TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION: THE LIVED EXPERIENCES

OF THE SCIENCE TEACHERS

A THESIS Presented to the

Faculty of Graduate Studies and Teacher Education Research
Philippine Normal University
Mindanao

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION
with Specialization in Science Education

JUAN DELA CRUZ

January 2023
 CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1. Background of the Study

COVID 19 Pandemic brought a significant change to educational landscape.

Education impact of the pandemic traverses across countries regardless of economic

standing. The primary group affected by this situation is the learners. This poses a

profound challenge in the education system on how to continue the educative process

despite the situation. As such, most of the countries tried their best to expedite all options

to make sure that education can continue even in the midst of the pandemic. One of the

primary measures employed to make it happen is the maximization of the use of

technology (The World Bank, 2020). These measures include the online learning, radio,

television, texting, chatting and modular learning. Philippines is one of the countries

which embraces the so called new normal of educational delivery.

It is the President of the Philippines himself; Pres. Rodrigo Roa Duterte

repeatedly pronounce that without a vaccine, face-to-face classes futile (CNN

Philippines, 2020). Education institution across the country, both public and private

implements alternative ways and approaches to provide and sustain quality education to

the learners in the midst of this crisis. One of the major alternatives implemented and

considered the best possible way is digital education or online delivery (Singh, 2020).

The Department of Education call their initiatives as remote learning delivery (Hodges,

C., et.al, 2020). This delivery classified into modular learning (uses self-learning

modules), Online Distance Learning (primarily uses internet) and blended learning
delivery (combines other delivery) (D.O. 32 s. 2020). The delivery is designed such that

teachers and students need not to go to school but still have continue the teaching-

learning process.

Regardless of the type of delivery, it clearly emphasizes that technology in

education have never been more vital. It is a recognition that technology in education

plays a vital role in this pandemic and in the 21st century teaching and learning (Yildiz,

2018). It paves the way to a revolutionary change the way the subjects are taught and the

way learners are learning. The dynamics of teaching in this pandemic requires teachers to

use and integrate technology into their teaching. This is not new anymore for the

teachers. In fact, this is being emphasized in the Philippine Professional Standard for

Teachers (PPST). There are two strands in the standard that specifically intended for ICT

and the positive use of it in the classroom. The standard point out that technology cannot

replace teachers but rather improve them and the way they teach ((Yildirim & Sensoy,

2018)) and the trend in the teaching-learning process of today is a complex process of

interweaving factors such as content, pedagogy, and integration of technology in

education (Koehler et al., 2013). However, the standard in itself poses a great challenge

to the teachers particularly those who are already in the service to enhance their

knowledge not only in the content and pedagogy but also on their technological know-

how and how to maximize it to achieve meaningful learning of students particularly in

midst of the pandemic.

Lots of research studies have already found out the valuable contribution of

technology in improving student performance (Rabacal & Alegato, 2017). Further, it has
been known that technology is not only a trend of education but rather a necessity to

address learner’s needs (Irum et al., 2018) and to prepare students to a society where ICT

is in its heart (Ghavifekr & Rosdy, 2015). Teachers of today’s generation should be

equipped with technological know-how and can use this know-how in their teaching.

However, studies revealed that technology integration in teaching science concepts is one

of the primary challenges experienced by the in-service science teachers (Tanak, 2020).

Part of the challenge for educators is the need to cope up with the advancement

technology, ICT infrastructure of the school (Antony et al., 2019) and the technology

know-how of the teachers (Plöger et al., 2018).

Yet, the practice of technology integration in teaching science is both limited in

terms of frequency and level of usage. Teachers most often use PowerPoint presentations

as an aid for teaching which in essence is just either similar or is simply a substitute to the

manila paper used before. This is a case most likely common to teachers in using

technology nevertheless not being able to maximize as an aid to develop meaningful

learning. In this connection, researchers have pointed out a number of impediments

hampering the maximization use of technology in education which includes limited time,

access and support (Holmberg, 2019); as well as teachers’ technological know-how,

attitude and beliefs (Taimalu & Luik, 2019). However, there is more than limited of

researches if there is any that delve into the concerns of technological content knowledge

based on the perspective and experiences of the science teachers themselves. Also, there

are no indicators for the level of technology integration in teaching the science of the

science teachers. The indicators will help both in-service training providers and pre-
service education institution to devise a program or intervention anchored on empirical

data.

