EFFECT OF TECHNOLOGY USE ON CRITICAL THINKING ABILITIES IN

GRADE 12 SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STEM AND HUMSS LEARNERS

OF BULWANGAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

A Research Paper Submitted to the

Faculty of the Bulwangan National High School,
Brgy. Bulwangan, Hinoba-an, Negros Occidental

in Partial Fulfillment of
Requirements for the Subject

PRACTICAL RESEARCH 2

JOELLE IAN C. ABAJA

ANGELICA P. ABELO
JEAN REA B. APE
JASPER D. ATADERO
ELLA JOHLYN C. CANTERO
JOHN VINCENT D. DAVID
REYNA JOY O. DIANOY
HERLINE GAYLE M. ELACO
DIEGO K. IBASITAS JR.
JAMEYLA G. RIN
VOULEN JOY M. SARENO

DECEMBER 2023
 ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGES
Title Page .................................................................................................................i
Table of Contents.....................................................................................................ii
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1
Background of the Study...............................................................................1
Statement of the Problem...............................................................................2
Hypotheses.....................................................................................................3
Conceptual and Theoretical Framework........................................................3
Scope and Delimitations................................................................................6
Significance of the Study...............................................................................7
Definition of Terms........................................................................................8
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE.............................................................12
METHOD.................................................................................................................26
Research Design ............................................................................................26
Participants.....................................................................................................28
Sampling Procedure.......................................................................................28
Data Gathering Instrument.............................................................................28
Validity and Reliability of Instrument...........................................................29
Data Gathering Procedure..............................................................................30
Data Treatment and Analysis.........................................................................31
Ethical Consideration.....................................................................................32
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..............................................................................34
 iii

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary........................................................................................................37
Conclusion.....................................................................................................37
Recommendation...........................................................................................37
REFERENCES.........................................................................................................39
APPENDICES..........................................................................................................45
 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The concept of using technology has been brought a big impact in enhancing the

level of teaching and the critical thinking skills of the students. Videos can be used for

class work and homework, which enhances classroom activities enabling interaction

between the learners and their teachers. Lessons can be executed properly and clearly by

the help of technology. Mobile devices have become more familiar to learners and

analyzing the benefits is of great importance (Chang et al., 2018).

The internet has paved a path for the transmission of ideas and information. Thus,

students are fed with so much information just by being exposed to technology (Chuchan,

M., 2018). The use of technology in STEM education expands students' access to a

wealth of information and resources beyond traditional textbooks. On the other hand, In

the context of HUMSS subjects, research by Garcia et al. (2023) highlighted the

effectiveness of digital storytelling and multimedia presentations in enhancing critical

thinking abilities. By incorporating technology into assignments and projects, students

were able to present their ideas in a visually engaging and interactive manner, promoting

critical analysis, synthesis of information, and effective communication skills. As

highlighted by Chen, Lai, and Tsai (2019), technology enables students to engage in

information gathering, analysis, and synthesis, which are fundamental aspects of critical

thinking. Moreover, technology provides various multimedia formats, such as videos,

 2

interactive tutorials, and online forums, that encourage students to evaluate and critically

assess different perspectives and sources of information (Domingo et al., 2023).

However, it is crucial to consider potential drawbacks associated with technology

use in the context of critical thinking development. Some critics argue that excessive

reliance on technology may hinder students' ability to think critically. For instance,

research by Kirschner et al. (2018) suggests that over-reliance on technology may lead to

shallow cognitive processing and reduced deep learning. They argue that students may

become passive consumers of information, rather than active critical thinkers. Even

though technology is now one of the most essential way that can be used by the students

to learn and gain knowledge, it still seems that some are not yet ready to make use of

technology while others don’t know how to control it.

Generally, this study aims to find out and validate the impact of using technology

and its significant relationship to the critical thinking abilities of grade 12 STEM

(Science, Technology, Engineering and mathematics) and HUMSS (Humanities and

Social Sciences) students.

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to evaluate the level of technology use and its impact to the

critical thinking abilities of Grade 12 STEM and HUMSS learners of Bulwangan

National High School, Bulwangan, Hinoba-an Negros Occidental.

 3

Specifically, it sought to find answers to the following research questions:

1. What is the level of the technology use of Grade 12 STEM and HUMSS

learners?

2. What is the level of Critical Thinking Abilities of Grade 12 STEM and

HUMSS learners?

3. Is there a significant relationship in the level of technology use to the

critical thinking abilities of Grade 12 STEM and HUMSS learners?

Hypothesis

1. There is no significant relationship in the level of technology use to the

critical thinking abilities of Grade 12 STEM and HUMSS learners.

Theoretical Framework

According to the Constructivist Learning Theory by Jean Piaget that is used in the

study of Shah (2019), technology can play a significant role in promoting critical thinking

abilities. By engaging with technology tools and resources, learners have opportunities to

explore, analyze, and evaluate information independently or in collaboration with their

peers. This active engagement fosters the development of higher-order thinking skills,

including critical thinking. The integration of technology in the learning process allows

students to access a wealth of information from various sources. They can conduct online

research, access multimedia content, and engage in interactive learning experiences.

These activities provide learners with a broader range of perspectives and enable them to
 4

critically evaluate the credibility, relevance, and reliability of information. Technology

also offers platforms for collaborative learning, problem-solving, and inquiry-based

activities, all of which promote critical thinking skills. In the context of Grade 12 Senior

High School STEM and HUMSS at Bulwangan National High School, technology can be

utilized to enhance their understanding of complex concepts and real-world applications.

For STEM and HUMSS learners, technology tools like simulations, modeling software,

and data analysis tools can facilitate hands-on experiences and experimentation,

encouraging critical thinking and problem-solving skills. The Constructivist Learning

Theory also emphasizes the role of teachers as facilitators of learning, this encouraged to

design technology-mediated learning experiences that align with the curriculum and

promote critical thinking. Teachers who possess the necessary technological and

pedagogical knowledge can effectively integrate technology into their instruction,

facilitating meaningful interactions and scaffolding students' critical thinking

development. By adopting the Constructivist Learning Theory as the study can explore

how technology use influences critical thinking abilities in Grade 12 Senior High School

STEM and HUMSS learners of Bulwangan National High School.

 5
INDEPENDENT DEPENDENT
VARIABLE VARIABLE

STUDENTS’
TECHNOLOGY CRITICAL
USE THINKING
ABILITIES

Figure 1: Schematic Diagram Showing the Relationships of the Level of

Technology Use and Its Impact to Students’ Critical Thinking Abilities
 6

Scope and Limitations of the Study

The scope of this study is limited to the evaluation of the effect of technology use

on critical thinking abilities among Grade 12 students who belong to the STEM and

HUMSS strands in Bulwangan National High School and are enrolled for the S.Y. 2023-

2024. The study focused on the use of technology at home and in the classroom, which

includes the use of computers, tablets, smartphones, software applications, and other

technological devices that aid in teaching and learning, and entertainment. The critical

thinking abilities that were evaluated are problem-solving, decision-making, creative

thinking, and logical reasoning. The study did not consider other factors that may affect

critical thinking abilities such as socio-economic status, family background, and personal

experiences.

The limitation of the study includes the following:

The study was only conducted in Bulwangan National High School, which may

limit the generalizability of the findings. Only Grade 12 that are enrolled for the S.Y.

2023-2024 STEM and HUMMS learners was included, so the results may not apply to

learners in other fields. The study only examined the effects of technology use on critical

thinking abilities and not assess other areas of academic performance.

 7

Significance of the Study

The significance of the study titled "Effect of Technology Use (Independent) on

Critical Thinking Abilities (Dependent) in Senior High School Grade 12 STEM and

HUMSS Learners of Bulwangan National High School" is multifaceted and has

implications for various stakeholders:

Students. This research is significant for students as it can help them understand

the impact of technology on their critical thinking abilities. Senior high school STEM and

HUMSS learners will gain insights into how their use of technology, such as laptops,

tablets, or smartphones, affects their problem-solving and analytical skills. This

knowledge can empower them to make informed choices about their technology usage

for both academic and personal development.

Teachers. Teachers can benefit from this study by gaining a deeper understanding

of how technology integration in the classroom can influence students' critical thinking.

They can use the findings to adapt their teaching methods and incorporate technology

effectively to enhance students' analytical and problem-solving skills. This research can

serve as a guide for educators looking to optimize technology for educational purposes.

Future Researcher/s. For future researchers, this study provides a foundation for
 8

further investigation into the relationship between technology and critical thinking. It

offers a methodological framework and insights into potential variables to consider when

conducting similar research. Future researchers can build upon this study's findings to

explore different contexts, grade levels, or technology tools.

School Administration. School administrators can use the results of this research

to inform policy decisions related to technology use in the classroom. They can assess

whether current technology integration strategies align with the goal of fostering critical

thinking among senior high school STEM and HUMSS learners. This information can

help them make informed choices regarding technology investments, professional

development for teachers, and curriculum development.

In summary, this study's significance extends to students, teachers, future

researchers, and school administration by shedding light on the relationship between

technology use and critical thinking abilities in senior high school STEM and HUMSS

learners, thereby contributing to the improvement of education and teaching practices in

the digital age.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of this study, the following terms are defined operationally and

conceptually to have clearer idea and better understanding of the content of this research.
 9

Technology. It refers to the application of scientific knowledge to the practical

aims of human life or as it is sometimes phrased to the change and manipulation of the

human environment (Zennstrom, 2023).

