1. THE ‘P’ AND ‘I’ OF E-LEARNING
IN THE HIGHER EDUCATION
INSTITUTIONS IN THE
PHILIPPINES
Dave E. Marcial, Ph.D.
College of Computer Studies, Silliman University
Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental
demarcial@su.edu.ph
2. Philosophical Underpinnings
• The technological stage in the history of
being has so transformed how things are
understood that people have been more or
less compelled to take part in the industrial
order and to adopt the modernist
worldview related to it (Zimmerman 1990).
• Heidegger’s philosophy went beyond the
simplistic view of technology as a neutral
benefactor of humanity (Thornton, 2007).
6. IT in education
was estimated as US $ 8.9 billion,
with a compound annual growth rate of
5.5 percent from 2007 – 2010.
In the global market size
MIS Asia 2007
IT in EDUCATION
9. Philippines is ranked last among Asian
countries in terms of IT usage.
–Singapore = 23%
–Malaysia = 19%
–Hong Kong = 15%
–Indonesia = 14%
–Thailand = 12%
–Philippines = 10%
MIS Asia 2007
10. What about IT in the Higher
Education Institutions in the
Philippines?
11. IT & its Purpose in Education
• IT in education means implementing
information technology equipment and
tools in the teaching-learning process as
media and methodology.
• The primary importance of IT in education is
that various teaching and learning resources
can be accessed quickly and instantly, by
students as well as teachers
12. • refers to the level of importance or urgency of
IT components in the higher education
institutions
5 – Essential
(Component needs to be done in the current year)
4 – High priority
(Component needs to be done in the next 3 years )
3 – Medium priority
(Component needs to be done in the next 6 years)
2 – Low priority
(Component needs to be done in the next 9 years)
1 – Not a priority
(Component is never been considered)
PRIORITIZATION
13. • refers to the degree of realization or execution of IT
components in the higher education institutions
5 – Very Highly Implemented
(Component is performed and done with careful review and
evaluation)
4 – Highly Implemented
(Component is performed but continuing and on-going)
3 – Moderately Implemented
(Component is in the strategic plan but no action yet)
2 – Fairly Implemented
(Component is discussed and considered for inclusion in the
next strategic plan)
1 – Not Implemented
(Component is never been considered)
IMPLEMENTATION
14. • What is the level of prioritization of the
teaching and learning with technology in
the higher education institutions in the
Philippines?
15. • What is the degree of implementation of
the teaching and learning with technology
in the higher education institutions in the
Philippines?
16. • What is the relationship between the level
of prioritization and degree of
implementation of the teaching and
learning with technology in the higher
education institutions in the Philippines.
17. • Is there a significant difference between the level
of prioritization and degree of implementation of
the teaching and learning with technology in the
higher education institutions in the Philippines in
terms of the:
• total number of years of existence of the HEIs;
• annual IT expenditures of the HEIs;
• total Internet bandwidth of the HEIs;
• level of proficiency of the respondent’s technical skills;
• rating of the respondents’ human skills;
• rating of the respondent’s conceptual skills; and
• extent of participation in decision-making of the
respondents.
18. • Descriptive (survey method)
• All HEIs in the Philippines as listed from
CHED’s website as of December 2010.
• Heads in the management of IT
• stratified sampling
• 95 out of 97 returned questionnaires
from February 4-pril 30, 2011
20. THE “P” OF E-LEARNING IN THE HEIs IN THE PHILIPPINES
Teaching ad Learning with Technology Component
Weighted
Mean
Description
1. The institution should organize or participate in communities of
practice to address strategic technology initiatives that include
teaching and learning
4.09 High Priority
2. School Presidents should give advise to the academic community
about decision processes for assessing proposed instructional
technologies
4.11 High Priority
3. A mechanism about the effectiveness and possible reformulation
of institutional technology should be provided
3.93 High Priority
4. There should be in place an IT teaching-learning program for
faculty development
4.17 High Priority
5. A system should be in placed to examine and reevaluate
institutional structures for campus technology on a regular
basis
3.91 High Priority
6. The MIS should communicate with the campus using regular and
timely information that helps stakeholder groups acknowledge
and improve
4.05 High Priority
21. THE “P” OF E-LEARNING IN THE HEIs IN THE PHILIPPINES
Teaching ad Learning with Technology Component (continuation…)
Weighted
Mean
Description
7. MIS Heads should be in dialogue with legal counsel, management and
leadership counsels, and records managers about the issues
inherent in the instructional use of emerging, user-focused
applications
3.86
High
Priority
8. MIS staff should appreciate that faculty members’ adaption of
emerging technologies may require rapid accommodations in the
configuration of the institution’s hardware and software
infrastructure
4.12
High
Priority
9. The institution should monitor the progress of e-learning technologies
and strategically implement those that require institutional
oversight
3.97
High
Priority
10. A strategy for choosing among proprietary systems, open source, or
cloud-based components should be developed
3.97
High
Priority
11. The institution should encourage other faculty who are resistant to
new technologies to attend training and to consider innovative
methods to enhance student engagement and promote learning
outcomes
4.16
High
Priority
Aggregate Mean 4.03 High Priority
22. THE “I” E-LEARNING IN THE HEIs IN THE PHILIPPINES
Teaching and Learning with Technology
