ENHANCING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY IN MSU-SULU COLLEGE OF EDUCATION: ISSUES AND PROBLEMS
Main Article Content
Abstract
The lack of sufficient trainings, seminars, consultations, and evaluation is a probable cause for the unsuccessful integration of Educational technology into the curriculum of the College of Education at Mindanao State University-Sulu. To effectively equip students with necessary skills and knowledge to meet the challenges of the modern era, it is crucial to have the ability to make modifications to the methods employed in teaching and learning. The utilization of technology can facilitate the construction of knowledge. Information can serve as a means to delve into the realm of knowledge. Learning by doing can be achieved through the utilization of content. Social and media platforms can be employed to foster interaction with others. Intellectual partners can aid in the learning process through reflective practices. The objective of this study is to investigate the incorporation of various types of educational technology into the instructional methodologies utilized by the faculty members of the College of Education at Mindanao State University-Sulu. The present study adopts a phenomenological methodology in conducting qualitative research. The objective of this study is acquired a more profound comprehension of the subjective encounters and integration of participants concerning a specific event, topic, or occurrence. The current study was conducted with the objective of gaining a more comprehensive of these specific experiences and interpretations. Standard data analysis techniques were employed to derive both universal and specific themes from the data. The findings presented in this section showcase the themes that surfaced from the feedback, responses provided by the eight faculty members affiliated with the College of Education at Mindanao State University-Sulu.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M.G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Ascd.
Cawelti, G. (1999). Handbook of Research on Improving Student Achievement. 2d ed. Arlington, Va. Educational Research Service.
Checkering, A., & Ehrmann, S.E. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever [Electronic version]. American Association for Higher Education, 3-6. Retrieved January 24, 2006.
Corcoran, T., & Goertz, M. (1995). Instructional capacity and high performance schools. Educational Research, 24 (9), 27-31.
Corcoran, T. B. (1995). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional development.
Corpuz, B. B., & Lucido, P. (2008). “Educational Technology 1. Quezon City.” Metro Manila: Lorimar Publishing Inc. (2008).
Creswell, J. W., Hanson, W.E., Clark Pano, V.L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and Implementation. The counseling psychologist, 35(2), 236-264.
Fenstermacher, G.D., & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality in teaching. Teachers college record, 107(1), 186-213.
Fouts, J. T. (2000). Research on computers and education: Past present and future. Seattle, WA: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Goldman, S., Cole, K., & Syer, C. (1999). The Technology/ Content Dilemma.
Jhurree, V. (2005). Technology integration in education in developing countries: Guidelines to policy makers. International Education Journal, 6(4), 467-483.
ISTE. (2016) ISTE Standards for Students. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/ for_students.
Jackson, A. W., & Andrews, G. A. (2000). Turning points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. Teachers College Press.
Kaufman, M. (1997). A professional development stance for equity. SSI Perspectives, 2(3), 4-5.
Kennedy, M.M. (1998). Education Reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 35(3), 249-263.
Marzano, R. J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Ascd.
Michigan Department of Education (2006). Michigan Merit Curriculum Online Experience Guideline Companion Document. Retrieved from https://wwwmichigan.gov/documents/mde/OE. Companion_Doc_12_184084_7.
Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 35-45. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage publications.
Order, C. M. No 30 series of 2004. Revised Policies and Standards for undergraduate teacher education curriculum.
Oliver, K. (2010). Evaluating teacher readiness for the implementation of one-on-one computing based on national educational technology standards. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 11(3), 40-76.
Papert, S. (1997). Why School Reform is Impossible (with Commentary on O’Shea’s and Koschmann’s Reviews of” The Children’s Machine”).
Park, T. & Van de Merwe, A. (2009). The transformative role of ICT in higher education: a case study of the alignment of educational technology utilization with the vision of Stellenbosch University. South African Journal of Higher Education, 23(2), 356-372.
Rogers, Y. and Scaife, M. (1998). How can interactive multimedia facilitate learning. In Proceeding on Multimedia Interfaces.
Wang, Q., & Woo, H. L. (2007). Systematic planning for ICT integration in topic learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10 (1), 148-156.