Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 15


The Problem and Its Background


The way the class was maneuver were depended on the teacher who utilizes it, so

to speak. Hence, whatever the technique and style of the teacher in teaching was always

the crucial point. No wonder, many teachers were now trying to innovate the old learning

styles and replacing it with more authenticated and well updated techniques like the

CBTS (computer-base teaching strategy).

Different students have different preferred ways to learn. Some may understand

quickly through images, others may prefer texts and readings. Some may deal well with

theories, others may learn through experiments and examples. By gaining insights into

different learning styles, it offers means to design and provide interventions that tailored

to individual needs. Moreover, several valuable advice can be provided to a wide range

stakeholders. For example, for learners, insights into their own styles will enable them to

be more confident in learning and optimize their learning paths (Herod, 2004). For

teachers, it will be able to offer valuable feedback on how to match suitable instructions

and learning materials to different groups of students at the appropriate stage of the

learning process (Stash, 2007). For instance, under Felder–Silverman’s theory (Felder &

Silverman, 1988), learning styles can be differentiated between the way students process

information: active experimentation or reflective observations. For “active” students, they

do not perform very well in a standard classroom situation. Conversely, they learn

effectively through interaction with other students.

Since the early 1960s educational technologists have been developing programs of

computer-based instruction (CBI) to drill, tutor, and test students and to manage

instructional programs. In recent years these CBI programs have been used increasingly

in schools to supplement or replace more conventional teaching methods.

Many educational technologists believe that CBI will not only reduce educational

costs in the long run but that it will also enhance educational effects. Some envision a day

when computers will serve at children as personal tutors: a Socrates or Plato for every

child of the 21st century.

Evaluators have conducted many studies to determine whether CBI programs can,

in fact, produce such beneficial effects. They have divided classes of students into

experimental and control groups and have taught experimental group students with

computer assistance while teaching control students with conventional methods only. At

the end of a study, the evaluator compares responses of experimental and control students

on a common examination, on a course evaluation form, or on a log of time-on-task. No

individual outcome study, however, can show whether CBI is generally effective. To

reach general conclusions reviewers must take into account the results from numerous

studies carried out in different places, at different times, and under different conditions. It

would be as pointless to judge all CBI programs by a single outcome study as it would be

to judge all textbooks, lectures, or films by a single comparison. Niemiec and Walberg

(1987) have provided a comprehensive review of efforts to summarize evaluation results

on CBI.

The importance of technology use in education has been widely acknowledged.

Many researchers have posited that technology use integrated with relevant teaching

methods improves student learning (Hastings & Tracey, 2005; Kozma, 2003; Winn,

2002). Researchers report that technology can not only provide authentic, engaging, and

collaborative learning environments but also can enable students to learn at any time with

peers outside of classrooms (Jonassen, Peck, & Wilson, 1999; Kozma, 2003; Morey,

Bezuk, & Chiero, 1997). Yet, the evidence is mixed, at best, that this investment of time,

money, and resources has produced measurable change in student learning outcomes, or

in teaching practices that effectively leverage the capabilities of technology to improve

student learning (Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck, 2001; Mehlinger & Powers, 2002;

National Center for Education Statistics, 1999,2000; Windschitl & Sahl, 2002).

The question that bears the researchers’ mind in this study is, is this teaching style

—the CBTS—are totally appropriate and, hence, worth the effort of the teachers? The use

of these materials such as the PowerPoint presentation is always the center of controversy

in many “traditionalists”, saying the traditional is still the best way.

This action-research aims to prove that CBTS is the most suitable in the teaching

learning process. This will try to found out the strong points of the CBTS proving it is the

most suitable.

The study focused in the grade 11 students of ACLC College of San Pablo because

this class is the present generation and most probably the benefactor of the future

teaching techniques such as CBTS.

Statement of the Problem

This study sought answers to the following questions:

1. What are the effects of using audio visual presentations in teaching grade 11

students with regards to their age and gender?

