Implementing EdTech: Challenging Assumptions

International Journal
of
Learning, Teaching
And
Educational Research
p-ISSN:1694-2493
e-ISSN:1694-2116IJLTER.ORG
Vol.1 No.1

PUBLISHER
London Consulting Ltd
District of Flacq
Republic of Mauritius
www.ijlter.org
Chief Editor
Dr. Antonio Silva Sprock, Universidad Central de
Venezuela, Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
Editorial Board
Prof. Cecilia Junio Sabio
Prof. Judith Serah K. Achoka
Prof. Mojeed Kolawole Akinsola
Dr Jonathan Glazzard
Dr Marius Costel Esi
Dr Katarzyna Peoples
Dr Christopher David Thompson
Dr Arif Sikander
Dr Jelena Zascerinska
Dr Gabor Kiss
Dr Trish Julie Rooney
Dr Esteban Vázquez-Cano
Dr Barry Chametzky
Dr Giorgio Poletti
Dr Chi Man Tsui
Dr Alexander Franco
Dr Habil Beata Stachowiak
Dr Afsaneh Sharif
Dr Ronel Callaghan
Dr Haim Shaked
Dr Edith Uzoma Umeh
Dr Amel Thafer Alshehry
Dr Gail Dianna Caruth
Dr Menelaos Emmanouel Sarris
Dr Anabelie Villa Valdez
Dr Özcan Özyurt
Assistant Professor Dr Selma Kara
Associate Professor Dr Habila Elisha Zuya
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and
Educational Research
The International Journal of Learning, Teaching
and Educational Research is an open-access
journal which has been established for the dis-
semination of state-of-the-art knowledge in the
field of education, learning and teaching. IJLTER
welcomes research articles from academics, ed-
ucators, teachers, trainers and other practition-
ers on all aspects of education to publish high
quality peer-reviewed papers. Papers for publi-
cation in the International Journal of Learning,
Teaching and Educational Research are selected
through precise peer-review to ensure quality,
originality, appropriateness, significance and
readability. Authors are solicited to contribute
to this journal by submitting articles that illus-
trate research results, projects, original surveys
and case studies that describe significant ad-
vances in the fields of education, training, e-
learning, etc. Authors are invited to submit pa-
pers to this journal through the ONLINE submis-
sion system. Submissions must be original and
should not have been published previously or
be under consideration for publication while
being evaluated by IJLTER.

VOLUME 1 NUMBER 1 January 2014
Table of Contents
Tackling Assumptions and Expectations; Implementing Technology in Higher Education........................................1
Teri Taylor
The Virtual Management of Schools .................................................................................................................................14
Dr. Esteban Vázquez-Cano and Dr. Eloy López-Meneses
Course Contents Analysis of Students’ Academic Performance in Basic Electronics.................................................. 25
Aina Jacob Kola and Akintunde, Zacchaeus Taiwo
Modified Useful-Learning Approach: Effects on Students‘ Critical Thinking Skills and Attitude towards
Chemistry .............................................................................................................................................................................. 35
Arlyne C. Marasigan, Allen A. Espinosa
Effects of Music on the Spatial Reasoning Skills of Grade-One Pupils ......................................................................... 73
Desiree B. Castillo, Czarlene Kaye San Juan, Maria Robelle Tajanlangit, Irish Pauline Ereño, Maria Julia Serino, Catherine
Tayo and Allen A. Espinosa
Impact of Organizational Commitment and Employee Performance on the Employee Satisfaction ....................... 84
Naveed Ahmad, Nadeem Iqbal, Komal Javed and Naqvi Hamad
A Multivariate Analysis (MANOVA) of where Adult Learners Are in Higher Education ........................................ 93
Gail D. Caruth
Group Communication and Interaction in project-based Learning: The Use of Facebook in a Taiwanese EFL
Context ................................................................................................................................................................................. 108
Wan-Jeng Chang

1 of 13
© 2014 The author and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-13, January 2014
Tackling Assumptions and Expectations;
Implementing Technology in Higher Education
Teri Taylor
Northumbria University
Newcastle upon Tyne, England
Abstract. This article explores the assumptions and expectations
underpinning technological implementation within Higher Education
(HE). From the author‟s experience, technology appears high on higher
education agendas in response to a multitude of economic and
competitive drivers. However, the assumptions upon which
technological implementation are based, derive from early research
undertaken regarding the expectations of “Net Generation” students.
From this early research, a popularised view of today‟s student cohorts
as consumers and extensive users of technology has arisen. In contrast,
assumptions have been made about the limited skills and amenability
towards technology of staff employed in higher education.
Contemporary literature, however, questions these early assumptions
and challenges the concept of the technologically literate student. This
article draws parallels with industrially based literature in exploring the
consequences of erroneous assumptions upon the expectations of both
implementers and users of technology within an organisation. Through
discussion of the current tensions within higher education, reasons for a
mismatch in expectations between the organisation and the user are
explored, and suggestions made regarding compromise between the
needs of mass delivered education and recognition of individual
learning need.
Keywords: technology; net generation; expectations mismatch
Introduction
In a climate of increasing austerity, both private and public sector businesses
have had to respond to a need for efficiency and cost effectiveness of operations
(Dos Santos & Sussman, 2000; Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000). These
demands occur at a time when technological ingenuity has seen the adoption of
many highly innovative and wide-reaching tools that profess to make life easier,
quicker or more pleasurable (Goggin, 2012). With extensive marketing for
technology in everything from billboard advertising to television commercials, it
is perhaps not surprising that industry increasingly turns towards innovations
in this area in order to improve upon delivery and production efficiency (Liang,
You, & Liu, 2010; Wu et al., 2006). In Higher Education, in particular, there

2 of 13
seems to be a drive for widespread technological implementation that moves
ahead at an alarming speed. Heralded as meeting the needs of students and
improving flexible access to learning, technological initiatives are represented as
a necessity in a competitive market. However, despite what appear to be
admirable intentions, professional experience has demonstrated a plethora of
hurdles that appear to limit both the implementation of and engagement with
these tools. Recent research suggests that implementation drivers based upon
student need/want are unsupported and may ignore the complexities of the
human psyche; with some students cited as finding technological initiatives
detrimental to their learning or contrary to their preferences (Jones, Ramanau,
Cross, & Healing, 2009; Salaway, Caruso, & Nelson, 2007; Waycott, Bennett,
Kennedy, Dalgarno, & Gray, 2010).
Net Generation
Early work (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005; Prensky, 2001a, 2001b) has proved
popular with academic institutions, and has underpinned many assumptions
made around the nature and requirements of “Net Generation” students
entering higher education; those born in the 1980‟s and 90‟s (Howe & Strauss,
1991). Prensky‟s earlier work has proved seminal in guiding institutional
development to consider these students cohorts as effortlessly engaging with
technology throughout their lives.
Prensky‟s work outlined the development of a generation of individuals
growing up with the use of technology and computers within their learning and
everyday lives. Future expectations of continuing symbiosis with technology
were felt to necessitate integration of much higher levels of technological
innovation within further and higher education (Prensky, 2001; Oblinger and
Oblinger, 2005). However, contemporary research in this field would suggest
that some earlier assumptions have been made erroneously or without clear
investigation and that these assumption, are not a true reflection of the reality
within current higher education cohorts.
Erroneous assumptions
In considering the use of technology within a population as a whole, more recent
literature generates metrics that challenge Prensky‟s assumptions that the “Net
Generation” will seamlessly integrate technology into all aspects of living. Both
Horrigan (2007) and Kennedy et al (2008) use large sample studies (n=4001 and
n=2096respectively) to investigate the use of technologies amongst diverse
populations. Whilst Horrigan explores a representative population of American
citizens, Jones et al explore technological use amongst students attending
differing Australian Universities. In both studies, findings have been used to
categorize participants according to their level of use and engagement with
mobile technologies, web 2.0 technologies and ICT as a whole.
Despite the differences in geographical location and in representative sample
populations, both studies find only a small proportion of their sample (23% and
14% respectively) to be representative of high technological users (loosely
defined as those using a wide range of technologies significantly more than

3 of 13
other participants) within their lives. Other categories cite approximately 20% of
the participant population to be representative of “middle of the road” users
(defined loosely in both studies as those engaging with mobile technologies and
with the internet but less likely to engage with other ICT outside of their social
organisation), with a further 50-60% of the participant populations
representative of less avid or disinterested users.
Whilst individually, the results of these studies could be questioned on the
grounds of age and population demographics, the correlation between two
diverse participant populations suggests a trend that may indicate erroneous
assumptions in Prensky‟s earlier work. If a population overall is demonstrating
differing categories of technological users, it is perhaps unsurprising that recent
research in higher education also finds differing requirements for technology
amongst different students.
Application to higher education
When focusing more specifically upon Higher Education, recent research
concurs with the findings of Horrigan and Kennedy et al. Jones et al (2009)
undertook a large scale (n = 596 students) study investigating student
engagement with common technologies. Jones et al‟s findings demonstrated
how students tended to engage extensively with common technologies such as
mobile phones, computers and emails but were less predictable when
considering activities such as Wikis or Blogs. The findings of the study
conducted across five English universities found considerable variation in actual
engagement and reasons for engagement with technologies, within the overall
participant cohort. As such, Jones et al cite the need to consider more than just
age and date of birth as a means of predicting student behaviour in response to
institutional expectations for technological use.
As a large scale investigation utilising students that could be considered to be of
the “Net Generation”, the findings of this study support contradiction of
Prensky‟s work. Furthermore, Waycott et al‟s study (2010) undertaken in
Australian Universities, exploring individual use of learning and social
technologies amongst students and staff, further challenges Prensky. Findings
from the study demonstrated a preference amongst students for the use of
technology to organise and communicate socially but a reduction in comfort in
using these technologies in a “learning context”. Contrary to many
assumptions, Waycott et al also found that not all students were adept at
communications and that in these cases technology was ineffective at improving
their abilities. Thus, this questions not only amenability towards technology but
also the underpinning epistemological assumptions made about abilities of those
entering higher education. This study occurred within Australian universities
and, therefore, may have some limitations in application to UK higher
education. In addition, Waycott‟s definition of what a “learning context” entails
is unclear, however, the findings from the research echo the author‟s experiences
with UK based student cohorts and concur with underpinning learning theory
that supports context driven application of pedagogy (Knowles, 2002).

