EFFECTIVENESS OF ICT-BASED LEARNING MATERIALS

IN TEACHING CHEMISTRY

I. INTRODUCTION
Education is the pivot on which the growth and development of any nation depends and this is why
every nation is striving to educate her citizens irrespective of age. In the time past and now, nearly
everybody in the industrialized countries of the world has gained access to the use of ICT. The provision
of computers, radio, ancillary equipment, audio tapes and audio-visual tapes, microfilms for on-line
learning in schools are not new to citizens of such countries. Besides, a lot of researches have been carried
out in these advanced and industrialized countries for the purpose of advancing knowledge on ICT to be
used in education. This on the other hand has increased the use of ICT for teaching and learning and
consequently has improved access to education in a way that nearly every student has his/her own gadget
for use.
Through the years, education in the country has undergone paradigm shifts and modification to
strengthen and attune it to the changing environment and keep up with the latest developments in the field,
as well as to develop high level of literacy among Filipino students to enable them to participate actively
and effectively in modern society. Several studies have shown that Philippine education needs an
immediate attention and healing to ensure and sustain quality education. Science education is no
exception. Most often, students perceived science as a hard and complicated subject. According to DepEd,
Science obtained the lowest percentage of 40.53% as compared with other core subjects in the high school
in the National Achievement Test in 2011-2012. It shows that students indeed encounter difficulties in this
subject. In the TIMSS in 2003 and 2008 results showed that the Philippines ranked 43rd out of 46
countries in High School Science and last of the ten countries in advanced math category, respectively,
even with the science high schools only who participated in the study. According to Lizaralde (1990), “the
continued deterioration of the quality of education in the country can be ascribed to the grossly inadequate
funding sources in both public and private schools”. The inadequate funding here implies several teaching
and learning problems like poor classroom environment and accommodation, inadequate evaluative
device and most importantly inadequate teaching aids and device.
The lack of instructional materials is one of the reasons identified as contributory to such condition.
That is why there is an extensive effort to alleviate the low performance of students in Science and other
subjects by the government to come up with materials that are readily available for use by students. The
search for network and linkages with funding agencies throughout the globe with the same interest of
providing resources and avenues for students’ improved academic achievements is also continuous.
Ramirez (2006) cited that many educators claimed that strategy and instructional materials are
indispensable tools in the teaching and learning process. Maximum use of senses in the educative process
proved to ensure better understanding of lessons. Sutaria (1990) claimed that children learn better when
they are happy and free to experiment and discover. She looked forward to seeing innovative and
adventurous teachers who do not stick to the monotonous question and answer technique but explore new
exciting strategies and who no longer resort to regressive feeding strategies that immobilize rather than
develop the child’s intellect.
On the other hand, the use of instructional materials that relate to technology is of great help to
improve the learning of students because they find it more creative, interesting and easy to recall unlike
the traditional way of “chalk and talk”. Today’s learners prefer activities where they can interact and
express themselves and get immediate feedback. Educators need to accept that students of the present
generation are techno-natives who can easily navigate through new technology. They have been highly
 exposed to various forms of media and technological tools, multi-sensorial stimulation, multi-tasking,
“instant” processes, “instant” products and a barrage of information from various sources-both accurate
and inaccurate (Tan, 2007). Haddad (2002) asserted that, “ICTs are powerful tools when used properly
because they increase the level of motivation of students and actively engage them in the learning process.
Furthermore, it can develop multiple intelligences of students through multimedia presentation of
materials and they make it easy to understand abstract concepts by making them more concrete”.
Chemistry being viewed as abstract science can be taught using ICT to make such abstract concepts more
concrete and ensure proper motivation and engagement of students in the learning process.
The use of ICT based instructional material in teaching chemistry may make a turn-around in the
present low academic achievement of students in science particularly in Chemistry knowing that
integration of technology in teaching the subject may be more appealing and relevant to the present
generation of learners.

