Perceived Effects of The Communication Barriers Among Arts and Humanities Students During Covid 19 Pandemic

CAGAYAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF THE COMMUNICATION BARRIERS AMONG ARTS

AND HUMANITIES STUDENTS DURING COVID 19 PANDEMIC
_______________________________________
A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the

College of Arts and Sciences
Cagayan State University
Carig Campus,
Tuguegarao City
____________________________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Arts in Communication
____________________________________
by
Mark Jade S. Etsa

Erica M. Ecita
YRMELYZA RODRIGUEZ
Adviser
Chapter 1
1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction
The coronavirus or COVID 19 pandemic has put everything on hold, including
business, vacation plans, dreams, and more. Schools are no exception. Many facilities here in
the Philippines have been closed due to a pandemic, and face-to-face classes are banned in all
schools to reduce the effects of the virus and protect students. This was the beginning of the
new normal or online learning classes.
As online learning became established as a normal in academic institutions and even
other workplaces, the role of communication was questioned when there was much debate
and debate about its implementation. The pandemic has changed the way people
communicate. At such times, when interaction between people is limited, it is necessary to
emphasize the importance of communication, which is an important way to connect with
people.
Communication is considered one of the most important elements of life. It has
become a part of our daily lives, sending and receiving information and ideas to each other.
Understanding and learning shared ideas is the result of successful communication. It is also
used in various educational institutions, especially schools, when teachers and students
interact for effective learning and career growth. Recent studies have shown that classroom
communication is associated with academic performance (Ndongko, 2015).
Being able to communicate effectively leads to the achievement of your goals. For
this reason, successful communication between teachers and students plays a decisive role in
the success of the course. Achieving these goals is difficult due to communication barriers.
Barriers to physical, perceptual, emotional, cultural, language, gender and interpersonal

2
relationships. These factors are the reasons why researchers have decided to carry out this
study. At the end of this study, we provide comprehensive insights into the impact of
communication barriers during online learning while facing COVID 19 pandemic.
Theoretical Framework
Cybernetics Theory Tradition of Communication
Cybernetics is a bit one of a kind than the other communication traditions. It examines
the general workings of communication when it comes to systems. A system being “a system
of parts, or variables, that affect one another, form and manage the individual of the general
system” (Littlejohn & Foss, 2008, p. 40).
The time period is a transliteration of the Greek phrase which means controller, ruler
and illustrates the way wherein feedback allows data processing in the minds and computers.
These systems have been capable of allow for the future trajectory of an enemy flight
primarily based totally on the sooner taken measures concerning its movement. The time
period of feedback, proposed through Wiener, enabled cybernetic lifestyle to be embedded in
the belief, assuming that communication is a link among separate elements of any system, i.e.
computer, family, institution, media systems” (Podgorecki, 2004).
Communication is theorized as discursive reflection. Social justice may be restored
while ideological distortions are recognized via communication practices that permit vital
reflection. The relevance of the theory to the topic is that both of them explore the attitude
and the relationship among persona and one’s communication. It is simple to apprehend the
collaboration among communication and psychology in the experience that one’s persona or
mental influence will impact how they react to sure messages, and the way they talk their
personal values, in the shape of discovering in positive stereotypical behaviour.
3
Conceptual Framework
Simple Input-Process-Output conceptual framework.
Feedback
INPUT
1. Review of Related Literature and Studies
2. Communication Barriers PROCESS OUTPUT
 Social and Cultural 1. Identify the communication barr
1. Descriptive research
 Temporal 2. Gathering data through during the COVID 19 outbreak.
 Contextual questionnaire/survey form
 Technological 3. Data analysis 2. Recommendations
 Psychological  Analyze the problem and respondents
 Collaboration 4. Statistical tools
3. Demographics  Mean
a. Sex  Percentage
 Descriptive interpretations
4
Figure 1. Research Diagram
Statement of the Problem
Generally, this study aims to determine the effect of the communications barriers
The questions that this research wants to answer are the following:
1. What is the profile of the respondents in term of:
a. Sex
b. Age
c. Course
d. Gadget/s used
e. Number of online course/subjects
f. Ethnicity
g. Location
h. Year level
2. How frequent that the respondents experience the communication barriers?
3. Is there significant relationship in the extent of experiencing/encountering
communication barriers by the respondents when grouped according to their profile
variables?
Significance of the Study
5
This study will reveal what communication barrier affects the students during online class
while facing the COVID 19 pandemic. Moreover, the study will be beneficial to the
following:
Respondents. The respondents will have awareness on what are the factors
affecting their academic performance. Through the recommendations of the researchers,
they would have various ideas on how they will mitigate possible negative effects of the
barriers they experienced.
Faculty or Teachers. The result of the study can be an assessment tool to provide
activities that are conducive to the students’ situation so that they could still enjoy the
learning environment.
Parents. This study will give them an idea to monitor their children if they are
struggling in their learning environment.
Future Researchers. The findings of the study will serve as reference material and
a guide for future researchers who wish to conduct the same type of study.
Scope and Delimitation of the Study
The conduct of analysis is limited to the available data gathered since the study is
done during the Corona Virus or COVID-19 pandemic. The respondents of this study are the
Arts and Humanities students enrolled in the academic year 2021-2022 Cagayan State
University Carig Campus.
6
This study will only focus on the topic: PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF THE
COMMUNICATION BARRIERS AMONG ARTS AND HUMANITIES STUDENTS
DURING COVID 19 PANDEMIC
The communication barriers used to determine the perceived barriers are anchored
from the study Abu Bakar, Kiramat Shah, and Xu Qingyu in their study “The Effect of
Communication Barriers on Distance Learners Achievements.” (2020).
The following are the communication barriers on the said study:
A. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL BARRIERS
Communication is a social interaction process that involves intra-individual, interpersonal,
and small group interactions. However, there are many obstacles to the effectiveness of this
social contact process. People socialize through communication, which is regarded as an
important tool in social education. In an educational environment, communication is a means
of establishing mutual understanding between students and teachers. However, there are
some obstacles in education that prevent the communication process from being as effective
as possible.
B. TEMPORAL BARRIERS
Time Barriers are linked to Temporal Barriers. In distant education, the greatest barrier to
communication is time. Because of the weak postal infrastructure, students do not receive
their course materials, assignments, or letters on time. Students deal with the anxiety of
running out of time, which is one of the leading causes of dropout. Distance education
students' learning abilities are influenced by time constraints. Teachers' attitudes, insufficient
communication access, time limits, and time pressures, as noted by Pajo and Wallace (2001),
cause barriers in the teaching-learning process.

