Research Article: 2022 Vol: 21 Issue: 6S
Implementation of Information and Communications Technology at Naval State University
Ernald M.D.U, Biliran Province State University
Marianne Shyne Balondo, Biliran Province State University
Dannah R. Pitao, Biliran Province State University
Citation Information: Ernald M.D.U., Balondo, M.S., & Pitao, D.R. (2022). Implementation of information and communications technology at naval state university. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 21(S6), 1-16.
Keywords
Information and Communications Technology (ICT), Naval State University, faculty
Abstract
This study primarily aimed to evaluate the implementation of the Information and Communications Technology at Naval State University. The descriptive-correlational design was used to gather data on the profile of the faculty, technological competencies of the faculty, extent of implementation of ICT at Naval Province State University, problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT, and the feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation of ICT at Biliran Province State University during the school year 2018-2019. Most of the faculty are middle-aged, females, non-ICT, has a length of service of 5 years and below, has masteral units, and has not attended trainings in ICT. The faculty has the competencies to use the technology on productivity, research, communication, presentation, and media purposes. The ICT is often implemented by the faculty in their teaching process. The facilities and equipment are sometimes available; the ICT equipment are often accessible; and the faculty are more confident in utilizing ICT in teaching. The faculty strongly agree in the implementation of ICT. There is no significant relationship between the profile of the faculty and the extent of implementation of ICT. On the other hand, there is a significant relationship between the technological competencies of the faculty and the extent of implementation of ICT, and between the problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT and the extent of implementation of ICT. It is concluded that the ICT was often implemented by the faculty in Naval State University. It is hereby recommended that the training plan crafted by the researcher should be utilized to improve the teaching competencies of the faculty in the utilization of ICT at Naval State University.
Introduction
The implementation of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is fast gaining prominence in the global arena nowadays. The use of ICT in teaching is relevant and functional in providing education to the learners that will assist them in imbibing the required capability for the world of work. In the current workplace, very few jobs do not require the use of skills in technology collaboration, teamwork, and information, which can be acquired with ICT.
Integrating ICT in education is an important agendum in all countries because in the world with rapid changes occurring every now and then, no country is willing to be left out (Abu-Obaideh, 2012).
Lloyd (2005) highlighted that ICT has become an important component in education. In some schools, it is taught as a subject, while for the majority, it is only a teaching tool. ICT does wonders in the classroom, enhances teaching-learning process, increases students’ motivation, and helps in the explanation of difficult concepts.
Ramayah (2006) also emphasized that ICT provides access to a huge range of resources that are of high quality and relevant. Lua & Sim (2008) added that ICT is capable in widening the range of materials that can be used in teaching and learning to include text and still and moving images and sound. It also increases the variety of ways that materials can be used for the whole class and individual learning.
Some research suggests that there has been an exponential growth in the use of ICT in education in developed countries. However, while ICTs are pervasive in developed countries, their use has been in a state of fluidity, and its integration into the school curriculum remains significantly immature in developing countries (Isaacs, 2007).
Mallow (2009); Olokoba, et al., (2014) mentioned that teachers lack the skills and knowledge in the use of computer and software, which resulted to the lack of confidence in utilizing ICT tools for communication. More so, even when ICT facilities are available, it shows that teachers do not make use of these tools.
In the Naval State University, most teachers leave teacher training institutions with limited ways, technology can be effectively used in professional practice. In this age of digitization, being able to effectively apply technology should be high on the list of what teachers at all levels in our education should know and be able to do in instructional transactions.
Although the integration of ICT in the teaching and learning process benefits both students and teachers, its implementation is dependent on the teachers’ readiness to integrate technology in order to be successful; thus, it is of utmost important to look at teachers’ readiness in terms of their ICT knowledge, competencies, and confidence towards the implementation of ICT.
Purpose of the Study
This study primarily aimed to evaluate the implementation of Information and Communications Technology at Naval State University.
Specifically, the study sought to find out:
1. Determine the profile of the faculty
2. Identify the technological competencies of the faculty in terms of productivity, research, communication, presentation and media.
3. Determine the extent of implementation of ICT at Naval State University
4. Identify the problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT in terms of, availability of facilities and equipment, accessibility of ICT equipment and confidence of faculty in utilizing ICT in teaching.
5. Determine the feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation of ICT at Naval State University.
6. Develop an Information and Communications Technology (ICT) training plan to enhance faculty performance.
The Conceptual Framework
This study is anchored on the Theory of Constructivism by Jean Piaget. As a learning theory, Piaget (1965) explains how people acquire knowledge and learn. The theory suggests that humans construct knowledge and meaning from their experiences. Constructivism as an approach to teaching and learning is based on the premise that cognition (learning) is the result of mental construction. Knowledge is not received from the outside, but by reflecting on one’s experiences. By fitting new information with what we already know, we construct knowledge in our head. Thus, we construct our own understanding of the world we live in. Piaget believes that people learn best when they actively construct their own understanding.
He emphasizes that learning is the process of adjusting mental models to accommodate new experiences.
Figure 1: The Conceptual Framework of the Study
For the purpose of this study in light of ICT implementation in teaching learning process is presented in Figure 1, which shows the diagrammatic representation of the interaction of the dependent and independent variables. The independent variables of the study include the profile of the faculty in terms of age, sex, specialization, length of service, highest educational attainment, and ICT trainings attended. The dependent variables; however, reflected the technological competencies of the faculty in terms of productivity, research, communication, presentation, and media; extent of implementation of ICT; problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT in terms of availability of facilities and equipment, accessibility of ICT equipment in utilizing ICT in teaching, and confidence of faculty in utilizing ICT in teaching; and feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation of ICT at Naval State University.
As the output of the study, the researcher has developed an Information and Communications Technology training plan to enhance faculty performance.
Methodology
Research Design
In this research, descriptive-correlational design was used to collect and analyzed the data obtained from all the respondents. It is considered appropriate for this study because it gives a better and deeper understanding of a phenomenon on the basis of an in-depth study, which provides the basis of improving ICT implementation and teachers’ competence, leading to formulate an ICT training plan for faculty of Naval State University. The researchers developed the questionnaire and finalized it before being distributed to the targeted group of respondents. Few sections on the questionnaire were designed specifically to address research objectives in regard with the implementation of Information and Communications Technology at the Naval State University. Therefore, the questionnaire was distributed to obtain the data from the respondents.
Population and Sampling
This study is focused on the implementation of Information and Communications Technology at Naval State University during the school year 2017-2018. The respondents were limited to the 159 faculty members, and the data were limited to their profile and technological competencies; extent of ICT implementation; problems encountered, and feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation of ICT at Naval State University.
Instrument
This research adapted and utilized the standardized survey questionnaire from previously conducted studies with slight modification to suit the needs of the present study. The survey questionnaire serves as the main instrument in data gathering, which consists of five parts: Part I asked the respondents profile which includes their age, sex, specialization, length of service, highest educational attainment, and ICT trainings attended. Part II ensured validity and reliability. The questionnaire was slightly modified to answer the objectives of this study. This section asked about the technological competencies of the faculty in five areas such as: productivity, research, communication, presentation, and media. Part III ascertains the extent of implementation of ICT in teaching and learning processes. This was adapted along with Part II from the study of Lawrence and Veena (2014).Part IV asked about the respondents’ problems encountered in the implementation of ICT as to the availability and accessibility of ICT facilities and equipment, and faculty’s confidence in utilizing ICT in teaching. This instrument was adapted from the study of Eze & Aja (2014) and Alaharbi (2014). Part V determines the feedback of the faculty in the implementation of ICT. This was adapted from the study of Ghavifekr & Rosdy (2015).
Data Collection Procedure
The data gathering procedure essentially involved the following activities: construction, editing, and production of the adequate copies of questionnaire; asking permission from the OIC President to conduct the study; distributing and retrieving the survey questionnaires from the respondents in person; grouping and tabulating the gathered data; treating the data statistically with analysis and interpretations; and drawing out of implications, findings, conclusion, and recommendations.
Data Analysis Process
As soon as all data were in, these were collated, tallied, analyzed, and interpreted using a 5-point rating scale. Descriptive statistics such as frequency count, simple percentage, weighted mean and standard deviation were used to determine the profile of the faculty, technological competencies of the faculty, extent of implementation of ICT, problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT, and feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was also used in determining the relationship among the variables of the study.
Results
The findings of this research will give the output needed by the researchers to answer the research questions.
| Table 1 Demographic Profile of the Respondents |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | n | % | |
| 159 | 100 | ||
| Age | Early Adulthood (20 – 39) | 134 | 84.3 |
| Adulthood (40 – 64) | 125 | 15.7 | |
| Sex | Male | 81 | 50.9 |
| Female | 78 | 49.1 | |
| Specialization | ICT | 32 | 20.1 |
| Non-ICT | 127 | 79.9 | |
| Length of Service | 5 years and below | 95 | 59.7 |
| 6 – 10 years | 39 | 24.5 | |
| 11 – 15 years | 193 | 11.9 | |
| 16 – 20 years | 3 | 1.9 | |
| Above 20 years | 3 | 1.9 | |
| Highest Educational Attainment | AB/BS Holder | 37 | 23.3 |
| MA/MS Units | 67 | 42.1 | |
| MA/MS Holder | 25 | 15.7 | |
| Ed. D./Ph. D. Units | 20 | 12.6 | |
| Ed. D./Ph. D. Holder | 10 | 6.3 | |
| Attended ICT Training Course | Yes | 62 | 39.0 |
| No | 97 | 61.0 | |
Demographic Profile of the Respondents
Age: As shown in the Table, 136 ( 85.6%) of the respondents belong to middle age category with the age bracket of 20-45, while only one (0.6 %) belong to senior citizen category with the age bracket of 60 years old and above. Results show that in the university, most of the faculty are at middle age. This implies that most of the faculty who are performing instructions in the university are considered to be in the millennial generation; thus, are capable of performing the 21st century skills. This was corroborated in the study of Mayanja (2002) when he said that teachers whose age ranges from 21 – 40 years old are more capable of using ICT than any other age group. Sanni, et al. (2010) further supported that at these age range, the utilization of ICT is more pronounced than that of their older counterpart.
Sex: It could be seen that 100 (62.9%) are females, while only 59 ( 37.1%) are males. Results reveal that there are more female faculty respondents than the male, which could that the female is dominant in the field of teaching.
Specialization: It could be observed that most of the respondents are non- ICT graduates at 127 (79.9%), while 32 or 20 percent graduated with ICT specialization. The study exposed that there are only few faculty who specialized ICT. This implies a need for trainings on ICT teaching integration to maximize the utilization of available ICT facilities and equipment in the university.
Length of Service: As gleaned from the Table, 95 (59.7%) of faculty have teaching experience of 5 years and below, and 3 or 1.9 percent have teaching experience of 16 to 20 years and 20 years and above. Results reveal that most of the faculty are new in the teaching career, since, most of them are teaching less than 5 years.
Highest Educational Attainment: It could be seen that more than one third (1/3) or 42.1 %are master’s degree holder, while only 10 (6.3%) are doctorate degree holder. Result reveals that most faculty members are pursuing their post graduate studies for a better performance.
ICT Trainings Attended: It could be noted that 97 (61%) of the faculty did not undergo an ICT training course, while 62 (39%) have attended ICT trainings. This study reveals that most of the faculty do not have ICT trainings. Results imply that training on ICT is ideal in order for the faculty to utilize the available ICT resources for an enhanced teaching and learning.
Technology Competencies of Teachers
This section highlights the basic technological competencies of the faculty in five areas of competency, such as: productivity, research, communication, presentation, and media.
Productivity: The weighted means range from 3.95% to 4.01% interpreted as moderately competent. It has an average weighted mean of 3.96% still interpreted as moderately competent. The indicator “produce and manage learning documents” got the highest weighted mean of 4.01%, while the indicator “utilize technology tools in creating communities of practice” got the lowest weighted mean. Both are interpreted more competent since all the indicators have the same interpretations. Results reveal that the faculty have the competence in using the technology as productivity tools, which help them produce learning materials that enhance their teaching and learning process. It further shows that that faculty are competent in using technology in the crafting of digital representation of educational information.
Research: It obtained weighted means ranging from 3.84%to 3.87%, and an average weighted mean of 3.86 all interpreted as more competent. Three of four indicators got the highest weighted mean such as: “use effective online search strategies,” “evaluate and compare online information and sources,” and “explore existing and emerging technology to acquire additional content and pedagogical knowledge;” while “save and cite online information and sources.” The results expose that faculty are competent in using technology for research such as choosing appropriate research tools, evaluating sources of information, and citing online resources.
Communication: The weighted means range from 3.37% to 4.12%. The indicator “communicate using digital tools” got the highest weighed mean of 4.12% interpreted as more competent, while the indicator “model collaborative knowledge construction in face to face and virtual environment” got the lowest weighted mean of 3.37% interpreted as competent. Results show that faculty are more competent in using the technology as communication tools, compared to that of initiating the technology for collaborative knowledge construction in physical and virtual environment.
Presentation: It obtained weighted means ranging from 3.61% to 4.09% and an average weighted mean of 3.87, all interpreted more competent. The indicator “deliver digital multimedia presentations” got the highest weighted mean of 4.09%, while “apply relevant technology tools for classroom activities has the lowest weighted mean of 3.78% being interpreted as more competent. Results show that faculty are competent in using technology to present and deliver digital presentations.
Media: The weighted means range from 3.74% to 3.97%, with an average weighted mean of 3.87%, all interpreted as more competent. The indicator “capture and edit images, audio, and video” has the highest weighted mean, while the indicator “differentiate instruction with digital media” has the lowest weighted mean. Results show that the faculty perceives technology as media that enhances their teaching through the production of digital experiences for students and evaluating using technology.
In summary, all the variables had interpretation of more competent with average weighted means ranging from 3.70% to 3.96%. It obtained an overall average weighted mean of 3.85%, also interpreted as more competent. Results reveal that the faculty in the university have the technological competencies. This implies that they have the competency to use the technology for productivity, research, communication, presentation, and media purposes.
| Table 2 Technology Competencies of Teachers |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Basic Technology Competencies of Teachers | |||
| WM | SD | Interpretation | |
| Productivity | |||
| Produce and manage learning documents | 4.01 | .879 | Moderately Competent |
| Analyse quantitative data | 3.96 | .909 | Moderately Competent |
| Organize information graphically | 4.04 | .989 | Moderately Competent |
| Develop digital learning resources to enhance teaching and learning | 3.95 | .955 | Moderately Competent |
| Utilize technology tools in creating communities of practice. | 3.82 | 1.01 | Moderately Competent |
| AWM | 3.96 | Moderately Competent | |
| Research | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Use effective online search strategies | 3.87 | 1.02 | Moderately Competent |
| Evaluate and compare online information and sources | 3.87 | 1.01 | Moderately Competent |
| Save and cite online information and sources | 3.84 | .991 | Moderately Competent |
| Explore existing and emerging technology to acquire additional content and pedagogical knowledge. | 3.87 | .975 | Moderately Competent |
| AWM | 3.86 | Moderately Competent | |
| Communication | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Communicate using digital tools | 4.12 | .944 | Moderately Competent |
| Collaborate online for learning | 3.74 | 1.06 | Moderately Competent |
| Publish learning resources online | 3.48 | 1.06 | Moderately Competent |
| Model collaborative knowledge construction in face to face and virtual environment | 3.37 | 1.14 | Competent |
| Collaborate with peers, colleagues and stakeholders to access information in support of professional learning | 3.79 | .983 | Moderately Competent |
| AWM | 3.70 | Moderately Competent | |
| Media | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Differentiate instruction with digital media | 3.74 | 1.05 | Moderately Competent |
| Capture and edit images, audio, and video | 3.97 | 1.00 | Moderately Competent |
| Produce digital multimedia educational experiences | 3.86 | 1.08 | Moderately Competent |
| Evaluate digital and non-digital learning resources in response to students’ diverse needs. | 3.81 | 1.05 | Moderately Competent |
| Use technology tools to create new learning opportunities to support communities of learners | 3.85 | 1.03 | Moderately Competent |
| AWM | 3.85 | Moderately Competent | |
| Presentation | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Create effective digital presentations. | 4.06 | .909 | Moderately Competent |
| Deliver digital multimedia presentations | 4.09 | .884 | Moderately Competent |
| Employ new media devices for learning | 3.61 | 1.04 | Moderately Competent |
| Manage technology-assisted instruction in an inclusive classroom environment | 3.79 | 1.04 | Moderately Competent |
| Apply relevant technology tools for classroom activities | 3.78 | 1.11 | Moderately Competent |
| AWM | 3.87 | Moderately Competent | |
Extent of Implementation of ICT in Naval State University
The extent of implementation of ICT in Naval State University was evaluated as always implemented, often implemented, seldom implemented, rarely implemented, and never implemented.
The Table shows that among the 35 indicators, “deliver the lesson using appropriate digital tools or applications” obtained the highest weighted mean of 3.74 described as often implemented. Meanwhile the indicator “utilized smart devices for building the positive relationships between teachers and students” got the lowest weighted mean of 3.11 interpreted as seldom implemented. The Table also indicates that in the extent of implementation of ICT, the average weighted mean is 3.55 interpreted as often implemented.
Results show that ICT is implemented by the NSU faculty in their teaching by delivering lesson with an appropriate tools and application. However, using technology to build relationships between teachers and students are seldom implemented by the faculty. This implies that faculty implements appropriate digital resources to enhance their teaching, and further implies that ICT is utilized to build network between teachers and students in relation to teaching and learning needs enhancement.
| Table 3 Extent Of Implementation of ICT In Naval State University |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Indicators | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Discuss national ICT policies affecting classroom practices | 3.48 | 1.02 | Seldom Implemented |
| Implement ICT policies in teaching learning | 3.66 | 0.927 | Often Implemented |
| Incorporate ICT policies in the design and implementation of teaching-learning activities | 3.65 | .956 | Often Implemented |
| Discuss ICT concepts, principles and theories in various teaching-learning processes | 3.60 | 1.02 | Often Implemented |
| Use technology tools in the assessment processes. | 3.68 | 1.07 | Often Implemented |
| Select digital and non-digital learning resources in reference to the student learning preferences. | 3.64 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Revise digital and non-digital learning resources in response to varied needs of students | 3.53 | 1.03 | Often Implemented |
| Produce digital learning material designed to enhance teaching-learning. | 3.55 | 1.08 | Often Implemented |
| Integrate ICT in teaching plans that require learners to connect the content of the lesson top society. | 3.71 | 0.916 | Often Implemented |
| Design a technology-enhance lesson to support learning | 3.72 | 0.949 | Often Implemented |
| Deliver the lesson using appropriate digital tools or applications | 3.74 | 1.01 | Often Implemented |
| Assist students to reflect on their own learning using technology tools. | 3.62 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Use varied teaching strategies like project-based learning that integrate technology tools to support thinking and collaboration | 3.65 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Initiate flexible learning through online communications (synchronous/ asynchronous modality) | 3.48 | 1.07 | Seldom Implemented |
| Perform basic trouble shooting and maintenance of technology tools and systems | 3.36 | 1.09 | Seldom Implemented |
| Use productivity and other tools in everyday work | 3.64 | 1.00 | Often Implemented |
| Make technology tools-based instructional materials to improve student learning. | 3.67 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Produce ICT based teaching and learning tools in collaboration with students | 3.53 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Propose ore recommend technology and policy innovations related to promoting continuous learning among students. | 3.50 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Facilitate flexible learning environment that enhances collaboration with the use of technology tools | 3.55 | 1.03 | Often Implemented |
| Lead group activities using technology tools. | 3.58 | 1.08 | Often Implemented |
| Use technology tools to search for mange, analyze, integrate and evaluate information that can be used to support professional learning. | 3.66 | 1.04 | Often Implemented |
| Evaluate technology resources in terms of appropriateness, quality, usability, accessibility and cost effectiveness. | 3.56 | 1.06 | Often Implemented |
| Use technology tools to collaborate and share resources among communities of practice | 3.63 | 1.06 | Often Implemented |
| Identify educational sites and portals suitable to their subject area | 3.64 | 1.09 | Often Implemented |
| Join Online expert and learning communities | 3.40 | 1.06 | Seldom Implemented |
| Use resources from relevant mailing lists and online journals | 3.49 | 1.04 | Seldom Implemented |
| Evaluate and compare useful and credible web resources to be share with other students. | 3.52 | 1.06 | Often Implemented |
| Active membership to local and global learning communities to maintain access to creative applications of technology that help enhance student learning. | 3.31 | 1.09 | Seldom Implemented |
| Discuss safety issues in obtaining resource materials from local area network-based and the internet | 3.40 | 1.09 | Seldom Implemented |
| Comply with intellectual property laws including the fair use of educational content | 3.49 | 1.07 | Seldom Implemented |
| Institute mechanisms to ensure child online safety and prevent cyberbullying | 3.44 | 1.03 | Seldom Implemented |
| Practice standard netiquette in sharing and utilizing shared materials among learning communities | 3.57 | 1.03 | Often Implemented |
| Provide support to learners digital culture and behaviors | 3.55 | 1.08 | Often Implemented |
| Utilized smart devices for building the positive relationships between teachers and students | 3.11 | 1.16 | Seldom Implemented |
| AWM | 3.55 | Often Implemented | |
Problems Encountered by the Faculty in the Implementation of ICT
The problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT is categorized in terms of availability of facilities and equipment, accessibility of ICT equipment, and confidence of faculty in utilizing ICT in teaching.
Availability of Facilities and Equipment: As shown in Table 4, the availability of facilities and equipment indicates a range of weighted means from 1.81-3.70, and an average weighted mean of 2.78 interpreted as sometimes available. From the identified ICT equipment/tools, laptop computers is identified as often available, while internet services and radio cassette player are identified as not available based on their weighted means of 3.70 and 1.81 respectively.
Results indicate that there are available laptop computers for teachers’ utilization in their classes; however, they find internet services and radio cassette player to be not available for use in teaching within the university. This implies that most teachers have their own laptop computers for use in their instruction, which could imply that internet services should be available for use by the faculty to further enhance their instruction. Moreover, the use of radio cassette player is obsolete since faculty can do it with their laptop computers.
Accessibility of ICT Equipment: The accessibility of ICT equipment, which indicates weighted means ranging from 1.82-3.61. LCD/data projector and screen were identified as often accessible with the highest weighted mean of 3.61, while internet services and overhead projector got the lowest weighted mean of 1.82 interpreted as not accessible.
Result shows that the faculty has no problem with the accessibility of the LCD projector, but has encountered problems on the accessibility of the internet services and overhead projector. This implies that there are available LCD projectors for use in instructions by the faculty; however, the internet services which faculty can access for information is a problem in the university. Further, the result implies that the university has the modern technologies for it has neither available nor accessible overhead projector.
Confidence of Faculty in Utilizing ICT in Teaching: As shown in the table , the confidence of faculty in utilizing ICT in teaching, which indicates weighted means ranging from 2.99-4.81, and average weighted mean of 4.22 interpreted as more confident.
From among the indicators, “using word processors (MS Word)” got the highest weighted mean of 4.81 interpreted as very confident, while “designing webpage or personal site” got the lowest weighted mean of 2.99 interpreted as confident. Results show that teachers are confident to use ICT in teaching, but are limited only to its basic features. On the other hand, utilizing ICT to design webpage or personal site shall be enhanced. This implies that the faculty has enough confidence to utilize ICT’s basic features, but limited in the advanced features.
| Table 4 Problems Encountered by the Faculty in the Implementation of ICT |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | |||
| Availability of Facilities and Equipment | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Laptop Computer | 3.70 | 1.07 | Often Available |
| desktop computer | 2.35 | 1.34 | Rarely Available |
| Internet services | 1.81 | 1.19 | Rarely Available |
| Tablets | 3.53 | 1.08 | Often Available |
| LCD/Data projector and screen | 3.60 | 1.15 | Often Available |
| Printers | 3.25 | 1.24 | Sometimes Available |
| Scanners | 2.79 | 1.21 | Sometimes Available |
| Digital cameras | 2.93 | 1.29 | Sometimes Available |
| Speakers | 2.39 | 1.43 | Rarely Available |
| Television set (Smart TV) | 2.36 | 1.34 | Rarely Available |
| CD\DVD\VCD | 3.65 | 1.24 | Often Available |
| Photocopier machines | 2.74 | 1.46 | Sometimes Available |
| Overhead projector | 1.86 | 1.11 | Rarely Available |
| Radio cassette player | 1.81 | 1.17 | Not Available |
| Electronic Type writer | 2.89 | 1.46 | Sometimes Available |
| AWM | 2.78 | Sometimes Available | |
| Accessibility of ICT Equipment | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Laptop Computer | 3.49 | 1.12 | Often Accessible |
| desktop computer | 2.30 | 1.31 | Sometimes Accessible |
| Internet services | 1.82 | 1.15 | Not Accessible |
| Tablets | 3.36 | 1.17 | Sometimes Accessible |
| LCD/Data projector and screen | 3.48 | 1.23 | Often Accessible |
| Printers | 3.23 | 1.29 | Sometimes Accessible |
| Scanners | 2.59 | 1.23 | Rarely Accessible |
| Digital cameras | 2.81 | 1.26 | Sometimes Accessible |
| Speakers | 2.33 | 1.38 | Rarely Accessible |
| Television set (Smart TV) | 2.33 | 1.37 | Rarely Accessible |
| CD\DVD\VCD | 3.61 | 1.33 | Often Accessible |
| Photocopier machines | 2.66 | 1.54 | Sometimes Accessible |
| Overhead projector | 1.82 | 1.14 | Not Accessible |
| Radio cassette player | 1.89 | 1.26 | Rarely Accessible |
| Electronic Type writer | 4.77 | 0.597 | Very Accessible |
| AWM | 2.83 | Sometimes Accessible | |
| Teachers’ Confidence to Utilize ICT in Teaching | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| Basics of Computer Operations. (using keyboard, mouse, etc.. | 4.77 | 0.597 | Very Confident |
| Managing files (delete, save, transfer or move) | 4.74 | 0.608 | Very Confident |
| Using word processor (MS Word) | 4.81 | 0.553 | Very Confident |
| Use spreadsheet processor (excel program) | 4.29 | 0.861 | Very Confident |
| Creating, using and manage database (MS Access program) | 3.66 | 1.13 | More Confident |
| Create and design presentation (PowerPoint presentation or slide show) | 4.63 | 0.688 | Very Confident |
| Combining file from different resources (sound or video file ) in creating presentations. | 4.13 | 1.00 | More Confident |
| Producing learning software | 3.23 | 1.33 | Confident |
| Using PowerPoint software | 4.41 | 0.906 | Very Confident |
| Searching for saved data on hard disk and other storage devices (Flash drive, optic disks, disk drives .etc) | 4.49 | 0.818 | Very Confident |
| Using data show basis on PC as projection tool | 3.99 | 1.16 | More Confident |
| Using different designing programs (Photoshop, etc) | 3.52 | 1.30 | More Confident |
| Deleting or editing pictures, animations or movies. | 3.86 | 1.16 | More Confident |
| Using digital camera | 4.14 | 1.06 | More Confident |
| Internet browsing | 4.57 | 0.846 | Very Confident |
| Searching for information on the internet | 4.67 | 0.709 | Very Confident |
| Downloading files from the internet | 4.67 | 0.707 | Very Confident |
| Using chatrooms and for a (Facebook, twitter, etc) | 4.53 | 0.817 | Very Confident |
| Publishing personal blog | 3.23 | 1.36 | Confident |
| Designing webpage or personal site | 2.99 | 1.41 | Confident |
| AWM | 4.22 | More Confident | |
Feedbacks of the Faculty in the Implementation of ICT
The feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation of ICT were assessed whether they strongly agree, agree, uncertain, disagree, and strongly disagree.
Table 5 shows the feedbacks of the faculty in the implementation of ICT. As revealed, it has an average weighted mean of 4.53 interpreted as strongly agree. Among the 15 indicators, “I think the use of ICT improves the quality of teaching” obtained the highest weighted mean of 4.77 interpreted as strongly agree. Meanwhile, the indicator, “students make no effort for their lesson if ICT is used in teaching” got the lowest mean of 4.22 interpreted as agree. Results expose that the faculty perceived that ICT implementation in teaching improves their quality of teaching; thus allowing students to have more efforts in their activities. This implies that ICT really improves the quality of education if it is effectively implemented in teaching and learning process.
| Table 5 Faculty Feedback/Opinion in the Implementation of ICT |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | |||
| Indicators | WM | SD | Interpretation |
| I feel confident learning new computer skills | 4.72 | 0.628 | Strongly Agree |
| I find it easier to teach by using ICT | 4.58 | 0.732 | Strongly Agree |
| I am aware of the great opportunities that ICT offers for effective teaching | 4.68 | 0.630 | Strongly Agree |
| I think that ICT supported teaching makes learning more effective | 4.72 | 0.594 | Strongly Agree |
| The use of ICT helps teachers to improve teaching with more updated materials | 4.75 | 0.573 | Strongly Agree |
| I think the use of ICT improves the quality of teaching. | 4.77 | 0.553 | Strongly Agree |
| I think the use of ICT helps to prepare teaching resources and materials | 4.75 | 0.571 | Strongly Agree |
| The use of ICT enables the students to be more active and engaging in the lesson. | 4.72 | 0.539 | Strongly Agree |
| I have more time to cater to students need if ICT is used in teaching. | 4.59 | 0.629 | Strongly Agree |
| I can still have an effective teaching without the use of ICT | 4.23 | 0.914 | Agree |
| I think the use of ICT in teaching is a waste of time. | 4.37 | 1.03 | Strongly Agree |
| I am confident that my students learn best without the help of ICT. | 4.22 | 1.06 | Agree |
| The classroom management is out of control if ICT is used in teaching. | 4.29 | 1.06 | Strongly Agree |
| Students pay less attention when ICT is used in teaching | 4.30 | 1.08 | Strongly Agree |
| Students make no effort for their lesson if ICT is used in teaching. | 4.22 | 1.03 | Agree |
| AWM | 4.53 | Strongly Agree | |
Hypothesis Testing
As depicted on Table 6, age, sex, specialization, length of service, highest educational attainment, and ICT trainings attended obtained p-values of 0.819, 0.818, 0.754, 0.506, 0.917, and 0.191, respectively. These p-values were less than .05, which means that there is no sufficient evidence that these profile variables are linearly associated with the extent of implementation of ICT in Naval State University. Thus, the hypothesis, which states that there is no significant relationship between the profile of the faculty and the extent of implementation of ICT in Naval State University is accepted.
| Table 6 Relationship Between the Demographic Profile of the Respondents and Their Extent of Implementation of ICT in Naval State University |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | Extent of Implementation | F-test | p-value | ||
| AWM | SD | ||||
| Age | Early Adulthood | 3.57 | 0.891 | 0.052 | 0.819 |
| Adulthood | 3.53 | 0.851 | |||
| Sex | Male | 3.58 | 0.876 | ||
| Female | 3.55 | 0.894 | 0.053 | 0.818 | |
| Specialization | ICT | 3.61 | 0.956 | 0.099 | 0.754 |
| Non-ICT | 3.55 | 0.866 | |||
| Length of Service | 5 years and below | 3.52 | 0.861 | 0.834 | 0.506 |
| 6 – 10 years | 3.66 | 0.972 | |||
| 11 – 15 years | 3.74 | 0.866 | |||
| 16 – 20 years | 2.92 | 0.579 | |||
| Above 20 years | 3.24 | 0.567 | |||
| Highest Educational Attainment | AB/BS Holder | 3.62 | 0.855 | 0.237 | 0.917 |
| MA/MS Units | 3.49 | 0.904 | |||
| MA/MS Holder | 3.55 | 0.961 | |||
| Ed. D./Ph. D. Units | 3.67 | 0.712 | |||
| Ed. D./Ph. D. Holder | 3.64 | 1.07 | |||
| Attended ICT Training Course | Yes | 3.72 | 0.89 | 1.672 | 0.191 |
| No | 3.46 | 0.87 | |||
Table 7 discloses the relationship between technological competencies of faculty and the extent of implementation of ICT obtained a correlation of .619 indicating a strong positive relationship. The p-value was .000, which indicates a highly significant relationship. This implies that technological competencies of faculty is directly associated with the extent of implementation of ICT at Naval State University.
| Table 7 Relationship Between Basic Technology Competencies of Teachers and Their Extent of Implementation of ICT in Naval State University |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | N | M | SD | r | p-value |
| Technology Competencies | 159 | 3.84 | 0.804 | 0.619** | 0.000 |
| Extent of Implementation | 159 | 4.25 | 0.716 | ||
As gleaned in Table 8, the problems encountered by the faculty obtained an r-value of .634 and a p-value of 0.000. This means that there is sufficient evidence that the problems encountered by the faculty are linearly correlated with their extent of implementation. Thus, the hypothesis, which states that there is no significant relationship between the problems encountered by the faculty in the implementation of ICT and the extent of implementation of ICT is rejected.
| Table 8 Relationship Between Problems Encountered by the Faculty and Their Extent of Implementation of ICT in Naval State University |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | N | M | SD | r | p-value |
| Problems Encountered | 159 | 3.26 | 0.724 | 0.634** | 0.000 |
| Extent of Implementation | 159 | 4.25 | 0.716 | ||
Discussion & Conclusion
This study primarily aimed to evaluate the implementation of the Information and Communications Technology at Naval State University. The findings indicated that most of the faculty are middle-aged, females, non-ICT and has a length of service of 5 years and below, with masteral units, and has not attended trainings in ICT. The faculty has the competencies and confident in utilizing ICT on productivity, research, communication, presentation, and media purposes in their teaching process. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that ICT was often implemented by the faculty in Naval State University.
Recommendations
The following are the recommendations based on the results of the study:
1. The university shall provide wide opportunities of ICT trainings to all faculty for them to be updated on the latest developments in integration of ICT in teaching.
2. The university shall implement policies on the maximum implementation of ICT’s in teaching and learning to ensure that available resources are utilized and guarantee quality education to its students.
3. The university shall provide the necessary ICT equipment and facilities and internet services that are readily available and accessible to all faculty, to further enhances the teaching and learning activities in the classroom.
4. The university shall send faculty to trainings regarding ICT implementations in the teaching-learning process, so that will earn confident in teaching with ICT and impart skills to students with learning activities supported with ICT.
5. It is recommended that the proposed training plan as an output of this study be implemented as guide for the different trainings about ICT for faculty.
It is strongly recommended that further study be conducted to validate the results of this study and to find out the effectiveness of the training plan.
References
Abu-Obaideh, A., Ab Rahim, B., Ramlah, H., & Asimiran, S. (2012). Effects of demographic characteristics, educational background, and supporting factors on ICT readiness of technical and vocational teachers in Malaysia. International Education Studies, 5(6), 229-243.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Alharbi, E. (2014). A Study on the Use of ICT in Teaching in Secondary Schools in Kuwait (Doctoral dissertation).
GoogleScholar, Crossref,Indexed at
Alston, A.J., Miller, W.W., Chanda, D., & Elbert, C.D. (2003). A correlational analysis of instructional technology characteristics in North Carolina and Virginia secondary agricultural education curricula. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 53(1), 140-153.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Baek, Y.G., Jong, J., & Kim, B. (2008). What makes teachers use of technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitation of technology with a Korean sample. Computers and Education, 50(8).
Basargekar, P., & Singhavi, C. (2017). Factors Affecting Teachers' Perceived Proficiency in Using ICT in the Classroom. IAFOR Journal of Education, 5(2).
Beauchamp, G., & Parkinson, J. (2008). Pupils’ attitudes towards school science as they transfer from an ICT-rich primary school to a secondary school with fewer ICT resources: Does ICT matter?. Education and Information Technologies, 13(2), 103-118.
Bebell, D., Russell, M., & O'Dwyer, L. (2004). Measuring Teachers' Technology Uses: Why Multiple-Measures Are More Revealing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(1), 45-63.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Buntat, Y., Saud, M.S., Dahar, A., Arifin, K.S., & Zaid, Y.H. (2010). Computer technology application and vocational education: A review of literature and research. European Journal of Social Sciences, 14(4), 645-651.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Cuban, L. (2000). So Much High-Tech Money Invested, So Little Use and Change In Practice: How Come? Paper prepared for the Council of Chief State School Officers’ annual Technology Leadership Conference. Washington, D.C.
Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational technology research and development, 53(4), 25-39.
Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of educational Change, 1(1), 5-27.
Ghavifekr, S., & Rosdy, W.A.W. (2015). Teaching and learning with technology: Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools.International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 1(2), 175-191.
Gilakjani, A.P. (2013). Factors contributing to teachers’ use of computer technology in the classroom. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1(3), 262-267.
Hernández-Ramos, P. (2005). If not here, where? Understanding teachers’ use of technology in Silicon Valley schools. Journal of Research on Technology in education.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Inan, F. & Lowther, D. (2009). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137-154.
Jamieson-Proctor, R.M., Burnett, P., Finger, G., & Watson, G. (2006). ICT Integration and Teachers' Confidence in Using ICT for Teaching and Learning in Queensland State Schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(4), 511-530.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Kalogiannakis, M. (2008). Training with ICT for ICT from the trainee’s perspective. A local ICT teacher training experience. Education and Information Technologies Journal, 15(1), 3-17.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Kirk, M., & Zander, C. (2004). Narrowing the digital divide: In search of a map to mend the gap. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 20(2), 168-175.
Kumar, N., Rose, R.C., & D’Silva, J.L. (2008). Teachers’ readiness to use technology in the classroom: An empirical study. European Journal of Scientific Research, 21(4), 603-616.
Lau, B., & Sim, C. (2008). Exploring the Extent of ICT Adoption among Secondary School Teachers in Malaysia. International Journal of Computing and ICT Research, 2(2), 19-36.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Lu, C. (2002). Instructional technology competencies perceived as needed by vocational teachers in Ohio and Taiwan. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Mahmud, R., & Ismail, M.A. (2010). Impact of Training and Experience in Using ICT on In-Service Teachers’ Basic ICT Literacy. Malaysian Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2).
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Mayanja, M. (2002) Uganda School-Based Telecenters: An Approach to Rural Access to ICTs.
Mbarika, V. (2005). Towards a model of consumer use of mobile information and communication technology in LDCs: The case of sub-Saharan Africa. Information Systems Journal, 15(2), 119-146.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Mitra, A., Lenzmeier, S., Steffensmeier, T., Avon, R., Qu, N., & Hazen, M. (2001). Gender and computer use in academics institution. Report from a longitudinal study.Journal Education computing Research, 23(1), 67-84.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Morrisa, D. (2011) 'Are teachers technophobes? Investigating professional competency in the use of ICT to support teaching and learning'. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 6(1).
Ogunkola, J.B. (2008). Computer Attitude, Ownership and Use as Predictors of Computer Literacy of Science Teachers in Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 3(2), 53-57.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Olatokun, W.M. (2009). Analysing socio-demographic differences in access and use of ICTs in Nigeria using the capability approach. Issues in Informing Science & Information Technology, 6.
P.I. Eze., & Aja, S.N. (2014). Availability and utilization of information and communication technology (ICT) in Ebonyi Local Government area of Ebonyi state: implications for effective teaching and learning education. Educ. Res, 5(4),116-121.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at,
Paryono & Quito, B.G. (2010). Meta-analysis of ICT integration in vocational and technical education in Southeast Asia. An International Conference on VTET Research and Networking. SEAVERN Research Report. SEAMO VOCTECH Regional Centre, Brunei Darussalam.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Pelgrum, W.J. (2001). Obstacles to the Integration of ICT in Education: Results from a Worldwide Educational Assessment. Computers & Education, 37, 163-178.
Rosnaini, M. (2006). ICT readiness of secondary school teachers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Universiti Kebang-saan Malaysia.
Sabariah, S., & Khaziyati, O. (2005). Teacher’s perception on professional development needs in information and communication technology (ICT). Inovasi Teknologi Instruksional dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran: Konvensyen Teknologi Pendidikan ke-18 (446-454). Terengganu: Persatuan Teknologi Pendidikan Malaysia.
Sadik, A. (2005). Factors influencing teachers’ attitudes towards personal use and schools use of computers: New evidence from a developing nation. Evaluation Review, 2(1), 1-29.
Thierer, A. (2000). Divided over the digital divide, Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.
UNDP. (2011). Promoting ICT for human development programme. A Pionnering Regional Human Development Report in Asia.
Veen, W (1993) The Role of Beliefs in the use of Information Technology: Implication for Teachers Education or Teaching the Right Things at the Right time. Journal of Information Technology in Teacher Education.
Volman, M. (2005). A variety of roles for a new type of teacher educational technology and the teaching profession. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 15-31.
Wachiuri, R.N. (2015). Effects of teachers’ experience and training on implementation of information communication technology in public secondary schools in Nyeri, Central District, Kenya. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 20(3), 26-38.
GoogleScholar, Crossref, Indexed at
Yi, Y. (2008). Relay Writing in an Adolescent Online Community. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51,670–680.
Received: 04-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. ASMJ-22-10796; Editor assigned: 06-Apr-2022, PreQC No. ASMJ-22-10796 (PQ); Reviewed: 20- Apr-2022, QC No. ASMJ-22-10796; Revised: 27-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. ASMJ-22-10796 (R); Published: 03-May-2022