Technology in education has various challenges. However, limited empirical attention has been bestowed to determining whether teachers, who are at the heart of innovation in classroom instruction, have a favorable attitude towards technology. This study describes the attitude of Filipino teachers towards technology, including their determinants and association with technology integration practice. Data were collected from a randomly-selected sample of 150 teachers who responded to a survey instrument adapted from the tools of Ventakesh and Davis (2000) and of Florida’s Center for Instructional Technology (2005). Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 21 and AMOS version 20. Results suggest that the teachers surveyed have a favorable attitude towards technology. Moreover, the confirmatory factor analysis reveals that the grade level assignment of the teachers is significantly associated with their attitude towards technology (β=-.12, p=.05). In addition, results of the structural equation model revealed that only the perceived ease of use of technology significantly associates with technology integration practice of the teachers (β=0.75, p<.001 and β=0.59, p<.001). There is a need for large-scale surveys to obtain definitive findings on the topic. However, if the present evidence is an indication, the positive attitude among Filipino teachers will bode well for their application and integration of technology into their teaching activities.
Keywords: attitude towards technology, educational technology, technology-integration skills, technological literacy, technology uses in educationAlharbi, S., & Drew, S. (2014). Using the technology acceptance model in understanding academics’ behavioral intention to use learning management systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 5(1), 143–-155. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f996/9c881e6228723b0e6975abc190b30926d1ef.pdf
Ab Hamid, M. R., Sami, W., & Sidek, M. M. (2017). Discriminant validity assessment: Use of Fornell & Larcker criterion versus HTMT criterion. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, (Vol. 890(, No. 1), 1–5, p. 012163). IOP Publishing.Retrieved from https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/890/1/012163/pdf
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational bBehavior and hHuman dDecision pProcesses, 50(2), 179–-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-
Bana, C., Romasame, J. R., & Cristobal, E. (2016). Gender disaggregated analysis of the e-learning readiness state of students in a public higher education institution. In A. Editor & B. Editor (Eds.), Journal/book title here (pp. 18.1–18.7). Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2E6EK4q
Bates, T. (2014, December 10). A short history of educational technology. Online Learning and Distance Education Resources. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2CZIq6F
Bang, E., & Luft, J. (2014). Secondary science teachers’ Uuse of technology in the classroom during their first 5 years. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, Vol 29( [4),] pp 118–-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2013.10784715
Beatty, S., Clark, T., Reed, D. & Xu, Y. (2017). Effects of Personal Technology Devices on Instruction and Learning in High School Biology. Murray State Theses and Dissertations, 34. https://digitalcommons.murraystate.edu/etd/34
Cavas, B., Cavas, P., Karaoglan, B., & Kisla, T. (2009). A study on science teachers` attitudes toward information and communication technologies in education. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED505935
DeCoito, I., & Richardson, T. (2018). Teachers and technology: Present practice and future directions. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(2). Retrieved from https://www.citejournal.org/volume-18/issue-2-18/science/teachers-and-technology-present-practice-and-future-directions
Dockstader, J. (1999). Teachers of the 21st century know the what, why and how of technology integration. TheHE Journal, Vol 26 [6),] pp 73–-74. Retrieved from http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~coesyl-p/principle3-article2.pdf
Elkaseh, A. M., Wong, K. W., & Fung, C. C. (2016). Perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness of social media for e-learning in Libyan higher education: A structural equation modeling analysis. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(3), 192–xxx. DOIdoi: 10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.683
Fathema, N., Shannon, D., & Ross, M. (2015). Expanding the technology acceptance model (TAM) to examine faculty use of learning management systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 11(2), 210–232. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/Vol11no2/Fathema_0615.pdf
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for Technology-based teaching and learning. Education Technology, Vol 38 [5),] pp 20–-23. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428478