7
C. TECHNICAL BARRIERS
Humans are thrust into a competitive world as technology advances. Educational
institutes can expand their knowledge globally thanks to Internet technology and computer-
mediated communication. However, there are some technical barriers to technology access
around the world, which refer to individual skill in using technology. However, as
communication technologies progress, such technological distances are shrinking.
Communication technologies are improving at a rapid pace, and communication tools are
bringing people together via the internet (Isbulan, 2011).
D. PSYCHOLOGICAL BARRIERS
Psychological or mental barriers are obstacles that people's thoughts erect in order to keep
them from communicating. A psychological condition can also influence it (Brainerd, J. C.)
(2020). The mental disorder that impairs communication makes communicators nervous.
Because each person's mind is distinct and different, psychological barriers are also known as
mind-related issues. People engaging in communication differ in their mental states. Their
anxiety and emotions create communication hurdles.
E. CONTEXTUAL BARRIERS
Individuals' communication processes are hampered by contextual constraints. Words
used by one person may have a distinct meaning in the context of another. Both utilize words
in distinct contexts, resulting in differing levels of understanding due to contextual meanings.
As a result, it is critical to comprehend words along with their context meanings, which
improves an individual's comprehension level.
F. COLLABORATION BARRIERS
8
Collaboration is teamwork in which people are directed to work together to achieve
communal assignments and goals. They communicate with each other and share ideas and
knowledge to gain their goals. As communication moves through small groups, people get to
interact with each other, but at the same time, they face some barriers which hinder their
communication process. Like in the education sector, students used to combine study for their
tough task and make them understandable. But it is not possible in the distance education
system because of geographical distances. However, collaboration among students enhances
learning and increases motivation. But some communication barriers hinder collaboration
learning.
CHAPTER II
9
REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE
In online learning, teachers have many different ways to conduct their classes
and teach their lessons, one obvious way is through video calls using different mobile
applications like zoom meeting and Google meet. Teachers can also present their lessons
through PowerPoint presentations, podcasts, PDFs, and other online resources. But we’ve
seen different scenarios, communication barriers are increasing or emerging in education as
technologies improve and expand their scope. Due to the increasing number of people with
Internet-capable devices and the opportunities for collaboration and problem solving,
communication barriers are being faced in education. This chapter presents a brief review of
the literature of studies that are related to this study.
RELATED LITERATURE
In a study presented by A. İŞMAN et al. (2003), they identified that there is an issue
in the adaptability of students and teachers to the new learning system. In addition to this,
they concluded that loss of motivation contributes to the low performance of the students.
Due to lack of face-to-face contact and feedback from teachers and students and vice versa,
there would be difficulty in evaluating the participation of each other. Technological barriers
under communication barriers also affect the performance of the students.
Pajo (2001) pointed out that the lack of ability to use the Internet is related to
technology. This prevents students from turning their intentions into actions. This study
explores Internet accessibility and skills using new technologies. Devices are also
recommended. Improving Social Media Networking Education-Learning Process.
10
Bakar et al. (2020) Point out that when learning online, learners face major
communication challenges. The study concludes that communication barriers, such as
technical and cultural barriers, intersect, increasing learner complexity and anxiety, and
significantly contributing to poor academic performance.
Asirvatham (2000) pointed out that all businesses and industries face difficulties in
creating a well-educated workforce. Not everyone can participate in a classroom-oriented
learning environment. Distance learning is a powerful asset for bridging access to education
and long distances between people. Alternative opportunities from technology providers
complement the forum for sound communication and interaction through technical or group
performance. Whatever the issues, such as interaction and lack of course technology, distance
learning is an opportunity to compete with traditional classroom styles.
A review study by F. DABAJ (2011) concludes that there are three main categories of
distance learning. (1) Student barriers, (2) Teacher barriers, and (3) Administrative barriers.
Note that the three distance learning perspectives can be combined into six categories: (1)
technology, (2) infrastructure / service support, (3) society, (4) prerequisite skills, and (5).
please. Motivation; and (6) time interruption.
Alawamleh (2020) concluded in his research that online learning has a negative
impact on the communication between the instructor and student, especially that his study
was conducted during the pandemic. The majority of his respondents still prefer face-to-face
classes over online classes due to the many problems they face when taking online classes,
some of which include: their lack of motivation and understanding of the material, the
11
decrease in communication levels between the students and their instructors, and their
increased feeling of isolation caused by online classes.
Baticulon et al, (2021) pointed out in their research that there were five (5) identified
categories of communication barriers in online learning: technological, individual, domestic,
institutional, and community barriers. Their study was conducted during the pandemic and
medical students were the primary respondents of the study. It was identified that the most
frequent barrier experienced was the adjustment of learning style where they have to perform
their responsibilities online and at home and poor communication between instructors and
students.
Galusha (2001) pointed out that distance learning is an excellent way to reach adult
learners. Adult learners want a high degree of flexibility. The distance learning structure
gives adults maximum control over the time, place and pace of lessons. However, it is not
without problems. Student withdrawal due to lack of face-to-face communication, potentially
exorbitant start-up costs, and lack of teacher support are barriers to successful distance
learning.
Sali (2008) pointed out in his study that the lack of social interaction is a discouraging
barrier for distance learning students. The researcher's work also supports the value of social
interaction. Therefore, the above research paper points out that there are some
communication barriers to online learning. To design an effective online learning system,
communication barriers need to be resolved, or at least minimized.
According to Stošić of 2015 the use of technology to assist in the processing and
dissemination of knowledge is not new. Over the past 50 years, rapid technological advances
in computer and communication technologies facilitated the development of alternative
educational methods and the supporting technological tools.