4 of 13
With reference to learning theory, earlier work questions how homogeneity can
be assumed of a “generation” of students with reference to application of
technology skills to learning in higher education. Mortimore (1999) uses the
concept of the “cognitive apprentice” to illustrate the importance of situation in
skills development; demonstrating that transference to a different context is not
always possible. Mortimore also recognises the role of relevance to the
individual in motivating learning. Mortimore‟s work is primarily focused upon
the development of school children and, therefore, may be limited in application
to adult learning. However, the notion of contextualised learning and
individuality appears reflected in many seminal educational texts, from Dunn
and Dunn (1979) to Schon (1988) and Knowles, Halton and Swanson (2011).
Whilst young people may be highly adept at the use of Facebook for social
networking, translation to more formal use may not occur where relevance is
unclear. Whilst children are taught to use computers as part of the national
curriculum, this does not necessarily translate to competence with the tools in
wider application. Thus, it is proposed that in considering technological use in
higher education, care needs to be taken over using technology for technologies
sake.
It cannot be denied that the internet is now integral to learning in all fields.
However, the media of the internet is felt to have merely replaced that of books
and the library. With a method of interface that has become commonplace
across a diverse spread of contexts and that is relevant to the majority of users,
its prevalence is unsurprising. The ease of access to information has, therefore
improved but the essence of learning has not. Wiki‟s, blogs, social networking
etc… however, represent a change in lifestyle and approach to communications
that may not have relevance in all educational contexts or to all individuals,
thus, it is to be expected that the experience, amenability and engagement of
individuals will vary.
Research undertaken by the author (Taylor, 2012, 2014a, 2014b) investigating the
use of video-based communications for the support of individual students, has
demonstrated the complexity of introducing technology into an existing system
and in gaining acceptance and engagement from not only students, but also
staff. Parallels are drawn with research (Gerdsri, 2013; Verjans, 2003) that has
explored the implementation of technology into blue collar industries and
commercial organisations. All of these bodies of work, though markedly
different in context, have explored the omission of the human factor in
technological implementation planning. Whilst organisations appear to consider
goals, objectives and context for a new technological initiative, there seems to be
little reference to the wider psychological, behavioural and experiential factors
that complicate technological engagement. In higher education, it is felt that the
nature of a learning environment necessitates greater consideration of the
human element central to practice. When wider factors are integrated, the
process of introduction and engagement with technologies in higher education,
can be seen to be considered to be working within a complex adaptive system

5 of 13
(Beckner et al., 2009)This complexity is recognised in literature exploring person-
environment fit theory.
Expectation Mismatch
Utilising the Person-Environment Fit theory (Edwards, Caplan and Van
Harrison, 1998), organisational psychology suggests job satisfaction, stress levels
and wellbeing of employees to be strongly influenced by a match between
job/organisational characteristics and employee characteristics (Kristof-Brown
and Guay, 2011). Overall, research in this area demonstrates how failure of an
organisation to consider the match between employee characteristics and that of
the role/organisation results in stress (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman and Johnson,
2005) . Person-Environment fit is not a new field of study and has been verified
in varying employment contexts. However, the subject has developed over
time, to recognise the complexity of measuring outcomes that are influenced by
human behaviour. There are limitations of this field, in particular, with defining
“fit”. In addition, critics of the theory (e.g. Edwards and Billsberry, 2010),
discuss multidimensional aspect of research investigating people and the
environment that they inhabit and consequently, are critical of a field of research
in which constructs and predicted behaviours vary on such a scale.
Through a survey approach recruiting 1875 participants from employees
primarily within the United States, Edwards and Billsberry explore the ability of
combined multiple dimensions of fit to predict overall perceived fit. Whilst
limited in generalizability to different cultures and employment demographics,
their study identifies how different factors influence different aspects of a
person‟s fit within an organisation, and suggests that these factors may change
over time and with circumstance.
In the context of technological implementation in higher education, variation of
individual response to the implementation of technology appears often to make
assumptions about age or technological exposure, and hence, measurements of
impact continue to rely upon quantitative measures of performance.
Contemporary literature, however, suggests that attitudes and abilities, rather
than age and experience, combine to be the most powerful predictors of
technological use (Charness & Boot, 2009).
From the employees perspective, the introduction of technologies into existing
working practices may threaten their perceived fitness for practice or operating
approach (Hagenson & Castle, 2003) and, therefore, their fit within their
role.From a student perspective, technology offers both opportunities and
challenges that may, or may not be a welcome inclusion within their learning
environment (Waycott et al, 2010). Individuals vary in terms of acceptance of
technology along a continuum from technophobes to tech-enthusiasts with a
corresponding response to drives to integrate it further into practice or life
(Coget, 2011). For those less comfortable with technology, the introduction of
initiatives driven by the institution may present a challenge to their status quo.

6 of 13
Coget suggests that technophobes will view technology more as an intrusion
into their existing approach to life. This is in contrast to individuals with
experience of the potential benefits of a particular technological tool, who are
more likely to embrace new initiatives into a wider sphere of practice. The
complexity of psychological theory associated with the way individuals respond
to challenge is outwith the abilities of this article to explore. However, the
impact of individuality upon engagement with technology can be explored as a
match or mismatch of expectations.
Person-environment fit theory is used to underpin suppositions, that with
technological implementation, stress, anxiety and negative responses are a result
of a mismatch in expectations between employer/organisation and employees
or users of technology (Verjans, 2003). Supporting Gerdsri (2013), emphasis is
placed upon the potentially problematic road mapping for implementation that
arises as a result of the theoretical nature of many of the early stages of planning.
Gerdsri recommendsacknowledgment of the impact of technology upon
individuals and roles in order to illuminate potential sources of stress or conflict.
Though Gerdsri focuses upon the nature of road mapping for the process of
implementation, it is interesting to note the clear emphasis upon the needs of the
individual and recognition of their expectations within the organisation, rather
than singularly upon the organisational ambitions.
Staff experience
From experience in higher education, the introduction of technology is often met
with mistrust by many of the staff involved. Until recently, an assumption has
been made that staff experience anxieties over new technologies whilst students
do not(Waycott et al, 2010). As a result, much of the research into technological
implementation within higher education has assumed an imbalance between
perceptions of staff and students, representative of the digital divide between
older staff and younger, technologically literate students (Underwood, 2007).
Implementation planning has, therefore, focused upon education of staff in new
technologies in order to meet the needs of the student (Tohidi, 2011).
With reference to person-fit theory, these assumptions appear an
oversimplification of a complex problem. Whilst older individuals may be
reticent in adopting technology as a result of lack of experience, lack of
knowledge and familiarity, it also has to be acknowledged that priorities,
environment, purpose and life experience to name a few variables, are
considerably different between older staff and younger students. Thus, even if
Prensky‟s supposition of older reluctance to engage with technology is accepted,
the reasons behind this are likely to be more complex than demographics.
Recent research supports this, proposing that it is not unfamiliarity with
technology or a lack of understanding amongst staff (Steel, 2006) that generates
anxieties, but much wider aspects (Kennedy, Judd, Dalgarno, & Waycott, 2010;
Tohidi, 2011; Waycott et al., 2010): From concerns over workload, the impact
upon the learning experience, mistrust of the organisational agenda and

7 of 13
anxieties over the lecturer role, for example, the multitude of possible
influencing variables can be seen to potentially perpetuate a mismatch of
expectations between organisation and employee (Verjans, 2003).
Prediction of areas of anxiety and tension, and the impact of technology upon a
workforce is further challenged by the nature of large organisations. The
constantly changing nature of employee networks, the concept of individuality,
and the changing dynamic components of learning and technology, prevent the
establishment of a set of conditions to study (Holland, 2006). Therefore,
assumptions made based upon data from other institutions, industries or from
previous experience cannot be accurately applied to implementation in the host
organisation. This complexity makes accurate study challenging and, therefore,
recognition of the specifics of the environment into which a technology is
proposed to be used becomes vital in anticipating sources of conflict.
The expectation of both individuals and the organisation can be further
compromised without realistic consideration of the initial stage of integration.
Enabling users to effectively utilise new technologies often necessitate a steep
learning curve and a commitment of time to learning the tool at the initial set up
(Keengwe, Kidd, & Kyei-Blankson, 2009). McKenzie et al (2001) investigated the
common practice of faculties encouraging the increased use of technology within
learning and teaching, through the act of buying technology and making it
available. Though this study is based within a US institution, the findings echo
the experiences of the author. McKenzie et al suggest that institutional
expectations that staff will engage with and utilise technologies within the
classroom if they are provided, ignores the cultural element of motivation.
Keengwe et al (2009) support McKenzie et al‟s proposals in suggesting that
support, time and leadership are central to the successful implementation of
technologies, through a change in expectations of those involved.
Though Keengwe et al‟s small scale study perpetuates the assumption that staff
are reluctant to engage with technology in teaching due to a lack of familiarity;
their investigation again highlights the wider influencing factors surrounding
the uptake of technological initiatives. In particular, Keengwe et al acknowledge
the importance of providing the time to engage with and learn about a new
technology, not just in terms of how to use it, but what it may be able to do.
Without this recognition of the initial time commitment, expectations of
improved efficiency, altered performance or innovative practice may not be
immediate. In this case, a mismatch between expectations and initial output may
be reflected in frustration and conflict between the instigating organisation and
employees utilising the given tool.
Student experience
Person-environment fit theory could just as easily be applied to the student
experience as to that of employees. Failure of technological initiatives within
higher education is often blamed upon student apathy or failure to engage. This
cognitively dissonant (Festinger, 2010) response effectively vilifies the individual