Weighted
Mean
Description
1) The institution should organize or participate in communities of
practice to address strategic technology initiatives that include
teaching and learning
3.30
Moderately
Implemented
2) School Presidents should give advise to the academic community
about decision processes for assessing proposed instructional
technologies
3.40
Highly
Implemented
3) A mechanism about the effectiveness and possible reformulation
of institutional technology should be provided
3.08
Moderately
Implemented
4) There should be in place an IT teaching-learning program for
faculty development
3.40
Highly
Implemented
5) A system should be in placed to examine and reevaluate
institutional structures for campus technology on a regular basis
3.13
Moderately
Implemented
6) The MIS should communicate with the campus using regular and
timely information that helps stakeholder groups acknowledge
and improve
3.22
Moderately
Implemented
23. THE “I” E-LEARNING IN THE HEIs IN THE PHILIPPINES
Teaching and Learning with Technology (continuation…)
Weighted
Mean
Description
7) MIS Heads should be in dialogue with legal counsel, management and
leadership counsels, and records managers about the issues inherent
in the instructional use of emerging, user-focused applications
2.91
Moderately
Implemented
8) MIS staff should appreciate that faculty members’ adaption of
emerging technologies may require rapid accommodations in the
configuration of the institution’s hardware and software
infrastructure
3.31
Moderately
Implemented
9) The institution should monitor the progress of e-learning technologies
and strategically implement those that require institutional oversight
3.07
Moderately
Implemented
10) A strategy for choosing among proprietary systems, open source, or
cloud-based components should be developed
3.14
Moderately
Implemented
11) The institution should encourage other faculty who are resistant to
new technologies to attend training and to consider innovative
methods to enhance student engagement and promote learning
outcomes
3.41
Highly
Implemented
Aggregate Mean 3.21
Moderately
Implemented
24. Teaching and Learning with Technology P I
1) The institution should organize or participate in
communities of practice to address strategic technology
initiatives that include teaching and learning
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
2) School Presidents should give advise to the academic
community about decision processes for assessing
proposed instructional technologies
High
Priority
Highly
Implemented
3) A mechanism about the effectiveness and possible
reformulation of institutional technology should be
provided
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
4) There should be in place an IT teaching-learning program
for faculty development
High
Priority
Highly
Implemented
5) A system should be in placed to examine and reevaluate
institutional structures for campus technology on a regular
basis
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
6) The MIS should communicate with the campus using
regular and timely information that helps stakeholder
groups acknowledge and improve
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
P vs. I
25. Teaching and Learning with Technology P I
7) MIS Heads should be in dialogue with legal counsel,
management and leadership counsels, and records
managers about the issues inherent in the instructional
use of emerging, user-focused applications
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
8) MIS staff should appreciate that faculty members’
adaption of emerging technologies may require rapid
accommodations in the configuration of the institution’s
hardware and software infrastructure
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
9) The institution should monitor the progress of e-learning
technologies and strategically implement those that
require institutional oversight
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
10) A strategy for choosing among proprietary systems,
open source, or cloud-based components should be
developed
High
Priority
Moderately
Implemented
11) The institution should encourage other faculty who are
resistant to new technologies to attend training and to
consider innovative methods to enhance student
engagement and promote learning outcomes
High
Priority
Highly
Implemented
P vs. I Continuation…
27. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE “P” AND “I”E-LEARNING
IN THE HEIs IN THE PHILIPPINES
Teaching and Learning with
Technology
ρ-value
ρ-value
(two-tailed test)
Remarks
Level of Prioritization and Degree
of Implementation
0.922 ** 0.000 Significant
Legend: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
28. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE “P” AND “I”E-LEARNING
IN THE HEIs IN THE PHILIPPINES
Teaching and Learning with
Technology
F-value ρ-value t-value ρ-value Remarks
No. of years of existence ,
Prioritization, Implementation
210.5174 7.97E-56 6.039902 8.63E-09 Significant
No. of curricular offerings,
Prioritization, Implementation
39.5657 2.01E-15 6.14589 7.02E-09 Significant
Annual IT Expenditures, Prioritization,
Implementation
12.50012
7.23434E-
06
5.65644 7.89E-08 Significant
Total Internet Bandwidth,
Prioritization, Implementation
12.53656
8.42068E-
06
4.289118 3.82E-05 Significant
Level of Proficiency of Technical Skills,
Prioritization, Implementation
28.37961
6.67721E-
12
5.960801 1.32E-08 Significant
Rating of Human Skills, Prioritization,
Implementation
56.79697
2.80281E-
21
5.902125 1.77E-08 Significant
Rating of Conceptual Skills,
Prioritization, Implementation
49.12509
6.37979E-
19
6.039902 8.63E-09 Significant
Extent of Participation in Decision-
making, Prioritization,
Implementation
49.12509
6.37979E-
19
6.039902 8.63E-09 Significant
29. • … high priority
• … that all of its items are highly prioritized
and need to be done in the next 3 years.