2. What are the different teaching strategies being used by teachers to motivate

students to actively participate in the class?

3. How effective are the Computer-aided instructional materials in terms of:

3.1 Instructional Assessment

3.2 Student Performance Assessment

3.3 Curriculum Adequacy Assessment

4. What are the effects of CBTS in the teaching-learning process of the students?


The performance of the students in Grade 11 is not significantly affected by:

 Respondent’s Profile

 Using Computer-Based Teaching Strategy

Conceptual Framework

The independent variable of the study comprises the respondent’s profile such as

age and gender and the assessment of the respondent’s with regards to instructional

assessment, student performance assessment and the curriculum adequacy assessment.

The dependent variable of the study pertains to the effects of using Computer-Based

Teaching Strategy.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

 Respondent’s Profile

o Age

o Gender

 Effectivity of Computer-
Effects of Computer-Based
Aided Instructions in terms
Teaching Strategy in Grade 11
of: Students
o Instructional


o Student


o Curriculum

In order for the researcher to found out the advantages of the Computer Based

Teaching Strategy in the Grade 11 students, the researcher will use the following

procedures to attain that objectives.


1. Identification of 1. Doing a Mock

objectives. demonstration
teaching in the An Action-Research
2. Reviewing Grade 11 students
related literature of ACLC College about the effects of
and studies. San Pablo.
using computer
3. Preparation of
instructional 2. Answering of the aided instruction
materials. survey
questionnaires (CBTS) in teaching
4. Preparation of intended for the
the mock students and grade 11 students of
demonstration teachers.
teaching. ACLC College of

5. Preparation of 3. Tallying and San Pablo

Survey interpreting the
Questionnaires. survey responses.

Figure 1.2 Conceptual Framework

In the input or the preparation part, the researcher make the necessary preparation

for the action research. Including here is identification of objectives where the researcher

develop a set of goals for the main topic to be solved. Next is the reviewing of the related

literature and studies where the researcher look after the magazine, newspaper or online

articles and early researches that was related to the main topic of the action-research.

Third is the preparation of the sample instructional materials. This is for the

demonstration teaching being planned. The materials being prepared are PowerPoint

Presentation, Movie Clips, and downloaded materials form the internet. Fourth is the

preparation for the mock demonstration. This is to test the instructional material being

prepared. This will test if the instructional materials are good or not enough in the

classroom setting. And the fifth one is preparation of the survey form. This survey form is

for the teachers and students who will go over and judge the instructional materials if

those were effective or not.

The process is the part where the researcher will try the instructional materials

through a mock demonstration teaching being prepared earlier. This is to test the

instructional materials and to find the effectiveness and advantages of it in the classroom

setting. Then the researcher will tally the score from the correspondence of the survey

and interpret them if the instructional materials aided with the technology were effective

and from that come up with the advantages of the CBTS.

Scope and Limitation

This research studies the effects of using CBTS in the teaching-learning process of

the Grade 11 students of ACLC College San Pablo. This also gives the advantages and

disadvantages of the CBTS in the classroom discussion. Nonetheless, this will give some

background in integrating technology in the learning process of students and teaching

strategies of teachers.

Significance of the Study

This study is expected to be a great help in the following fields:

School Administrators. This is for them to realize the importance and helpfulness

of using AVP’s in teaching and learning process.

Senior High School Students. This is to make them enjoy as they are learning

through utilizing technology in the teaching learning process.

Teachers. This is to enhance the teaching skills of the teachers by giving different

ways of utilizing technology in the teaching learning process especially in motivating the

students to study.

College of Education students. This is to develop their skills in using different

teaching strategies together with utilizing technology.

Psychologist. This is to give them background on how technology helps in

controlling the students behavior during classes especially in motivating them.

Future Researcher. This is to encourage them to further test and use this king of

teaching strategy towards millennial age.