In this study, it refers to the instruments or tools that students utilize in order to

support their academic activities.

Critical Thinking Abilities. It refers to the ability to analyze information

objectively and make a reasoned judgement. It involves the evaluation of source, such as

data, facts, observable phenomena and research findings (Doyle, 2022).

In this study, it refers to the student’s capability to think logically and

analytically.

Internet. It refers to the vast network that connects computer all over the world

through the internet people can share information and communicate from anywhere with

an internet connection (Dennis, 2023).

In this study, it refers to the student’s ability to collect and critically assess

information on the internet and how frequently they rely and utilize it.

STEM. It refers to educational program developed to prepare primary and

secondary students for college graduate study and careers in the fields of Science and

Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) (Lutkevich, 2023).

In this study, it refers to the students who are enrolled in the Science, Technology,
 10

Engineering and Mathematics strand.

HUMMS. It refers to Humanities and Social Sciences which deals with studying

the diversity of human behaviors and interaction in social, cultural, environmental,

economic and political contexts (Pasarin, 2019).

In this study, it refers to the students who are enrolled in the Humanities and

Social Sciences strand.

E-Text. It refers to the visual, electronic depiction of text whereby by the text

itself is digitally recognizable by both the user and the computer. Allows for the use of

screen/text readers and other assistive technology.

In this study, is refers to the non-material resource that students use whether for

leisure or academic purposes.

Digital Audiobook. It refers to an electronic book format which is listened to

instead of being read in the traditional sense (Pedersen, 2021).

In this study, it refers to the type of resource which acts as service for readers

who, for various reasons have difficulty reading printed books, either it because they do

not see well, have not learned to read (yet), or because they are dyslexic.

Reading Modalities. It refers to the learning modalities which are the sensory

channels or pathways through which individuals give, receive, and store information,

perception, memory, and sensation comprise the concept of modality (Rose, 2019).

In this study, it refers to the different strategies which are used in order for a
 11

student to learn efficiently.

 12

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Technology Use: Definitions and Dimensions

Technology is the application of scientific knowledge to the practical aims of

human life or, as it is sometimes phrased, to the change and manipulation of the human

environment (Britannica, 2023). Technology has become part of our lives with the pass

of the years, to the point most people will start depending on this technology. Technology

has changed the way students learn and how they interact with their professors for help

and questions. Making not only students change their method to learn but changing

teacher’s method to teach. According to Rashid T, et.al. (2016), the use of technology

among student has a direct positive relationship with students’ engagement and self-

directed learning, however, no significant direct effect was found between technology use

and academic performance. The widespread use of technological devices in an academic

classroom brought with it many learning opportunities, but also posed a challenge of

handling the off-task technology use in class (Neiterman E., et.al.,2019). As a technology

wide spread and dominating almost the world, students were also one whom affected the

most. Students uses technology and benefit from its many advantages, especially in

getting new information and communicating with people. On the other hand, information

technology hurts concentration in class and consumes a significant amount of time (Shatri

C.G., 2020). Thus, the positive effect of using technology through gadgets is that students

are able to get information and communication easily while the negative effect of using
 13

gadgets is that students forget time to study so that it can have an effect on student

outcomes learning (Aprianti F. et.al.,2022).

Technology Use in the Philippine

higher level. Also, oftentimes, the reading comprehension of the users improves when
they listen and read the text by themselves.
Reading will always be the foundation of knowledge. This is why people will
always look for books to instill knowledge, whether for leisure or academic. However,
the users wants and needs also changed due to the change in our technology. The
users now considers a lot of things including the cost, availability among
others.
Understanding the decisions that people make in their preference from digital or printed
books is a wonderful start to understanding whether there is a possibility of
digital
technology overtaking the printing industry (Byars, 2015).
Technology was brought by globalization of the countries. It brought many

changes in culture, daily living, economy, and education. These changes brought positive

and negative effects in our lives. To adopt these changes in our world, the countries are

trying to improve their technology to improve their people’s living.

In this fast-accelerating modern day, technology plays a big part in today’s

society, especially in education. This helps students to do their tasks simultaneously.

Primarily, electronic devices are used for communication, but electronic devices are also

widely used for the enhancement of education in modern countries which includes the

United, England and other first world countries. Meanwhile, the third world countries are

still left over to the changes in education and still uses the traditional system of using

printed materials instead of electronic materials.

 14

Reading modalities

Modalities refer to how students use their senses in the learning process

(Powell,2013). Learning depends on the modality/ modalities used by the teachers to

teach a certain topic to the students. According to Powell (2013) in her article Learning

Modalities, she cited four modalities: the visual (seeing), auditory (hearing), kinesthetic

(moving), and tactile (touching). All the students have different preferred learning

modalities which is hard for the teacher to comply it all. However, students may have the

combination of those modalities. “The great majority of students can learn using all four

modalities, but we all have preferences that can be capitalized on, as well as weaker

leanings that can be enhanced,” said Powell (2013). This means that each student has a

preferred modality that enable them to learn efficiently. The improvement of the

preferred modality enables a student to work efficiently to a given task.

In a traditional classroom setting mostly uses auditory learning modality. In the

view of the fact students differ on their learning modality, the teachers need to

differentiate the product, process and content of the learning according to their learning

style, interest and readiness (Wilder, 2017). Thus, the teachers must vary their teaching

strategies in accordance with the students’ learning style. This is where technology comes

in. The use of electronic gadgets in the class can help the students’ reading

comprehension because it offers three modalities simultaneously. These are visual

 15

(seeing), auditory (hearing) and dual-modality which includes both auditory and visual

modality. Technology brought a lot of changes in our culture, education, and daily living.

These changes took place mostly in the first world countries and the third world countries

were left behind. The use of technology in to improve the education is one of the

prominent examples of these changes.

Philippines, a third world country, is considered as one of the fastest progressing

country in Southeast Asia, but the education system is still stuck with the traditional

system using books. Unlike USA, England and other countries, which are currently using

the new education system, using electronic devices in replacement to books. In a statistic

conducted, 29 million Filipinos are smart phones users (Statistica, 2017). This implies

that Filipinos are naturally smartphones users. Naturally, Filipinos are literate when it

comes to use of gadgets.

to education. The researchers suggested that the use of iPad in education is useful for the

students, especially the students who were observed to input and change data and carry

iPad for their observations.

Digital Audiobook

Digital audiobooks are voice recordings of a text that is intended for listening

rather than reading. Digital audiobooks are electronic devices have built-in audio system.
 16

This mean that digital audiobooks are readily available for the users, and is generally cost

less than those printed materials. Classroom use of audio recordings has long been a

viable instructional intervention for struggling readers Gilbert, Williams, and

McLaughlin 1996).

According to Johnson (2003), audiobooks have traditionally been used in schools

by teachers of second-language learners, learning-disabled students, and struggling

readers or non-readers. Audiobooks have proven successful for the students to access the

information and enjoy books in an effortless reading. But for the normal readers without

deficiency, digital audiobooks are rarely used.

According to Kozlowski in his study in 2015, 5 million people bought audiobooks

at Amazon. That is 5% of the total population. According to the study conducted by

Greenfield and Subrahmanyam (2008), in which they expiremented grades 1,2,3 and 4

students with a video version and an audio version of children’s stories with the same

soundtrack. The study shows that the students who just listened to the audio version of

the story have better imagination, while the children who watched the story in a video

version recalls better than those who just listened. The researchers concluded that

electronic devices can contribute to the learning of the students.

 17

E-text

Electronic textbooks have a lot of advantages over the traditional printed books.

They are environmentally friendlier; appeal to a generation accustomed to using

electronic devices; can be revised and delivered quicker; and have a greater portability

than printed texts. In addition, they are generally cheaper, require less storage space, and

do not result in obsolete inventories (Doering, Pereira, Kuechler, 2012).

Electronic texts are widely used in education nowadays. Even the third world

countries like Philippines are using electronic textbooks like PDF. E-textbooks or

electronic textbooks are malleable, wherein the user can change the font style and size,

the margin and the line spacing (Johnson, 2003). A study online was conducted by

Gunter in 2005 in the United Kingdom shows that one of the perceived benefits of using

e-books is that, it is convenient than going to a bookstore, and is cheaper than printed

books. In addition to this, Goering et. al. (2012) mentioned that the use of electronic

devices for reading is more convenient because the user can search and annotate. Jamali,

Hamid R. Nicholas, David and Rowlands, Ian (2009) categorized the major advantages of

using e-textbooks into 4 categories: Online access, ability to search, cost, and portability.

Electronic textbooks are generally much accessible than traditional printed books, and is

available anytime and anywhere the user needs it because it is readily accessible by the

use of electronic devices. This feature was 55% higher level. Also, oftentimes, the

reading comprehension of the users improves when they listen and read the text by
 18

themselves.