In the aforementioned information and the researcher’s experience, there have

indeed been numbers of In-service training and seminars workshops that have been

conducted as well as the provision of ICT equipment in the school. However, there is a

scarcity of data that shows how did science teachers integrate technology as well as the

level of integration. The researcher believes that there is no other person who can give us

the most valid explanation other than the ones who experienced it and they are the

science teachers themselves. Thus, recognizing the importance of ICT and the issues

relating to ICT integration in science teaching as discussed, the researcher being a science

teacher conduct this study.

1.2. Literature Review

Teachers today need to develop current working knowledge of a variety of

technologies, as well as the knowledge to appropriately match and apply technologies to

relevant content in the classroom to reach digitally fluent students (Hechter, et al., 2012).

Accordingly supporting the notion that in order for technologies to be effectively used in

the teaching and learning process in the classrooms, teachers should have a clear

understanding of the critical relationship between subject – specific technology use,

pedagogical approaches and curriculum development (Fryling, 2013; Hughes, 2005).

Improving the quality of the teaching workforces is also to improve students’

outcomes. In connection to this, results confirmed that teachers have extensive impacts

on performance and life-long success of students (Blazar, 2016; Judith & Junio, 2017).
Hence, other studies reveal that students can do well if they are correctly guided by the

teachers (Singh, 2016; Farooq & Berhanu, 2011). Teachers indeed contribute an

imperative part in promoting learning among students (Kapur, 2018). Similarly, academic

achievement of students are highly affected by student – centered activities, teaching

methods as well as extensive knowledge of various instructional strategies of teachers

(Ganyaupfu, 2014); development of instructional strategies that provides opportunities to

arrive at the students’ fullest potentials in the learning and performance (Farooq &

Berhanu, 2011); and school resources – technology, skills and abilities of teachers -

usage of technology (Kapur, 2018; Mushtaq & Khan, 2012).

With all the factors mentioned affecting the academic performance of students,

teachers need to be updated of the changes that happens from time to time in order to

cope up with the teaching demands. In the 21st century classroom experience for

instance, technology plays a large part (Canbazoğlu Bilici et al., 2013). Technology in

modern society enabled a wealth of continuous information and as technology – driven

standards continue to emerge in education, there is a necessary urgency of call to prepare

K to 12 students for digital media use and information fluency (Luo & Murray, 2018).

The challenge is to effectively integrate educational technologies into instruction in order

to meet curriculum requirement, students’ learning needs, available technologies’

affordances, constraints and realities of school and classroom contexts (Curriculum-

based, Harris, & Hofer, 2011).

Technology and teaching are both dynamic in nature. It is constantly changing

and updating from time to time. Henceforth, Singer (2016) specified that what is novel
today will sooner be a common place tomorrow. In other words, what usually has been

used to be done using the technology before can either be no longer useful nowadays or

are obsolete and is being altered by more advancements and updates especially in the

field of education with more specifics in the teaching and learning process. Since the

quality of students’ performance remains at top priority for educators (Farooq &

Berhanu, 2011), teacher therefore are expected to process and evaluate new knowledge

relevant to the core professional practice and to regularly update knowledge to improve

and to keep in track with the new teaching advancements to further develop students’

performance.

Since teachers contribute a vital role in students’ performance, the efforts of

teachers in improving their knowledge in their manner of teaching greatly relies in their

own eagerness to learn and progress their selves specifically in the use of technology in

class. Canbazoğlu Bilici, et. al., (2013) detailed that teachers’ perceptions and beliefs

about technology are important factors that greatly influence how to use technology in

teaching. Teachers’ self – efficacy beliefs toward technology likewise play a key role in

technology integration. In addition, a study conducted by (Heath, 2016) reveals that

teachers’ positive beliefs about technology led to greater autonomy in learning.

Recently, one of the novel trends in the integration of technology in teaching is

its synergy with other important factors in education which are the content and pedagogy.

This framework is known as Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK).