Review of Related Literature and Studies


There is a lingering issue on how educational technology is integrated in the

teaching learning process. This is due to the fact that the mere use of the computer does

not mean technology has already integrated in the instruction (Lucido, 2007). Example of

these is students just playing around the internet or playing in the games internet like

DOTA and Crazy cart. This degrade the technology in the lower standard, giving it a

thought that computer is just for games and nothing else.

On the other hand of the thing, through progressive state policies that support

technology-in-education, and other new development in the pedagogical practices, our

educators today have become more aware and active on adopting state-of-the-art

educational technology practices they can possibly adopt. Furthermore, recent changes

have also occurred in the area of pedagogical theory and practice. It is now accepted that

the contribution of the computer to the pedagogy makes up for “good instruction”

(Lucido, 2007).

But this doesn’t mean taking the role of the teachers in the teaching learning

process. One assumption is the change of role of the teacher from the “dispenser of

knowledge” to “facilitator of learning.” CAI can also helped the students in their work. In

secondary and tertiary schools, most students use tool applications like word processing,

spreadsheets and presentation (Grabe & Grabe, 1996).


In the article, “Teaching English Through Computer”, learning English as a second

language is very difficult. Hence, many developed a way of doing it more easily and

accessible. One of them is by utilizing Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL).

One of the advantages of teaching English using computer is that we can learn more than

the language itself but we will be given a chance to know more about that language.

According to the article, “Computer in Teaching English,” the computer has only

the background, assisting role, as it solves the same methodological task that the

traditional means of learning to do. Such term as “computer assisted language learning”

describes the idea. The use of computer is not a method; it is a methodological device in

the modern approaches of foreign language learning.

In the article, “Electronic Performance Support,” EPPS is another of an computer

assisted instruction. Its purpose is to help automate a job. Turbo tax is an example of



According to the study of Dr. Martin Endley of “Teacher’s Attitude towards

computer technology use in vocabulary instruction, traditional approaches to language

teaching and learning have been challenged by new and innovative approaches based on

the latest advances in computer and internet technology. The vast resources and

opportunities that computers and internet provided have brought about new tools

approaches, and strategies in language teaching and learning.

Computer technology, internet and web-based resources are now in many schools

and offer teachers and learners vast resources and opportunities for language teaching and

learning. Maximum benefit from these resources can only be achieved through teachers’

use of technology in developing materials for the language classroom. In the context of

this study, ‘computer technology resources’ is used as a general term referring to any

computer, internet and web-based resource that can be use in the language instruction.

Many of today’s learners use the Internet as a key source of information both in

and out of school. Despite the opportunities presented by the Internet, evidence indicates

that students struggle to successfully locate, integrate, evaluate, and comprehend

information they encounter online (Coiro, Knobel, Lankshear, & Leu, 2008; Reid,

Morrison, & Bol, 2017).

An increasing number of teachers are using flipped classroom approach in their

teaching. This instructional approach combines vide o-based learning outside the

classroom and interactive group learning activities inside the classroom.

The field of Learning Design has emerged during this century. It seeks to develop

a conceptual and descriptive framework of teaching practices, making use of technology,

in order to make learning designs explicit, sharable, and reusable (Conole, 2012;

Kirschner, Strijbos, Kreijns, & Beers, 2004).

Mobile computers have gradually been introduced into educational contexts over

the past 2 decades. Mobile technology has led to most people to carry their own

individual small computers that contain exceptional computing power, such as laptops,

personal digital assistants (PDAs), tablet personal computers (PCs), cell phones, and e-

book readers. This large amount of computing power and portability, combined with the

wireless communication and context sensitivity tools, makes one-to-one computing a

learning tool of great potential in both traditional classrooms and outdoor informal

learning. With regard to access to computers, large-scale one-to-one computing programs

have been implemented in many countries globally (Bebell& O’Dwyer, 2010; Fleischer,