Reading will always be the foundation of knowledge. This is why people will

always look for books to instill knowledge, whether for leisure or academic. However,

the users want and needs also changed due to the change in our technology. The users

now consider a lot of things including the cost, availability among others. Understanding

the decisions that people make in their preference from digital or printed books is a

wonderful start to understanding whether there is a possibility of digital technology

overtaking the printing industry (Byars, 2015).

Technology Use in Education

The world is changing due to society's fast paced use of technology and

information. Current students will live in a future that will be driven by technology,

which means that change is coming for education leaders (Preston, 2015). Technology

leaders in education can be identified as support personnel, teachers, and administration

(Hineman, 2015). How educators perceive technology in education differs by subject area

and their perception of the integration of technology is not clearly understood because

each subject has a different set of learning outcomes (Howard, 2015). Educators have

slowly begun to adapt their teaching practices to accommodate the integration of

technology, which has made some teachers fluent in technology use, yet some still

struggle and lack the confidence necessary to use technology in the classroom (Martin,

2018). Research has been conducted across multiple subject areas to identify some math,
 19

science, technology, and special education teachers' feelings towards the use of

technology (Badia et.al, 2019). To begin the examination of educational leaders' beliefs,

it has been found that special education teachers are more apt to accepting technology

when they can connect it to their daily teaching routine (Mohamed, 2018). Although

special education teachers have technology in their classrooms that does not necessarily

mean that they are confident in using such technology and believe that they need more

training and experience using technology (Mohamed, 2018). Special education leaders

are not alone in the feeling of uncertainty. Teachers' motivations to integrate technology

are led by their feelings and a positive way to make teachers feel confident about

integrating technology is to provide specific support such as a peer (Howard, 2015).

Experienced teachers are being asked to be efficient in using technology with differing

experiences in technology use (Hineman, 2015). It has been concluded that in order for

students to benefit in a technology-based learning environment the most, principals

themselves must help teachers, encourage the collaboration between teachers, and

provide positive role models of what good teaching looks like while using technology

(Hineman, 2015). Teachers' viewpoints on technology integration are not solely based on

themselves. Students are meant to benefit from the use of technology in the classroom.

The types of technology available for students and how students use technology also play

a role in how teachers feel about technology integration. For example, how students use

technology in an engineering course outside of the classroom promotes the hesitant

 20

viewpoint for educators (Gyllen, 2018). Students do not do the recommended reading

using the e-textbook outside of the classroom and spend the majority of their time

working on homework problems or studying for their test (Gyllen, 2018). It was also

indicated that students who are more comfortable using technology will use technology

for other purposes besides the sole purpose of using it for their classroom work (Kay,

2016). These uses may have an impact on teachers' feelings. Students are being prepared

to positively participate in a global economy by learning math, science, and technology

(Berlin, 2012). The educators teaching these subjects seemed to have different feelings

towards technology integration than special education teachers. Science teachers in Utah

tended to have a constructivist approach to teaching with technology and tended to use it

most to present information to the class (Badia, 2019). Pre-Service STEM teachers at

Midwestern University approached using technology in their educational practices with a

positive attitude (Berlin, 2012). Findings from a study from five different types of

schools suggest that technology in the classroom is irreplaceable and that teachers view

the integration of technology with high importance, especially after being supported in

the use of a specific type of technology (de Koster, 2017). Ultimately, the support

teachers receive when it comes to technology integration and the subjects, they teach do

have a direct correlation with their readiness and beliefs in regards to integration and

readiness (Howard, 2015). It is important to also identify what students' feelings are

towards using technology in the classroom. Over 200 3rd grade students were
 21

interviewed after their completion of computer science lessons. The results from the

study were overwhelmingly positive for nearly all of the students and even the students

who did not have positive feelings towards the computer science lessons experienced

feelings of neutrality (Tran, 2019). In addition to the positive feelings, students were able

to make connections between computer science lessons and day to day routines of

everyday life (Tran, 2019). By introducing technology into the learning process students’

engagement levels rise and puts them in the driver's seat of their own learning (Preston,

2015). Some examples of how technology motivates students and promotes positive

feelings towards learning include the use of science apps in science class, using iPads to

communicate with non-verbal special education students, and using an iPad for digital

notes in the general education classrooms (Preston, 2015). A more recent technique to

promote positive feelings towards the use of technology includes “flipping the

classroom”. Flipping the classroom calls for students to complete certain work at home,

while completing problem solving in an active environment during class time with peers

(Cukurbasi, 2018). By flipping the classroom using LEGO applications, the teacher’s role

differs from the traditional role of teaching to creating videos for students to watch and

being present during their active learning to give guidance (Cukurbasi, 2018). Upon

completion of the LEGO applications assignments students felt like learning was fun,

boosted their motivation and any negative perceptions were shifted to positive

(Cukurbasi, 2018).
 22

Technology at Home

A widely-utilized definition of the smart home has been developed by Aldrich

(2003), who defined it as “a residence equipped with computing and information

technology, which anticipates and responds to the needs of the occupants, working to

promote their comfort, convenience, security and entertainment through the management

of technology within the home and connections to the world beyond”. The main technical

attributes of a smart home are: an established communication platform of interconnected

devices; a degree of artificial intelligence that manages and controls the smart home

technology system, embedded sensors that collect information, and smart attributes (e.g.,

a smart lighting or heating system), which can automatically respond to the information

gathered through sensors (Balta-Ozkan et al., 2013).

The services that a smart home provides can be categorized into three groups:

lifestyle support; energy and consumption management; and safety and security

(Marikyan et al., 2019). Lifestyle support refers to a broad area, embracing such types of

activities as communication, entertainment, assisted living, provision of e-health and

comfort. The application of smart home technology in daily routines has been shown to

improve users’ well-being by diminishing the feeling of isolation, as well as promoting

independent living for an ageing population (Coughlin et al., 2007). Energy and

consumption management is possible through effective monitoring and the management

 23

of energy usage behaviour. Interconnected technologies perform daily routine activities

such as house heating, water heating, light management, the search for cheaper energy

providers, the termination of energy loads and the regeneration of energy through solar

panels. The last group of services is security and safety, which can be achieved through

an embedded recognition system, remote cameras and motion sensors. The system can

perform real-time health diagnostics, it sets reminders for taking medications and even

provides the possibility of virtual hospital visits (Ding et al., 2011,).

The literature lists a significant number of benefits that smart home services are

capable of bringing (Balta-Ozkan et al., 2013). The benefits can be classified into three

groups: health-related, environmental and financial ones (Marikyan et al., 2019). The

dominant attention of studies is focused on the contribution of technologies to

independent living, and the monitoring and management of the occupants’ health status

(Zhou, 2017). In addition, smart home technologies can diminish the feeling of isolation

and improve psychological well-being. This is achieved through the provision of

assistance and support in daily routine activities, inducing a feeling of companionship.

The attention to long-term environmental benefits of a smart home has been facilitated by

increasing concern with global warming, climate change and fluctuating energy prices.

The assurance in environmental sustainability has drawn upon the ability of smart home

technology to reduce energy usage and the carbon footprint. The financial benefits of

smart home technology are usually connected to environmental and health-related

 24

benefits. Users benefit financially from the utilization of technology for the management

of energy and water consumption (Bhati et al., 2017). While environmental sustainability

is an ultimate long-term benefit, monetary saving is an immediate outcome. The

transformation from traditional health services to home-care can also bring financial

benefits in terms of savings of travelling expenses (Marikyan et al., 2019).

The examination of the perceived beliefs about the behaviour is one of the pillars

in IT adoption research. Hence, this study will analyze how behavioural beliefs will

affect the use behaviour. The following sections will describe the theoretical foundation

of the study and hypotheses.

Critical Thinking Abilities

Critical thinking abilities According to Alessio F A D, developing critical

thinking abilities is an essential aspect of education that has been the endeavor of many

instructors throughout the years, as it is believed that it can lead to higher academic

performance (2019). Thus, critical thinking abilities are important to student as it is a way

to improve academic performance and in any aspect. Kumrow D. E. et.al (2020) their

study reveals that students with higher critical thinking dispositions tend to employ more

reflective learning styles, enhancing their analytic and evaluative skills. Siburian

J.,et.al.,on their study the correlation between critical thinking skills and creative thinking

skills on cognitive learning The results showed that: (1) there was a significant
 25

correlation between critical thinking skills and creative thinking skills on cognitive

learning results, (2) the contribution of critical thinking skills and creative thinking skills

simultaneously to cognitive learning results was 72.80%, (3) the effective contribution of

creative and critical thinking skills to cognitive learning results was 64.91% and 7.89%

respectively. Implications for Research and Practice: Lecturers can consider inquiry

strategies as an alternative learning, especially for new students in universities to

empower critical thinking skills and creative thinking skills, based on research results,

that may have a big contribution to cognitive learning results. On several studies, the

research results showed that: (1) the critical thinking skills of junior high school students

were in a low category; and (2) the evaluation, analysis, and self-regulation sub-skills

became the lowest critical thinking sub-skills mastered by the students compared to other

critical thinking sub-skills, (Basri H. et.al.,2019). Kumrow and McHatton (2020)

investigate the strategies employed by higher education institutions to foster critical

thinking abilities. They discuss the concept of creating "cultures of thinking" within

universities, emphasizing the importance of engaging students in independent and

collaborative critical thinking. The authors stress the significance of incorporating

various teaching approaches, such as problem-based learning and active learning

strategies, to cultivate critical thinking skills among undergraduate students. Critical

thinking abilities were also in need that all should have and, in any field, Leigh and

Shapiro (2018) explore the significance of critical thinking development in the context of
 26

psychotherapy training. They argue that critical thinking skills are essential for therapists

to make informed decisions, effectively assess clients' needs, and develop appropriate

treatment plans. The authors emphasize the importance of incorporating critical thinking

instruction within psychotherapy training programs. Thus, Students with higher critical

thinking abilities can improve and be useful in their field of expertise. Relationship

between technology use and critical thinking abilities among STEM and HUMMS

learners. Several studies and researches have their way to investigate on the relationship

between technology use on critical thinking abilities among learners.