II. DESCRIPTION OF DATA

The following are the pretest and posttest scores of the four groups of respondents:

A. Lecture Method

MATCH NUMBER PRETEST POSTTEST

1 15 24
2 15 25
3 15 23
4 10 18
5 10 21
6 10 24
7 10 22
8 10 21
9 9 23
10 9 19
11 9 21
12 9 21
13 9 21
14 9 21
15 9 22
16 9 21
17 9 18
18 9 23
19 9 22
20 9 21
21 9 22
22 8 18
23 8 20
 24 8 20
25 8 22
26 8 18
27 8 19
28 8 23
29 8 25
30 8 21

B. Simulation

MATCH NUMBER PRETEST POSTTEST

1 16 28
2 15 26
3 15 28
4 11 27
5 11 28
6 11 28
7 11 23
8 11 24
9 11 26
10 10 22
11 10 25
12 10 29
13 10 24
14 10 24
15 10 28
16 10 28
17 10 22
18 10 26
19 10 25
20 9 24
21 9 27
22 9 25
23 9 28
24 9 27
25 8 28
26 8 24
27 8 25
28 8 25
29 8 24
30 8 27
C. Animation

MATCH NUMBER PRETEST POSTTEST

1 15 28
2 15 27
3 15 24
4 11 22
5 11 25
6 11 25
7 11 23
8 11 23
9 11 23
10 10 21
11 10 25
12 10 23
13 10 25
14 9 19
15 9 21
16 9 24
17 9 25
18 9 22
19 9 21
20 8 22
21 8 23
22 8 22
23 8 21
24 8 24
25 8 24
26 8 21
27 8 23
28 8 22
29 7 22
30 7 23
 D. Video Clip

MATCH NUMBER PRETEST POSTTEST

1 15 24
2 15 23
3 15 25
4 11 21
5 10 24
6 10 22
7 10 23
8 10 21
9 10 20
10 9 22
11 9 23
12 9 22
13 9 21
14 9 22
15 9 22
16 9 21
17 9 21
18 9 21
19 9 20
20 9 24
21 8 21
22 8 21
23 8 22
24 8 21
25 8 21
26 8 21
27 8 21
28 8 21
29 8 23
30 8 21

III. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM & HYPOTHESIS

Generally, the study will determine the effectiveness of ICT-Based Learning Materials in teaching
Chemistry. Specifically, it will seek to answer the following questions:
1. What is the pre-test and post-test score of the respondents in Atomic Theory?
2. What is the level of performance of the respondents in Atomic Theory?
3. What ICT-Based learning material is the most effective in teaching Atomic Theory?
4. Is there a significant difference in the performance of the respondents in Atomic Theory?
The null hypothesis to be tested in the study:
1. There is no significant difference in the performance of students in Chemistry when taught using ICT-
Based Learning Materials.

IV. STATISTICAL TOOLS TO BE USED

The data and information gathered from the respondents will be tallied, tabulated, analyzed and
interpreted with the aid of the following statistical tool:
1. To describe the pretest and posttest scores of the students, the mean will be used.
2. To identify the level of performance of the respondents in Atomic theory, the mean will also be
used.
3. To determine the most effective ICT-Based learning material in teaching atomic theory, the mean
gain score will be used.
4. To determine if there is a significant difference of the respondents in atomic theory, ANOVA will
be used.

V. PRESENTATION OF RESULTS/INTERPRETATION
The pretest was conducted to the respondents in order to find-out if the four groups were
initially comparable in terms of performance.
The pretest and posttest scores of the respondents are presented in Table 1. As shown in the
table, 27 or 90.00 % of the respondents gained a score that fall within the range 7-12 in the given
pretest on the lecture-discussion method, simulation, animation, and video clip .
It is also reflected in the table that 2 or 6.67 % of the respondents achieved a score that fall
within the range of 25-30 in the posttest on the lecture-discussion method. In contrast, 21 or 70.00
% of the respondents obtained a score that fall within the range of 25-30 in the given posttest on
the simulation.
Moreover, the mean of the pretest scores in all the groups of respondents in both the lecture-
discussion method and in all the strategies included in the ICT-based instruction are lower
compared to the mean obtained in the posttest.
Table 1: Pretest and posttest scores of the four (4) groups of respondents.
Score Lecture-discussion Simulation Animation Video Clip
method
Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest
25-30 2 21 7 1
19-24 24 9 23 29
13-18 3 4 3 3 3
7-12 27 27 27 27
0-6
Mean 9.47 21.23 10.16 25.83 9.70 23.10 9.50 21.83
 Table 2 presents the level of performance of the respondents. As gleaned from the table, the control
group obtained a mean pretest score of 9.47 with a level of performance of fairly satisfactory and a mean
posttest score of 21.23 with a level of performance of very satisfactory. On the other hand, the experimental
group obtained a mean pretest score of 9.78 with a level of performance of fairly satisfactory and a mean
posttest score of 23.59 with a level of performance of very satisfactory. Therefore, both groups have the same
level of performance based on their posttest scores. However, comparison of means of the two groups shows
that ICT-based instruction obtained a higher mean than lecture-discussion method which means that ICT-
based instruction is still better to use in teaching Atomic Theory.
Table 2: Level of Performance of the Control and Experimental Group
Strategy Group Mean Level of Performance
Pretest 9.47 Fairly Satisfactory
Lecture
Method Posttest 21.23 Very Satisfactory