12
Shahabadi & Uplane (2015) said that it has available educational methods that can be
used in distance learning that are divided into two basic categories: synchronous and
asynchronous learning. Farhad (2017) defined synchronous learning as course delivery with
all members presents on the same time even in distinct places. It simulates study room
teaching techniques wherein members are not bodily placed in the same area however are
geographically dispersed. It is also completed upon a predefined schedule, which needs to be
accompanied by all of the members while asynchronous learning is more flexible method of
learning, where learners have access to course materials on their own schedule from virtually
any place. Learners are not required to attend at the same time.
Algahtani (2011) described the completely online mode as “synchronous” or
“asynchronous” by the application of applying optional timing of interaction. The
synchronous timing comprises alternate on-line access between teachers or instructors and
learners, or between leaners, and the asynchronous, to him allows all participants to post
communications to any other participant over the internet.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design, respondents of the study, the followed data
gathering procedure and the statistical tools used in the study.
Research Design
13
This study is a quantitative research study through a survey. The researchers used a
descriptive method in this research. It describes the data gathered and the process regarding
what effects of communication barriers the respondents experience during the COVID-19
outbreak. This research design is the most fitting one because it is a fact-finding study with
an adequate and accurate interpretation of findings. The descriptive method of research will
help the researcher obtain information and justification needed to fully understand the
research in connection with the problem of the study.
Locale of the Study
This research was conducted at the Cagayan State University Carig Campus,
Tuguegarao City. Due to the pandemic, the survey was answered by the respondents online
by sending them personal copies of the survey itself through google forms.
Respondents and Sampling Procedure
The respondents of this study are the third-year students of Bachelor of Arts in
Communication (AB COMM), Bachelor of Science in Industrial Commercial (BS ICC) and
Communication and Bachelor of Arts in English and Language Studies (ABELS) which are
courses are under the Arts and Humanities Department of College of Arts and Sciences at
Cagayan State University Carig Campus in the first semester, academic year 2021-2022.
The researchers are able gather data from the respondents’ experiences that will help
in answering the concern of this study. Complete enumeration sampling procedure will be
used in this study as the respondents’ populations exposed to online learning are involved.
14
Table 1. Number of respondents enrolled in the first semester
Course N
Bachelor of Arts in 16
Communication
Bachelor of Arts in English 20
Language Studies
Bachelor of Science in Industrial 29
and Commercial
Communication
Total 65
Thus, there are 65 respondents in the study.
Research Instrument
This study used a google form survey made by the researchers and verified by the
adviser. The questionnaire consisted of two parts. The first one elicited data about the profile
of the respondents and the second part are the communication barriers with have five
indicators each which the students frequently encounter.
Below is the survey form that will serve as the research instrument for this study.
PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF THE COMMUNICATION BARRIERS AMONG ARTS

AND HUMANITIES STUDENTS DURING COVID 19 PANDEMIC
To help us generate result on the barriers experienced by the Arts and Humanities
students during the pandemic, we would like to ask you to take few minutes of your time to
answer this survey. Thank you!
PART 1. DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
Name: ____________________________ Age: _________

15
Year: _____________________________ Sex: _________
Ethnicity: __________________________ Current Address: _______________________
No. of course/subject: _________
Gadget/s used in flexible online learning:
_____1. Cellphone/smart phone _____2. Laptop
_____3. Personal Computer (PC) _____4. iPad
_____5. Others
PART 2. Communication Barriers
Directions: The following are communication barriers during the implementation of flexible
online learning that students frequently encounter. Choose below that corresponds to your
opinion.
A. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL BARRIERS
Always Sometimes Rarely Never

STATEMENT
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. Differences of socio-economic status
among learners create hindrance in
the learning.
2. Different orientation or cultural
background affects the way one
communicates or interacts with
others.
3. Because of cultural differences,
students are reluctant and
uncomfortable to express their ideas,
opinions and point of views in class
discussion.
4. Because students are from other
locale and culture, communication
and language are becoming more of a
problem.
5. Because of racial stereotypes,
students from marginalized or
minority groups might feel intense
pressure to work harder than other
16
students at academics.
B. TEMPORAL BARRIERS

STATEMENT
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. Lack of immediate feedback from the
instructor causes time pressure to the
students.
2. Multiple assignments and projects in
a single deadline date will drain the
students.
3. Course materials not always uploaded
on time in the course site affect the
teaching-learning process.
4. Personal and school responsibilities
cause difficulty among students in
managing their time wisely.
5. Instructors who delay and cancel their
class schedule may cause time
conflict with other class subjects.
C. TECHNICAL BARRIERS

STATEMENT
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. Poor connectivity will lead to
difficulty in joining online class.
2. Lack of essential gadget/s for online
class will lead to poor participation in
class.
3. Sudden removal from an ongoing
class affects the student’s
performance.
4. Lack of technical knowledge in using
different online class platforms will
lead to poor participation in class.
5. Students experience technical
disturbances like crashing of the
application or the course site, screen
17
freezing, echoes and blurred screen

resolution.
D. PSYCHOLOGICAL BARRIERS

STATEMENT
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. Lack of quick feedback from the
instructor causes anxiety.
2. Pressure from family, friends and
relatives will affect the student’s
performance during class.
3. Virtual learning fatigue may lead to
anxiety and stress for both students
and professor.
4. Resistance to online learning
platforms causes low interest of
learning among students as they still
prefer face-to-face classes.
5. Procrastination causes pressure,
stress, and anxiety among students.
E. CONTEXTUAL BARRIERS

STATEMENT
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. Lack of understanding messages
because of differences in assumptions
leads to miscommunication.
2. Poor understanding of context clues
during discussion leads to confusion
to the topic discussed.
3. Low level of understanding context
causes poor comprehension to the
message received.
4. Hearing unfamiliar words or phrase
for the first time will lead to
confusion.
5. Cultural background may affect one’s
contextual understanding.
18
F. COLLABORATION BARRIERS