In this framework the teacher acts as a bridge to connect the content and pedagogy with

the appropriate integration of technology (Şimşek & Boz, 2016). TPACK is the extension
of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) which is a systematic approach to joining

technical expertise in teaching. TPACK is an emergent model resulting from the

intersection of technology, pedagogy and content (Chai, et. al., 2013). The framework

contributes clear explanation of how technology should not be treated in isolation but is

expected to be in unison with pedagogy and content to achieve effective teaching with

technology (Owusu, 2014; & Mishra and Koehler, 2006).

However, Bulut (2012) stated that technology is not a cure-all medicine. The

decision is left on the teachers’ part on when and how technology will be used in

instruction effectively. Teachers should use technological knowledge beneficially since it

is by itself not sufficient to be able to effectively teach lessons using technology

(Doering, Veletsianos, Scharber, & Miller, 2009). Thus, TPACK only if used

appropriately promises a massive and effective results in the teaching and learning

process improving the academic performance of the students. It is within this framework

where the knowledge bares significance to teacher’s effective technology integration

(Koehler et al., 2014). TPACK in the study of Bozkurt (2014) shows that attitudes toward

the framework and its dimensions affect academic achievement of Physics and Science

interns’ in a positive way. Moreover how science teachers beliefs and context factors

affect their instructional practices and decisions with technology (Dursun & Taşar, 2016).

Teacher’s beliefs in using TPACK in their classes is pivotal because their capability to

use technology is powerful predictor of their potential technology use (Canbazoğlu Bilici

et al., 2013). In addition to, according to Chai, Ling, & Tsai (2013) TPACK is a powerful
framework which has many potential generative uses and development related to the use

of ICT in education.

Consequently, TPACK framework has been the center of researches in a number

of different populations including pre-service and in-service teachers in a variety of grade

levels, subject areas, and pedagogical contexts (Depew, 2015). It is with emphasis that

TPACK is the effective use of technology within a teaching strategy as a pedagogical

tool. It involves a decision-making process which includes choosing the appropriate

technological tool to use in presenting a specific content area (Rose & Cavin, 2007).

In addition to, it is important to be purposeful in how to integrate technology into

instruction and not simply for technology’s sake. Layering technology into antiquated

tasks will not improve learning experiences. But purposefully altering the substances of

these tasks to address the skills students needed today will improve learning.

Teachers therefore play a highly important role in understanding how technology

can be coordinated with pedagogy and content knowledge in order to integrate

technology effectively into classroom instruction. According to Akkoc (2011) and Wu et

al. (2008) understanding students’ difficulties in learning the subject matter (Content)

following the framework Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and seeking

Technological representations through Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TCK)

could help address students’ problem in comprehending a specific topic thus promoting

meaningful learning on the part of the learners.

 Nevertheless, Brantley-dias & Ertmer (2013) draw attention to the downside of

the seven knowledge domains of TPACK framework which according to them may be

too large, vague or ambiguous of a construct to enable reasonable application. The

researchers further emphasized in their study that TPACK takes the concept of

technology integration and packages it as a framework that is much too big while

simultaneously making it too small by dividing the package into so many pieces that have

become impossible to distinguish one from another. Further, a significant limitation of

TPACK framework is that it is neutral to the broader goals of education. It does not speak

to what kinds of content need to be covered and how it shall be taught (Koehler et al.,

2014).

In teacher professional development, TPACK framework has significantly

influenced theory, research, and practice in teacher education. A number of studies

already conducted about TPACK mostly with pre – service (Benson, 2012); (Canbazoğlu

Bilici et al., 2013), in – service teachers (Knolton, 2014; (Ritter, 2012) and science

teachers (Dursun & Taşar, 2016). However, there is still a big gap to fully further

understand TPACK. Accordingly, continuous and further research studies about it are

highly essential since TPACK framework offers many insights into how technology

should relate to other components of education in order for the teaching and learning

process be successful.

1.3. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

The practice of technology integration is a way of addressing the challenge of

educating the 21st century learners (Uçar et al., 2014). The Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (TPACK) (Koehler et al., 2014) comes into fruition. The framework

that intertwined three concepts in education: technology, pedagogy and content

knowledge. All of which are important aspects of today’s learning environment and

learners. This framework provides every teacher the opportunity to examine and re-

examine themselves on their teaching competence which does not only imply the

repertoire of strategy and depth of content knowledge on the discipline but also the

positive use of technology to deliver the content in the best possible way (Urban et al.,

2018).