8 of 13
in order to continue supporting the organisational demands. In considering
adult learning theory in particular, this emphasis upon organisationally driven
agendas, at the expense of student need seems unlikely.Whilst the student voice
becomes increasingly important to university evaluation and performance
measures (Woodall, Hiller, & Resnick, 2012), it seems strange that individual
perceptions regarding technologies do not appear to be investigated more fully
when planning for widespread innovation. However, from professional
experience, the intricacies of engaging with technology appear to be
inadvertently ignored in favour of more global measures of satisfaction or
engagement.
Integrative thinking
The various contributing factors for mismatched expectations discussed above
suggest separation between the organisation, the employee and the student. In
the context of educational theory, this is perhaps not surprising with the
perceived role of the educator in facilitating the learning of the individual and
being managed by the institution. However, critics of mainstream educational
theory and thinking suggest that the failure of initiatives such as technologies in
a learning institution, is not so much due to a mismatch of expectations as to a
lack of understanding of the interactions between organisations and individuals
(Stacey, 2001). Professor Stacey‟s background is in organisational research and
management with his more recent role as an academic in a higher education
institution. As such, his perspective represents it is felt, both ends of the
spectrum, from organisational expectations to those of the individual.
Stacey (2001) argues that this perception of divide and separation of roles is
predominant in mainstream thinking about education and learning within
organisations. With reference to cognitive and even humanist models of
education, Stacey contends the presumption that the student is the generator of
knowledge, separated from the role of peers and the academic, and that the
academic‟s role is one of facilitator or mentor/demonstrator. Stacey intimates
that in mainstream thinking the organisation‟s role in a student‟s learning is
merely as a home in which the activity takes place and a supporting
infrastructure for the process, with the student becoming the commodity of
learning output. His opinions regarding this isolation contrasts with more
recent educational theory that illustrates the complex, collaborative nature of
relationships between educator and student (Knowles et al., 2011; Mann,
Gordon, & MacLeod, 2009). However, his inclusion of the organisation as part
of the learning experience, suggests that in order to fully understand the impact
of technological initiatives upon learning, there needs to be acceptance and
exploration of the intricacies of interaction between all elements of the learning
experience. Thus, any planning for implementation of technologies within
higher education needs an awareness of the multi-factorial nature of influences
upon expectations, and therefore, “person-environment fit”.
Tensions in higher education
The ability of an organisation, employees and students to perform as an
integrated unit in learning and teaching is further complicated by tensions

9 of 13
within the field of higher education. Drivers used to underpin rationalisation of
higher education ironically promote a conflict between the needs of the
institution within a competitive market and those of the consumer. Altback et al,
in their series of books from 1999 (Altbach, Reisberg, & Rumbley, 2009) to the
present day illustrates how core issues have progressed for example, from
consideration of accountability and multiculturalism to the economics of
competition.
Rolfe (2012) discusses the “MacDonalisation” of higher education, citing a
change in culture, and confusion over the role of learning institutions in the
modern age. With increasing emphasis on costs and competition, higher
education institutions are under pressure to provide education for “the masses”.
In 1974, investigation into the role of higher education suggested that the 15%
youth engagement with the process to be indicative of separation between the
elite and mass education (Trow, 1973). However, at present, the UK engages
closer to one third of the youth population in higher education, suggesting a
move towards “education for the masses” with the resultant impact upon costs.
In addition, the move away from the “elite” has the potential to significantly
impact upon pedagogy, with changes in motivation, approach, life experience
and learning methodology amongst students (Rossi, 2010).
Contrary to Stacey‟s recommendations, organisational drivers, targets and
competition within higher education inevitably quantifies knowledge and
learning leading to objectives and measurement. This change in culture away
from the original concept of universities as institutions for the pursuit of
knowledge and enlightenment (Oakeshott, 1950: in Rolfe, 2002) has seen
organisations move more towards accountability and measurability, which
necessitates considering learning as a commodity. This is a generalisation and
not a criticism of learning institutions‟ motivations. However, the influences of
this direction of movement can be seen to polarise learning and teaching
elements in higher education, creating what are felt to be the following
illustrated tensions between: mass delivery of curriculum vs. individual learning
need, quantity vs. quality and innovation vs. accountability.
Figure 1 below, is aimed at representing, in simplified form, some of the key
tensions that are felt to arise in this context.
Figure 1: Simplified diagram representing polarised tensions in higher education and
their impact upon the approach to technological implementation planning.
Quantity
Control
Mass delivery
Accountability
Internationalisation
Technological focus
FacilitationPerformance
expectations
Measurement
Enhancement
Innovation

10 of 13
Review Individual learning
need
Quality
With emergence of a global market for higher education, many of the parameters
by which institutions operate have altered: With diverse student groups from
differing cultures and social backgrounds, an understanding of expectations
becomes ever more challenging.This change in performance expectations has
created additional difficulties for those managing institutions; difficulties which
it is suggested, some senior management are ill equipped to deal with (Fahy,
Hurley, Hooley, & DeLuca, 2009). As such, unrealistic or unfeasible
expectations are felt to potentially further complicate expectation mismatch
between organisational management and participants in technological
initiatives.
The constantly changing nature of higher education and the individuality of
those engaging with it, represents a changing, dynamic set of components and,
therefore, challenge the establishment of a set of conditions to study (Holland,
2006). Possibly, this underpins the reasoning for why much literature
investigating the implementation of technological lacks exploration of wider
influences. Although complex adaptive systems theory suggests the need for
recognition of a diverse range of influencing factors, it is questioned whether
this is feasible in reality. Thus, in an organisation requiring policy decisions and
advanced future planning, the tension between organisational and individual
need necessitates compromise. It can be seen how clear communication and
realism in order to prevent mismatch of expectations, and on-going transparent
evaluation in order to address arising issues (Dorrian & Wache, 2009; Hannon,
2009) may be necessary amongst all participants engaged with any new
technological initiative.
Conclusion
In the context of delivering widespread education to large cohorts of students,
the need for compromise is recognised. As a consequence of various tensions
within Higher Education, this article has highlighted the need for balance
between the needs of the organisation and the individual. Whilst the
underpinning pedagogical and organisational reasoning for technological
implementation may appear sound, the involvement of the human element
inevitably complicates an otherwise relatively simple concept. The requirements
of the individual are a necessary consideration in response to adult education
theory, principles of individual need and in recognising the financial impact of
the student as a consumer. However, large scale, long term planning for a large
organisation will, by its nature, limit the responsiveness of the system. Whilst
Stacey (2001) advocates the integral nature of the organisation and the
individual in learning, the use of league tables and resulting comparisons,
necessitates measurement of learning in the form of performance indicators. As
such, any initiative designed to improve the teaching or learning experience
must be justified both in a measurable manner and in terms of cost effectiveness.

11 of 13
Thus, whilst this article advocates the importance of the individual and an
understanding of differing expectations, as central to the process of
technological implementation planning, the reality of applying this in a large
scale institution is recognised. Therefore, a compromise is suggested in the form
of respect, on a macro scale, for the breadth of influencing factors affecting
student and staff amenability towards technologies. Acknowledgement of the
integral nature of the organisation, staff, peer and student experiences, and of
the intricate nature of human psychology, may facilitate more realistic
expectations and, therefore, expectations match between organisation and users
of technologies. Studying technological implementation is challenging due to
the constantly changing nature of cohorts, technologies and context. However,
through observation of engagement and response, and listening to anxieties
perhaps some of the mismatches seen in Verjans (2003) earlier work can be
avoided in contemporary application.
References
Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2009). Trends in global higher education:
Tracking an academic revolution: Center for International Higher Education.
Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C., . . .
Schoenemann, T. (2009). Language Is a Complex Adaptive System: Position
Paper. Language Learning, 59, 1-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.x
Charness, N., & Boot, W. R. (2009). Aging and information technology use potential and
barriers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 253-258.
Coget, J.-F. (2011). Technophobe vs. Techno-enthusiast: Does the Internet Help or Hinder
the Balance Between Work and Home Life? The Academy of Management
Perspectives, 25(1), 95-96.
Dorrian, J., & Wache, D. (2009). Introduction of an online approach to flexible learning
for on-campus and distance education students: Lessons learned and ways
forward. Nurse Education Today, 29(2), 157-167. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2008.08.010
Dos Santos, B., & Sussman, L. (2000). Improving the Return on IT Investment: The
Productivity Paradox. International Journal of Information Management, 20(6),
429-431.
Dunn, R. S., & Dunn, K. J. (1979). Learning styles/teaching styles: Should they... can
they... be matched. Educational leadership, 36(4), 238-244.
Edwards, J., Caplan, R., & Van Harrison, R. (1998). Person-environment fit theory.
Theories of organizational stress, 28, 67.
Edwards, J. A., & Billsberry, J. (2010). Testing a Multidimensional Theory of Person-
Environment Fit. Journal of Managerial Issues, 22(4), 476-493,433-434.
Fahy, J., Hurley, S., Hooley, G., & DeLuca, L. (2009). Resources, Capabilities and
Competition in Higher Education.
Festinger, L. (2010). Cognitive dissonance theory. R. West and LH Turner, Introducing
communication Theory Analysis and Application, 4, 112-128.
Gerdsri, N. (2013). Implementing Technology Roadmapping in an Organization
Technology Roadmapping for Strategy and Innovation (pp. 191-210): Springer.
Goggin, G. (2012). Cell phone culture: Mobile technology in everyday life: Routledge.
Hagenson, L., & Castle, D. (2003). The integration of technology into teaching by
University College of education faculty. In Crawford C, Willis D.A, Carlsen R,
Gibson I, McFerrin K, Price J & Weber R (Eds.), Proceedings of society for