STATEMENT
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. Unresponsive group members during
online class leads to poor group
performance.
2. Different opinions lead to
misunderstanding between and among
the members group.
3. Differences of time zone create
problems among online learners.
4. Inability of managing the group
workflow leads to cramming and
dissatisfaction of output.
5. Not knowing the group members
during online class affect the
communication and group
performance.
Data Gathering Procedure
The instrument of data collection is an online survey through a questionnaire. The
data gathering procedure is done through questionnaires disseminated online to the
respondents through the use of google forms. But before designating the survey, the class
advisers of the respondents is informed for approval.
The instrument used to gather data undergone to a content validation with the help of
communication specialist that help the researchers to gather more credible result for the
study.
After the respondents answered the survey, the results gathered by the researchers
were analysed using statistical tool by help of a statistician.
19
Moreover, the results were validated and the researchers tabulated the results and
eventually make conclusions.
Data Analysis
After the data gathering, the answered were checked by the researchers with the help
of their adviser. After getting the results, the data gathered through the questionnaire were
tallied, computed and treated with the following statistical tool using 0.05 level of
significance.
Frequency and percentage were used to establish the respondents’ profile in terms of
sex, age, course, gadget/s used, number of subjects, ethnicity and location.
Also, weighted mean was used to establish the mean score of the respondents’
experiences on communication barriers with the Four Point Likert-Scale, with 4 meaning,
“Always;” 3 meaning, “Sometimes;” 2 meaning, “Rarely” and 1 meaning, “Never”. The
students returned the completed surveys to the researchers to start analyzing the data
collected.
Scale for the Communication Barrier Experienced by the Respondents
Legend:
Descriptive Center Limits of mean Scale Category Mean

Interpretation score
Always 3.26-4.00 4 3.26-4.00
20
Sometimes 2.26-3.25 3 2.26-3.25
Rarely 1.26-2.25 2 1.26-2.25
Never 1.00-1.25 1 1.00-1.25
In order to categorically answer the problems raised in the study, the following statistical
tools is used.
Mean. Mean or average was employed to determine the overall picture of a set of data.
Formula:
x=___ƩXn___
Where: x- the computed mean
Xn- the set of scores
N- The number of respondents
Percentage. The percentage was used to determine the space occupied by each stratum or
item in the frequency table of the variables considered in the study.
Formula:
P= _____f____×100
21
Where: P- computed percentage
f- Frequency or number of responses
N- Number respondents
100- constant
Lastly, chi square and Pearson-r were utilized to find out existing relationship in the
extent of experiencing/encountering communication barriers by the respondents and their
profile variables. This was used to establish whether the computed correlation coefficients are
significant.
22
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
The succeeding portion of this chapter presents the data analysis and interpretation of
tables.
Table 1. Profile of the Respondents
Age of the Respondents
Table 1.1 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents when
group according to age. It can be obtained in the table that most of respondents are aged 21
with the frequency of 33 or 51% followed by 20 years old with frequency of 17 or 26% and
the least is at age 22 years old with frequency of 7 or 11%.
Table1.1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents when Grouped

According to Age.
AGE FREQUENCY PERCENT
20 17 26
21 33 51
22 7 11
23 and above 8 12
TOTAL 65 100
Sex of the Respondents
23
The table 1.2 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents by
sex. The table revealed that most of the respondents are female with the frequency of 54 or
83% the male respondents on the other hand with frequency of 11 or 17%. The frequency
and percentage of the respondents according to sex are from the combined three (3) courses
from the Arts and Humanities Department. The respondents of this study is represented
mostly by female.

According to Sex.
SEX FREQUENCY PERCENT
Male 11 17
Female 54 83
Total 65 100
Course of the Respondents
Table 1.3 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents
according to course or program taken by the respondents. The table shows that most of the
respondents are from Bachelor of Science in Information and Commercial Communication
(ICC) with the frequency of 31 or 47% followed by Bachelor of Arts in English Language
Studies with the frequency of 20 or 31% and the least are from Bachelor of Arts in
Communication (AB Comm) with frequency of 14 or 22%.

According to Course.
SEX FREQUENCY PERCENT
AB ENGLISH 20 31
BS ICC 31 47
AB COMM 14 22
24
Total 65 100
Gadgets used by the Respondents
The table 1.4. presents the frequency and percentage distribution of respondents when
grouped according to the gadgets used by the respondents in online-learning. Base on the
table below, most of the respondents use their cellphone in online-learning with the frequency
of 47 or 72% followed by laptop with the frequency of 16 or 24% and the list are personal
computer and iPad with only 2 % of the respondents’ population.
Table 1.4. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents when Grouped

According to Gadgets used in Online Learning.
Gadgets Used Frequency Percentage
Cellphone 47 72
Laptop 16 24
Personal Computer (PC) 1 2
iPad 1 2
Total 65 100
Number of Subjects of the Respondents
Table 1.5 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of respondents when
grouped according to the number of subjects taken as of 1 st semester of the current academic
year 2020-2021. Most of the respondents took 7 subjects last semester with the frequency of
41 or 63% of the respondents’ population followed by the respondents who took 8 subjects
with frequency of 16 or 23%. There are also respondents who have 3 and 9 subjects who
have tied with frequency of 3 or 3% and the least is 4 and 6 subjects with 2% percent of the
respondents’ population
25

According to Number of Subject.
Number of Subject Frequency Percentage
3 3 5
4 1 2
5 0 0
6 1 2
7 41 63
8 16 23
9 3 5
Total 65 100
Ethnicity of the Respondents
grouped according to the ethnicity of the respondents. Base on the table below, most of the
respondents are Ilocano with the frequency of 26 or 40% followed by It awes with the
frequency of 21 or 31% followed by Tagalog with frequency number of 15 or 23% and the
remaining percentage of the population are Ibanag, Malaueg, and Igorot with percentage of
2%.

