Digital Technology Skills of Grade 1 Teachers at Bayombong 2 District, Schools Division of Nueva Vizcaya: An Appraisal
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsair.V2.I2.243Keywords:
Assessment, Classroom Organization and Administration, Digital Technology Skills, Grade 1 Teachers, Instructional Integration, Professional Development, Tools and OperationAbstract
This study examined the digital technology skills of Grade 1 teachers in Bayombong 2 District, Schools Division of Nueva Vizcaya. It was anchored on the Input-Process-Output method and guided by the view that teachers play a central role in delivering quality education in the digital age. Using a descriptive survey design, the study involved 20 Grade 1 teachers from public elementary schools selected through simple random sampling. Data were gathered through a researcher-made questionnaire composed of two parts covering respondent profile and digital technology skills, with some items adopted and enhanced from previous studies. The data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, and weighted mean, while ethical protocols on consent, confidentiality, and data protection were observed. Findings showed that the respondents were all female, mostly 41 years old and above, largely married, and many had earned units in a master’s degree. Most had 1–5 years of teaching experience, had outstanding performance ratings, and had attended seminars and trainings at different levels. The teachers demonstrated very evident digital technology skills in tools and operation, curriculum and assessment, and classroom organization and administration, while instructional integration was rated evident. The acquisition of digital technology skills was also found to be very evidently beneficial for professional development. However, some areas still needed enhancement, particularly hardware and software operations, troubleshooting and maintenance, and helping learners develop and implement project plans and solutions. The study concluded that Grade 1 teachers generally possess strong digital technology skills but still require continued support in more technical and advanced areas. It recommended sustained training, provision of digital resources, technical assistance, monitoring, and stronger institutionalization of technology integration in instruction, assessment, and classroom administration. The study is closely aligned with SDG 4 (Quality Education) because it focuses on strengthening teacher competence and improving instructional effectiveness through digital technology. It also relates to SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) by supporting technology-enabled teaching practices in schools. Its sustainability impact lies in promoting educational, technological, and institutional sustainability through evidence-based support for teacher development and improved classroom practice.
References
Abud, G. G., Jr. (2014). The impact of one to one computing on student achievement in schools. http://abud.me/the-impact-of-one-to-one-comtuing-on-students-achievement-in-schools
Afshari, M., Bakar, K., Luan, W., Samah, B., & Fooi, F. (2009). Technology and school leadership. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(2), 235–248.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Ten years of tracking online education in the United States: Changing course (pp. 1–47). http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingsourse.pdf?ref=driverlayer.com/web
Amparo S. Lardizabal. (1991). Principles and methods of teaching. Phoenix Publishing House.
Ang, J. Y. (2003). Non-intellectual factors related to doing homework and their effects to the academic performance of the Grade Three pupils (Unpublished master’s thesis). Trinity College of Quezon City, Quezon City, Philippines.
Arnett, T. (2014). Does blended learning work? http://www.christenseninstitute.org/does-blended-learning-work/
Attwell, G., & Hughes, J. (2010). Pedagogic approaches to using technology for learning: Literature review. http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/2021/
Bailey, J., et al. (2013). How blended learning can improve the teaching profession. Digital Learning Now. http://digitallearningnow.com/site/uploads/2013/05/Conditions-and-Careers-Final-Paper1.pdf
Becta. (2001). ImpaCT2 emerging findings from the evaluation of the impact of information and communications technologies on pupil attainment. Becta.
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age. Routledge.
Bebel, D., et al. (2010). One to one computing: A summary of the quantitative results from the Berkshire wireless learning initiative. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(2), 5–60. http://napoleon.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/jtla/article/viewFile/1607/1462
Best, J. T. (1987). Research in education (p. 88). McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Britland, M. (2013). How has technology transformed the role of the teacher? [Web log post]. http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2013/jun/18/technology-transform-teaching-students-schools
Brown, E. (2011). Questions about virtual schools' effectiveness. The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-schools-insider/post/evidence-of-virtual-schools-effectiveness-is-scant/2011/11/19/gIQAGJ3K5N_blog.html
Chen, M. (2010). If technology motivates students, let’s use it. http://www.edutopia.org/blog/motivating-students-technology
David, F. (2002). Understanding and doing research: A handbook for beginners. Educational Publishing House.
Dunmire, R. E. (2010). The use of instructional technology in the classroom: Selection and effectiveness (Unpublished master’s thesis). Center for Teacher Excellence, United States Military Academy. http://www.usma.edu/cfe/literature/dunmire_10.pdf
Gardener, J. (2011). Learning motivation in technology-rich training. http://www.jclarkgardner.com/uploads/5/4/1/4/5414483/jclark_gardner_learnig_motivation_2.pdf
Goodman, E. (2013). What are the advantages of a virtual school: Student perspective. http://www.examiner.com/article/what-are-the-advantages-of-a-virtual-school-student-perspective
Graffin, M. (2011, April 29). What the heck is a PLN? http://www.blog.mgraffin.com/2011/04/29/what-the-heck-is-a-pln/#.VNqk6LDF_3o
Granito, M., & Chernobilsky, E. (2012). The student's motivation and knowledge retention (Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut). Northeastern Educational Research Association. http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=nera_2012
Heick, T. (2012). A primer: 3 ways technology has changed education. http://www.edudemic.com/a-primer-3-ways-technology-has-changed-education/
Hom, E. (2014). What is STEM education? http://www.livescience.com/43296-what-is-stem-education.html
Huneycutt, T. (2013). Technology in the classroom: The benefits of blended learning. http://www.nms.org/Blog/TabId/58/PostId/188/technology-in-the-classroom-the-benefits-of-b
Hung, C., Hwang, G., & Huang, I. (2011). A project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students’ learning motivation, problem-solving competence, and learning achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 368–379. http://ifets.info/journals/15_4/31.pdf
Lynch, M. (2014). 4 ways technology has changed K12 learning. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-lynch-edd/4-ways-digital-technology_b_4802846.html
Mandrazo, D. R. (2011). The effect of modern technology infusion on at-risk high school students’ motivation to learn (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Appalachian State University. http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/asu/f/Madrazo,%20Danielle_2011_Dissertation.pdf
McMillan, D. (2010). Education vs. technology. https://medium.com/teaching-learning/education-vs-smartphones-b87949c9efcd
Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2013, April 17). To see increases in student achievement in 1:1/BYOD classrooms teachers must be given curriculum with technology activities baked in. http://thejournal.com/articles/2013/04/17/curriculum.aspx
Parvis, S. (2012). Time for kids: Almanac 2013. WS Pacific Publication, Inc.