 27

METHOD

The level of technology use of the Grade 12 STEM and HUMSS learners was

processed with proper guidelines in research methodology through research design,

locale, and participants of the study, the research instrument with its validity and

reliability. This commenced on the data gathering procedure and statistical tools that

were utilized for the data analyses.

Research Design

The researchers utilized the descriptive-correlational design to determine the data

needed for this study. Canonizado (2020) cited that the aim of descriptive-correlational

method is to understand and assess the statistical relationship between the two variables

with no influence from any extraneous variable. Canozizado added that descriptive-

correlational studies are useful to establish a link or influence of one variable from

another variable. Similarly, Mustieles (2020) cited that descriptive correlational study is a

study in which the researcher is primarily interested in describing relationships among

variables, without seeking to establish a causal connection. The research study which

concerns the effect of technology use on critical thinking abilities in senior high school

STEM and HUMSS learners was used in the study. As a result, the direction and extent

of relationship between different variables was garnered.

Locale of the Study

The study was conducted at Barangay Bulwangan, a barangay in the municipality

 28

of Hinoba-an, in the province of Negros Occidental. Its population as determined by the

2020 Census was 4,152. This represented 6.82% of the total population of Hinoba-an.

Bulwangan is situated at approximately 9.5165, 122.5355, in the island of Negros.

Elevation at these coordinates is estimated at 12.0 meters or 39.4 feet above mean sea

level (PhilAtlas,2019).

Bulwangan National High School is a public secondary school located in the

municipality of Hinoba-an in the province of Negros Occidental, Philippines. It is a

government-funded institution that provides education to students from Grades 7 to 12.

The school offers various academic tracks such as Science, Technology, Engineering, and

Mathematics (STEM), and Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS). The school also

offers vocational courses such as Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) and Technical

Vocational Livelihood (TVL). Aside from academic subjects, Bulwangan National High

School also offers various co-curricular and extra-curricular activities for its students

such as sports, clubs, and organizations. The school has been recognized for its

achievements in various competitions such as athletics and dance. Bulwangan National

High School is committed to providing quality education to its students and to producing

graduates who are equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge to succeed in their

chosen career paths.

 29

Participants

The participants of the study was the 100 Grade 12 Senior High School learners

of Bulwangan National High School. The participants were composed of 42 STEM and

58 HUMSS learners of Bulwangan National High School who are enrolled for the S.Y.

2023-2024.

Sampling Procedure

In this research study, the researchers used population census on Grade 12 STEM

and HUMSS learners in total of 100 participants, to test their critical thinking abilities

and also test the level of their technology use. There was no sampling procedure that was

used to identify the participants.

Research Instrument

The data gathering instrument that was used in this research study was self-made

questionnaire, this was used to test the level of technology use among Grade 12 Science

Technology Engineering and Mathematics and Humanities and Social Sciences students

in order to gather information statistically that provides relevant information to the

research study. The questionnaire that was used to test the level of critical thinking
 30

abilities is a standardized questionnaire from Watson-Glacers Critical Thinking Test

(2002). The Watson-Glacers Critical Thinking Test questionnaire is composed of 17

question that test critical thinking ability that are subdivided into (6) subtopics on critical

thinking abilities. On the questionnaire that test the level of technology use of the

respondents, it is composed of 15 questions. The alternative responses were assigned

numerical weight such that higher scores indicated high level of technology usage. The

weights assigned known as Likert’s 5-point rating scale (Khandelwal, 2021) were as

follows:

Weights Responses

5 Very High Usage

4 High Usage
3 Moderate Usage
2 Low Usage
1 Very Low Usage

Validity and Reliability of Instrument

The instrument of this study was subjected to content and construct

validation and it was referred to the persons who were knowledgeable on the subject and

on the rudiments of questionnaire construction. A research instrument evaluation used the

criteria set forth by Carter V. Good and Douglas E. Scates (Basilio, et.al., 2013).

The data gathering instrument was validated by the jurors. Some of the items was
 31

reconstructed as to their suggestions. The average rating of the jurors was 3.74, which

was verbally interpreted as excellent. Thus, the data gathering instrument is valid.

In establishing the reliability of the technology use questionnaire, using test-retest

method, it was administered twice to dry-run participants, compose of grade 11 learners,

5 learners from STEM and 5 learners of HUMMS. These dry-run participants are not

included on the actual participants of the study. A letter was sent to the school principal

asking permission for the conduct of the dry-run. The approval of the principal was asked

before administering the questionnaire to the dry-run participants. The result of the first

administration was recorded. The second administration was done two weeks after the

first administration. The results of the two dry-run administrations of the questionnaire

were correlated using the Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient or Spearman rho

(Basilio, et.al., 2013).

The correlation between the mean obtained in the two administrations represents

the reliability coefficients of the data-gathering instrument. If the (r) value is high, this

means that the measuring instrument is reliable.

After the two dry-run administrations, the correlation value (r) obtained was

0.9515 which is interpreted verbally as high correlation. Therefore, the data gathering

instrument is reliable.

Data Gathering Procedure

 32

The researchers presented a letter of approval to the Principal I of Bulwangan

National High School to ask permission to conduct the study inside the campus. Before

starting the data gathering procedure, the self-made tool was subjected for validity and

reliability tests to ensure that the quality of data that was gathered from the respondents is

accurate. The questionnaire was validated by the jurors. The letter also included the

sample questionnaire for the further assessment of the administrators and was subjected

for the approval or modification of the study.

Before conducting the tool, the students were oriented about the questionnaire that

they will answer and was informed about the purpose of the study. The researchers also

emphasize that their identity and privacy was ensured and their answer to the

questionnaire was confidential to others. After the data has been collected it was been

analyzed, treated, and interpreted statistically.

Data Treatment and Analysis

To determine the level of technology use, the mean was used and descriptively

interpreted using the assigned scale.

The obtained mean scores was interpreted according to the following

interpretative guide known as Likert’s Scale (Calmorin, 2010):

Mean Score Range Interpretation

4.21 – 5.00 Very High Usage

3.41 – 4.20 High Usage

 33

2.61 – 3.40 Moderate Usage

1.81 – 2.60 Low Usage

1.00 – 1.80 Very Low Usage

The 0.05 level of significance was used as basis for accepting or rejecting the null

hypotheses.

The level of critical thinking abilities of Grade 12 STEM and HUMSS learners

were determined using frequency and percentage distribution. The level of critical

thinking abilities was evaluated using the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking test with the

designated descriptors. Scores excess to 75% are generally considered above average.

Scores of 50%-75% are generally considered average. Scores below 50% are generally

considered below average.

To determine the significant relationship between the level of technology use and

critical thinking abilities of the learners, utilizing a quantitative correlational statistics

design with a Pearson’s r test. The Pearson’s r test was used to measure the “linear

relationship between two continuous variables (measured on an interval or ratio scale).

Pearson’s r can range from -1.00 (a perfect negative correlation), to 0.00 (no correlation)

to +1.00 (perfect positive)” (Rayvid, 2011).

Ethical Considerations

The study aimed to investigate the relationship between technology use and

critical thinking abilities in senior high school STEM and HUMSS learners. While
 34

research in this area can yield valuable insights, it is crucial to address the ethical

considerations associated with conducting such a study. This document describes the

ethical issues that must be taken into account in order to guarantee the participants' safety

and informed consent, responsible use of technology, and privacy protection throughout

the research process.

Informed Consent: Participant Autonomy: Participants must be fully informed

about the study's purpose, procedures, potential risks, and benefits. They should have the

right to voluntarily decide whether or not to participate without any form of coercion or

undue influence. Parental Consent: Since the participants are high school students,

parental consent should be obtained to ensure that the study does not compromise their

rights or well-being.

Protection of Participants: Privacy and Confidentiality: Participants' privacy and

confidentiality must be maintained throughout the study. Steps should be taken to ensure

that any personal information collected is anonymized and stored securely. Minimization

of Harm: Measures should be taken to minimize potential harm to participants. This

includes avoiding any distressing or invasive procedures that could adversely affect their

emotional, psychological, or physical well-being. Withdrawal and Debriefing:

Participants should have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without

consequences. After the study, participants should be debriefed, providing them with an

opportunity to ask questions and receive additional information about the study.
 35

Responsible Use of Technology: Access and Equity: Ensure that all participants

have equal access to the required technology and resources for the study. Consideration

should be given to any potential disparities in technology access among participants and

efforts made to address them. Appropriate Use of Technology: The use of technology

should align with the study's objectives and not involve any unethical practices, such as

cyberbullying, invasion of privacy, or exploitation of personal information. Potential

Harms and Risks: Assess and address potential risks associated with technology use, such

as excessive screen time, addiction, or social isolation. Steps should be taken to mitigate

these risks and promote digital well-being.