According to Ethnicity.
Ethnicity Frequency Percentage
Ilocano 26 40
Ibanag 1 2
Itawes 21 31
26
Tagalog 15 23
Malaueg 1 2
Igorot 1 2
Total 65 100
Location of the Respondents
grouped according to the location the respondents while undergoing online-learning. Base on
the result, majority of the respondents are from Cagayan Valley with the frequency of 57 or
88% followed by respondents who are from Manila with frequency of 4 or 6% and the least
are from Isabela and Bulacan with frequency of 32 or 3% of the respondents’ population

According to Location.
Location Frequency Percentage
Cagayan Valley 57 88
Isabela 2 3
Manila 4 6
Bulacan 2 3
Total 65 100
Table 2. Respondents’ Experience on Communication Barriers
Social and Cultural Barriers
Table 2.1 presents the total mean score, scale and the descriptive interpretation or
value of the respondents’ experience on Social and Cultural Barriers. The table below shows
27
that most of the respondents experience the Number 1. Indicator “Differences of socio-
economic status among learners create hindrance in the learning.” With a total mean
score of 3.15 or “Sometimes” as its descriptive value followed by Number 2. Indicator
“Different orientation or cultural background affects the way one communicates or
interacts with others.” with a total mean score of 3.11 or “Sometimes” as its descriptive
value. This is also followed by Number 5 Indicator “Because of racial stereotypes,
students from marginalized or minority groups might feel intense pressure to work
harder than other students at academics.” with total mean score of 3.02 and “Sometimes”
as its descriptive value. Indicators 3 and 4 with the total mean score of 2.97 and 2.89 with
both “Sometimes” as their descriptive value, respectively.
Social and Cultural Barriers experienced by the respondents falls under the category
mean of 3.03 as its total mean score and falls under descriptive interpretation as
“Sometimes”.
Table 2.1 Mean Score, Scale and Descriptive Interpretation of the Respondents’
Experience on Social and Cultural Barriers.
Social and Cultural Barriers Mean Scale Descriptive
Indicators Score Interpretation
1. Differences of socio-economic
status among learners create 3.15 3 Sometimes
hindrance in the learning.
2. Different orientation or cultural
background affects the way
3.11 3 Sometimes
one communicates or interacts
with others.
3. Because of cultural
differences, students are
reluctant and uncomfortable to
2.97 3 Sometimes
express their ideas, opinions
and point of views in class
discussion.
4. Because students are from 2.89 3 Sometimes
other locale and culture,
communication and language
28
are becoming more of a

problem.
5. Because of racial stereotypes,
students from marginalized or
minority groups might feel
3.02 3 Sometimes
intense pressure to work harder
than other students at
academics.
Category Mean 3.03 3 Sometimes
On a study conducted by Bhat et al., (2016) found that the students with high
socioeconomic status have high academic achievement than students with middle
socioeconomic status and low socioeconomic status.
Temporal Barriers
value of the respondents’ experience on Temporal Barriers. It can be obtained from the table
that most of the respondents experience Temporal Barrier Number 2 Indicator “Multiple
assignments and projects in a single deadline date will drain the students.” during
online-learning with its total mean score of 3.57 or “Always” as its descriptive interpretation.
This is followed by Indicator Number 4 “Personal and school responsibilities cause
difficulty among students in managing their time wisely.” with total mean score of 3.48 or
“Always” as its descriptive value. Followed by Indicator Number 5 “Instructors who
delay and cancel their class schedule may cause time conflict with other class subjects.”
with a total mean score of 3.32 or “Always” as its descriptive value. Indicators Number 1
and 3 with the total mean of 3.28 and 3.11 or “Always” and “Sometimes” as their
descriptive interpretation, respectively.
The Temporal Barrier experienced by the respondents during online learning falls
under the category mean of 3.35 as its total mean, meanwhile “Always” as its descriptive
value.
29
Experience on Temporal Barriers.
Temporal Barriers Indicators Mean Scale Descriptive
Score Interpretation
1. Lack of immediate feedback
from the instructor causes 3.28 4 Always
time pressure to the students.
2. Multiple assignments and
projects in a single deadline 3.57 4 Always
date will drain the students.
3. Course materials not always
uploaded on time in the
3.11 3 Sometimes
course site affect the
teaching-learning process.
4. Personal and school
responsibilities cause
3.48 4 Always
difficulty among students in
managing their time wisely.
5. Instructors who delay and
cancel their class schedule
3.32 4 Always
may cause time conflict with
other class subjects.
Category Mean 3.35 4 Always
Similarly, Yilmaz (2017) discovered that students in an online setting procrastinate
more than their traditional face-to-face counterparts on assignment submissions. Given how
life circumstances can affect schoolwork, this is understandable. The e-learning environment
places a great demand on students' self-regulation because of its completely independent
nature.
Technical Barriers
value of the respondents’ experience on Technical Barriers during online-learning. The data
30
presented below shows that most of the respondents experience Technical Barrier Indicator
Number 1 “Poor connectivity will lead to difficulty in joining online class.” with a total
mean score of 3.72 or “Always” as its descriptive value. Followed by Indicator Number 2
“Lack of essential gadget/s for online class will lead to poor participation in class.” with
a total mean score of 3.57 or “Always” as its descriptive value. This is also followed by
Indicator Number 5 “Students experience technical disturbances like crashing of the
application or the course site, screen freezing, echoes and blurred screen resolution.”
with a total mean score of 3.45 or “Always” as its descriptive value. Indicators 3 and 4 are
the least experienced by the respondents with a total mean score of 3.34 and 3.20 or both
“Sometimes” as their descriptive interpretation, respectively.
The Technical Barriers experienced by the respondents during online learning falls
under the category mean of 3.46 as its total mean score and falls under descriptive
interpretation of “Always”.
Experience on Technical Barriers.
Technical Barriers Indicators Mean Score Scale Descriptive
Interpretation
1. Poor connectivity will lead
to difficulty in joining 3.72 4 Always
online class.
2. Lack of essential gadget/s
for online class will lead to 3.57 4 Always
poor participation in class.
3. Sudden removal from an
ongoing class affects the 3.34 4 Sometimes
student’s performance.
4. Lack of technical
knowledge in using
different online class 3.20 3 Sometimes
platforms will lead to poor
participation in class.
5. Students experience 3.45 4 Always
31
technical disturbances like

