IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bjc/journl/v9y2022i7p131-143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teacher’s Accomplishment Level of The Components of an E-Learning Module: A Basis for Teacher Training and E-Module Quality Standard Development

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica E. Ayawan

    (College of Teacher Education,King’s College of the Philippines)

Abstract

This study determined the extent to which teachers in a private institution in La Trinidad, Benguet, Philippines have accomplished the essential components of an E-learning module, and identified the factors that influenced their level of accomplishment of these components. This study used mixed method explanatory sequential design. Total enumeration was used to determine the population of respondents who were full-time tertiary teachers. Out of the thirty-six full-time teachers, twenty-eight teachers responded and answered the self-assessment survey questionnaire for the quantitative phase, while seven of them who were selected using purposive sampling were interviewed for the qualitative part. Descriptive statistics using weighted mean was used to analyze quantitative data while descriptive approach using thematic analysis for the qualitative data. Quantitative descriptive analysis revealed that the teachers’ overall accomplishment level of the criteria for a quality E-learning module is partial/moderate (2.68 overall weighted mean/WM). Specifically, the teachers partially accomplished the following components of the E-learning module: instructional design (2.84 WM); communication, interaction, and collaboration (2.85 WM); student evaluation and assessment (2.89 WM); instructional materials and technologies (2.75 WM); and accessibility (2.66 WM) while slightly accomplished the components: learner support and resources (2.21 WM), and course evaluation (2.24 WM). For the qualitative descriptive inquiry, absence of capacity-building training in making E-learning module; lack of awareness of the school services, learner support, and resources sites; lack of time; lack of systemic approach to developing an online module; non-consistency of instructions; and amotivation and lack of enthusiasm emerged as factors that influence the teachers’ level of accomplishment of the parts of an E-learning module. The results show that the E-learning modules have fallen short of strict quality standards attributable to certain dire circumstances. This study thus recommends that the institution may adopt or develop its online module criteria to guide the teachers as well as the institution in writing or designing their online modules, and may conduct training in E-module design for teachers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica E. Ayawan, 2022. "Teacher’s Accomplishment Level of The Components of an E-Learning Module: A Basis for Teacher Training and E-Module Quality Standard Development," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 9(7), pages 131-143, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bjc:journl:v:9:y:2022:i:7:p:131-143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrsi/digital-library/volume-9-issue-7/131-143.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.rsisinternational.org/virtual-library/papers/teachers-accomplishment-level-of-the-components-of-an-e-learning-module-a-basis-for-teacher-training-and-e-module-quality-standard-development/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gökhan ORHAN & Ömer BEYHAN, 2020. "Teachers’ Perceptions And Teaching Experiences On Distance Education Through Synchronous Video Conferencing During Covid-19 Pandemic," Social Sciences and Education Research Review, Department of Communication, Journalism and Education Sciences, University of Craiova, vol. 7(1), pages 8-44, July.
    2. Eric S. Taylor & John H. Tyler, 2012. "The Effect of Evaluation on Teacher Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3628-3651, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Papay, John P. & Kraft, Matthew A., 2015. "Productivity returns to experience in the teacher labor market: Methodological challenges and new evidence on long-term career improvement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 105-119.
    2. Balch, Ryan & Springer, Matthew G., 2015. "Performance pay, test scores, and student learning objectives," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 114-125.
    3. Stephen Machin & Sandra McNally & Martina Viarengo, 2018. "Changing How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 217-241, May.
    4. Busso, Matias & Montaño, Sebastián & Muñoz-Morales, Juan & Pope, Nolan G., 2024. "The unintended consequences of merit-based teacher selection: Evidence from a large-scale reform in Colombia," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    5. Cory Koedel & Jiaxi Li & Matthew G. Springer & Li Tan, 2018. "Teacher Performance Ratings and Professional Improvement," Working Papers 1808, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    6. Murphy, Richard & Weinhardt, Felix & Wyness, Gill, 2021. "Who teaches the teachers? A RCT of peer-to-peer observation and feedback in 181 schools," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    7. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    8. Berlinski, Samuel & Ramos, Alejandra, 2020. "Teacher mobility and merit pay: Evidence from a voluntary public award program," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    9. Matthew P. Steinberg & Morgaen L. Donaldson, 2016. "The New Educational Accountability: Understanding the Landscape of Teacher Evaluation in the Post-NCLB Era," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 11(3), pages 340-359, Summer.
    10. Liebowitz, David D., 2021. "Teacher evaluation for accountability and growth: Should policy treat them as complements or substitutes?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    11. Cory Koedel & Eric Parsons & Michael Podgursky & Mark Ehlert, 2015. "Teacher Preparation Programs and Teacher Quality: Are There Real Differences Across Programs?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 10(4), pages 508-534, October.
    12. Dawson, Peter & Massey, Patrick & Downward, Paul, 2020. "Television match officials, referees, and home advantage: Evidence from the European Rugby Cup," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 443-454.
    13. Thomas J. Kane & David Blazar & Hunter Gehlbach & Miriam Greenberg & David M. Quinn & Daniel Thal, 2020. "Can Video Technology Improve Teacher Evaluations? An Experimental Study," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(3), pages 397-427, Summer.
    14. Alfonso Infante-Moro & Juan C. Infante-Moro & Julia Gallardo-Pérez & Antonio Luque-de la Rosa, 2021. "Motivational Factors in the Use of Videoconferences to Carry out Tutorials in Spanish Universities in the Post-Pandemic Period," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-11, October.
    15. Yi Zhang & Siyu Sun & Yuhan Ji & Yazhi Li, 2023. "The Consensus of Global Teaching Evaluation Systems under a Sustainable Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, January.
    16. Kirabo Jackson & Alexey Makarin, 2018. "Can Online Off-the-Shelf Lessons Improve Student Outcomes? Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 226-254, August.
    17. Buurman, Margaretha & Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert & Zoutenbier, Robin, 2020. "When do teachers respond to student feedback? Evidence from a field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    18. Aenneli Houkes-Hommes & Bas Weel & Karen Wiel, 2016. "Measuring the Contribution of Primary-School Teachers to Education Outcomes in The Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 164(4), pages 357-364, December.
    19. Thomas S. Dee & James Wyckoff, 2015. "Incentives, Selection, and Teacher Performance: Evidence from IMPACT," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 267-297, March.
    20. Gershenson, Seth, 2021. "Identifying and Producing Effective Teachers," IZA Discussion Papers 14096, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bjc:journl:v:9:y:2022:i:7:p:131-143. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Renu Malsaria (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrsi/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.