions on task engagement and performance. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning,4(2), e4211922. Yap, K. D., Fastidio, L. A., St Lawrence, S. A., & Suero, M. R. (n.d.). Assessment of the performance of freshmen students in mathematics in the modern world: Basis for an intervention program. Zhang, X., & Kim, H. (2024). Exploring the factors influencing student engagement in university english classes. English Teaching,79(1). 17 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17312892/NIJSE.2025