12 of 13
information technology and teacher education international conference (pp. 947-
952): Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Chesapeake.
Hannon, J. (2009). Breaking down online teaching: Innovation and resistance.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 14-29.
Holland, J. H. (2006). Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of Systems Science
and Complexity, 19(1), 1-8.
Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1991). Generations: The history of America‟s future. New York:
Quill.
Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2009). Net generation or digital natives:
Is there a distinct new generation entering university? URL (last checked 21
October 2009).
Keengwe, J., Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2009). Faculty and technology: Implications
for faculty training and technology leadership. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 18(1), 23-28.
Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Dalgarno, B., & Waycott, J. (2010). Beyond natives and
immigrants: exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 26(5), 332-343. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00371.x
Knowles, M., Holton, E., & Swanson, R. (2011). The adult learner: The definitive classic
in adult education and human resource development: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Kouzmin, A., & Korac-Kakabadse, N. (2000). Mapping Institutional Impact of „Lean‟
Communication in „Lean‟ Agencies: IT Literacy and Leadership Failure.
Administration and Society, 32(1), 26-69.
Kristof-Brown, A., & Guay, R. P. (2011). Person-environment fit. APA handbook of
industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3).
Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of
individuals' fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization,
person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281-342.
Liang, T.-P., You, J.-J., & Liu, C.-C. (2010). A resource-based perspective on information
technology and firm performance: a meta analysis. Industrial Management &
Data Systems, 110(8), 1138-1158.
Mann, K., Gordon, J., & MacLeod, A. (2009). Reflection and reflective practice in health
professions education: A systematic review Advances in Health Sciences
Education, 14(4), 595-621.
McKenzie. J. (2001). How teacher learn technology best. The Educational Technology
Journal, 10(6). Retrieved from http://www.fno.org/mar01/howlearn.html
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L., (Eds),. (2005). Educating the Net Generation. Boulder,
Colorado: EDUCAUSE.
Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, part 2: Do they really think
differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 6.
Rolfe, G. (2012). Fast food for thought: How to survive and thrive in the corporate
university. Nurse Education Today, 32(2012), 732-736.
Rossi, F. (2010). Massification, competition and organizational diversity in higher
education: evidence from Italy. Studies in Higher Education, 35(3), 277-300.
Salaway, G., Caruso, J., & Nelson, M. (2007). The ECAR study of undergraduate students
and information technology, 2007. Boulder, Colorado: EDUCAUSE Center for
Applied Research.
Schon, D. A. (1988). From technical rationality to reflection-in-action. Professional
judgment: A reader in clinical decision making, 60-77.
Stacey, R. D. (2001). Complex responsive processes in organizations: Learning and
knowledge creation: Psychology Press.
Steel, C. (2006). Influence of teacher beliefs on web-enhanced learning experiences:
Learners and teachers. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 23rd Annual

13 of 13
Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary
Education: Who‟s Learning.
Taylor, T. (2012). Preparing the foundations for video-based, practice-placement
support: establishing the role from a students‟ perspective. Research in Learning
Technology. The Journal of the Association for Learning Technology (ALT). Vol.
20. pp 71-84, (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/view/19
193/pdf_1
Taylor, T. (2014a). Considering complexity in simple solutions: What's so complicated
about Skype? International Journal of Systems and Societies, 1(1), 35-52.
Taylor, T. (2014b). Guidelines for supporting placement learning via video-
communications technologies. Higher Education, Skills and Work-based
Learning, 4 (1). Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=2042-3896&show=latest
Tohidi, H. (2011). Human Resources Management main role in Information Technology
project management. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 925-929.
Trow, M. (1973). Problems in the Transition from Elite to Mass Higher Education.
Underwood, J. D. M. (2007). Rethinking the Digital Divide: impacts on student-tutor
relationships. European Journal of Education, 42(2), 213-222. doi: 10.1111/j.1465-
3435.2007.00298.x
Verjans, S. (2003). Harmony and Stress in Information Systems Development and
Implementation: A Multilevel Theory and Some Empirical Work on the
Crossroads of Work Psychology, Organisational Theory and Information
Systems Research. (Philosophical Doctorate), University of Southern Denmark -
Odense University.
Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., & Gray, K. (2010). Digital divides?
Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies.
Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202-1211.
Woodall, T., Hiller, A., & Resnick, S. (2012). Making sense of higher education: students
as consumers and the value of the university experience. Studies in Higher
Education(ahead-of-print), 1-20.
Wu, S., Chaudhry, B., Wang, J., Maglione, M., Mojica, W., Roth, E., Shekelle, P. G. (2006).
Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality,
efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of internal medicine, 144(10), 742-
752.

14
© 2014 The authors and IJLTER.ORG. All rights reserved.
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14-24, January 2014
The Virtual Management of Schools
Dr. Esteban Vázquez-Cano
Department of Didactics, School Organization and Specific Didactics.
Spanish National University of Distance Education.
Madrid, Spain
Dr. Eloy López-Meneses
Department of Education and Social Psychology
Area of School Organization and Didactics
Pablo de Olavide University
Seville, Spain
Abstract. This paper presents a research conducted in fifty schools in
the province of Toledo in Castilla-La Mancha (Spain) in which the
potential of virtual tools and digital resources in the development of
management functions and school organization was analyzed. Through
a quantitative and qualitative methodology we check educational
communities‟ opinions about main virtual tools and digital resources to
improve communication, administrative tasks, academic activities and
digital relationships in order to enhance the quality of educational
institutions. We have reached remarkable results, such as: school
organization, digital communication among all members of school
communities, educational programming, along with teaching functions
can be significantly improved with the use of institutional interactive
networks that include communicative functions and school
management in a virtualized way.
Keywords: school organization; collaborative virtual environments;
networking; e-management
Introduction
This research aims to analyze the potential of virtual tools in the development of
management tasks in a sample of secondary schools in the province of Toledo
(Spain). The main objective is to check educational community opinions about
how ICT can improve the organization and management of schools. The
organization of schools is still in many cases under archaic operational
structures that do not integrate digital tools into the routine organizational
processes that affect mostly board of management's work (Preece, 2000;
Halverson, & Smith, 2010). The management of schools may be substantially
improved through collaborative work and the design of digital structures in
order to monitor the information, downloading of bureaucracy and paperwork
of the school (Fulk, & DeSanctis, 1995; Blanchard, & Markus, 2004; Minocha,

15
2009). The main management tasks that can be improved with ICT strategies in
schools are the following (Vázquez-Cano, & Sevillano-García, 2013; Vázquez-
Cano, 2013): coordinate academic activities and complementary guidance of
teachers and students; develop academic schedules for students and teachers,
coordinate the activities of heads of department, coordinate and direct the action
of tutors, coordinate faculty development activities and organize teacher
training activities, encourage the participation of different sectors of the school
community, participate in the development of the proposed educational project
and the annual programming, and romote coexistence in school.
Among the tools and actions based on Web 2.0 to enhance the management
functions, we can highlight: virtual tutoring, virtualized attention to diversity,
cloud computing, virtualized control of curriculum development, digital and
computerized management of the school activities, social networks and websites
for the international exchange of students, sending digital messages to different
members of the educational community, faculty and their families for the call of
regular meetings and information, virtual secretary for virtualization of all
information, management of discipline (information and administrative data
through interactive database), control and management of teacher absences and
their substitutions in a virtualized way (Blank, Berg, & Melaville, 2006; Bouras.
Giannaka, & Tsiatsos, 2008; Bishop, et al., 2010).
Virtual school organization
School of XXI century is characterized for being into the Information and
Knowledge Society (Chapman, Allen, & Harris, 2005; European Commission,
2010; Archambault, Wetzel, Foulger, & Williams, 2010). Organizational aspects
so invariable and settled as the traditionally time-space, classrooms, buildings
and organizational resources have significantly changed. At present, it is
changing the school organization incorporating ICT and structures involved in
the concept of virtuality (Clark, 2001; Baker, & Ward, 2002; Murray, 2008). A
school that prepares students for the society in which they live and where ICT
play an essential role which change all organizational dimensions (Jones, 2004;
Wenger, White, Smith, & Rowe, 2005).
A global and technological society that is changing the paradigm of school
management, making it more universal and open from the principle of
collaboration. The main objective is bringing innovation to organizational forms
of learning organizations, so they can innovate, adapt and change (Warren, 2005;
Zigurs, 2009). The society of the future will be, therefore, a society that must
invest in intelligence, a society in which each individual could create their own
educational paths; in other words, it will be a learning society.
Modern societies are immersed in the dynamics of rapid change that generates
demands into the educational system. The new technologies of information and
communication, the processes of immigration and multicultural societies, new
forms of relationships between people and cultural and social groups or so-
called economic and cultural globalization, among other things, cause that the
new realities and issues search for an answer in the educational system (Taylor,
& Adelman, 2000; UNESCO, 2009). A summary of what will be the new society