Guarte, J. M., & Barrios, E. B. (20062004). Estimation under purposive sampling. Communications in Statistics—Simulation and Computation®, 35(2), 277–-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610910600591610
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. ArticlesElectronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 253–60. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2WQvDOG
Howley, A., Wood, L., & Hough, B. (2011). Rural elementary school teachers’ technology integration. Journal of Research in Rural Education, Vol 26 [9),] pp 1–-13. Retrieved from http://sites.psu.edu/jrre/wp-content/uploads/sites/6347/2014/02/26-9.pdf
Hox, J. J., & Bechger, T. M. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modeling. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Manikandan, S. (2011). Frequency distribution. Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics, 2(1), 54–56. doi: 10.4103/0976-500X.77120
Mikropoulos, T. A., Sampson, D. G., Nikopoulos, A., & Pintelas, P. (2014). The evolution of educational technology based on a bibliometric study. In A. Editor, B. Editor, & C. Editor (Eds.), Research on e-learning and ICT in education (pp. 15–-24). Springer, New York, NY: Springer. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6501-0_2
Morales, H. M. (nd2015). Information and communication technology (ICT) integration model of instructional design: Its effectiveness. In E. Gorgon, J. Solana, O. Monforte, T. Tolentino, C. de Mesa, E. Habijan,…E. Libranda (Eds.), R2A in Calabarzon: Reflection, research, action, (Vol. 2, pp. 129–146). Retrieved March 19, 2018 from http://bit.ly/2pmwOGT.
Meigs, R. (2010). The development of technology integration matrix questionnaire (Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Baker University, Dissertation Location. Retrieved from https://www.bakeru.edu/images/pdf/SOE/EdD_Theses/Meigs_Russell.pdf
Mustafina, A. (2016). Teachers’ attitudes toward technology integration in a Kazakhstani secondary school. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 2(2), 322–-332. Retrieved from https://ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/112
Panda, S. (2017). Educational technology: Historical developments. http://bit.ly/2oUnFEr
Ponto, J. (2015). Understanding and evaluating survey research. Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology, 6(2), 168–171. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2oT9gZc
Pittman, T., & Gaines, T. (2015). Technology integration in third, fourth and fifth grade classrooms in a Florida school district. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 539–-554. DOI doi: 10.1007/s11423-015-9391-8
Ruggiero, D., & Mong, C. J. (2015). The teacher technology integration experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 161–-178. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP161-178Ruggiero0958.pdf
Ruman, M., & Prakasha, G. (2017). Application of technology integration matrix (TIM) in teaching and learning of secondary school science subjects. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol 22( [12)] pp, 24–-26. Retrieved from http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol.%2022%20Issue12/Version-9/D2212092426.pdf
Saettler, P. (2004). The Evolution of American educational technology. Connecticut: Information Age Publishing. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2tj7qGz
Semerci, A., & Aydin, M. (2018). Examining high school teachers’ attitudes toward ICT use in education. International Journal of Progressive Education,. Vol 14( [2)], pp 93–-105. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1177301.pdf
Thang, S. M., Lin, L. K., Mahmud, N., Ismail, K., & Zabidi, N. A. (2014). Technology integration in the form of digital storytelling: mMapping the concerns of four Malaysian ESL instructors. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(4), 311–-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.903979
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Tezci, E. (2010). Attitudes and knowledge level of teachers in ICT use: The case of Turkish teachers. International Journal of Human Sciences,. Vol 7( [2),] pp 19–-44. Retrieved from http://www.acarindex.com/dosyalar/makale/acarindex-1423936485.pdf
Vergel de Dios, B. V. (2016). Building and sustaining national ICT/education agencies: Subtitle. Retrieved March 19, 2018 from http://bit.ly/2u3p5Ci
Williams, D. (2015). An investigation of K-12 Teachers’ attitude towards computer technology use in schools. Journal of Business & Economic Policy,. Vol 2( [1),] pp 71–-87. Retrieved from http://jbepnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_1_March_2015/9.pdf
Zyad, H. (2016). Integrating computers in the classroom: Barriers and teachers` attitudes. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 65–-78. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1086973