Pretest 9.78 Fairly Satisfactory

ICT-based
Posttest 23.59 Very Satisfactory

It can be inferred from Table 3 the mean gain score of the four groups of respondents. The mean gain
score of simulation, animation, and video clip is 15.67, 13.40, and 12.33, respectively. Hence, the most
effective ICT-based learning material in teaching atomic theory is simulation. This finding is attributed to the
fact that developing fluency across symbolic, macroscopic, and particulate-level representations is central to
learning chemistry. Within the chemistry education community, that support multi-representational fluency is
considered critical. With advances in the accessibility and sophistication of technology, interactive computer
simulations are emerging as uniquely powerful tools to support effective and efficient chemistry learning.(
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/ed4005084)
Table 3: Mean Gain Scores of the three ICT-based learning materials
Strategy Test Mean Mean Gain Score Rank
Pretest 10.16
Simulation 15.67 1
Posttest 25.83

Pretest 9.70
Animation 13.40 2
Posttest 23.10

Pretest 9.50
Video Clip 12.33 3
Posttest 21.83
 In order to find-out whether both lecture discussion method and ICT-based instruction contributed to
students’ performance in Chemistry, the posttest of each group were compared.
Table 4 reveals that the computed p-value is 3.5 x 10-17, which is less than 0.05. The null hypothesis
is therefore rejected. Thus, there is a significant difference in the performance of the respondents in Atomic
Theory. It suggests that ICT-based instruction did enhance the performance of students. This finding is
attributed to the fact that ICT-based learning materials are helpful in concretizing abstract ideas. It helps
students visualize abstract concepts through the involvement of more senses, does not only involve hearing
but also seeing which improves visualization and therefore, the understanding of the concept is
enriched.(http://teach2gether.com/simulations.html)
Moreover, research outcomes of the Technology- enabled Active Learning (TEAL) project for
teaching chemistry at MIT (Dori, Hult, Breslow, & Belcher, 2007) indicated that the learning gains were
significantly greater than those obtained by traditional lectures and recitation settings without the use of ICT-
based learning materials.

Table 4: Test of difference in the performance of the respondents in Atomic Theory

ANOVA

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit Decision

Reject
Between Groups 375.6 3 125.2 37.97908 3.58E-17 2.682809 Ho
Within Groups 382.4 116 3.296552

Total 758 119

* significant at ∝ = 0.05
Table 5 shows the difference between lecture-discussion method and simulation. The lecture-
discussion method had a mean score of 21.23 in the posttest and a standard deviation of 1.99. Meanwhile,
simulation had a mean score of 25.83 in the posttest and a standard deviation of 1.98.
The table further discloses that the posttest mean scores between lecture-discussion method and
simulation varied significantly. Furthermore, the computed p-value is 1.57 x 10-12, which is less than 0.05.
The null hypothesis is therefore rejected. The finding bests support the idea of Stone(2009) that simulations
promote the uses of critical and evaluative thinking. Because they are ambiguous or open-ended, they
encourage students to contemplate the implications of a scenario. Simulations provide experience where
learning is both interactive and dynamic. The situation feels real and thus leads to more engaging interaction
by learners. He also noted that simulations promote concept attainment through experiential practice. They
help students understand the nuances of concept. Students find them more deeply engaging than other
activities, as they experience the activity first hand, rather than about seeing or hearing it.