Researcher Responsibilities: Competence: Researchers should possess the

necessary expertise to conduct the study ethically and effectively. They should be aware

of the potential biases and limitations associated with the research topic and strive to

minimize them. Institutional Review: The study should undergo review and approval by

an institutional ethics committee or review board to ensure compliance with ethical

standards and guidelines. Transparent Reporting: Researchers should ensure transparent

and accurate reporting of the study's methods, results, and conclusions, enabling other

researchers to assess and replicate the study's findings.

 36

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter of the research study presents and analyzes the data gathered from

the responses of the participants. These data were tallied, tabulated, and subjected to

statistical analysis and interpretations. The presentation is according to the order of the

study objectives.

Level of Technology Use

The succeeding table displays the level of technology use of the 100 Grade 12

Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics and Humanities and Social Sciences

of Bulwangan National High School, who were the participants of the study.

Table 1. Level of Technology Use

Scale Interpretation Frequency Percentage
4.21-5.00 Very High Usage 21 21.00
3.41-4.20 High Usage 43 43.00
2.61-3.40 Moderate Usage 35 35.00
1.81-2.60 Low Usage 1 1.00
1.00-1.80 Very Low Usage 0 0.00
Weighted Mean = 3.69 High Usage N=100 100.00

It can be observed in the table that 21% of the total participants are described as

very high usage and 43% of the participants are described as high usage. It can be

observed that 35% of the participants are described as moderate usage with only 1% can
 37

be interpreted as low usage. Moreover, it can be noted that none of the participants is

interpreted as very low usage.

The overall level of technology use of 100 Grade 12 Science Technology

Engineering and Mathematics and Humanities and Social Sciences of Bulwangan

National High School, has a weighted mean of 3.69 and is interpreted as high usage.

Level of Critical Thinking Abilities

Table 2. Level of Critical Thinking Abilities

Scale Interpretation Frequency Percentage
75-100 Above Average 1 1.00
50-74 Average 48 48.00
0-49 Below Average 51 51.00
Weighted Mean = 48.53 Below Average N=100 100.00

The table shown above illustrates the students’ level of critical thinking abilities.

It is shown in Table 2 that the participants who achieved a score between 75-100 has an

above average level of critical thinking abilities with a frequency of 1% while the

participants who scored between 50-74 was interpreted as average attaining a frequency

of 48%. The participants who acquired a score between 0-49 demonstrates below average

with a frequency of 51%. Moreover, the overall weighted mean of Critical Thinking

Abilities of the 100 Grade 12 Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics and

Humanities and Social Sciences of Bulwangan National High School is 48.53% and is

interpreted as below average. The result shows that the majority of participants has a

level which is below average of critical thinking abilities.

 38
Table 3.The Relationship Between the Level of Technology Use and Critical Thinking
Abilities of Learners
Pearson R Correlation Interpretation
Level of Technology Use
0.109 Not Significant
Critical Thinking Abilities
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

The table 3 shows The Relationship Between the Level of Technology Use and

Critical Thinking Abilities of Grade 12 Senoir High School STEM and HUMSS

Learners. It can be noted that the correlation between the two variables has a value of

0.109 which is higher than the significant value of 0.05 and is interpreted as not

significant. This implies that the level of technology use has no significant relationship on

the critical thinking skills of the grade 12 senior high school STEM and HUMMS

learners.
 39

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains the summary of findings, and conclusions which were based

on the results of this investigation. Recommendations, on the latter part, are stated to

provide alternative ways to help solve the weaknesses of this study and to help improve

the level critical thinking abilities.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to determine the significant relationship between

the Level of technology use and the Level of critical thinking abilities of the grade 12

STEM and HUMMS learners of Bulwangan National High School for the school year

2023-2024.

It has been established in this study that majority of the students of the Grade 12

STEM and HUMSS was found out that their critical thinking abilities has a weighted

mean of 48.53 which is interpreted as Below Average and that most of them were

engaging with technology at High Usage. Moreover, there was no significant relationship

with the level of technology use and the level of critical thinking abilities of Grade 12

STEM and HUMSS learners.

Conclusions
 40

Based on the results of this study, there was no significant relationship in the

Level of technology use to the Level of critical thinking abilities of the grade 12 STEM

and HUMSS learners of Bulwangan National High School. The researchers therefore

concludes that if students were actively engaged in technology, the student’s level of

critical thinking ability is not affected. Engagement in technology should have set limits,

and student must prioritize their studies and academic activities.

Recommendations

Out of the findings and results presented and conclusions generated, the following

are recommended:

1. Learners must maintain their high level of involvement in textbooks and other

learning materials that aids to elicit higher performance and achieve above

average or average level of critical thinking abilities.

2. Learners must be a responsible user of technology.

3. Parents must take part of nurturing their children to lessen the use of technology.

4. School administrators must propose some programs that would help enhance the

learners critical thinking skills.

5. A similar study should be conducted in other schools using other variables that

may influence on the findings.

 41

REFERENCES

Alessio F.A.D., Avolio B. E., Charles V.,(2019). Thinking Skills and Creativity 31, 275-
283.

Asef-Vaziri, A. (2015). The Flipped Classroom of Operations Management: A Not-For-

Cost Reduction Platform. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education,
13(1), 71–89. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12054

Aprianti F. et.al.,(2022) International Journal of Education, Information Technology, and

Others 5 (5), 121-130.

Avsec, S., Rihtarsic, D., & Kocijancic, S. (2014). A Predictive Study of Learner Attitudes
Toward Open Learning in a Robotics Class. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 23(5), 692–704. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-
9496-6

Badia, A., & Iglesias, S. (2019). The Science Teacher Identity and the Use of Technology
in the Classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(5), 532–541.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09784-w

Baron, L. S., Hogan, T. P., Schechter, R. L., Hook, P. E., & Brooke, E. C. (2019). Can
educational technology effectively differentiate instruction for reader profiles?
Reading and Writing, 32(9), 2327–2352. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09949-4

Beasley, J. G., & Beck, D. E. (2017). Defining Differentiation in Cyber Schools: What
Online Teachers Say. TecTrends, 61(6), 550–559. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0189-x

Berlin, D. F., & White, A. L. (2012). A Longitudinal Look at Attitudes and Perceptions
Related to the Integration of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education.
School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 20–30. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00111.x

Blair, E., Maharaj, C., & Primus, S. (2016). Performance and perception in the flipped
classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 21(6), 1465–1482.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9393-5

Carey, K. L., & Stefaniak, J. E. (2018). An exploration of the utility of digital badging in
higher education settings. Educational Technology Research and Development,
66(5), 1211–1229 Retrieved from. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9602-1
 42
Cukurbasi, Baris, and Mubin Kiyici. (2018). “High School Students’ Views on the PBL
Activities Supported via Flipped Classroom and LEGO Practices.” Journal of
Educational Technology & Society, 21(2), 46–61.

Delacruz, S. (2019). Building Digital Literacy Bridges: Connecting Cultures and

Promoting Global Citizenship in Elementary Classrooms through School-Based
Virtual Field Trips. TechTrends, 63(4), 428–439. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0350-1

de Koster, S., Volman, M., & Kuiper, E. (2017). Concept-guided development of

technology in ‘traditional’ and ‘innovative’ schools: quantitative and qualitative
differences in technology integration. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 65(5), 1325–1344. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-
017-9527-0

Disney, L., Barnes, A., Ey, L., & Geng, G. (2019). Digital play in young children's
numeracy learning. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 44(2), 166–181.

Dohn, N. B. (2020). Students' interest in scratch coding in lower secondary mathematics.

British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1) 71-83.

Fernandez, S. (2018). University Student’s perspectives on using cell phones in

classrooms – are they dialing up disaster? TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology,17 (1) 1-13.

Giannakas, F., Kambourakis, G., Papasalouros, A., & Gritzalis, S. (2018). A critical
review of 13 years of mobile game-based learning. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 66(2), 341–384. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9552-z

Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., & Knight, E. (2015). Digital badges
in education. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 403–410. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9291-7

Gyllen, J., Stahovich, T., & Mayer, R. (2018). How students read an e ‐textbook in an
engineering course. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(6), 701–712.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12277

Haelermans, C., Ghysels, J., & Prince, F. (2015). Increasing performance by

differentiated teaching? Experimental evidence of the student benefits of digital
differentiation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1161–1174.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12209
 43
Han, I. (2020). Immersive virtual field trips in education: a mixed-methods study on
elementary students' presence and perceived learning. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 51(2) 420-435.

Hineman, J. M., Boury, T. T., & Semich, G. W. (2015). Technology-Literate School

Leaders in a 1:1 iPad Program and Teachers’ Technology Self-Efficacy
International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education,
11(2), 68–79. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4018/ijicte.2015040106

Howard, S. K., Chan, A., & Caputi, P. (2015). More than beliefs: Subject areas and
teachers’ integration of laptops in secondary teaching. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 46(2), 360–369.