16
from a very dynamic life of the people and the changes that happen quickly can
be summarize, as follows (Vázquez-Cano, 2013): the globalization of the
economy, the appearance of new employment sectors, the promotion of change,
industrial automation, interactivity, complexity, the immediacy of outputs and
outcomes, and the efficiency and progress.
This brings new forms of social organization, where the simultaneity appears as
a constant. An age where modernity has already left passage to technological
post-modernity, virtual reality and new ways of interacting in not only physical
spaces but with a technological base (Martin-Kniep, 2007). We understand the
need to share in a world increasingly open and ongoing participation of all
citizens and social agents (Jaeger, & Bertot, 2010).
For years, we have been hearing about major changes as a result of this
knowledge society, to adapt to it and to learn from and with it. But the truth is
that although ICT falls gradually in teaching materials (often from fashion and
not from the conceptual and procedural pedagogical justification) the
organizational structure of schools finds itself in a considerable delay with
respect these new ways of apprehending reality (Hiatt-Michael, 2001).
One of the problems that we believe the school has failed to assume is the gap
and the speed at which information flows in an escalation of unprecedented
technological innovation.
And we talk about school in the sense of organization, not so much teaching.
There are notable approximations to integrate ICT into the school curriculum,
but the organization of the school does not respond with participatory and
collaborative structures that support the structure of the school that opens to a
technological world and a society increasingly interconnected (Henderson, &
Mapp, 2002). Given the new challenges of the Information and Communication
Society should be a priority of the current educational processes to integrate the
media in the educational process to reflect on them, their languages, ways of
reporting on the world in order to contribute to the organization of schools.
These organizational strategies are based on the knowledge of organizations and
on theoretical positions based on the resources and theories based on dynamic
capabilities (Blanchard, & Markus, 2004). They generally distinguish between
two levels of knowledge management: strategic management (creation of core
competencies) and operational management (distribution of knowledge and
information).) A changing society requires organizations to adapt and revise
their consistency and forms of action in relation to the needs of the environment.
The innovation was a purpose of leading creative organizations and becomes a
widespread need and a problem that constantly arises at different levels and
with different strategies. Management and technology innovation for the
organization of the school enhance the teaching-learning processes as well as
relationships among educational community members in different dimensions
(Vázquez-Cano, 2013): To help schools to develop institutional capacity enabling
them to enhance self-review processes, planning and strategic action aimed at
institutional improvement. Ensure the development of a collaborative culture
among the agents of innovation, so that professional dialogue, sharing

17
experiences, ideas, values, learning with others, and so on., could be highly
achieved. Facilitating the learning of skills and techniques that make possible the
cultivation of self-review process, planning, development, evaluation and
collaborative work from the viewpoint of improvement and professional
development as permanent training framework on teacher. Increasing the
professionalism of teachers in the field of collaborative institution that promotes
self-direction without impairing the ability to respond to the needs of individual
or social. To facilitate the institutionalization of change. Connect the pedagogical
and organizational.
In developing plans for technology, schools may want to: Consider how
technology can help when making decisions about how to deliver excellent
teaching, effective school management and improved accountability. Think
about the scope of the knowledge and resources available to pupils beyond the
bounds of the classroom and the textbook, to the very best online lessons, digital
resources and tools. Consider the scope of professional tools in the hands of
teachers, so they can carry out assessment, record and access data easily when
they need to. Ensure teachers are equipped with the skills to integrate digital
technologies and new approaches successfully into their teaching, and set a clear
expectation that no teacher should ignore the importance of technology in
learning. Deliver an ICT curriculum that engages pupils and equips them with
the skills and knowledge needed for further study and the 21st century
workplace. Manage technology infrastructure and services professionally,
offering access to tools and resources anywhere, anytime and achieving best
value when purchasing technology.
Method
The method used has been a multiple case study (Biddle, & Anderson, 1989).
This method try to extrapolate theories by contrasting hypotheses learned in a
context within different contexts. Our study aims to assess the appreciation of
the educational community about the functionality of ICT tools in the
development of director of studies' functions in the school. For data collection
techniques have been used questionnaires, ethnographic interview, and
participant observation on one side and on the other hand, monitoring the
operation and content of the social network as an active participant. These
techniques have an important complementary value, as the interview can
understand and grasp what an informant thinks and believes, how he/she
interprets his/her world and what meanings they use and manage. We analyze
the next sample of schools in the province of Toledo (Spain):
Table 1: Data
High-
Schools
Private-
Public
High-
Schools
Private
Schools Total
City 25 10 5 40
Rural 10 0 0 10
Number of
Students
3845 1301 301 Total
50 Schools

18
Total: 5447
Students
The comparison among the various schools in the province of Toledo aims to
generate hypotheses confronting theories learned in different contexts. The
range and types of institutions rather than representing a difficulty becomes a
methodological enrichment that generates greater validity to the findings;
providing a general explanation in multiple contexts. Furthermore, comparison
of these schools is productive for the following characteristics: From a regulatory
point of view include a full range of types of schools that currently exist in
Spain. Replicating the same study, variability and balance (rural vs. urban and
public vs. private). Because we present schools with a variable number of
students and families, which gives sample variability.
Thus, contrasting these schools and test our hypotheses and conclusions in
multiple educational settings, we provide a method to generate substantive
theories, with different levels of depth concerning the amount of information
collected and the sample of people involved: students, teachers, families and
school inspectors (Kemmis, & McTaggart, 1988). The phases in the research
process were as follows:
1. Refined instruments are applied in the first phase of immersion in all schools
in the province of Toledo, prior to this, it is performed a validation of the
questionnaire and data collection instrument by the Education Inspection
Services of Toledo.
2. Data is collected by education inspector's visit and the results are analyzed in
different schools in the province to enrich theory and case study contrasting
results.
3. Results are contrasted in the different educational areas and discarded the
questionnaires or unreliable results.
Our key informants in the sample were as follows: Teachers of the schools
analyzed in the province of Toledo. All head of department of the analyzed
schools. All guiding and orienting team in each school. All members of
management teams (Principal and head-master) of the schools analyzed. A
sample of fifty students. A sample of fifty parents.
Triangulations
The Triangulations developed are as follows: Triangulation of data analysis
(families, students and teachers). Triangulation techniques in collecting data
(Likert questionnaire and open questions). Triangulation longitudinal
temporarily and permanently.
For the analysis of these triangulations, we have adopted the principles of a
holistic study focused on the relationship of systems or acting, referenced to
personal, stay in the context expressing the feelings of the researcher and ethical
commitments, reworking the instruments from the context and even in our final
analysis will be modified to be applicable in the future on other broader
contexts.

19
Techniques and tools
The techniques and tools tried and collect as much information as possible about
the objective of the research. The following techniques are related data collection
projects in the three levels of depth and key informant:
Level I. Interview by questionnaire and open questions to the management
teams of the schools studied.
Level II. Sample of teachers, using questionnaires and inspectors personally
visited all the high-schools analyzed with a stay of between three and six days.
During these visits they used the following instruments: Interviews (Individual
semi-structured interviews to teachers. Opinion questionnaires to teachers.
Inspector observation for checking the functioning of different virtual tools on
the management of schools. Collection of information for further analysis).
Level III. Sample of families and students through a questionnaire and
individual and group interviews.
In these interviews were passed the following instruments: Interviews and
opinion questionnaires to different members of the school community.
Results
The quantitative results obtained were analyzed using the SPSS statistical
package. We used descriptive analysis and contingency tables and were
facilitated frequencies and percentages of the variables analyzed. Results are
shown below organized according to the objectives of our research. First we will
address the expectations of teachers (including management teams), and later
analyze the students and parents expectations.
Expectations of educational community about the ICT use in management of
schools
We have analyzed what were the expectations that educational community had
about integration of ICT in management practice. The descriptive results are
presented in the following tables:
Table 2. Descriptive statistics: AREA 1: Monitoring and execution of management
tasks with ICT support.
AREA 1: Monitoring and execution of management tasks with ICT
support.
1. What action based on ICT means an improvement of management
functions?
Family Teacher Supervisor
a) Virtual 65% 72% 90%
b) Communication of Absences 97% 90% 100%
c) Academic Information for Families 89% 79% 88%
d) Virtual 65% 69% 87%
e) Digital agenda 85% 77% 93%
f) Electronic Assessment Information 91% 74% 99%
2. How do you rate the inclusion of ICT in management duties?

20
a) Excellent 81% 75% 80%
b) Very good 5% 10% 9%
c) Good 4% 5% 6%
d) Regular 10% 10% 5%
e) Poor 0% 0% 0%
Table 3. Descriptive statistics: Digital communication among all members of the
educational community.
AREA 2: Digital communication among all members of the educational
community.
1. What action based on ICT means improved communication among
members of the educational community?
a) E-mail 75% 67% 78%
b) Networking 95% 89% 100%
c) Virtual Tutor 40% 54% 78%
d) Virtual Agenda 67% 57% 69%
e) Videoconferencing 15% 5% 34%
2. How do you rate the inclusion of ICT to improve communication
among members of the educational community?
a) Excellent 71% 45% 75%
b) Very good 9% 15% 9%
c) Good 10% 10% 6%
d) Regular 9% 12% 6%
e) Poor 1% 18% 4%
Table 4. Descriptive statistics: Advice, guidance, participation and information with
ICT.
AREA 3a (Family): Advice, guidance, participation and information with
ICT.
1. Rate the use of virtualized tools in the
development of management functions.
1
0
%
2
2
%
3
26
%
4
21
%
5
49
%
6
2%
development of personal and professional
competences.
1
0
%
2
1
%
3
19
%
4
21
%
5
25
%
6
34
%
3. Rate the use of virtualized management
systems in your expectations about the
school.
1
0
%
2
3
%
3
23
%
4
25
%
5
38
%
6
11
%
AREA 3b (Teachers): Advice, guidance, participation and information
with ICT.
development of management functions.
1
8
%
2
6
%
3
16
%
4
20
%
5
30
%
6
20
%
2. Rate the use of virtualized tools in the 1 2 3 4 5 6

21
development of personal and professional
competences.
6
%
10
%
19
%
21
%
25
%
34
%
3. Rate the use of virtualized management
systems in your expectations about the
school.
1
0
%
2
3
%
3
23
%
4
25
%
5
38
%
6
11
%
Figure 1 shows main digital tools and resources considered useful by
educational community members.
Figure 1. digital tools and resources considered useful by educational community
members
Our research demonstrates that the educational communities analyzed very
highly appreciate the fact that schools must integrate the principles of open
government and e-leadership. Besides, the expectation that the principles of
open government with the support from the ICT would substantially improve
the performance of the schools was found to be common among all the members
of the educational community. The open government at schools mediated by the
ICT could create a learning environment as an aligned and synergistic system of
systems that creates learning practices, human support, and physical
environments that will support teaching, learning, tutoring, and counseling.
Supports professional learning communities that enable leaders to collaborate,
share the best practices, and integrate the ICT skills into school organization.
Allows equitable access to data, technologies, and resources. Provides
architectural and interior designs for group, team, and individual learning and
supports expanded community and global involvement in the learning process.

