Readiness of the Public Junior High Schools in the Province of Albay Offering Robotics: An Assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsair.V2.I2.179Keywords:
Educational Robotics, Financial Resources, Instructional Materials, Public Junior High Schools, Readiness, STEM Education, Teacher Readiness, TrainingAbstract
This study assessed the readiness of public junior high schools in the Province of Albay to offer robotics education, focusing on institutional capacity, challenges, and opportunities within STEM implementation. Anchored on the Triangular Theory of Creativity (Sternberg, 2024), Multidimensional Digital Pedagogy Readiness Theory (Fatma, Fahmi, & Darmawan, 2025), Unified Theory of AI Adoption, and the ROBO GEAR UP framework (Llabore, 2026), the study employed a mixed method research design integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches. Data were collected through structured survey questionnaires and interviews from fifty-six (56) department heads and creative technology teachers across fourteen public junior high schools using total enumeration. Descriptive statistics, including weighted mean and percentage distribution, and thematic analysis were utilized. Findings revealed a significant disparity between funded and non-funded schools. Funded schools demonstrated moderate to high readiness across teachers, facilities, instructional materials, training, and financial resources, while non-funded schools were largely unready due to insufficient training, limited infrastructure, lack of standardized materials, and inadequate funding. Challenges were strongly evident in non-funded schools, whereas funded schools reported minimal constraints. Non-funded schools relied on adaptive strategies such as community support, improvisation, and use of free digital tools, though these approaches raised sustainability concerns. Despite these limitations, robotics education presented opportunities for enhancing technical skills, creativity, engagement, and career readiness. The study concludes that sustainable robotics integration requires alignment of institutional capacity, technical expertise, and financial support, and recommends institutionalized training, improved infrastructure, standardized materials, and sustainable funding mechanisms. The study aligns with SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), as it promotes equitable access to STEM education, innovation, and collaborative resource mobilization. It contributes to educational, socio-economic, and institutional sustainability by supporting inclusive STEM development, strengthening workforce readiness, and informing policy and program improvement in public schools.
References
Adam, G., Paynter, R. A., Itani, S., Siddique, S. M., & Anderson, J. K. (2022). Semi-automated tools for systematic searches. In S. G. Weiner (Ed.), Systematic reviews (Vol. 2345, pp. 17–40). Humana. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1562-1_2
Albert, J. R. G., Basillote, L. B., Alinsunurin, J. P., Vizmanos, J. F. V., Muñoz, M. S., & Hernandez, A. C. (2023). Sustainable Development Goal 4 on quality education for all: How does the Philippines fare and what needs to be done? (Discussion Paper Series No. 2023-16). Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
Altinok, H. (2022). Investigating the teacher professional development process in educational robotics: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 5(3), 738–756. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.1107569
Anikarnisia, S., & Wilujeng, I. (2020). Need assessments of STEM and robotics education for public junior high school: Linking local culture and technical innovation. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1440(1), 012051. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1440/1/012051
Anito, J. C., Jr., Morales, M. P. E., & Palisoc, C. P. (2020). The Philippine STEAM pedagogical model. Trends in Science and Technology Education, 2020(1), 1–15.
Aslanoglou, K., Zygouris, N. C., Tsermentseli, S., Beazidou, E., & Xenakis, A. (2025). Utilizing educational robotics in elementary school to foster problem-solving skills and enhance the teaching of history. Pedagogical Research, 10(1), em0231. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/15680
Atman Uslu, N., Yavuz, G. Ö., & Koçak Usluel, Y. (2023). A systematic review study on educational robotics and robots. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9), 5874–5898.
Atman Uslu, N., Yavuz, G. O., & Kocak Usluel, Y. (2023). Profiles of teachers' readiness for educational robotics integration: A latent profile analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(2), 551–567. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12765
Baser, D., Kopcha, T. J., & Ozden, M. Y. (2021). Training in-service teachers through individualized technology-related mentorship. Frontiers in Education, 6, Article 649495.
Bayudan-Dacuycuy, C., Flores, H., & Uy, A. O. (2024). Financial sustainability of higher education institutions in the Philippines: Issues, challenges, and opportunities (Discussion Paper Series No. 2024-24). Philippine Institute for Development Studies. https://doi.org/10.62986/dp2024.24
Bers, M. U. (2021). Coding as a playground: Programming and computational thinking in the early childhood classroom (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Cevizci, F. (2022). The role of educational robotics in interdisciplinary STEM education: A systematic review. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 10(19), 184–205. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1012354
Cheung, K. Y., Chung, R. H., & Mok, S. S. (2020). The effects of robotics on primary and secondary students’ computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12401
Cho, Y. H., Lee, S. Y., & Shin, S. K. (2023). Open source vs. proprietary robotics in education: A comparative study of learning outcomes, engagement, and sustainability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(4), 1102–1120. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12789
Corsby, C., & Bryant, A. S. (2020). The maintenance of innovation: Overcoming technical and financial attrition in school-based robotics. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(4), 615–632.
Dela Cruz, R. (2024). Assessment of science laboratory facilities in public secondary schools: Implications for 21st-century learning.
Dela Cruz, R. J., & Cabile, M. L. (2024). Beyond the competition: Transitioning from recipe-style to challenge-based robotics education in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Science and Technology Education, 11(1), 15–32.
Delos Santos, A. J. (2020). STEM implementation in rural Philippine schools: Challenges and pedagogical adaptations. Journal of Rural Education and Innovation, 12(1), 88–104.