crashing of the application
or the course site, screen
freezing, echoes and blurred
screen resolution.
Internet connection issues in an online learning environment have a significant impact
on students' performance and involvement in class. According to research undertaken by
Siddiquah and Salim (2017) and Bisht et al. (2020), internet signal issues may constitute an
impediment to students' learning. Wickramanayake and Muhammad Jika (2018) found the
same thing, showing that inconsistent internet connections are one of the challenges for
students.
Psychological Barriers
value of the respondents’ experience on Psychological Barriers during online-learning. The
respondents mostly experience Psychological Barrier Indicator Number 2 “Pressure from
family, friends and relatives will affect the student’s performance during class.” during
online learning with a total mean score of 3.45 or “Always” as its descriptive interpretation.
This indicator is followed by Indicator Number 3 “Virtual learning fatigue may lead to
anxiety and stress for both students and professor.” With a total mean score of 3.37 or
“Always” as its descriptive value. Third on this is Indicator Number 5 “Procrastination
causes pressure, stress, and anxiety among students.” with total mean score of 3.31 or
“Always” as its descriptive value. Indicators 1 and 4 are the least experienced by the
32
respondents with 3.00 and 3.23 total mean scores and both “Sometimes” as their descriptive
interpretation, respectively.
The Psychological Barriers experienced by the respondents during online-learning
falls under the category mean 3.27 as its overall total mean score and interpreted as
“Always” descriptively.
Experience on Psychological Barriers.
Psychological Barriers Indicators Mean Score Scale Descriptive

Interpretation
1. Lack of quick feedback from
3.00 3 Sometimes
the instructor causes anxiety.
2. Pressure from family, friends
and relatives will affect the
3.45 4 Always
student’s performance during
class.
3. Virtual learning fatigue may
lead to anxiety and stress for 3.37 4 Always
both students and professor.
4. Resistance to online learning
platforms causes low interest
of learning among students as 3.23 3 Sometimes
they still prefer face-to-face
classes.
5. Procrastination causes
pressure, stress, and anxiety 3.31 4 Always
among students.
Academic pressure from parents on children to meet their unreasonable goals,
combined with a lack of positive feedback, can be damaging to their self-esteem.' Positive
reinforcement from major adults in the child's life, mostly the parents, is required to foster
self-esteem, a sense of value, and the confidence to confront the world. Many of the early
33
theorists who explained the antecedents of self-esteem believe that parents have a crucial role
in the formation of self-esteem. (Srivastava, 2017)
Contextual Barriers
value of the respondents’ experience on Contextual Barriers during online-learning. It shows
in the table that most of the respondents experience the Number 1. Indicator “Lack of
understanding messages because of differences in assumptions leads to
miscommunication.” with a total mean score of 3.35 or “Always” as its descriptive value
followed by Number 2. Indicator “Poor understanding of context clues during
discussion leads to confusion to the topic discussed.” with a total mean score of 3.34 or
“Always” as its descriptive value. This is also followed by Number 3 Indicator “Low level
of understanding context causes poor comprehension to the message received.” with
total mean score of 3.31 and “Always” as its descriptive value. Indicators 4 and 5 with the
total mean score of 3.22 and 2.94 with both “Sometimes” as their descriptive value,
respectively.
Contextual Barriers experienced by the respondents’ falls under the category mean of
3.23 as its total mean score and falls under descriptive interpretation as “Sometimes”.
Experience on Contextual Barriers.
Contextual Barriers Indicators Mean Scale Descriptive
1. Lack of understanding messages
because of differences in
3.35 4 Always
assumptions leads to
miscommunication.
2. Poor understanding of context 3.34 4 Always
34
clues during discussion leads to

confusion to the topic discussed.
3. Low level of understanding
context causes poor
3.31 4 Always
comprehension to the message
received.
4. Hearing unfamiliar words or
phrase for the first time will lead 3.22 3 Sometimes
to confusion.
5. Cultural background may affect
2.94 3 Sometimes
one’s contextual understanding.
Differences in contextual clues: Verbal / Linguistic clues such as lexicon, accent,
pronunciation, as well as non-verbal clues such as gestures, mimics, and intonation;
politeness techniques, individual differences; thinking; values and beliefs can be a reason to
miscommunication. The absence of previous knowledge and the delivery of the speech are
further factors contributing to the issues. (Özdemir-Çağatay & Küllü-Sülü, 2013)
Collaboration Barriers
value of the respondents’ experience on Collaboration Barriers. It can be obtained from the
table that most of the respondents experience Temporal Barrier Number 1 Indicator
“Unresponsive group members during online class lead to poor group performance.”
during online-learning with its total mean score of 3.54 or “Always” as its descriptive
interpretation. This is followed by Indicator Number 5 “Not knowing the group members
during online class affect the communication and group performance.” with total mean
score of 3.29 or “Always” as its descriptive value. Followed by Indicator Number 3 and 4
with the same total mean score of 3.09 or “Sometimes” as its descriptive value. Indicators
Number 2 with the total mean of 3.08 or “Sometimes” as its descriptive interpretation.
35
The Collaboration Barrier experienced by the respondents during online learning falls
under the category mean of 3.22 as its total mean, meanwhile “Sometimes” as its descriptive
value.
Experience on Collaboration Barriers.
Descriptive
Collaboration Barriers Indicators Mean Score Scale
Interpretation
1. Unresponsive group members
during online class lead to poor 3.54 4 Always
group performance.
2. Different opinions lead to
misunderstanding between and 3.08 3 Sometimes
among the members group.
3. Differences of time zone create
problems among online 3.09 3 Sometimes
learners.
4. Inability of managing the
group workflow leads to
3.09 3 Sometimes
cramming and dissatisfaction
of output.
5. Not knowing the group
members during online class
3.29 4 Always
affect the communication and
group performance.
Summary of Respondents’ Experiences on the Communication Barriers
Table 2.7 presents the summary of communication barriers that the respondents’
experience during online-learning. It can be obtained in the data below that the most frequent
communication Barrier that the respondents experience in online learning with a total mean
score of 3.46 or “Always” as its descriptive value is Technical Barriers followed by
Temporal Barriers with total mean score of 3.35 or “Always” as its descriptive value.
Followed by Psychological Barriers with total mean score of 3.27 or “Always” as its
36
descriptive value. Social and Cultural Barriers, Contextual Barriers and Collaboration
Barriers are the least frequent communication barriers experienced by the respondents with
total mean scores of 3.03, 3.23 and 3.22 or “Sometimes” as their descriptive value,
respectively.
Table 2.7 Summary of the Experiences of the Respondents to Communication Barriers
Category Mean Descriptive