2012; Zucker & Light, 2009), such that elementary- and middle-school students and their

teachers have their own mobile devices. In addition, in terms of promoting innovation in

education via information technology, not only does mobile computing support

traditional lecture-style teaching, but through convenient information gathering and

sharing it can also promote innovative teaching methods such as cooperative learning

(Lan, Sung, & Chang, 2007; Roschelle et al., 2010), exploratory learning outside the

classroom (Liu, Lin, Tsai, & Paas, 2012), and game-based learning (Klopfer, Sheldon,

Perry, & Chen, 2012). Therefore, mobile technologies have great potential for facilitating

more innovative educational methods. Simultaneously, these patterns in educational

methods will likely not only help subject content learning, but may also facilitate the

development of communication, problem-solving, creativity, and other high-level skills

among students (Warschauer, 2007).

However, despite the proposed advantages of using mobile computing devices for

increasing computer accessibility, diverse teaching styles, and academic performance,

currently researchers found mixed results regarding the effects of mobile-devices (e.g.,

Warschauer, Zheng, Niiya, Cotten, & Farkas, 2014), and very few studies have addressed

how best to use mobile devices, and the effectiveness of doing so.

Fleischer (2012) conducted a narrative research review of 18 different empirical

studies on the usage of laptops. These studies found a large range in the number of hours

that students used laptops, from a few days to as little as 1 hour per week. The most

frequently used computer functions were searches, followed by expression and

communication. In most studies it was found that students had a positive attitude toward

laptops, and felt that they were more motivated and engaged in their learning, and it was

further believed that teachers conducted more student-centered learning activities.

Moreover, considerable differences in classroom educational practices arose from the

diversity of teachers’ beliefs about the usefulness of laptops. Fleischer (2012) also found

several challenges regarding the use of laptops in classrooms, such as encouraging

teachers to change their previous beliefs and teaching methods (e.g., teacher-centered

lectures) in response to their students’ greater flexibility and autonomy; how to reconcile

the conflict between the students’ desire for independent study and the need for teachers’

guidance; and how to facilitate teachers’ competence by designing an appropriate

curriculum and teaching models for laptop usage programs.

With respect to the research on the use of mobile technology in education, Hwang

and Tsai (2011) provided a broad discussion of studies on mobile and ubiquitous learning

published in six journals between 2001 and 2010. In their review of 154 articles, they

discovered that the use of mobile and ubiquitous learning accelerated markedly during

2008; researchers mostly studied students of higher education, and the fields most often

researched were language arts, engineering, and computer technology. Frohberg, Goth,

and Schwabe (2009) categorized 102 mobile-learning projects, and discovered that most

mobile-learning activities occurred across different settings, and took place within a

physical context and an official environment, such as a classroom or workplace.

Regarding the pedagogical roles that mobile devices play in education, most research has

used mobile devices primarily as a sort of reinforcement tool to stimulate motivation and

strengthen engagement, and secondarily as a content-delivery tool. Few projects have

used mobile devices to assist with constructive thinking or reflection. Furthermore, most

learning activities using mobile devices have been controlled by the teacher, with there

being only a handful of learner-centered projects in existence. Concerning the

communication functions, very few projects have made any use of cooperative or team


Moreover, the vast majority of studies have made use of novice participants; little

research has involved experienced participants. When sorted according to educational

goals, it was found that the vast majority of research has focused on lower-level

knowledge and skills, and ignored higher-level tasks such as analysis and evaluation.

Wong and Looi (2011) investigated the influence of mobile devices on seamless learning.

Seamless learning refers to a learning model that students can learn whenever they want

to learning a variety of scenarios and that they can switch from one scenario or one

context to another easily and quickly (Chan et al., 2006; Wong & Looi, 2011). Wong and

Looi (2011) selected and analyzed a sample of 54 articles on the use of mobile devices to

facilitate seamless learning, and found that all 54 articles contained 10 features, including

formal and informal learning, personalized and social learning, and learning across

multiple durations and locations.