This study will be dealt with using the lens of Technological Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (TPACK). In the context of this study, it is then expected that the use of

technology of the teachers in teaching science concepts should be in harmony with

pedagogy and knowledge. This implies that the three TPACK components are not in

isolation but rather complement each other. Science teachers’ lived experiences will give

meaningful information on how these three domains interact with each other.

TPACK complexity arises from the fact that it comprises both a framework

constructed within a framework. TPACK has been conceptualize as a new definition of

knowledge base needed in teaching. Taking into considerations the three major domains:

content, pedagogy and technology; and the intersection among them. Content Knowledge

(CK) that refers to any subject – matter knowledge that a teacher is responsible for

teaching; Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) which refers to teacher’s knowledge about

variety of instructional practices, strategies and methods to promote students’ learning;

and Technological Knowledge (TK) which refers to teacher’s knowledge about

traditional and new technologies that can be integrated into curriculum. The TPACK

framework (figure 1) emphasizes how the connections among these three factors

interacting with one another to produce effective learning (Koehler et al., 2014).

Further, the connection of the three domains resulted into four components. These

are Technological Content Knowledge (TCK) which refers to knowledge of the

reciprocal relationship between technology and content; Pedagogical Content Knowledge

(PCK) refers to the understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are

organized, represented and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners and

presented for instruction; Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) which refers to

an understanding of technology constrain and afford specific pedagogical practices; and

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) which refers to knowledge

about the complex relations among technology, pedagogy, and content that enables

teachers to develop appropriate and context - specific teaching strategies.

 Figure 1.Technology, Pedagogical, Content Knowledge (TPACK): An
Exploratory Study of Adjunct Faculty Technology Proficiency (From:
http://www.tpack.org))

In the context of this study, it is then expected that the use of technology of the

teachers in teaching science concepts should be in harmony with pedagogy and

knowledge. This imply that the three TPACK component are not in isolation but rather

complement each other. In order for the teacher to maximize technology in teaching, it

must not just a tool but rather a process also upon which concept development is

maximize. Teachers must also take the opportunity on the advancement of technology to

optimize concrete experiences as compared before. For instance, the teaching of “Atomic

Theory” can be carried out using a simulation showing to the learners that there are sub-

atomic participles and these particles are mobile by nature instead of showing to them

using drawing and simply following up with description that electrons are moving around

the nucleus. In these perspectives, the examination and description of science teachers’
experiences on how they use technology in the classroom will help us determine how can

we best help the teachers to improve their TPACK competence or enhanced them.

The researcher believes that the experiences of those who have first-hand

experiences of the phenomenon are the best ones to give us ample information to better

understand the phenomenon of technology integration (Gardner, 2017). This way we will

have an empirical data to better explain the phenomenon and finds the best possible

course of action to take to help the teachers become successful even in the pandemic and

provide the best possible quality education despite the situation. The phenomenological

inquiry will capture the essence of the experiences and make meaning from them ((Matua

& Van Der Wal, 2015)).

Science Teachers’ Lived
experiences in Integrating
Technology in Teaching
Science
Science Teachers’
Lived experiences in
Integrating Technology
in Teaching Science Coping mechanism

Figure 2. Conceptual paradigm

Opportunities
The conceptual paradigm (figure 2) shows the interrelatedness of the different

concepts and construct involve in this study. Exploring the lived experiences of the

science teachers that centers on the technology integration. The study will examine what

how the teacher’s technology integration and the challenges that come after it. Through
the participants’ experiences, we can extract the problems encountered and the coping

mechanisms on how teachers continuously try to enhance their competence.

1.4. Research Questions

This study aims to examine the lived experiences on technology integration of the

senior high school science teachers of the Municipality of Veruela in the midst of COVID

19 Pandemic. In line with the major aim, the following questions will be answered:

1. How do senior high school science teachers describe their experiences in

integrating technology in science teaching in the midst of the COVID 19

Pandemic?

