Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examined the influence of Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) teaching practices aligned with the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers (PPST) on learners’ moral development and classroom behavior in public elementary schools in Loay District, Bohol, during School Year 2025–2026. Anchored in the Theory of Planned Behavior, Character Education Framework, and Kohlberg’s Moral Development Theory, the study employed a descriptive-inferential research design involving 282 purposively selected respondents comprising 11 Grade 4 teachers, 11 school heads, and 260 learners from 11 public elementary schools. Data were collected using three validated questionnaires and analyzed through weighted mean and Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA). Findings revealed a very high extent of GMRC teaching practices (WM = 3.53), highly evident moral development (WM = 3.43), and consistently positive classroom behavior (WM = 3.46). GMRC teaching practices demonstrated a significant combined influence on moral development and classroom behavior (Pillai’s Trace = 0.819, F(2,9) = 20.40, p < .001). However, univariate analyses revealed a significant influence on classroom behavior (F = 34.50, p < .001) but not on moral development (F = 2.84, p = 0.123). Areas requiring improvement included moral reasoning, academic honesty, and resistance to negative peer influence. The study recommends strengthening instructional assessment, teacher professional development, reflective learning, and school–family–community collaboration. It supports Sustainable Development Goals 4 (Quality Education), 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) through values-based education, responsible citizenship, and stakeholder cooperation. Its sustainability contribution lies in promoting continuous instructional improvement, institutional collaboration, and the long-term development of morally responsible learners and respectful school communities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danie et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: