An Assessment of the eLearning Readiness State of Faculty Members ...

An Assessment of the eLearning Readiness State of Faculty Members and Students at Malayan Colleges Laguna Ellenita R. Red Malayan Colleges Laguna Pulo Diezmo Road, Cabuyao, Laguna 4025, Philippines [email protected] Hanna Grace S. Borlongan Malayan Colleges Laguna Pulo Diezmo Road, Cabuyao, Laguna 4025, Philippines [email protected] Tesalonica T. Briagas Malayan Colleges Laguna Pulo Diezmo Road, Cabuyao, Laguna 4025, Philippines [email protected] Ma. Jonessa M. Mendoza Malayan Colleges Laguna Pulo Diezmo Road, Cabuyao, Laguna 4025, Philippines [email protected]

Abstract - Technological trends these days shift the economy of the countries including the behavior of the universities. The need to acquire and to provide students knowledge and skills beyond geographic borders drives higher education institutions to an astute state of cogitation. [1] As a result, higher education institutions scramble to implement eLearning for their students and putting everything in place for its adoption. This paper discusses the assessment of the eLearning readiness status at Malayan Colleges Laguna (MCL) in preparing the faculty members, students, administration and facilities for its implementation of eLearning.

I. INTRODUCTION The phenomenon brought by eLearning has stirred all sectors of society and institutions around the world. In the Philippines, Information and Communications Technology (ICT) has been revolutionizing the way we live our lives by tearing down borders and making them non-existent. Learning, likewise, has extended beyond the four walls of the classroom and now takes place at home, in internet cafes, shopping malls, restaurants and in the unlikeliest of places. Several universities have started eLearning degree programs: the University of the Philippines Open University (UPOU), De La Salle University (DLSU), Ateneo de Manila University (ADMU), and Polytechnic University of the Philippines Keywords - eLearning, Blended Learning, (PUP) which promote eLearning [2]. By definition, the “e” in e-learning refers to Readiness Assessment Tool, Technology the “how”: the course is digitized so it can be Skills, Technology Access, Attitudes stored in electronic form while the “learning” in eLearning refers to the “what”:

International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management Vol.21 No.3 (September-December, 2013) pp 20-26

20

Ellenita R. Red, Hanna Grace S. Borlongan, Tesalonica T. Briagas, and Ma. Jonessa M. Mendoza

the course includes content and ways to help people learn it; and the “why” refers to the purpose: to help individuals achieve educational goals or to help organizations build skills related to improved job performance [3]. Alongside technology, for this eLearning to happen there are other important elements needed to complete the environment and these are the different stakeholders including the teachers, students, administration resource support and facilities[1,5-8]. At present, MCL uses blended learning. It is a type of eLearning with face to face interaction of the faculty members and students. It suggests an elegant solution to the challenges of tailoring learning and development to the needs of individuals. It represents an opportunity to integrate the innovative and technological advances offered by online learning with the interaction and participation offered in the best of traditional learning. It can be supported and enhanced by using the wisdom and one-to-one contact of personal coaches. [4] Figure 1 shows the implementation of the schools eLearning website and out of 672 courses only 196 courses or 20.83% of all the courses are being used or utilized by faculty members. Which leads us to the question, “What are the factors affecting the use of faculty members and students of the schools’ eLearning website?” Hence, there is a need to measure the readiness of the different stakeholders to determine which of the factors in the implementation of eLearning can be addressed.

value of understanding the institutions current state and the different readiness parameters in implementing an eLearning environment. The tool was based on different issues and factors from the literature. Here are some of the bases of Mercado’s study: [4] Khan’s (2002) eight critical dimensions: pedagogical, institutional, technological, interface design, evaluation, management, resource support, and ethical considerations. [5] Chapnick’s (2000) eight factors: psychological readiness, sociological readiness, environmental readiness, human resource readiness, financial readiness, technological skill readiness, equipment readiness and content readiness [6]. Pirani’s (2004) factors: technical infrastructure of the institutions, instructors and students’ technical skills, and instructors’ capability to design online courses which incorporates effective pedagogy [7]. Anderson’s (2002) five critical success factors: culture, content, capability, cost, and clients [8]. Tham’s (2002) critical factors: institutional, technological, and student issues [9]. Mercado (2008) was able to extract the commonalities among the different issues and concerns from the literature and came up with three categories for the needs of the teacher and student: technology access, technical skills and attitude. First technical skills, a basic requirement for online learning is the access to a stable Internet connection and dependable computer. Second, these involve basic computer skills, online skills and computer application literacy. Lastly, for student’s attitude towards eLearning maybe measured along the following dimensions: study habits, abilities, motivation and their time management behavior and for teacher’s attitude towards eLearning maybe measured along the following dimensions: teaching style and strategies, circumstances, abilities, Fig 1. Number of Courses that Uses MOODLE motivation and time behavior management. for SY2010-2013 For the institutional readiness, support systems This study utilized a readiness assessment should provide instructional and technical tool by Mercado(2008) that would reflect the resources to teachers, students, administrators