İ Bakır Arabaci. (2017). Investigation faculty of education students' cyberloafing

behaviors in terms of various variables. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology, 16

Jimoyiannis, A., & Angelaina, S. (2012). Towards an analysis framework for

investigating students’ engagement and learning in educational blogs. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 28(3), 222–234. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00467.x

Kay, R., & Lauricella, S. (2016). Assessing laptop use in higher education: The Laptop
Use Scale. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 28(1), 18–44.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9106-5

Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2013). The Effect of a Classroom-Based
Intensive Robotics and Programming Workshop on Sequencing Ability in Early
Childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), 245–255.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0554-5

Kroksmark, T. (2016). The stretchiness of learning the digital mystery of learning in one-
to-one environments in schools. Education and Information Technologies, 21(1),
35–52. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9308-x

Kumrow, D. E., & McHatton, P. A. (2020). Creating Cultures of Thinking: Fostering

Independent and Collaborative Critical Thinking in Higher Education.
Scholarship and Practice of Undergraduate Research, 4(1), 35-44.

Leigh, J., & Shapiro, J. M. (2018). Critical Thinking Development: A Key Component to
Psychotherapy Training. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 48(3), 149-
158.
 44
Liu, K. P., Tai, S. J. D., & Liu, C. C. (2018). Enhancing language learning through
creation: the effect of digital storytelling on student learning motivation and
performance in a school English course. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 66(4), 913–935. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9592-z

Marín Victoria I. (2020). Research-based learning in education studies: design inquiry

using group e-portfolios based on blogs. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 36(1), 1–20.

Martin, N. M., & Lambert, C. (2015). Differentiating Digital Writing Instruction. Journal
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(2), 217–227. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.435

Mead, C., Buxner, S., Bruce, G., Taylor, W., Semken, S., & Anbar, A. D. (2019).
Immersive, interactive virtual field trips promote science learning. Journal of
Geoscience Education, 67(2), 131–142. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2019.1565285

McNally, B., Chipperfield, J., Dorsett, P., Del Fabbro, L., Frommolt, V., Goetz, S.,
Lewohl, J., Molineux, M., Pearson, A., Reddan, G., Roiko, A., & Rung, A.
(2017). Flipped classroom experiences: student preferences and flip strategy in a
higher education context. Higher Education, 73(2), 281–298.

Mohamed, A. H. H. (2018). Attitudes of special education teachers towards using

technology in inclusive classrooms: a mixed-methods study. Journal of Research
in Special Educational Needs, 18(4), 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-
3802.12411

Nemiro, J., Larriva, C., & Jawaharlal, M. (2017). Developing creative behavior in
elementary school students with robotics. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(1), 70-
90.

Newby, T. J., & Cheng, Z. (2020). Instructional digital badges: effective learning tools.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 1053-1067.

Norris, E., Shelton, N., Dunsmuir, S., Duke-Williams, O., & Stamatakis, E. (2015).
Virtual field trips as physically active lessons for children: a pilot study. BMC
Public Health, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1706-5

Padron, Y. N., Waxman, H. C., Lee, Y.-H., Lin, M.-F., & Michko, G. M. (2012).
Classroom observations of teaching and learning with technology in urban
elementary school mathematics classrooms serving English Language Learners.
International Journal of Instructional Media, 39(1), 45+.
 45
Persico, D., Passarelli, M., Pozzi, F., Earp, J., Dagnino, F. M., & Manganello, F. (2019).
Meeting players where they are: digital games and learning ecologies. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 50(4), 1687-1712.

Preston, J. P., Wiebe, S., Gabriel, M., McAuley, A., Campbell, B., & MacDonald, R.
(2015). Benefits and Challenges of Technology in High Schools: A Voice from
Educational Leaders with a Freire Echo. Interchange, 46(2), 169–185.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780- 015-9240-z

Rihtaršič, D., Avsec, S., & Kocijancic, S. (2016). Experiential learning of electronics
subject matter in middle school robotics courses. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 205–224.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9310-7

Rosen, Y., & Beck-Hill, D. (2012). Intertwining digital content and a one-to-one laptop
environment in teaching and learning. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 44(3), 225–241.

Shah, Rajendra Kumar. “Effective Constructivist Teaching Learning in the Classroom.”

Shanlax International Journal of Education, vol. 7, no. 4, 2019, pp. 1–13.

Shatri Z. G. (2020) Journal of Turkish Science Education 17 (3), 420-428.

Shute, V., & Rahimi, S. (2017). Review of computer-based assessment for learning in
elementary and secondary education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
33(1), 1– 19. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12172

Stonehouse, P., Keengwe, J., & Shabb, C. (2012). Using blogs as a technology tool to
promote teaching goals in education. International Journal of Information and
Communication Technology Education, 8(1), 44+.

Strawhacker, A., & Bers, M. U. (2019). What they learn when they learn coding:
investigating cognitive domains and computer programming knowledge in young
children. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 541–575.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9622-x

Tran, Y. (2019). Computational thinking equity in elementary classrooms: what third-

grade students know and can do. Journal of Educational Computing Research,
57(1), 3–31.

Vanbecelaere, S., van den Berghe, K., Cornillie, F., Sasanguie, D., Reynvoet, B., &
Depaepe, F. (2020). The effectiveness of adaptive versus non ‐adaptive learning
with digital educational games. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(4),
 46
502–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12416

Videnovik, M., Vlahu‐Gjorgievska, E., & Trajkovik, V. (2020). To code or not to code:
Introducing coding in primary schools. Computer Applications in Engineering
Education. Published. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22369

Vu, P., Fredrickson, S., & Gaskill, M. (2019). One-To-One Initiative Implementation
from Insiders’ Perspectives. TechTrends, 63(1), 62–67.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018- 0359-5

Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C. H., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in One-to-One
Laptop Environments. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1052–1084.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316628645

Zhong, B., & Li, T. (2020). Can pair learning improve students' troubleshooting
performance in robotics education? Journal of Educational Computing Research,
58(1), 220-248.Shah, Rajendra Kumar. “Effective Constructivist Teaching
Learning in the Classroom.” Shanlax International Journal of Education, vol. 7,
no. 4, 2019, pp. 1–13.
 47

Appendix A: Data Gathering Instrument

DATA GATHERING INSTRUMENT

QUESTIONNAIRE ON TECHNOLOGY USE

Questionnaire ID: _________________________ Date: ________________________

Part A – Technology Use

Below are several statements followed by a range of answers, please read them
carefully and check the answer that best describes how much you agree with the
statement.
It is most helpful if you answer honestly and accurately. Your responses will
remain highly confidential.
This information will assist the school in planning activities and programs that are
as helpful to parents as possible.

Very Very
No Low Moderate High
Statements Low High
.
1 2 3 4 5
1. I use technology for
communication (e.g.,
smartphones, social media)
extensively.
2. I often find myself spending
more time on digital devices
than I intend.
3. Technology has improved my
ability to access information.
4. I rely on technology for work or
educational purposes.
5. I feel comfortable navigating
and using various technological
devices.
6. I believe technology has
enhanced my productivity.
7. I use technology to entertain
myself (e.g., streaming,
 48

gaming).
8. Technology has made my life
more convenient.
9. I feel anxious or restless when I
am without access to
technology.
10. I often check my digital devices
first thing in the morning.
11. I feel that technology has
strengthened my relationships
with others.
12. I am concerned about the
amount of personal data
collected by technology
companies.
13. I use a smartphone for more
than 8 hours a day.
14. I feel anxious when I don't have
access to the internet.
15. I rely on technology for work or
school-related tasks.
 49
Part B – Survey on Critical Thinking Ability
Below are the questions composed of 5 tests that includes inference, recognition
of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments. You will be given
a statement that will be your basis to choose an answer. Each test has designated
instruction to follow, please read them carefully. Watson-Glaser’s test will be used to
measure your critical thinking ability.

No. Statements T PT ID PF F
Test I. Inference
In the exercises that follow, more than one of the inferences from a given
statement of facts may be true (T), or false (F), or probably true (PT), or probably
false (PF), or have insufficient data (ID) to warrant any conclusion. Thus, you are
to judge each inference independently.

Statement: Studies have shown that there is relatively much more heart disease
among people living in the north of England than people living in the south of
England. There is little if any difference, however, in rate of heart disease between
northerners and southerners who have the same level of income. The average
income of southerners in England is considerably higher than the average income
of northerners.
1. The easiest way to eliminate
heart disease in England would
be to raise the general standard
of living
2. People in high income brackets
are in a better position to avoid
developing heart disease than
people in low-income brackets.
3. There is a lower rate of heart
disease among northerners with
relatively high incomes than
among northerners with much
lower incomes.
4. Whether northerners have high
incomes or low incomes makes
no difference to the likelihood
of their developing heart
disease.
YES NO
Test II. Recognition of Assumptions
 50

If you think that the given assumption is taken for granted in the statement, mark
‘YES’ under ‘Assumption made’ in the proper place on the answer sheet. If you
think the assumption is not necessarily taken for granted in the statement, mark
‘NO’ in the space under ‘Assumption made’. Remember to judge each
assumption independently.

Statement: ‘The proper aim of education in a free society is to prepare the

individual to make wise decisions.’
5. People who have been educated
in a free society will not make
unwise decisions.
6. Some education systems in our
society do not have the proper
aim.
7. Some kinds of education can
help individuals make wise
decisions.
8. In a society that is not free, the
individual cannot make any
decisions.
Test III. Deduction
In this test, each exercise consists of several statements (premises) followed by
several suggested conclusions. For the purpose of this test, consider the statements
in each exercise as true without exception. Read the first conclusion beneath the
statements. If you think it necessarily follows from the statements given, mark
‘YES’ under ‘Conclusion follows’ in the proper place on the Answer Sheet. If you
think it is not a necessary conclusion from the statements given mark ‘NO’ under
‘Conclusion follows’, even though you may believe it to be true from your general
knowledge. Similarly, read and judge each of the other conclusions. Try not to let
your prejudices influence your judgement – just stick to the given statements
(premises) and judge whether each conclusion necessarily follows.

Statement: No responsible leader can avoid making difficult decisions. Some

responsible leaders dislike making difficult decisions. Therefore:
9. Some difficult decisions are
distasteful to some people
10. Irresponsible leaders avoid
things they dislike.
11. Some responsible leaders do
things they dislike doing
 51

Test IV. Interpretation

For the purpose of this test, assume that everything in the short paragraph is true.
The problem is to judge whether or not each of the proposed conclusions logically
follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given in the paragraph.
If you think that the proposed conclusion follows beyond a reasonable doubt
(even though it may not follow absolutely and necessarily), mark ‘YES’ under
‘Conclusion Follows’ in the proper place on the answer sheet. If you think that the
conclusion does not follow beyond a reasonable doubt from the facts given, mark
‘NO’ under ‘Conclusion Follows’.

Statement: In 1970, 60.4% of adults (people 25 years of age and older) had
completed 11 years or less of schooling, while 4.6% had completed three or more
years of university. In 1990, 40.0% of adults had completed 11 years or less of
schooling, while 7.1% had completed three or more years of university

12. In 1970, most adults had not

entered the sixth form.
13. If the trend toward more
education continues at the rate
indicated by the above figures,
then by 2000 more than 25% of
adults will have completed
three or more years of
university.
14. In 1990, for every adult who
had completed three or more
years of university, there were
more than five adults who had
completed not more than 11
years of schooling.
STRONG WEAK
Test V. Evaluation of arguments
Mark ‘STRONG’ on the answer sheet under ‘Argument’ if you think the
argument is strong, or ‘WEAK’ if you think the argument is weak. Judge each
argument separately on its own merit. Try not to let your personal attitude
toward the question influence your evaluation of the argument, since each
argument is to be regarded as true.

Statement: Should the government provide ‘baby grants’ to help support each
dependent child in a family so that the family standard of living is not lowered by
 52

having children?
15. Yes; many families who cannot
now afford it would then
provide better childcare, and
this would greatly improve the
general health of the nation.
16. No; such grants would seriously
undermine parents’ sense of
personal responsibility for their
own families.
17. No; government provision of
‘baby grants’ would involve
additional public expenditure of
money.
 53

Appendix B: Raw Data on level of Technology Use

1 1 1 1 1 1 MEA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 N INTERPRETATION
A1 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 5 3 4 4 3.80 High Usage
A2 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 3 3 5 5 3 3 4 4.27 Very High Usage
A3 3 2 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 1 3 2 2.87 Moderate Usage
A4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 3.80 High Usage
A5 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 3 5 4 4 5 4 5 4.47 Very High Usage
A6 5 5 5 4 5 3 5 5 5 5 3 4 5 4 3 4.40 Very High Usage
A7 4 4 5 2 3 3 4 4 3 5 2 2 3 4 2 3.33 Moderate Usage
A8 4 3 5 3 5 4 5 5 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3.80 High Usage
A9 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 4.67 Very High Usage
A10 4 2 4 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2.93 Moderate Usage
A11 5 3 4 5 4 4 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 3.40 Moderate Usage
A12 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4.00 High Usage
A13 5 5 5 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 2 2 3 3.60 High Usage
A14 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 4.80 Very High Usage
A15 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 3.40 Moderate Usage
A16 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 5 4 1 2 3 3 3.20 Moderate Usage
A17 5 5 5 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 2 4 3.73 High Usage
A18 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3.27 Moderate Usage
A19 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.13 Moderate Usage
A20 5 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 5 3 3 2 4 5 3.33 Moderate Usage
A21 5 4 5 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 3.33 Moderate Usage
A22 3 3 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2.87 Moderate Usage
A23 3 4 5 4 3 2 4 4 2 3 2 4 3 4 3 3.33 Moderate Usage
A24 5 3 4 5 4 4 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 4 2.93 Moderate Usage
A25 5 3 4 4 3 4 5 4 2 4 3 3 3 3 5 3.67 High Usage
A26 5 2 3 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 2 2 2.80 Moderate Usage
A27 5 4 5 4 4 3 4 5 4 5 3 4 3 4 4 4.07 High Usage
A28 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 3.13 Moderate Usage
A29 3 2 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 2.27 Low Usage
A30 4 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 4 5 3 2 5 4 4 3.47 High Usage
A31 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 5 3 4 4 4 4 3.67 High Usage
A32 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 4.80 Very High Usage
A33 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 2 2 2 3.07 Moderate Usage
A34 4 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4.07 High Usage
 54

A35 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 3 5 5 4.73 Very High Usage

A36 4 4 5 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3.33 Moderate Usage
A37 3 3 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3.40 Moderate Usage
A38 4 4 3 5 4 3 5 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 3.80 High Usage
A39 5 4 5 3 4 4 3 3 2 4 4 3 3 2 3 3.47 High Usage
A40 5 5 4 4 4 3 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 4 4.13 High Usage
A41 5 4 5 4 4 3 5 5 3 5 4 5 5 5 3 4.33 Very High Usage
A42 5 5 4 5 4 3 5 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3.93 High Usage
A43 4 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 5 3 3 4 3 4 3.33 Moderate Usage
A44 5 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 2 2 3 4 2 2 3 3.13 Moderate Usage
A45 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 3.80 High Usage
A46 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 2.93 Moderate Usage
A47 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 1 3 2 2.73 Moderate Usage
A48 5 3 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 4 3.53 High Usage
A49 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 3 5 4 4.27 Very High Usage
A50 3 2 4 4 2 4 4 2 3 2 3 4 1 2 3 2.87 Moderate Usage
A51 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3.47 High Usage
A52 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3.40 Moderate Usage
A53 4 3 4 2 4 3 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2.80 Moderate Usage
A54 5 5 4 3 4 4 5 3 5 5 4 4 5 5 3 4.27 Very High Usage
A55 5 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 4 5 2 4 4 3 3.47 High Usage
A56 5 2 3 3 3 4 2 1 3 5 2 3 2 3 5 3.07 Moderate Usage
A57 5 5 5 2 3 4 4 3 3 5 3 3 4 3 3 3.67 High Usage
A58 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 5 5 2 4 4 4 3.87 High Usage
A59 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 3 5 4 4 4.20 High Usage
A60 4 4 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 1 3 4 3 4 5 3.60 High Usage
A61 3 2 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 3.53 High Usage
A62 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 2 4 3 3.47 High Usage
A63 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3.13 Moderate Usage
A64 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 3 2 2 3 3 2.80 Moderate Usage
A65 5 4 5 5 5 5 3 4 3 5 4 3 3 3 5 4.13 High Usage
A66 5 4 1 5 5 2 2 1 4 4 1 5 1 4 5 3.27 Moderate Usage
A67 5 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4.47 Very High Usage
A68 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 5 3 3 4 4 4 3.93 High Usage
A69 5 4 5 5 3 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 5 4.13 High Usage
A70 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 3 3 5 5 3 2 4 4.13 High Usage
A71 5 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 3.80 High Usage
A72 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 3 4 5 3 1 3 5 4.07 High Usage
A73 4 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 2 3 2 1 3 4 2.87 Moderate Usage
A74 4 5 4 3 4 5 5 4 3 5 4 3 4 3 4 4.00 High Usage
 55

A75 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 3.33 Moderate Usage

A76 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3.47 High Usage
A77 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2.80 Moderate Usage
A78 4 4 4 5 4 3 2 4 3 5 4 3 4 3 4 3.73 High Usage
A79 5 5 5 4 4 3 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4.47 Very High Usage
A80 4 3 4 4 3 2 3 5 2 4 3 2 1 2 3 3.00 Moderate Usage
A81 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4.53 Very High Usage
A82 3 4 5 4 4 2 1 2 2 4 1 3 2 3 5 3.00 Moderate Usage
A83 5 2 3 3 4 5 5 4 2 3 3 5 4 2 3 3.53 High Usage
A84 5 3 4 5 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 5 3.73 High Usage
A85 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 4.47 Very High Usage
A86 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 4.47 Very High Usage
A87 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 4 2 4 4 2 3 4 4 3.93 High Usage
A88 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 3.67 High Usage
A89 5 5 5 4 3 4 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 5 4 4.47 Very High Usage
A90 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3.93 High Usage
A91 5 4 5 5 5 5 3 4 3 5 4 3 3 3 5 4.13 High Usage
A92 5 3 5 5 4 3 5 5 4 5 5 3 4 3 5 4.27 Very High Usage
A93 5 5 5 4 4 3 5 4 3 5 5 3 5 3 4 4.20 High Usage
A94 4 2 4 5 4 2 2 4 2 2 5 2 3 2 5 3.20 Moderate Usage
A95 5 3 5 5 4 4 5 3 4 5 5 3 4 5 5 4.33 Very High Usage
A96 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 5 4 3 4 5 4 3.60 High Usage
A97 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 5 4.67 Very High Usage
A98 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 5 5 5 4 3 5 5 4 4.40 Very High Usage
A99 4 3 3 4 3 4 5 4 5 5 5 3 5 5 4 4.13 High Usage
A10
0 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 3 4 5 5 5 4.60 Very High Usage