22
Communications technologies provide pathways for the connections among
students, parents, families, administrators, and teachers who are at the heart of
all strong learning communities. School management information systems based
on ICT support transparency, collaboration, and participation through
connections that are essential for people to get involved in the education system.
Furthermore, e-leadership and online management programs enable busy
families to be in contact with the school anytime, anywhere, while fostering the
exchange of ideas and best practice with all the members of the educational
communities Virtual environments are transforming schools to increasingly use
technology to manage the complex array of tasks for which they are responsible,
including management of personnel, food and transportation services, supplies
and instructional materials, security, and, of course, student information.
Conclusions
It seems clear, and this is consistent throughout the literature on school
organization, that what defines a school organization is not only its
conformation in a formal structure, but with greater determination on how to
operate the school structure. In this structure it plays a crucial role the
relationships and how to address the problems and processes of the schools.
Social computing networks have opened an exciting new dimension to the
schools. Virtualized Management of the school by teachers, members of the
management team and family is a system that minimizes the time and integrates
all members of the educational community. These 2.0 tools enhance the following
dimensions: integrate effectively to all members and sectors of the educational
community of a school, save time and energy in the development of school
organization and academic management of schools, keep up to date parents on
the status of tasks, exams, absences, tests and exercises of their children, allow to
see information about the school or their children through the digital bulletin
board service or email alerts, facilitate the expansion or reinforcement of
academic activities at home and encourage the creation of an interactive network
in order to (co) manage the school.
Among the main features we highlight the following ones: make a direct
management, user-friendly and updated daily, generate database exportable and
recoverable per year for statistical and internal evaluations of the school, the
discipline and truancy of students are two areas of school management that are
substantially improved with this type of applications, communication among
faculty, educational departments, tutors, parents and management team
becomes more fluid, continuous and solvent, communication can be activated
according to the profile of community member in order to optimize the
communication channels and the quality of the information provided, encourage
the active participation of all sectors in the educational process of students, and
save time and improve the processes of school organization and academic
management of schools.
Online school interaction among all community members also incorporates
more sophisticated forms than declarative and procedural information exchange
(i.e., questions and answers), such as transactive learning (knowledge about who

23
knows what) and developing shared mental models through processes of sense
making. The Internet is not a separate social reality, it is rather an extension of
other forms of life and another means of staying connected. We suspect that
people not only have more relationships than in pre-Internet times, they are in
more frequent contact with their relationships, and the strengthening of the
bonds through more frequent contacts means that ties can be more readily
mobilized for aid. In sum, communication sharing in online school communities
is facilitated by means of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, personal
characteristics, collective social capital, shared culture, and appropriate features
of conversational technologies.
References
Archambault, L., Wetzel, T., Foulger, & Williams, M. (2010). Professional Development
2.0: Transforming Teacher Education Pedagogy with 21st Century Tools. Journal of
Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 27, 4.
Baker, P., & Ward, A. (2002). Bridging temporal and spatial „gaps‟: The role of
information and communication technologies in defining communities. Information.
Communication & Society, 5(2), 207-224.
Biddle, B., & Anderson, D. (1989). Theory, method, knowledge and research on teaching.
En M. C. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching, (230-252). New York:
McMillan.
Bishop, A., Riopelle, K., Gluesing, J., Danowski, J., & Eaton, T. (2010). Managing global
compliance through collaborative innovation networks. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 2(4).
Blanchard, A., & Markus, M.L. (2004). The Experienced “Sense” of a Virtual Community:
Characteristics and Processes. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems,
35(1), 65-79.
Blank, M., Berg, A., & Melaville, A. (2006). Community-based learning. Washington, DC:
Coalition for Community Schools.
Bouras, C., Giannaka, E., & Tsiatsos T. (2008). Exploiting Virtual Environments to
Support Collaborative E-Learning Communities. International Journal of Web-Based
Learning and Teaching Technologies, 3(2), 1-22.
Chapman, C., Allen, T., & Harris, A. (2005). Networked Learning Communities and Schools
Facing Challenging Circumstances. Nottingham: National College for School
Leadership.
Clark, J. (2001). Stimulating collaboration and discussion learning environments. Internet
and Higher Education, 4, 119-124.
European Commission (2010). Learning, Innovation and ICT. Lessons learned by the
ICT cluster. Report of ICT Cluster, Education & Training 2010 Programme.
Retrieved from http://www.unescobkk.org.
Fulk, J., & DeSanctis G. (1995). Electronic communication and changing organizational
forms. Organ. Sci. 6(4), 337-349.
Halverson, R., & Smith, A. (2010). How New Technologies Have (and Have Not)
Changed Teaching and Learning in Schools. Journal of Computing in Teacher
Education, 26(49).
Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K.L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family,
and community connections on student achievement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory.
Hiatt-Michael, D.B. (2001). Home-school communication. D. B. Hiatt-Michael (Ed.),
Promising practices for family involvement in schools. Greenwich, CT: Information Age
Publishing, 39-57.

24
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (Eds.). (1988). The Action Research Planner. Melbourne:
Deakin University.
Jaeger, P.T., & Bertot, J.C. (2010). Transparency and technological change: Ensuring
equal and sustained public access to government information. Government
Information Quarterly, 27, 371-376.
Jones, C. (2004). The conditions of learning in networks. Kaleidoscope CSCL SIG. Lausanne.
Martin-Kniep, G. (2007). Communities that Learn, Lead and Last: Building and Sustaining
Educational Expertise. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Minocha, S. (2009). A case study-based investigation of students' experiences with social
software tools. New Review of Hypermedia & Multimedia, 15(245).
Murray, C. (2008). Schools and social networking: Fear or education? Synergy
Perspectives: Local, 6(1), 8-12.
Preece, J. (2000). Online communities. Designing usability, supporting sociability. Chichester:
Wiley.
Reichardt, C.S., & Cook, T.D. (1979). Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods. In
T.D. Cook & C.S. Reichardt (Eds.), Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation
research (7-32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Taylor, L., & Adelman, H. (2000). Connecting schools, families, and communities.
Professional School Psychology, 3, 298-307.
UNESCO (2009). Guide to measuring information and communication technologies
(ICT) in education. Retrieved from,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001865/186547e.pdf.
Vázquez-Cano, E., & Sevillano García, M.ª L. (2013). ICT strategies and tools for the
improvement of instructional supervision. The Virtual Supervision. The Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(1), 77-87.
Vázquez-Cano, E. (2013). Open government and e-leadership in schools mediated by
ICT. Croatian Journal of Education, 15(1), 11-41.
Warren, M. R. (2005). Communities and schools: A new view of urban education reform.
Harvard Educational Review, 75, 133–173.
Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J. D., & Rowe, K. (2005). Technology for communities.
CEFRIO book chapter. http://www.ewenger.com/pub/index.htm.
Zigurs, I. (2009). Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? Organizational
Dynamics, 31, 4.

25
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 25-34, January 2014
Course Contents Analysis of Students’ Academic
Performance in Basic Electronics
Aina Jacob Kola
Physics Department
College of Education (T) Lafiagi, Kwara State, Nigeria
Akintunde, Zacchaeus Taiwo
Physics Department
Oyo State College of Agriculture, Igboora, Oyo State, Nigeria
Abstract. Year 1 Physics students in a College of Education (Technical)
were sampled to analyze students’ performance based on course content
in basic electronics. End of semester examination marked scripts
containing sixty multiple choice questions were used as a research
instrument; frequency counts and percentage was used to analyze the
data. Findings revealed that students’ overall performance was not
good; students’ areas of weakness were fluorescent tube, vacuum tube
amplifier, diode, energy band, p-n junction and transistor. However
students’ performances were better in discharge tube, cathode ray, CRO,
integrated circuit and resistor colour code. The paper concluded that
students’ performance in basic electronic was determined by the course
content and that students have difficulty in learning some aspects of
basic electronics. Some recommendations were suggested based on the
finding of the study; one of such recommendations was that Physics
teachers should pay more attention to students’ areas of weakness.
Keywords: Performance, Enrolment, Physics, Electronics
Introduction
Basic electronics is a course offered by Physics students in their first year in
colleges of education. Physics has been a course that always has low enrolment
and poor students’ performance in all level of education (Aina, 2013). Physics is
by nature mathematical and full of measurement this makes science educator
like Omosewo (2009) regards it as a science of measurement. Performance of
students in Physics has been very low as observed by many scholars
(Aigbomian, 1994; Uguanyi, 1994; Aiyelabegan, 2003; Akanbi, 2003 and Kola,
2007). This poor performance is not limited to Nigeria alone as Wanbugu,
Chiangeiywo and Ndirit 2013) observed that physics is a difficult subject among
students in Kenya schools, not popular, avoided by students and with poor
performances. Reasons for this poor performance vary as some think Physics is