21

An Assessment of the eLearning Readiness State of Faculty Members and Students at Malayan Colleges Laguna

and including financial, human and infrastructure/technical resources for the organization. II. METHODOLOGY The research design used in this study is quantitative in nature thus quantitative research will be employed. Specifically, the researchers implemented descriptive survey method. Survey method was employed as a preliminary step to have a direct source of valuable knowledge of the readiness of the students, faculty members, administration and resources of the MCL to an eLearning environment. This study was conducted at Malayan Colleges Laguna. MCL has five (5) recognized colleges: the Mapua Institute of Technology at Laguna (MITL), the E.T Yuchengco College of Business at Laguna (ETYCB), the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS), the College of Maritime Education and Training (CMET), and the College of Computer and Information Science (CCIS). Table I shows the summary of respondents for the study, a total of 60 faculty members, 336 students, and 3 administrators joined in the survey and stratified sampling were used to ensure that the five colleges are adequately represented in the sample size of the faculty members and students while three administrators answered the eLearning readiness survey, they hold key positions at MCL and can be considered decision makers in terms of information technology implementation. They are heads of the following department: Learning Environments and Innovation, Development Office for Information Technology and eLearning implementation. TABLE I SUMMARY OF RESPONDENTS Stakeholder Faculty members Students Administrators

the readiness of the students, faculty members, and administrators of MCL to an eLearning environment. There are three different sets of questionnaires distributed for students, faculty, and administrators. For students, the instrument contains a total of 53 questions divided into 3 parts-technology access, technology skills, and attitude towards eLearning. Questions on attitude are further divided into study habits, abilities, motivation and time management. For Faculty, it contains a total of 71 questions which are also divided into technology access, technology skills, and attitude towards eLearning. Questions on attitude are further divided into teaching styles and strategies, abilities, motivation, time management. For the administrator, there are only 15 questions which consist of commitment, policies, and instructional administrative support questions and another 15 questions for the resource support of the school which consists of financial, human, and technical. Also, this study is interested in making a profile of the students and faculty members of MCL by describing their age and gender. The instruments used in the study were in likert scale format and the scale below was used to interpret the total responses of all the respondents by computing the weighted mean as shown in the Table II. TABLE II LIKERT SCALE INTERPRETATION Range 4.20 - 5.00 3.40 - 4.19 2.60 - 3.39 1.80 - 2.59 1.00 - 1.79

Verbal Interpretation Always Usually About half of the time Seldom Never

III. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS This section presents the status of the eLearning readiness of all the stakeholders at Malayan Colleges Laguna.

n 60 336 3

A. Demographic Profile and eLearning Readiness of Faculty Members The data gathering tool is an instrument by The Faculty Members play an important Mercado (2008) which was used to measure role in an eLearning environment. They must


22


have the right tools and attitudes to be able to provide the right environment for their students. Almost half or 43.33% of the respondents’ ages are between 21 to 30 years old, 25% are between 31 to 40 years old, 18.33% are between 41 to 50 years old, and the respondents in the age range of 51 to 60 years old represents 13.33% or the smallest portion of the sample size. The gender of the respondents is almost equally represented with 55% of them are male and 45% are female. Table III shows the technology access of the respondents, 80% of them have an access to internet connection at home and in campus while tools such as virus protection and javaenabled browsers has the lowest percentage of 77.50%. TABLE III FACULTY MEMBERS’ TECHNOLOGY ACCESS Technology Access Computer

Yes 72.08%

No 27.82%

Internet Connection Tools

80.00% 77.50%

20.00% 22.50%

Table IV shows the technology skills of the respondents in which 93% of them have basic internet skills and the category literacy on software application is 77.83% with respondents stating they have not attended online classes before nor have used a learning management system and have not attended seminars/workshops related to online learning activities. TABLE IV FACULTY MEMBERS’ TECHNOLOGY SKILLS Technology Skills Computer Skills Basic Internet Skills Literacy on Software Application