PRIORITIZATION
30. IMPLEMENTATION
• …. moderately implemented
• … that this component is already in the
strategic plan of the HEI; however, action is
still to be done.
32. SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES
• …a significant difference between the “P” and
“I” in terms of:
– the total number of years of existence of the HEIs,
– annual IT expenditures of the HEIs,
– total Internet bandwidth of the HEIs,
– level of proficiency of the respondent’s technical
skills,
– rating of the respondents’ human skills,
– rating of the respondent’s conceptual skills,
– and extent of participation in decision-making of
the respondents.
33. • Information Technology impacted the teaching and learning
process in the HEIs in the Philippines.
• The philosophical view of Heidegger confirms how IT changes the
teaching and learning process in any higher education institution
with each other and the rest of stakeholders in the institution.
• IT redefined the role not only of the teachers and the learners,
but as well as of the school administrators.
• HEIs in the Philippines are challenged in coping up to keep abreast
with the latest technology that enhances teaching-learning
process in order to provide quality education.
• IT, however, is not a central factor in the teaching and learning
process that provides opportunities for knowledge creation,
acquisition and distribution among the other components and
resources within the institution.
34. • MIS heads, administrators, students and all members
in the institution’s community should take the
challenge to overcome the constraining effect of
technology on the learning process in the institution.
• The way to overcome this constraining effect is
through the strength component of general education
component of the curriculum of the HEIs in the
Philippines.
• It is further recommended that HEIs should revisit and
review their strategic plan and address the issues
inherent in the instructional use of emerging, user-
focused and e-learning technologies to ensure quality
and innovative teaching-learning experiences.
• The challenge is to overcome the constraining effect
of technology in the learning process.
35. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• HEIs through their School Heads, MIS Heads and
Directors,
• Philippine Society of IT Educators,
• Computing Society of the Philippines,
• Philippine e-Learning Society,
• Cebu Educational Foundation for Information
Technology, and the
• ICT Association in Dumaguete and Negros Oriental, for
sharing their database of members;
• Silliman University through the Faculty Development
Committee
36. CITED REFERENCES
• del Rosario, M. T. (2007). Technology Integrationin Teacher Education Programs in the Philippines:An InternationalDevelopmentPerspective.
Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved April 23, 2011 from http://gradworks.umi.com/32/69/3269057.html
• Frenzel, C. W. (1999). Managementof Information Technology (3rd Edition). Cambridge, MA: Course Technology Press.
• Gorospe, M. J. (2010). Technological Resources, Knowledge and Skills of the Basic Education Teachers. Miriam College. Retrieved April 23,
2011 from http://elearning.ph/web/userfiles/gorospe.pdf
• Graziano and Raulin. 2007. Research Method Textbook. Program Generator written by Weaver and Raulin. Retrieved from
http://www.mikeraulin.org/graziano7e/supplements/random_prog/randprog.htm
• Ingerman, B., Yang, C. and the 2010 EDUCAUSE Current Issues Committee. (2010). Top-Ten IT Issues, 2010. The text of this article is licensed
under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
• JETRO (2004). Philippine IT Industry Report. Makati, Philippines: JETRO Manila Center.
• Marcial, D. (2010). eLearningfor All: The SOUL Model. PeLS Online Journal. 2010, Volume 1, Number 1. ISSN 2094-781x. Retrieved from
http://elearning.ph/web/userfiles/pelsonlinejournal1soulmodelmarcial.pdf
• Marcial, D. 2011. Prioritizationand Implementationof IT in the Higher Education Insitutionsin the Philippines:An Analysis Towards the IT
Landscape.Silliman University, DumagueteCity, Philippines.
• Marcial, D. (2011). InformationTechnology Resources in the Higher Education Institutionsin the Philippines.Proceedings in the 9th National
Conference on Information Technology Education (NCITE 2011), held at Palawan State University, Puerto Princesa, Palawan, Philippines,
on October 27 to 29, 2011.
• MIS Asia (2005). ManagingInformationStrategies. 100 Asia’s Top IT Users (9th Edition). Singapore: Hitachi Asia.
• MIS Asia (2007). ManagingInformationStrategies. 100 Asia’s Top IT Users. Singapore: Hitachi Asia.
• Policarpio, J. M. (2009). Resistance to Acceptance: Issues and Challenges of IntegratingTechnology in Basic Education (The Genyo Experience).
DIWA Learning Systems. Retrieved April 23, 2011 from http://elearning.ph/web/userfiles/pelsonlinejournal5genyoexperiencepolicaprio-1.pdf
• Quimbo, M. A. (2009). Teachers’ Perspectives of the Quality of E-learning Courseware Integrationin the Secondary Curriculum. University of
the Philippines-Los Banos. Retrieved April 23, 2011 from
http://elearning.ph/web/userfiles/pelsonlinejournal6teachersperspectivesquimbo.pdf
• Thornton, J. (2007). The Foundationsof Computingand the Information Technology Age: A Historical, Sociologicaland PhilosophicalInquiry.
Sydney, Australia: Pearson Education Australia.
• Zimmerman, M. E. (1990). Heidegger’s Confrontationwith Modernity:Technology, Politics, and Art. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