2. How do senior high school science teachers adapt and integrate technologies to

their teaching?

3. How do senior high school cope up with the demands of technology integration in

this time of the pandemic?

4. Based on the results, what technology integration activity can be proposed?

1.5. Scope and Limitations

This study will focus on the lived experiences of the science teachers on their

technology integration based on the TPACK framework as they teach science concepts.

The focus of the study is to describe the meaning and the essence of the lived experiences

of the respondents about the technology integration in teaching science. The data will be

gathered through conversational type of interview which will then be interpreted through
line by line interpretation. This interpretation will be the basis of a proposed program to

enhance teachers’ competence in technology integration.

This study is limited only on the lived experiences of the science teachers

in integrating technology in teaching science subjects. The school ICT status, budget

allocation for ICT as well as the principals and other subject teachers are not part of the

study. The interpretation is limited only to the data provided by the respondents. Based

from the data that will gathered the researcher will proposed a training to the Division of

Agusan del Sur if results show that the respondents has the need to undergo training

about TPACK.

In phenomenological research, some of the interview questions asked participants

to recall events, though it is not unusual, it remains a limitation of the study (Heath,

2016). Further limited to science teachers teaching sciences either in Junior High School

or Senior High School or both as long as they have been teaching science for at least

three years. The school also is not a representative of all schools across the region or in

the division. The study is also limited and follows the hermeneutic phenomenological.

Basic themes of hermeneutic phenomenology are interpretation, textual meaning,

dialogue, pre - understanding and tradition.

1.6. Definition of Terms

To provide the clarity of the language and terms used in this study, the following

definitions of some terminologies are offered.

 Lived experiences. It refers to day to day experiences of respondents on how they

integrate technology in their science lessons.

Phenomenon. It refers to the integration of the technology by the science teachers

in teaching science concepts.

Teachers. Refers to the respondents of the study. They are science teachers across

all field in science and are teaching science subjects for three years in either Junior or

Senior High School or both.

 CHAPTER 3

Procedures

2.1. Qualitative Design/Methodology

This study will employ descriptive phenomenological research design (Lopez &

Willis, 2004). Descriptive phenomenological research design is a design that illuminate

and explain a phenomenon as perceived by the one who experience (Abalos et al., 2016).

In descriptive phenomenology, one is considered as a vehicle from which importance

structure of the phenomenon of interest can be assessed and described. This study is

guided with an Husserl’s philosophy ideal of transcendental subjectivity which describes

a state of consciousness wherein researcher is detached from his own lived experiences

and reality (Ziakas & Boukas, 2014) to describe the phenomenon in its purity (Wojnar &

Swanson, 2007). In ensuring that researcher is free from his own perspective, bracketing

is used (Chan et al., 2013; Ibones1 et al., 2016). In this study, it is used to describe and

explore the narrative of the lived experiences of the senior high school science teacher.

Data are generated through conversational interview.

2.2. Research Site

The study will be conducted in the Municipality of Veruela, Agusan del Sur. is a

2nd class municipality in the province of Agusan del Sur, Philippines. According to the

2015 census, it has a population of 43,706 people. There are four senior high schools in

the municipality with a total of 15 science teachers.

2.3. Selection Criteria and Participants

The participants of the study are tentatively five purposively selected senior high

school science teacher. However, data saturation will determine the actual number of the

research participants. The participants will be selected using the following selection

criteria: (1) He/she is a senior high school teacher; (2) He/she is teaching in one of the

senior high schools of the Municipality of Veruela, Agusan del Sur; (3) He/she is

teaching at least one science subject; (4) He/she is assigned to teach using the online

delivery or blended learning delivery.

2.4. Data Collection

Data collection will be conducted using online conversation type interview with

the participants. The participants will be personally asked by the researcher to participate

in this study. They will also be asked on the time and the online media platform to be

used in the conduct of the interview which they feel comfortable, convenient and safe to

divulge information pertaining to this study. All the participants will be briefed about the

study, the risk and benefits of it and the recording of the interview and they will also be

asked to signed an informed consent. The interview may last from 30 minutes to 60

minutes.

