Development of Google Classroom as a Learning Management System in Teaching English in Grade 4
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20237015Keywords:
Learning Management System , Google Classroom, Lesson ExemplarsAbstract
Class interruptions caused by adverse weather conditions create learning gaps and disrupt instructional continuity. This study examined the utilization of Google Classroom as a learning management system (LMS) to support continuous learning for Grade 4 English pupils at Ratay Elementary School, Calabanga East District, during the first quarter of the 2024–2025 school year. Specifically, the study analyzed eight official MATATAG Grade 4 English lesson exemplars in terms of content, structure, and assessment. It used the results to design and develop a Google Classroom aligned with the MATATAG Most Essential Learning Competencies. The study employed a descriptive-developmental research design guided by the Analysis–Design–Development (ADD) model. Eight lesson exemplars served as the primary materials for analysis, while the developed Google Classroom prototype was evaluated by five Master Teachers using a three-point appropriateness scale. In addition, the study considered the alignment of instructional materials with learners’ needs, accessibility of content, and the integration of interactive features to enhance engagement in an online environment, ensuring relevance and usability for learners. Findings revealed that all Google Classroom components were rated Appropriate to Very Appropriate, with mean scores ranging from 2.30 to 3.00. The Topic Outline, PowerPoint presentations, and Q&A sessions were considered particularly effective in organizing lessons and promoting interaction. However, challenges such as cognitive overload, uneven participation, assessment difficulties, and late submissions were identified. The study concludes that a well-designed Google Classroom can effectively support instructional continuity and enhance learners’ conceptual understanding during class disruptions, while also encouraging independent learning and digital literacy skills among pupils, especially in flexible learning contexts.
References
Adams, J., & Garcia, M. (2024). Global standards in primary education: Ensuring quality through objective-based learning. Educational Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edupress.2024.0012
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay Company. https://archive.org/details/taxonomyofeducat01bloo
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674710016
Cabrera, R. (2023). Digital feedback and learner autonomy: A study on primary school pupils. Philippine Journal of Educational Technology, 8(3), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7891234
Candilas, M. (2023). Accessibility and productivity of Google Classroom in rural school settings. Modern Pedagogy Review, 4(2), 88–95. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/mpr23
Carter, D., & Harris, M. (2024). Cognitive connections: Grouping related ideas in language instruction. Academic Insights. https://doi.org/10.1017/aci.2024.05
Davies, R., & Wilson, K. (2021). Curriculum design hurdles and the misalignment of learning objectives. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(4), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2020.1798561
Delos Santos, J. (2023). Responsive teaching in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: The role of Learning Management Systems. Tech-Education Quarterly, 10(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159x23115678
Hastutiningsih, D. (2023). Implementation of Google Classroom by teachers with limited technical experience. Digital Learning Trends, 7(2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.21831/dlt.v7i2.56789
Hughes, T., & Carter, S. (2022). Aligning digital activities with clear instructional goals. Educational Technology Research, 14(4), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10114-z
Jones, L., & Martin, G. (2024). Adaptive goals in digital learning environments. Journal of Online Learning, 11(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v11i1.3456
Patel, R., & Nguyen, T. (2024). Interactive language teaching through skill integration. Modern Classroom Studies, 13(2), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/mcs.12345
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. International Universities Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/11494-000
Robinson, D., & Larkin, V. (2022). Deep thinking and problem-solving in digital real-world contexts. Innovative Teaching Strategies, 17(3), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2022.1901234
Santos, M. (2021). Digital literacy and connectivity challenges in Philippine public schools. Southeast Asian Educational Review, 12(4), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1163/1234-5678-012
Simpson, H., et al. (2020). Problem-solving skills in students experiencing integrated curricula. Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2020.1789543
Thomas, M., & Adams, R. (2021). Data-driven learning and the necessity of organized instructional frameworks. Cognitive Education Journal, 29(2), 120–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00245-z
Torres, J. (2024). Improving student performance through real-time digital assessments. Tech-Enhanced Learning Review, 15(2), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telr.2024.03.011
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data used in this research can be accessed through a formal request to the author of the study.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The International Review of Multidisciplinary Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
