Teacher and Institutional Readiness for ICT Integration at Bambang II District: Basis for Instructional Technology Intervention
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20179771Keywords:
ICT Competence, ICT Integration, Institutional Readiness, Microlearning, Teacher ReadinessAbstract
This study aimed to determine the teacher and institutional readiness in integrating ICT in the Bambang II district during the school year 2025-2026. Data were gathered using the descriptive-correlational research design from 104 public elementary school teachers who were selected using stratified random sampling. The researcher designed questionnaires based on the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework to evaluate the readiness of teachers and institutions in the integration of ICTs. The collected data were analyzed using mean and Spearman's rho. The teachers showed positive attitudes towards technology, pedagogical competence and readiness to use ICT in teaching. Some small areas of weakness were observed in self-efficacy for ICT integration. Similarly, the schools were found to be well led and collaborative in organizational culture and policies which fostered ICT integration. However, there were some weaknesses highlighted in the areas of infrastructure and access readiness. The findings also demonstrated a strong relationship between teacher readiness and institutional readiness, indicating that there is a need for a mutual match between the individual attributes and institutional support systems for successful integration of ICT. Based on the above findings, a Microlearning Package and Learning and Development Activity was developed as an intervention to solve the gaps identified. The package offers flexible and engaging learning materials with technology support that will enhance teachers' ICT competencies and confidence in using technology. The experience has led to the conclusion that while overall ICT readiness levels are good, ongoing professional development, ongoing institutional support and contextualized learning interventions are still necessary to further strengthen the integration and use of ICT and effective technology-supported teaching and learning.
References
Akram, H., Abdelrady, A. H., & Al-Adwan, A. S. (2022). Teachers’ perception of technology integration in teaching-learning practices. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 920317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.920317
Anh, T. T. N., Phong, N. T., & Jan, A. (2023). Teachers’ perceptions and readiness for digital transformation in education: Empirical evidence from Vietnam, a developing nation. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 17(3), 86–99.
Avidov-Ungar, O. (2018). Empowerment among teachers in leadership positions involving ICT implementation in schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 17(1), 138–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2016.1270331
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.
Barth-Cohen, L. A., Swanson, H., & Arnell, J. (2023). Methods of research design and analysis for identifying knowledge resources. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19(2), 020119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.020119
Baticulon, R. E., Sy, J. J., Alberto, N. R., Baron, M. B., Mabulay, R. E., Rizada, L. G., Tiu, C. J., Reyes, J. C., & Clarion, C. A. (2021). Barriers to online learning in the time of COVID-19: A national survey of medical students in the Philippines. Medical Science Educator, 31, 615–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01231-z
Callo, E. C., & Yazon, A. D. (2020). Exploring the factors influencing the readiness of faculty and students on online teaching and learning as an alternative delivery mode for the new normal. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3509–3518. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080826
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.).
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Department of Education. (2020). DepEd Computerization Program (DCP) and Digital Rise Program. Department of Education.
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.
Miftah, M. (2022). Strategi peningkatan kualitas pembelajaran melalui pemanfaatan media pembelajaran berbasis TIK. DIAJAR: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 1(3), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.54259/diajar.v1i3.900
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., Baran E & Phillips (2025). Handbook of Technological pedagogical context knowledge (TPACK) for Educators. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 101–111). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36119-8_7
Peng, R., Razak, R. A., & Halili, S. H. (2023). Factors influencing in-service teachers’ technology integration model: Innovative strategies for educational technology. PLOS ONE, 18(8), e0286112. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286112
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Ta, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P.A. & Ottenbreit Leftwich A.(2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. Education Tech Research Dev 65, 555–575 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
UNESCO. (2018). UNESCO ICT competency framework for teachers (Version 3.0). UNESCO.
Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (2018). Rethinking learning in a digital age: Outcomes from EDUsummIT 2017. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(3), 369–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9383-y