Yes

No

91.20% 93.00%

8.80% 7.00%

77.83%

22.17%

Table V shows the faculty members’ attitude towards eLearning, their teaching styles and strategies with a mean of 4.39, abilities with 4.40, motivation a mean of 4.11,

23

and time management is 3.75, all categories with verbal interpretation of usually. The abilities criterion is computed to have the highest mean which indicate that the faculty members have self-discipline, can work independently, and ability to experiment with new pedagogical approaches. However, there is a need of improvement on the faculty member’s time management since it has shown the lowest mean compared to other categories. TABLE V FACULTY MEMBERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS ELEARNING Category

Mean

SD

Verbal Interpretation

4.42

0.66

Usually

4.41 4.10

0.71 1.00

Usually Usually

3.77

1.10

Usually

Teaching Styles and Strategies Abilities Motivation Time Management

B. Demographic Profile and eLearning Readiness of Students Students should also have the right technology skills and attitudes in order to thrive into an eLearning environment. This section shows the demographic profile of the students and the state of their eLearning readiness. Majority of the respondents’ age are between 16 to 20 years old which could be one of the reasons of the high percentage in technology skills and access of the respondents while the respondents in the age range of 21 to 25 years old represents 9.54% which is a very small portion of the sample size. The respondents’ gender consists of 56.83% male and 41.36% female. The results for technology access shows 85.42% own or have an access to a computer, internet connection received the lowest which is 84.97%, and tools is highest with 92.11% as shown in Table VI. TABLE VI STUDENTS’ TECHNOLOGY ACCESS Yes

Technology Access Computer

85.42%

No 14.58%

Internet Connection

84.97%

15.03%

Tools

92.11%

7.89%


Table VII shows the technology skills of the respondents in which 95.76% of them have computer skills and the category literacy on software application is 88.35%, and basic internet skills having the lowest percentage of 86.51% with the statements, “I have attended online classes before and I have previously joined in online discussions and online forums” getting the least number of approval. TABLE VII STUDENTS’ TECHNOLOGY SKILLS Technology Skills Computer Skills Basic Internet Skills Literacy on Software Application

Yes 95.76% 86.51%

No 4.24% 13.49%

88.35%

11.65%

instructional administrative support were all answered yes by the administrators meaning MCL is fully committed in this endeavor of utilizing eLearning and in doing so policies and instructional materials are being prepared to be aligned with this undertaking. However, of the 15 questions in the resources support only 10 were answered yes and there are some disagreements in questions pertaining to bandwidth, connection speed, and infrastructure. TABLE IX INSTITUTIONAL READINESS OF MCL

Table VIII shows the students’ attitude towards eLearning categories showed a mean of 3.65 in study habits, 3.80 in abilities, 3.67 in motivation and 3.67 in time management were all of which can be verbally interpreted as usually. Similar with the faculty members, the students’ abilities criterion is computed to have the highest mean for students which indicate that the students are self-starter, able to communicate effectively with others using online technologies, able to express their thoughts and ideas in writing, and take responsibility of their own learning. However, there is a need of improvement on the student’s study habit since it has shown the lowest mean compared to other categories.

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Changes brought by technology indeed have revolutionized everything even our classroom. Learning has extended beyond the four walls of the classroom and now takes place at home, in internet cafes, shopping malls, restaurants and in the unlikeliest of places. [2] This is made possible by the power of the internet, a learning management system, and having all stakeholders involved in fulfilling each role with the goal of quality student outcome. This study attempted to assess the TABLE VIII eLearning readiness state at Malayan Colleges STUDENTS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS Laguna as perceived by its faculty members, ELEARNING students, and administrators. The study used Verbal the literature as a guide in this endeavor and Category Mean SD Interpretation made use of a readiness assessment tool by Study Habits 3.65 0.93 Usually Cecilia Mercado (2008) wherein she pointed Abilities 3.80 0.91 Usually out that “the value of understanding the Motivation 3.67 0.93 Usually institutions current state and the different Time 3.70 0.88 Usually readiness parameters in implementing an Management eLearning environment” [1]. Based on the data collected the following C. eLearning Readiness of Administrative are the factors that should be looked into for Support and Resource Support improvement of the eLearning The results of the assessment shows that 15 the environment at Malayan Colleges Laguna: out 15 questions in commitment, policies, and