3.69 High Usage

 56

Appendix C: Raw Data on Level of Technology Use

1 2 3 4
A1 6 35.29412 Below Average 3.8
A2 9 52.94118 Average 4.266667
A3 8 47.05882 Below Average 2.866667
A4 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.8
A5 11 64.70588 Average 4.466667
A6 11 64.70588 Average 4.4
A7 12 70.58824 Average 3.333333
A8 15 88.23529 Above Average 3.8
A9 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.666667
A10 9 52.94118 Average 2.933333
A11 6 35.29412 Below Average 3.4
A12 8 47.05882 Below Average 4
A13 9 52.94118 Average 3.6
A14 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.8
A15 5 29.41176 Below Average 3.4
A16 9 52.94118 Average 3.2
A17 10 58.82353 Average 3.733333
A18 11 64.70588 Average 3.266667
A19 6 35.29412 Below Average 3.133333
A20 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.333333
A21 5 29.41176 Below Average 3.333333
A22 6 35.29412 Below Average 2.866667
A23 7 41.17647 Below Average 3.333333
A24 8 47.05882 Below Average 2.933333
A25 10 58.82353 Average 3.666667
A26 6 35.29412 Below Average 2.8
A27 6 35.29412 Below Average 4.066667
A28 9 52.94118 Average 3.133333
A29 7 41.17647 Below Average 2.266667
A30 9 52.94118 Average 3.466667
A31 11 64.70588 Average 3.666667
 57

A32 9 52.94118 Average 4.8

A33 9 52.94118 Average 3.066667
A34 7 41.17647 Below Average 4.066667
A35 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.733333
A36 11 64.70588 Average 3.333333
A37 9 52.94118 Average 3.4
A38 12 70.58824 Average 3.8
A39 7 41.17647 Below Average 3.466667
A40 10 58.82353 Average 4.133333
A41 12 70.58824 Average 4.333333
A42 9 52.94118 Average 3.933333
A43 5 29.41176 Below Average 3.333333
A44 10 58.82353 Average 3.133333
A45 6 35.29412 Below Average 3.8
A46 8 47.05882 Below Average 2.933333
A47 11 64.70588 Average 2.733333
A48 7 41.17647 Below Average 3.533333
A49 7 41.17647 Below Average 4.266667
A50 10 58.82353 Average 2.866667
A51 9 52.94118 Average 3.466667
A52 9 52.94118 Average 3.4
A53 8 47.05882 Below Average 2.8
A54 7 41.17647 Below Average 4.266667
A55 9 52.94118 Average 3.466667
A56 9 52.94118 Average 3.066667
A57 5 29.41176 Below Average 3.666667
A58 10 58.82353 Average 3.866667
A59 11 64.70588 Average 4.2
A60 7 41.17647 Below Average 3.6
A61 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.533333
A62 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.466667
A63 9 52.94118 Average 3.133333
A64 6 35.29412 Below Average 2.8
A65 6 35.29412 Below Average 4.133333
A66 9 52.94118 Average 3.266667
A67 10 58.82353 Average 4.466667
A68 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.933333
A69 9 52.94118 Average 4.133333
A70 6 35.29412 Below Average 4.133333
A71 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.8
 58

A72 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.066667

A73 4 23.52941 Below Average 2.866667
A74 9 52.94118 Average 4
A75 9 52.94118 Average 3.333333
A76 6 35.29412 Below Average 3.466667
A77 9 52.94118 Average 2.8
A78 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.733333
A79 5 29.41176 Below Average 4.466667
A80 8 47.05882 Below Average 3
A81 7 41.17647 Below Average 4.533333
A82 9 52.94118 Average 3
A83 6 35.29412 Below Average 3.533333
A84 9 52.94118 Average 3.733333
A85 9 52.94118 Average 4.466667
A86 9 52.94118 Average 4.466667
A87 9 52.94118 Average 3.933333
A88 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.666667
A89 9 52.94118 Average 4.466667
A90 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.933333
A91 9 52.94118 Average 4.133333
A92 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.266667
A93 9 52.94118 Average 4.2
A94 9 52.94118 Average 3.2
A95 10 58.82353 Average 4.333333
A96 8 47.05882 Below Average 3.6
A97 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.666667
A98 9 52.94118 Average 4.4
A99 8 47.05882 Below Average 4.133333
A100 7 41.17647 Below Average 4.6

48.53465 Below Average

Appendix D: Communication
Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education 59
Region VI-Western Visayas
Division of Negros Occidental
Bulwangan National High School
Bulwangan, Hinoba-an, Negros Occidental

MARIE SOL G. VILLALUNA

Principal I
Bulwangan National High School

Sir:
Good Day!
May I respectfully ask permission from your good office to conduct a research
study entitled, “EFFECT OF TECHNOLOGY USE ON CRITICAL THINKING
ABILITIES IN GRADE 12 HUMSS AND STEM LEARNERS” This research is a
fulfillment in partial requirement
– for our Practical Research 2. In line with this, we
would like to ask your approval to allow us to conduct our research study inside the
campus.
Furthermore, this research study can be a relevant basis for the teachers, parents
and school administration to revise programs and strategies to address the ascertaining
problems in our school.

I am hoping for your favorable response.

Respectfully yours,

JOELLE IAN C. ABAJA

ANGELICA P. ABELO
JEAN REA B. APE
JASPER D. ATADERO
ELLA JOHLYN C. CANTERO
JOHN VINCENT D. DAVID
REYNA JOY O. DIANOY
HERLINE GAYLE M. ELACO
DIEGO K. IBASITAS JR.
JAMEYLA G. RIN
VOULEN JOY M. SARENO
Researchers

Approved: MARIE SOL G. VILLALUNA

Principal - I
 60
Appendix E: Research Instrument Evaluation Form (Results for Validity)

Direction: Kindly rate or evaluate according to the rating scale provided herein (based on

Carter V. Good and Douglas F. Scales’ criteria)

4 = Very Good 3 = Good 2 = Fair 1 = Poor

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION RATINGS

Juror 1 Juror 2 Juror 3
1. The questionnaire is short enough such that the
respondent will not reject it because it will not 4 4 4
consume much of his precious time.
2. The questionnaire has face appeal such that the
respondent will be inclined to accomplish it 4 4 4
fully.
3. The questionnaire can obtain some depth to
responses and avoid superficial answers or 3 4 3
information.
4. The items and their alternative responses are
4 4 3
neither too suggestive nor too unstimulating.
5. The questionnaire can elicit responses, which
4 4 3
are definite but not mechanically forced.
6. The items were stated in such a way that the
responses will not be embarrassing to the person 4 4 4
concerned.
7. Items are framed in such a manner as to allay
suspicion on the part of the respondent
4 4 4
concerning hidden purposes in the
questionnaire.
8. The questionnaire is not so narrow, not
3 4 4
restrictive or limited in its scope or philosophy.
9. The responses to the questionnaire, when taken
as a whole could answer the basic purpose for
4 3 3
which the questionnaire is designed and,
therefore, are considered valid.
AVERAGE 3.78 3.89 3.56
OVERALL RATING 3.74
 61
The overall rating of the three jurors has an average of 3.74 which is verbally
interpreted as excellent, thus the questionnaire is valid.
 62
Appendix F: Reliability Testing of the Data Gathering Instrument
(Scores and Computation of Spearman Rho)

Students Mean Scores Ranks Differences D²

S1 S2 R1 R2
1 2.93 2.93 9.0 9.0 0 0
2 3.33 3.53 7.0 5.0 2.0 4.0
3 3.6 3.6 4.0 4.0 0 0
4 3.53 3.467 5.0 6.0 1.0 1.0
5 3.4 3.2 6.0 7.0 1.0 1.0
6 4.13 4.2 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0
7 3.067 3.067 8.0 8.0 0 0
8 4.2 3.8 2.0 3.0 1.0 1.0
9 2.267 2.4 10.0 10.0 0 0
10 4.267 4.467 1.0 1.0 0 0
TOTAL 8.0

r = 1 — __________
6Σ D²
s

N³ - N
_
6 (8)
r = 1 — __________
s

(10)³ - 10
48
r = 1 — __________
s

1000-10
_
48
rs = 1 — __________
990
_
rs = 1 — 0.0485

rs = 0.9515

The Spearman Rho value

obtained is 0.9515, which denotes high relationship thus, the instrument is reliable.
63