Communication Barriers Scale
Social and Cultural Barrier 3.03 3 Sometimes
Temporal Barrier 3.35 4 Always
Technical Barrier 3.46 4 Always
Psychological Barrier 3.27 4 Always
Contextual Barrier 3.23 3 Sometimes
Collaboration Barrier 3.22 3 Sometimes
Table 3 revealed that majority of the communication barriers does not have significant
relationship between the respondents’ profile and their experience to communication barriers.
The communication barriers do not depend on the specific profile. However, the data below
also shows that Technical Barriers have a significant relationship on the location of the
respondents at 0.05 significant level.
The result conveys that the respondents’ experience to technical barriers is dependent
to their location. This means that respondents most likely experience technical barrier – for
example, poor connectivity in internet will lead to difficulty in joining online class – if their
location does not have enough access to internet connection specially in the rural areas.
A study conducted by Das et al, (2021) who studied about challenges to online-
learning in rural and remote areas in India revealed that lack of internet connectivity and data
usage is a problem the rural areas. The study also found out that in rural and isolated places,
37
the benefits of holding online classes are limited. Even while communications and the
internet are widely available in India's rural areas, not every location has a reliable network or
Internet access. As a result, students are unable to attend classes or take exams.
Table 3. Significant Relationship between the Respondents’ Profile and their
Experience/Encounter to Communication Barriers
RESPONDENT
COMMUNICATIO Chi-square/
S’ PROFILE P-value Inference
N BARRIERS Pearson R Value
Social and Cultural 1.372819 .71192 Not Significant
Temporal 1.407637 .49469 Not Significant
SEX
Technical .21422957 .89839 Not Significant

Psychological 5.650230 .05930 Not Significant
Contextual 1.769709 .41277 Not Significant
Collaboration 1.645322 .64916 Not Significant

AGE
Technical 5.042314 .53840 Not Significant


COURS

E

GADGE

USED
T/S

38

NO. OF
SUBJE
CTS Technical 6.897004 .330408 Not Significant
LOCAT ETHNI

CITY

Temporal .8174675 .66449 Not Significant
ION
Technical 7.477613 .02378* Significant

*-significant level of 0.05
39
Chapter 5
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary of Findings
1. The most frequent communication barrier experienced by the respondents is
Technical Barrier with total mean score of 3.46 or “Always” as its descriptive value.
2. Majority of the communication barriers experienced by the respondents does not
depend on a specific profile variable.
3. Among 6 communication barriers presented in this study, 5 of them does not have
significant relationship between the respondents’ experience/encounter to barriers and
their demographic profile.
4. However, the findings on this study also revealed that Technical Barriers have a
significant relationship on the location of the respondents at 0.05 significant level.
This implies that the respondents’ experience to technical barriers is dependent to
their location, especially if the location of the respondents during online learning does
not have enough access to internet connection like in the rural areas.
Conclusion
The data gathered from the students of Arts and Humanities students in the College of
Arts and Sciences in Cagayan State University Carig Campus is essential in finding out the
perceived effects of communication barriers in online learning during the pandemic. As this
40
study revealed that majority of the communication barriers experienced by the respondents is
independent to their demographic profile, the effects of these barriers still have an impact to
their performance and in the learning process. The results from the statistics proved that
despite the availability of resources in online learning setup, communication barriers still
occur and limits the performance output of the students.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions drawn, the following are recommended:
1. In order to remove the communication berries and get an effective online learning
process, the students, faculty, and the institution should be aware of and comfortable
in the patterns of online learning set-up.
2. Advocate and encourage teachers to maintain contact with their students via online
office hours and reach out personally to each student in their class.
3. Ensure communication is developmentally appropriate and accessible for all students.
4. Schools must ensure that students feel supported and are reassured that they remain a
vital part of the school community.
5. The solution is with the teachers; they must alter the classroom environment, correct
the teaching content, and mold the students to accomplish their goal of effective
teaching-learning.
6. The school should also provide technical support to the students to give sufficient
time for online class communication in a classroom.
41
References
Alawamleh, M. (2020, August). The Effect of Online Learning on Communication Between Instructors
And Students During Covid-19 Pandemic. Asian Education and Development Studies.
DOI:10.1108/AEDS-06-2020-0131
Algahtani. (2011). The role of e-learning, advantages, and disadvantages of its adoption in higher
education. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348335311_The_role_of_e-
learning_advantages_and_disadvantages_of_its_adoption_in_higher_education
42
Apuke, O. D. (2018, May). Another Look at Mapping the Territory: Seven Traditions in The Field Of
Communication Theory. European Centre for Research Training and Development UK.
www.eajournals.org
Bakar, A., Shah, K., & Qingyu, X. (2020). The Effect of Communication Barriers on Distance Learners
Achievements. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica. DOI: 10.24205/03276716.2020.1027
Baticulon, R. E., Alberto, N. R., Baron, M. B., Mabulay, R. E., Rizada, L. G., Sy, J. J., Tiu, C. J.,
Clarion, C. A., & Reyes, J. C. (2020). Barriers To Online Learning in The Time Of COVID-19: A
National Survey of Medical Students in The Philippines.
https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.16.20155747
Bhat, M. A., Joshi, J., & Wani, I. A. (2016). Effect of Socio-Economic Status on Academic Performance
of Secondary School Students. https://www.ijip.in. DIP: 18.01.004/20160304
Bisht, R. K., Jasola, S., & Bisht, I. P. (2022). Acceptability And Challenges of Online Higher Education in
The Era Of COVID-19: A Study Of Students' Perspective. Asian Education and Development
Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-05-2020-0119
Das, N. K., Sahoo, S., & Pati, L. (2021, July 7). Online Learning: Challenges for Education in Rural and
Remote Areas. https://iarjset.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/IARJSET.2021.8712.pdf.
DOI: 10.17148/IARJSET.2021.8712
Farhad, S. (2017). Blended Learning in Distance Education: A Comparative Study of Selected Mega
Open Universities. Quarterly Journal of Iranian Distance Education (IDEJ), 9-24.
http://idej.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_4201.html
Galusha, J. M. (2001). Barriers to learning in Distance Education. The Infrastructure Network,
University of Southern Mississippi. Retrieved from http://www.njcu.edu/, on 21st of March
2022
43
İŞMAN, A. (2003, September). Communication Barriers in Distance Education. The Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology.
Pajo, K. (2001). Barriers to the Uptake of Web based Technology by University Teachers. Journal of
Distance education.
Santelli, B., Robertson, S. N., Larson, E. K., & Humphrey, S. (2020). Procrastination and delayed
assignment submissions: Student and faculty perceptions of late point policy and grace
within an online learning environment. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i3.2302
Shahabadi, M. M., & Uplane, M. M. (2015). Synchronous and Asynchronous e-learning Styles and
Academic Performance of e-learners. Social and Behavioral Sciences.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273641978_Synchronous_and_Asynchronous_e-
learning_Styles_and_Academic_Performance_of_e-learners
Siddiquah, A., & Salim, Z. (2017). The ICT Facilities, Skills, Usage, and the Problems Faced by the
Students of Higher Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology
Education, 13(8), 4987-4994. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00977a
Srivastava, A. (2017). Impact of Parental Pressure on Academic Achievement.
Stošić. L. (2015). The importance of educational technology in teaching. International Journal of
Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278848636_The_importance_of_educational_te
chnology_in_teaching
Wickramanayake, L., & Muhammad Jika, S. (2018). Social media use by undergraduate students of
education in Nigeria: A survey. The Electronic Library. https://doi.org//10.1108/EL-02-2017-
0023.
44
Yılmaz, B. M. (2017, August 17). The Relation between Academic Procrastination of University
Students and Their Assignment and Exam Performances: The Situation in Distance and Face-
to-Face Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i9.2545
Özdemir-Çağatay, S., & Küllü-Sülü, A. (2013). Aa nvestigation of intercultural miscommunication
experiences. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET),1(1). 39-52. .
http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/43/63
45