Table 5: Test of difference between lecture discussion method and simulation

Strategy Mean SD df t-value p-value Decision

Lecture Method 21.23 1.99

58 -8.9556 1.57E-12 Reject Ho
Simulation 25.83 1.98
 Table 6 shows the difference between lecture-discussion method and animation. The lecture-
discussion method had a mean score of 21.23 in the posttest and a standard deviation of 1.99. Meanwhile,
animation had a mean score of 23.10 in the posttest and a standard deviation of 1.92.
The table further reveals that the posttest mean scores between lecture-discussion method and
animation varied significantly. Furthermore, the computed p-value is 0.0005, which is less than 0.05. The null
hypothesis is therefore rejected. This finding is attributed to the idea of Nielson(2000) and Vossen(1997) that
animations draw learners’ attention or alert viewers to new information, demonstrates navigation in particular
direction and create icons for actions that cannot be adequately expressed with a flat and static picture. Thus,
students have the deeper and better retention of understanding of the concept, mastery of the skill or strategy
or acquisition of knowledge. They pointed out also that animations could support constructivist learning
through learning by doing, and it can be used for discovery learning, experiential learning, and problem-based
learning, etc.

Table 6: Test of difference between lecture discussion method and animation

Strategy Mean SD df t-value p-value Decision

Lecture Method 21.23 1.99

58 -3.6948 0.0005 Reject Ho
Animation 23.10 1.92

* significant at ∝ = 0.05
Table 7 shows the difference between lecture-discussion method and video clip-reinforced instruction.
The lecture-discussion method had a mean score of 21.23 in the posttest and a standard deviation of 1.99.
Meanwhile, video clip had a mean score of 21.83 in the posttest and a standard deviation of 1.26.
The table further displays that the posttest mean scores between lecture-discussion method and
animation had a slight difference. Furthermore, the computed p-value is 0.1701, which is greater than 0.05.
The null hypothesis is therefore accepted. This finding is attributed to the fact that specific strategies are only
suitable for specific topics. Probably, atomic theory is not well-matched for the use of video clips. Another
reason is that the video clip used was lecture type of discussion where in the students prefer the researcher to
talk rather than watching the video clips presented. This finding supports the idea of Sosnowski(2010) that
when designing multimedia learning experience, the role of the teacher shifts from instructor to facilitator. If
a lesson allows students to complete learning, classroom management becomes increasingly difficult. This
particularly true if students work in groups to view multimedia sources or share computers or televisions.

Table 7: Test of difference between lecture discussion method and video clip
Strategy Mean SD df t-value p-value Decision

Lecture Method 21.23 1.99

58 -1.3925 0.1701 Accept Ho
Video Clip 21.83 1.26

* significant at ∝ = 0.05
VI. CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:
1. The posttest scores of all the groups of respondents are higher than their corresponding pretest
scores.
2. The level of performance of the respondents in the pretest is fairly satisfactory while performed
very satisfactory in the posttest.
3. The simulation is the most effective ICT-based learning material in teaching Atomic Theory.
4. The performance of the respondents when taught using the ICT-based instruction is higher than
lecture-discussion method in teaching atomic theory.

VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are presented.
1. Since the use of ICT-based learning materials significantly increased the students’
performance, this strategy therefore is highly recommended in the teaching of Chemistry to
enhance students’ performance.
2. A replication of this study is also recommended with a bigger sample to ascertain the same
results.
3. Science teachers should undergo seminar-workshop/trainings on the use of ICT-based learning
materials in teaching chemistry to help them undertake similar activities in their respective
classes.
4. ICT-based-reinforced instruction should be used as supplement in teaching Chemistry and
other science subjects to help students understand better difficult concepts.
5. School heads, principals, and administrators should plan and conduct special trainings on
innovative teaching approaches which are intended for non-Chemistry who are teaching the
subject.
6. School heads, administrators and other higher officials in the department should consider this
study in making policies especially in the allocation of funds for the procurement of audiovisual
and other instructional materials/ modern equipment to be used in the science instruction.