26
abstract in nature Adeyemo (2010); others attributed it to teacher’s strategy of
teaching (Oladejo, Olosunde, Ojebisi and Isola, 2011).
Akanbi (2003) argued that poor performance in Physics is due to factors like
shortage of science teachers in quality and quantity, inadequate laboratory
equipment and facilities; poor teaching strategies and shortage of suitable
Physics textbooks and other factors. Bamidele (2001) stressed that students
themselves have lost interest in physics due to preconceived idea that Physics is
a difficult subject, this has affected both enrolment and performance of students
in physics.
Apata (2007) submitted that students taught by qualified and experienced
teachers may likely perform better than students taught by unqualified and
inexperienced teachers. Apart from teacher’s qualifications, lack of good
classroom management is also very important if students will learn well in
physics class. Garba (2004) conducted a research on the relationship between
classroom control and students’ performance; his findings revealed that teachers
who are sufficiently equipped with strategies that assist in classroom control
adequately will automatically enable the students have full concentration and
lead to positive academic performance of the students.
Physics is very important to national and economic development of nations;
therefore no one should be comfortable if students are failing it. Sheriff, Maina &
Umar (2011) said Physics is the most basic science, and its concepts and
techniques support the progress of all other branches of science. National
Commission for Colleges of Education (NCCE) in Nigeria has been coordinating
Physics programme in colleges of education. According to NCCE (2008), Physics
in colleges has many branches which are mathematics for Physics,
electromagnetism, mechanics & properties of matter, acoustics, and introduction
to Physics practical, others include thermal Physics, optics, basic electronics,
Physics methodology, Physics practical, workshop practice, environmental
Physics, atomic and quantum Physics.
Basic electronics is a course prescribed for Physics student in second semester in
college of education. According to NCCE (2008), the course is made of passage
of electricity in gases and in evacuated tubes, induced electricity and their uses,
cathode rays, positive rays and their properties, simple electronic devices,
diodes properties, Oscilloscope T.V. tubes, band theory of solids LC, energy
level diagrams for conductors, semi-conductors and insulators, doping, types of
semiconductors: P-types and N-types, P-N junctions, rectifying property of a p-n
junction, forward and reverse biasing, simple transistors and oscillator circuits.
Others include n-p-and p-n, basic structures and terminologies and their
applications, colour coding, Integrated circuits (ICS). This study focused on basic
electronics because is one of the branches of Physics that is not mathematical in
nature at Nigeria Certificate in Education (NCE) level like other branches; yet
students still performed very low. It is therefore a matter of concern to find out
which aspect of this course did students find difficult to pass.

27
Research Design
The study adopted descriptive survey method of research where students’
marked examination scripts in basic electronics are collected for analysis. The
researcher collected all the marked examination scripts of all students of basic
electronics from Physics department of College of Education (Tech.) Lafiagi after
due permission from the course lecturer.
Participants
The population for this study were all Physics students from Colleges of
Education (Technical) Lafiagi in Kwara State while the sampled population were
all 50 NCE 1 Physics students who offered basic electronics.
Instrumentation
Research instrument for this study was End of Semester Basic Electronics
Examination Marked Scripts (ESBEEMS); this examination mark scripts are in
Multiple Choice format. The instrument had been giving to experts in Physics
education to scrutinize for both face and content validity. The statistical analysis
found suitable for this study was frequency counts and percentages. According
to Daramola (2006), it is used for organizing and describing the characteristics of
educational variables in concise and meaningful quantifiable terms.
Findings
Table1: Vacuum Tube
s/n Question % of correct answers
1 1 52
2 2 62
3 3 66
4 4 40
5 5 42
6 6 28
7 7 68
8 8 34
9 9 62
10 39 28
11 40 46
12 42 30
13 43 16
14 54 26
15 55 40
16 56 32
From Table 1, 16 questions were asked from vacuum tube and students did well
in only 5 questions.

28
Table 2: Semiconductor Physics
s/n Question % correct answers
1 10 82
2 11 56
3 12 48
4 13 24
5 14 38
6 15 18
7 16 18
8 17 40
9 18 42
10 19 40
11 20 48
12 21 78
13 22 58
14 23 76
15 24 62
16 25 28
17 26 44
18 27 84
19 28 18
20 29 22
21 30 88
22 31 30
23 33 46
24 34 10
25 35 20
26 47 46
Table 2 revealed that 26 questions were asked from semiconductor Physics and
student performed well in only 8 questions.
Table 3: Transistor
1 32 64
2 36 38
3 37 42
4 38 38
5 39 28
6 41 34
7 42 30
8 44 44
9 46 36
10 48 58
Out of 10 questions that were asked from transistor students did well in only
two questions as shown in Table 3.

29
Table 4: Integrated Circuit
1 45 52
2 49 46
3 50 82
4 59 52
5 20 40
5 questions were asked from integrated circuit and students did well in 3
questions as indicated by table 4.
Table 5: Resistor Colour Code
1 51 40
2 52 66
3 53 58
4 57 78
5 58 52
Table 5 shows that 5 questions were asked from resistor colour code and
students scored less than 50% in only 1 question.
The sixty objective questions were distributed as shown below:
Table 6: summary of course contents distribution
s/n Course content No of questions
1 Vacuum tube 14
2 Semiconductor physics 26
3 Transistor 10
4 Integrated circuit 5
5 Resistor colour code 5
Semiconductor Physics has the highest number of questions followed by
vacuum tube and transistor; integrated circuit and resistor colour code have the
same number of questions.
Table 7: topical distribution of questions in vacuum tube
s/n Topic No of questions % of correct answers
1 Discharge tube 4 55.5
2 Fluorescent tube 2 34
3 Cathode ray 2 51
4 Cathode ray oscilloscope 1 62
5 Vacuum tube amplifier 5 32

30
From Table 7, 4 questions were asked from discharge tube and students did well
in these questions; 2 and only 1 question were asked from cathode ray and CRO
respectively with scores above 50% in both. 2 and 5 questions were asked from
fluorescent tube and vacuum amplifier respectively with the scores of less than
40% in both.
Table 8: topical distribution of questions in Semiconductor Physics
s/n Topic No of questions % of correct
answers
1 Diode 5 49.5
2 Energy band 4 36.5
3 P-N junction 17 44.2
Table 8 reveals that 5 questions were asked from diode, 4 from energy band and
17 from p-n junction material with the scores of less than 50% in all the
questions.
Table 9: topical distribution of questions in transistor
answers
1 Transistor 10 41.2
Table 9 shows that the scores of all the 10 questions from transistor were less
than 50%.
Table 10: topical distribution of questions in integrated circuit
answers
1 Integrated circuit 5 54.4
From Table 10, integrated circuit had only 5 questions and the scores were
54.4%.
Table 11: topical distribution of questions in Resistor colour code
answers
1 Resistor colour code 5 58.8
Resistor colour code had only 5 questions and 58.8% scores as shown in Table
11.
Table 12: Summary of performance based on topics in electronics
s/n Topic % pass
1 Discharge tube 55.5
2 Fluorescent tube 34
3 Cathode ray 51
4 Cathode ray oscilloscope (CRO) 62
5 Vacuum tube amplifier 32

31
6 Diode 49.5
7 Energy band 36.5
8 P-N junction 44.2
9 Transistor 41.2
10 Integrated circuit 54.4
11 Resistor colour code 58.8
From the summary in Table 12, it shows that only 47.2 % of the questions were
got correct by the students. This table also clearly indicates that highest strength
of the students comes from CRO with 62% and very weak in Vacuum tube
amplifier with 32%.
Discussion
Findings above revealed areas of students’ weakness and strength in basic
electronics as highlighted below. Scores from fluorescent tube, vacuum tube
amplifier, diode, energy band, p-n junction and transistor were less than 50%;
this implies that students are weak in these areas of basic electronics.
Reasons for this weakness may be due to the nature of the topics; some of these
deal with numbers, for instance transistor deals with number such as calculation
of transistor gain. It has been observed by Aina (2013) that mathematical nature
of Physics leads to students’ poor performance in the subject.
Another reason that is obvious here was that most of these areas of students’
weakness were very wide and therefore many questions were asked from there.
Students showed some strength in discharge tube, cathode ray CRO, integrated
circuit and resistor colour code because students’ scores here were above 50%.
The reason for this might be that the scope of these topics in basic electronic was
very small and that is why their questions were also few. Generally, students’
performance was not good as revealed that only 47.2% of the students’ scores
were correct.
Conclusion and recommendations
The findings of this study have revealed that students’ performance in basic
electronics was not good. The study observed that students’ academic ability in
basic electronics was weak in fluorescent tube, vacuum tube amplifier, diode,
energy band, p-n junction and transistor and strong in discharge tube, cathode
ray, CRO, integrated circuit and resistor colour code.
This study revealed that students’ academic performance in basic electronic was
determined by the subject content. The study also indicated that students of
basic electronics from College of Education had problem in learning fluorescent
tube, vacuum tube amplifier, diode, energy band, p-n junction and transistor.
The study concluded that weakness of student ability in those topics might be
due to some of the topics that contain calculation and the large scope of some
topics in basic electronics. This weakness might also be due to teacher’s strategy
of teaching. Most teachers do not make use of community resources for their
teaching and this affects student understanding and performances in basic

32
electronics. Aina & Philip (2013) fully analyzed the potential of community
resources in teaching and learning of Physics in their two papers - Harnessing
the Potential of Community Resources as an Antidote to Poor Academic
Performance in Physics and Imperative of Environment in Science Learning. It
was affirmed in these papers that Physics teachers who failed to make use of
resources available in their environment for teaching Physics will have poor
students’ academic performance in Physics.
The following recommendations are hereby suggested in the light of the above
conclusion:
 Physics teachers should pay more attention to areas of students’
weakness. Government should assist the college by sending Physics
teachers to in-service courses specializing in fluorescent tube, vacuum
tube amplifier, diode, energy band, p-n junction and transistor.
 Teachers should ensure the use of community resources for electronic
teaching as there are many resources in Nigerian communities that can
enhance students’ learning
 Physics teachers should always attend seminars, workshops and
conferences through which they could update their method of teaching.
The idea of a Physics teacher being in classroom for more than a year
without attending any conference or seminar for any reason should be
discouraged.
 Government should ensure all schools are internet compliance so that
students and teachers could always have access to modern electronic
materials through the internet. At this age of Information
Communication and Technology [ICT] all Physics teachers should be
mandated to possess laptop for teaching and learning purpose.
 Electronics books should be written by indigenous authors because most
of the textbooks written for electronics were written by foreign authors
with language foreign to our students
 Government should equip our schools with modern electronic
equipment that could be used to teach Physics electronics practically. We
are in the era of Information Communication and Technology [ICT]
where there are soft-wares that could be used to teach and demonstrates
complex activities in basic electronic for students’ better understanding.
 Students should be motivated through bursary and scholarship awards
to any brilliant student in Physics electronics.
 Competent and qualified Physics teachers should always be employed
to teach Physics; the idea of just leaving Physics teaching in the hand of
any science teacher or engineer should stop.
 Physics teachers should teach electronics within the content of NCE
curriculum this is necessary because electronics are taught at different
level of our education; there is electronics for engineering students and
also for telecommunication students but electronics at NCE level is for
prospective Physics teachers.
 It will be very good to allow different teacher to teach different topic in
Physics electronics through peer teaching. A teacher may not be very