24


• For the Faculty Members, these must be taken in consideration and must be improved: access to computer since without a computer or access to one, they have no way of creating or developing their electronic courses, literacy on software application must also be improved as it yielded the lowest criterion in technology skills, training them on the use of the learning management system might help improve the utilization of the online activities and lastly, for the attitude towards eLearning, time management must be handled by the Faculty Members by allotting appropriate time in doing their electronic courses moreover a policy should be established for time equivalency for the use of eLearning website;

• Perform another research using qualitative design to know an in-depth situation of the eLearning implementation; • Perform data mining on the actual web logs of faculty members and students to describe the current use of the online activities and further describe the users online behavior; and, • Develop own framework for the implementation of eLearning website based on the combined collection of data from the quantitative and qualitative research performed. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors would like to thank Malayan Colleges Laguna for allowing them to conduct this study, the faculty members and students and the financial grant. The authors would like to thank Prof. Jordan Aiko P. Deja, Methods of Research Adviser for his support in the completion of this paper and to Prof. Cecilia A. Mercado, author of “Readiness Assessment Tool for an eLearning Environment Implementation” which was used in this study.

• For the Students, these must be taken in consideration and must be improved: computer and internet access should be provided for them whenever they are in school so that can access their online courses, a training and resource materials can also be prepared for them so that they can improved on their internet skills and literacy on software application specifically on how to use the learning management system being used by MCL, lastly, a good study habits of students would help students focus on what is [1] important for their learning; and, • For the institution, the problem on the bandwidth capability of the eLearning website must be solved as connection tends to be slow or unresponsive users would turn away and use it as an excuse for not using the eLearning website. The following are the recommendations [2] for future studies: • Explore other factors in the implementation of eLearning like knowing the preferred learning styles of students as Spector et al. (2010) states in his research, “e-Learning delivery has to cater for different learning styles, especially for the two opposite dimensions of concrete experience and abstract conceptualization”;[10]

25

REFERENCES Mercado, C. (2008), “Readiness Assessment Tool for an E-Learning Environment Implementation”, Special Issue of the International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management, Vol.16 No. SP3, December, 2008 Available: http://www.elearningap.com/eLAP2008/ Proceedings/18_fullpaper_cecilia%20M ercado_Revised.pdf Charmonman, Srisakdi (2008), Regional Report 2008 on ASEAN UniversityLevel eLearning, Fifth International Conference on eLearning for Knowledge-Based Society, December 11-12, 2008, Bangkok, Thailand, Available:http://www.elearningap.com/e LAP2008/Proceedings/02_fullpaper_Sris akdi_Report.pdf


[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

Clark, Ruth Colvin and Mayer, Richard E. e-Learning and the Science of Instruction, Published by Pfeiffer 2008. Thorne, Kaye, Blended Learning: How to Integrate Online and Traditional Learning, Kogan Page Limited6, 2003. Khan, B. (2002), The Global eLearning Framework: An Interview with Badrul Khan.. Available: www.kfupm.edu.sa/dad/deanship/events/ workshops/material/ws041002/.../07%20 The%20Global%20eLearning%20Frame work.doc Chapnick’s (2000). Are you ready for elearning? Available: http://www.gc21.de/ibt/en/site/gc21/ibt/p ermanent/publicforum/dok/are_you_read y_for_elearning. pdf Pirani , J (2004). Supporting E-Learning in Higher Education. Educause Ceter for Applied Research, Available http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ER S0303/ec m0303.pdf Anderson, T. (2002). Is E-Learning Right for Your Organization?, Available: http://www.gc21.de/ibt/en/site/gc21/ibt/p ermanent/publicforum/dok/is_elearning_ right_for_your_o rganization.pdf Tham C (2002). Designing and Evaluating Elearning in Higher Education: A Review and Recommendationa. Elearning in Higher Education, Available: http://cobacourses.creighton.edu/MAM/ 2002/pap ers/Tham.doc. J.M. Spector et al. (2010), Learning and Instruction in the Digital Age, Springer Science & Business Media, LLC 2010, Available: https://wiki.ucop.edu/download/attachm ents/34668692/Catering+for+Different+ Learning+Styles+i n+e-Learning.pdf


26