2.5. Data Analysis

This study will employ the Colaizzi’s method of analysis in analysing the data

which is commonly used in analysing descriptive phenomenology (Sanders, 2003). In

this study, all interviews will be audio recorded to ensure that all information will be
transcribed correctly for the purpose of meaningful data analysis and will be reviewed as

the need of clarification and verification arise. The interview will provide vital

information on the participant’s lived experiences on their summer internship program.

The recordings of the interview will be listened several times and will be transcribed

verbatim to capture the meanings the participants wanted to convey. Other expressions

such as sighs and pauses are also transcribed. Then, the transcript of the interview will be

translated into English and repeatedly read to fully grasp the meaning of what the

interviewee wanted to communicate and notes significant information and codes.

Maximum codes will be constructed about concepts related to the lived experiences of

the participants. Themes and categories will be formulated through the progress of line-

by-line coding.

2.6. Role of the Researcher

The researcher itself is the key instrument in the study. The researcher will gather

all the necessary information the will be used in the study. The researcher will collect

data, observe verbal and nonverbal gestures during the interview with participants. Ask

permission to audio/video record the interview. The researcher during interview will

actively listen and should refrain from interrupting the participant. The researcher

reflexively identifies biases, values, gender, history, culture and socioeconomic status

that may affect the researcher in the interpretation of data.

2.7. Methods of Validation

 Conceptualization of the study and procedures should match the research problem

stated in the study (Heath, 2016). The study concerns itself with perceptions and

experiences and phenomenological methodology fit with the overall qualitative questions

of how and why. Qualitative research attempts to describe the reality and lived

experiences of participants. While it is impossible to fully capture an objective reality,

returning to the participants and seeking to ensure that what is written fully represents the

participants’ experiences, is a useful method to ensure credibility. The researcher will

return to the participant if needed to confirm that what the researcher heard and

accurately represent the lived experience of the participant. Return to the participants in

order to ensure that the themes and conclusions accurately represented the lived

experience of the participant. Triangulation is also done in order to compare and cross –

check data. Epoche will also be done in the study to attain reflexivity. This will make

clear the role of the researcher and allow experts to evaluate the work with full

understanding of the researcher’s position.

Qualitative research does not generalize; however, some can be transferrable. The

responsibility of transferability does not rest with the researcher, but rather with those

reading the research for application (Merriam, 2009). The researcher cannot know the

ways others may try to transfer her work; instead, her responsibility is to make the work

as detailed as possible so as to make transferability possible. The clearer the case and the

richer and thicker the description of the findings, the more likely it is that a fellow scholar

finds the case transferrable (Creswell, 2013; Merriam, 2009). Phenomenological inquiry
involves synthesizing multiple participants’ views on a certain lived experience and then

reporting on commonalities within the data set (Gardner, 2017).

2.8. Ethical Considerations

The ethical consideration and protocol will be strictly followed in this study. The

participants will be asked for their voluntary participation in the study. All consenting

participants will be assured of utmost confidentiality of their identity and their pertinent

information that may identify them with strict adherence to ethical principles and

standards of research all throughout the conduct of the study. The participants will also

be briefed on the purpose and procedure as well as the risks and benefits in participating

in the study. Written informed consent will be signed by them before the conduct of the

interview. Number is used as identifier of each participant to safeguard his/her identify in

the study report. The participants will also be informed on the time and manner of the

disposal of the data.