Department of Education. (2010). Policies and guidelines on strengthening science and mathematics education at the secondary level (DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2010). https://www.deped.gov.ph/
Department of Education. (2017). K to 12 curriculum guides: Creative technologies. https://www.deped.gov.ph/
Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013, Rep. Act No. 10533 (2013) (Phil.). https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2013/05/15/republic-act-no-10533/
Erol, O., Sevim-Cirak, N., & Baser Gulsoy, V. G. (2023). The effects of educational robotics activities on students’ attitudes towards STEM and ICT courses. International Journal of Technology in Education, 6(2), 203–223. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.365
Fatma, S., Fahmi, D. A., & Darmawan, D. (2025). Multidimensional digital pedagogy readiness: A theoretical framework for 21st-century education. Journal of Educational Technology and Digital Innovation, 6(1), 45–62.
Galino, J. R., & Tanaka, H. (2021). Initiatives and development of secondary school robotics education in Camarin High School. Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life, 8(1), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.2991/jrnal.k.210521.014
Galino, J. R., Moralejo, R. P., & Robles, A. C. (2021). Initiatives and development of secondary school robotics education: The case of Camarin High School. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1835(1).
Galino, M. R., & Tanaka, K. (2021). Localizing robotics: A case study of low-cost STEM initiatives at Camarin High School. Journal of Philippine Technology Education, 8(2), 56–72.
Grankina, V., Krasnikova, I., Smirnova, Y., Kulibaba, I., & Barinov, V. (2026). Digital transformation of the educational process in schools of Kazakhstan: The concept of intelligent assistant in school physics curriculum. Frontiers in Education, 11, Article 1766616. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1766616
Guan, H., et al. (2025). Artificial intelligence in pre-service teacher education: Bibliometrics analysis. Pedagogical Research, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/17402
Gul, Y., Aydogdu, S., & Bıkmaz, F. H. (2023). The effect of educational robotics on students' affective and social skills: A systematic review. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 11(21), 112–134. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1189456
Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2020). The use of educational robotics in the development of computational thinking skills in preschool and primary education. In Mobile learning and STEM (pp. 132–151). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003020479-10
Khalil, A. K., & Hadidi, M. S. (2020). The impact of a robotics laboratory on the development of students' skills and knowledge. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(13), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i13.13451
Kim, C., & Kim, M. K. (2023). Integrating robotics into mathematics and science education: A systematic review of conceptual understanding and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(2), 345–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221115661
Kumar, S., Sharma, R., & Gupta, A. (2024). Educational robotics in rural and low-resource settings: A systematic review of challenges, adaptations, and effectiveness. International Journal of Educational Development, 104, 102945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102945
Kumari, P., & Garg, M. (2023). Social robots in education: A systematic review. International Journal of Social Robotics, 15(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00951-4
Lee, I., Grover, S., Martin, F., Pillai, S., & Malyn-Smith, J. (2020). Computational thinking from a disciplinary perspective: Integrating computational thinking in K-12 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09803-w
Llabore, D. J. B. (2026). ROBO GEAR UP (Robotics: Gauging Educational Adaptability Readiness and Unified Preparedness) framework. Unpublished conceptual framework, Bicol College.
Mane, M. S. B. (2025). Teachers’ readiness and the integration of technology in teaching. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current Educational Research (IJMCER), 7(3), 260–290. https://www.ijmcer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/IJMCER_O0730260290.pdf
National Economic and Development Authority. (2023). Philippine Development Plan 2023–2028. https://neda.gov.ph
Naval, R. A. (2022). Policy gaps and pedagogical hurdles: The state of robotics education in Philippine public schools. Journal of Educational Policy and Reform, 14(3), 102–118.
Navarro, J. C. (2022). The state of Philippine basic education infrastructure: Gaps, gains, and the road to recovery. Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
Negrini, L. (2020). Teacher training in educational robotics: A check of the state of the art. Frontiers in Education, 5, 552697. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.552697
Ocaña, J. M., Morales-Urrutia, E. K., Pérez-Marín, D., & Pizarro, C. (2023). About gamifying an emotional learning companion to teach programming to primary education students. Simulation & Gaming, 54(4), 402–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781231175013
Paderna, E. E. S., & Monterola, S. L. C. (2021). The status of science and mathematics education in the Philippines.
Pan, J. (2023). Evaluation of robotics education programs in Region IV-A: Assessing barriers and instructional readiness. Journal of Philippine STEM Education, 12(2), 45–60.
Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021). Using educational robotics in primary education: A systematic review. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 15(2), 113–138. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMLO.2021.114131
Petraki, E., & Herath, S. J. (2022). Pedagogical readiness in robotics education: Bridging the gap between technical complexity and learning outcomes. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(4), 112–129.
Rodrigo, M. M. T. (2023). Computing education in the Philippines: Contexts, challenges, and opportunities. Ateneo de Manila University Press.
Science Act of 1958, Rep. Act No. 2067 (1958) (Phil.). https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1958/06/13/republic-act-no-2067/
Sternberg, R. J. (2024). Do not worry that generative AI may compromise human creativity or intelligence in the future: It already has. Journal of Intelligence, 12(7), Article 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence12070069
Sun, Z., & Zhou, B. (2022). Effects of educational robotics on the creativity of K–12 students: A meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(2), 380–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12753
Terra, J. (2025). What are cobots? Collaborative robots explained. Simply Learn. https://www.simplilearn.com/tutorials/robotics-tutorial/what-is-cobot
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000385723
Yamani, H. A., & Almazroa, H. (2024). The relationship between female students' interest in STEM and their self-efficacy: A study in the context of robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10100-w
Yang, G. (2021). The integration of robotics in school curricula: Challenges and opportunities for sustainable development. Journal of Educational Technology and Research, 15(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/jetr.2021.1904562