33
good to teach transistor, let such teacher leave transistor to another
teacher who could teach it better.
 Teacher should always give internet assignment and homework to
students to encourage them seeks for information on their own. There are
many simple uses of electronics devices like diodes, transistors etc on the
net that can assist the student to learn.
Limitations
The sampled population for this study was small due to general low enrolment
of students in Physics class in schools in Nigeria. The findings of this study may
not be generalized but could be applied in other Colleges in the country.
Acknowledgements
We appreciate the efforts of our colleagues in General studies department who
helped us read through the work for corrections. We are also very grateful to the
Head of Physics department who allowed us to make use of students’ scores in
basic electronics.
References
Adeyemo, S. A. (2010). Teaching/ learning physics in Nigerian secondary school: The
curriculum transformation, issues, problems and prospects. International Journal of
Educational Research and Technology, 1(1), 99-111,
Aigbomian, D.O.(1994). Student’s perception of technical words in the learning of
physics. Studies in Education, 2(1), 86-92.
Aina, J. K. (2013). Perceived causes of students’ low enrolment in science in secondary
schools, Nigeria. International Journal of Secondary Education, 1(5), 18-22. doi:
10.11648/j.ijsedu.20130105.11.
Aina, J. K. and Philip, Y. J. (2013). Imperative of Environment in Science Learning. Open
Science Journal of Education, 1(1): 1-6.
Aina, J. K. and Philip, Y. J. (2013). Harnessing the potential of community resources as
an antidote to poor academic performance in Physics. IOSR Journal of Research & Method
in Education (IOSR-JRME, 3(5), 92-95.
Aiyelabegan, A. T. (2003). Effect of physics practical on Students’ Academic performance
in Senior School Certificate Physics Examination in kwara state. Lafiagi Journal of Science
Education 5(1& 2), 84-89.
Akanbi, A. O. (2003). An Investigation into Students’ Performance in Senior Secondary
School Physics. Journal of Teacher education trends, 1(1), 58-64.
Apata, S. F. (2007). Influence of Teachers ‘Academic Qualification and Experience on Students’
performance in senior secondary school physics in Kwara state. (Unpublished master thesis).
University of Ilorin.

34
Bamidele, O. M. F. (2001). Promoting Science and Mathematics Education Amongst
females in Nigeria. A paper presented at The NCCE/UNESCO 5-Day Train the Trainer
Workshop for The revitalization of science Education in Nigeria.
Daramola, S. O. (2006). Research and statistical methods in education. Students and
Researchers in Tertiary Institutions. Ilorin, Nigeria; Bamitex.
Garba, R .B. (2004). Teachers’ Classroom Control and Students’ Academic
Achievement(Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Ilorin.
Kola, A. J. (2007). Uses of Instructional Materials for Teaching and Learning Physics in
Edu and Patigi Local Government Areas, Nigeria. International Journal of Research in
Education, 4(1&2). 74-79.
National Commission for Colleges of Education [NCCE] (2008). Minimum Standard.
Abuja: Government press.
Oladejo, M. A, Olosunde, G.R, Ojebisi,A.O and Isola,O.M.(2011). Instructional materials
and students’ academic achievement in Physics: some policy implications. European
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(1), 2220-9425.
Omosewo, E. O. (2009). Views of Physics teachers on the need to train and retrain
Physics teachers in Nigeria. African Research Review, 3(1), 314-325.
Sheriff, M. A. Maina, B. T. and Umar, Y. (2011). Physics in education and human
resources development. Continental Journal of Education Research, 4(3), 23-36.
Uguanyi, J. U. (1994). Aids: A threat to African survival. Discovering and Innovation 8(1),
30-34.
Wanbugu, P. W, Changeiywo, J. M. and Ndirit. F. G (2013). Investigations of
experimental cooperative Concept mapping instructional approach on secondary school
girls’ achievement in physics in Nyeri county, Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice,
4(6), 120-130.

35
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 35-72, January 2014
Modified Useful-Learning Approach:
Effects on Students‘ Critical Thinking Skills
and Attitude towards Chemistry
Arlyne C. Marasigan, Allen A. Espinosa
Faculty of Science, Technology and Mathematics,
College of Teacher Development, Philippine Normal University,
1000 Manila, Philippines
Abstract. This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the
Modified Useful- Learning approach against the traditional teaching
approach in improving students‘ critical thinking skills and attitude
towards chemistry. Specifically, it sought to find out if the mean posttest
score in the critical thinking appraisal and chemistry attitude scale is
significantly higher for students exposed to the MUL approach than for
the students exposed to the traditional teaching approach.Modified
Useful-Learning (MUL) approach is a combination of Learning-for-Use
model developed by Edelson (2001) and Hypothetico-Predictive
Reasoning by Lavoie (1999). It is an innovative approach to teaching and
designed using group learning, hands-on and laboratory activities,
reflective thinking, discovery and inquiry learning and small group
discussion to increase student‘s participation.This study used the quasi-
experimental pretest-posttest control-group design. The sample of the
study consisted of two intact sections of junior students at Diliman
Preparatory School, Quezon City during the School Year 2005-2006.
Thirty six (36) students were taught using the MUL approach, whereas
thirty eight (38) were exposed to the traditional teaching approach. The
instrument used in this study is the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal and the Chemistry Attitude Scale developed by the
researchers. The instruments were content validated by group of experts
and was pilot tested. The MUL group showed a significantly higher
posttest mean score in the critical thinking test than the traditional
counterpart. Moreover, the mean rating in the attitude scale of the MUL
group was found to be significantly higher than that of the traditional
group.Based on the results of the study, it is recommended among
others, that the Modified Useful Learning (MUL) approach be used by
science teachers in their teaching as it was shown in this study that the
approach helps students improve their critical thinking skills and
attitude towards chemistry.
Keywords: Modified-Useful Learning Approach; Critical Thinking
Skills; Attitude towards Chemistry

36
Background of the Study
Educators believe that when students come to class they have ideas that are
sometimes different from what is generally accepted by the scientific
community. The different conceptions that students acquire have been called
―alternative conceptions‖, ―naïve theories‖, ―children‘s science‖, or
―misconceptions.‖ The new knowledge acquired by the students interferes with
their misconception. It is difficult for the student to picture out the link among
science concepts and principles, and to apply the principles meaningfully to
daily life (Sungur, Semra, CerenTekkaya&ÖmerGeban, 2001).
Gallagher (2000)enumerated four related facts why students are unable to
understand and apply the new scientific concepts/information learned in class;
1) It is not clear to the students that the learned concept goes or should go
beyond examinations and tests.
2) It is not clear to the students how to make sense of new information.
3) It is not clear to the students how to make connections between new and
previous information in order to develop deeper understanding.
4) Little importance is given to the application of science knowledge in
science classes and test (Gallagher, 2000, p. 311).
Furthermore, most of our students do not take chemistry seriously as one of the
major subjects in high school level due to several reasons. First, it is hard for
them to see the significance of what is being taught in real-life situation. There is
a wide discrepancy between school where they take the subject – chemistry and
real-life (Clarke & Biddle, 1993). In real life, problems tend to be chaotic, ill-
defined, confusing and call for true problem solving. While inside the classroom
they feel they have the pattern to memorize and to follow which is not evident in
real-life (Clarke & Biddle, 1993). Thus, they have a hard time solving given
problems and applying what they learned. Second, general chemistry concepts
are taught and assessed in terms of facts; mathematical representation and
procedural knowledge at the high school and university level are also taught
without emphasizing conceptual understanding (Scalise, Claesgens, Krystyniak,
Mebane, Wilson, & Stacy, 2003). Third, according to Johnstone (in Gabel, 2003),
the main factor that prevents students from understanding chemistry concepts,
is not due to the existence of the three levels of matter (macroscopic, microscopic
and symbolic) but for the reason that chemistry instruction is presented on the
most abstract level or symbolic level. Most of the students feel that the abstract
nature of chemistry concepts is always confined to the four corners of the
classroom. Thus, students think that it is not applicable outside the school
(Stieff&Wislensky, 2002). Lastly, in traditional chemistry/science classroom
settings, students rarely experience the source questions of inquiry, critical and
logical reasoning, the challenges or the surprises in real-life (Clarke & Biddle,
1993). For these reasons, students are not engaged in deep, intense or deep
critical thinking and concept understanding, thus enhancement of positive
attitude towards chemistry does not occur.
Educators are engaged in significant reform in science teaching. The reform
focuses on four main goals: 1) Science for all; 2) teaching for understanding; 3)

Implementing EdTech: Challenging Assumptions

Implementing EdTech: Challenging Assumptions

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (17)

Similar to Implementing EdTech: Challenging Assumptions

Similar to Implementing EdTech: Challenging Assumptions (20)

More from ijlterorg

More from ijlterorg (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Implementing EdTech: Challenging Assumptions