References

Abalos, E. E., Rivera, R. Y., Locsin, R. C., & Schoenhofer, S. O. (2016). Husserlian
Phenomenology and Colaizzi’s Method of Data Analysis: Exemplar in Qualitative
Nursing Inquiry Using Nursing As Caring Theory. International Journal for Human
Caring, 20(1), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.20467/1091-5710-20.1.19
Antony, M. K., Paidi, Subali, B., Pradana, S. P., Hapsari, N., & Astuti, F. E. C. (2019).
Teacher’s TPACK Profile: The Affect of Teacher Qualification and Teaching
Experience. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1397(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1397/1/012054
Chan, Z. C., Fung, Y., & Chien, W. (2013). Bracketing in phenomenology : Only
undertaken in the data collection and analysis process ? The Qualitative Report,
18(59), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137326072.0007
DepEd Order No. 32 S. 2020. Guidelines on the Engagement of Services of Learning
Support Aides to Reinforce the Implementation of the Basic Education Learning
 Continuity Plan in Time of COVID-19 Pandemic. DepEd.gov.ph
Gardner, M. (2017). Understanding integrated STEM science instruction through the
experiences of teachers and students, (June)
Ghavifekr, S., & Rosdy, W. A. W. (2015). Teaching and learning with technology:
Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools. International Journal of Research in
Education and Science, 1(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.23596
Hodges, C., et. Al. (2020). The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and
Online Learning. Retrieved August 24, 2020 from
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-
teaching-and-online-learning
Holmberg, J. (2019). Designing for added pedagogical value A design-based research
study of teachers’ educational design with ICT.
http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-162491
Ibones1, N. C., Oliverio, J. S., Ondo, H. J. L., Tagpuno, H. F. C., & Inocian, R. B.
(2016). Señor Santo Niño Devotees’ Lived Experiences in a Fluvial Parade. Asia
Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(2), 180–187.
Irum, S., Munshi, P., Bhatti, T., & Awan, J. H. (2018). University Teachers knowledge
about technological devices and their use: An Analytical study. International
Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 18(8), 74–80.
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is Technological Pedagogical
Content Knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework. 101–111.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5
Lopez, K. A., & Willis, D. G. (2004). Descriptive versus interpretive phenomenology:
Their contributions to nursing knowledge. Qualitative Health Research, 14(5), 726–
735. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304263638
Matua, G. A., & Van Der Wal, D. M. (2015). Differentiating between descriptive and
interpretive phenomenological research approaches. Nurse Researcher, 22(6), 22–
27. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.22.6.22.e1344
Plöger, W., Scholl, D., & Seifert, A. (2018). Bridging the gap between theory and
practice – The effective use of videos to assist the acquisition and application of
pedagogical knowledge in pre-service teacher education. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 58(October 2017), 197–204.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.12.009
Rabacal, J. S., & Alegato, C. C. (2017). K-12 STEM Track in One Public Secondary
School: Opportunities and Challenges. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary
 Research, 5(54), 28–33.
Sanders, C. (2003). Application of Colaizzi’s method: interpretation of an auditable
decision trail by a novice researcher. Contemporary Nurse : A Journal for the
Australian Nursing Profession, 14(3), 292–302.
https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.14.3.292
Singh, A. (2020). Online learning and education for all during and after Covid-19
pandemic. Retrieved August 27, 2020 from
https://www.financialexpress.com/education-2/online-learning-and-education-for-
all-during-and-after-covid-19-pandemic/2021940/
Taimalu, M., & Luik, P. (2019). The impact of beliefs and knowledge on the integration
of technology among teacher educators: A path analysis. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 79, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.012
Tanak, A. (2020). Designing tpack-based course for preparing student teachers to teach
science with technological pedagogical content knowledge. Kasetsart Journal of
Social Sciences, 41(1), 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2018.07.012
Uçar, M. B., Demir, C., & Hiğde, E. (2014). Exploring the Self-confidence of Preservice
Science and Physics Teachers towards Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3381–3384.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.768
Urban, E. R., Navarro, M., & Borron, A. (2018). TPACK to GPACK? The examination
of the technological pedagogical content knowledge framework as a model for
global integration into college of agriculture classrooms. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 73, 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.013
WHO (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Retrieved August 24, 2020 from
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200311-
sitrep-51-COVID-19.pdf
Wojnar, D. M., & Swanson, K. M. (2007). Phenomenology: An Exploration. Journal of
Holistic Nursing, 25(3), 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898010106295172
Yildirim, H. I., & Sensoy, O. (2018). Effect of science teaching enriched with
technological practices on attitudes of secondary school 7 th grade students towards
science course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(5), 947–959.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2018.060516
Yildiz, A. (2018). TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (
TPACK ) CRAFT : UTILIZATION OF THE TPACK WHEN DESIGNING THE
GEOGEBRA, 11(1), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.11.1.8.
Ziakas, V., & Boukas, N. (2014). Contextualizing phenomenology in event management
research: Deciphering the meaning of event experiences. International Journal of
Event and Festival Management, 5(1), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEFM-08-
2012-0023