Perceived Effects of The Communication Barriers Among Arts and Humanities Students During Covid 19 Pandemic

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Perceived Effects of The Communication Barriers Among Arts and Humanities Students During Covid 19 Pandemic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CAGAYAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF THE COMMUNICATION BARRIERS AMONG ARTS

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the

Mark Jade S. Etsa

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

The coronavirus or COVID 19 pandemic has put everything on hold, including

new normal or online learning classes.

As online learning became established as a normal in academic institutions and even

communicate. At such times, when interaction between people is limited, it is necessary to

emphasize the importance of communication, which is an important way to connect with

Communication is considered one of the most important elements of life. It has

communication is associated with academic performance (Ndongko, 2015).

Barriers to physical, perceptual, emotional, cultural, language, gender and interpersonal

communication barriers during online learning while facing COVID 19 pandemic.

Cybernetics Theory Tradition of Communication

system” (Littlejohn & Foss, 2008, p. 40).

period of feedback, proposed through Wiener, enabled cybernetic lifestyle to be embedded in

computer, family, institution, media systems” (Podgorecki, 2004).

Communication is theorized as discursive reflection. Social justice may be restored

personal values, in the shape of discovering in positive stereotypical behaviour.

Simple Input-Process-Output conceptual framework.

Figure 1. Research Diagram

Statement of the Problem

1. What is the profile of the respondents in term of:

2. How frequent that the respondents experience the communication barriers?

3. Is there significant relationship in the extent of experiencing/encountering

communication barriers by the respondents when grouped according to their profile

Significance of the Study

affecting their academic performance. Through the recommendations of the researchers,

barriers they experienced.

struggling in their learning environment.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

University Carig Campus.

Communication Barriers on Distance Learners Achievements.” (2020).

The following are the communication barriers on the said study:

A. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL BARRIERS

Communication is a social interaction process that involves intra-individual, interpersonal,

social contact process. People socialize through communication, which is regarded as an

important tool in social education. In an educational environment, communication is a means

cause barriers in the teaching-learning process.

Humans are thrust into a competitive world as technology advances. Educational

communication technologies progress, such technological distances are shrinking.

bringing people together via the internet (Isbulan, 2011).

anxiety and emotions create communication hurdles.

Individuals' communication processes are hampered by contextual constraints. Words

in distinct contexts, resulting in differing levels of understanding due to contextual meanings.

improves an individual's comprehension level.

Collaboration is teamwork in which people are directed to work together to achieve

system because of geographical distances. However, collaboration among students enhances

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

seen different scenarios, communication barriers are increasing or emerging in education as

the literature of studies that are related to this study.

under communication barriers also affect the performance of the students.

recommended. Improving Social Media Networking Education-Learning Process.

communication challenges. The study concludes that communication barriers, such as

significantly contributing to poor academic performance.

creating a well-educated workforce. Not everyone can participate in a classroom-oriented

learning is an opportunity to compete with traditional classroom styles.

please. Motivation; and (6) time interruption.

increased feeling of isolation caused by online classes.

categories of communication barriers in online learning: technological, individual, domestic,

without problems. Student withdrawal due to lack of face-to-face communication, potentially

communication barriers to online learning. To design an effective online learning system,

Name: ____________________ Age: _

Year: _____________________ Sex: _

Ethnicity: ____ Current Address: _

_1. Cellphone/smart phone _2. Laptop

_3. Personal Computer (PC) _4. iPad