Bridging Learning Through The Blink: an Evaluation Research

Bridging Learning through the Blink: An Evaluation Research

Steve A. Solano

King’s College of the Philippines, Benguet, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803146S

Received: 20 May 2024; Revised: 13 June 2024; Accepted: 21 June 2024; Published: 19 July 2024

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted traditional education systems, necessitating the creation of innovative learning programs. This study evaluates the implementation of Berkeley School Baguio’s BLINK (Berkeley’s Link to the Entire Community) program, an initiative developed to address the challenges posed by distance learning. BLINK integrates information technology with innovative pedagogical approaches, structured around four core Integrative Learning Clusters: Social Literacy, Logical Analysis, Wika at Pagpapakatao, and Psychomotor Skills.

Through a process-based evaluation model, this quantitative descriptive research analyzes data gathered from senior high school students who participated in the program during the 2022-2023 academic year, and the teachers who implemented the curriculum especially redesigned for the BLINK. The evaluation focuses on four main areas: time management, content alignment, teaching-learning, and evaluation. The study reveals that students generally agreed with the effective implementation of BLINK, highlighting proper time management, coherent content alignment, diverse teaching methods, and appropriate evaluation strategies. However, unique challenges were identified, such as technological issues and difficulties in teaching-learning processes.

To address these challenges, the study suggests improvements in automated notifications, mobile-friendly access, and streamlined navigation on the BLINK platform. Additionally, it recommends removing open-note assessments to encourage diligent study habits. This evaluation provides insights for administrators, faculty, and parents to refine BLINK, ensuring it continues to offer meaningful and effective educational experiences in a dynamic learning environment.

INTRODUCTION

The Object of Evaluation

Berkeley School Baguio has always been responsive to the learning needs of its students. Inspired by its vision to be a school of excellence empowering lifelong learners with knowledge, skills, and values relevant to being productive citizens now and the future, it has been continuously creating and innovating methods that will make delivery of learning not only convenient but makes educational experiences of students meaningful.  However, like any other school in the world, Berkeley was also challenged during the outbreak of COVID 19 especially in delivering instruction. Its adoption of the Distance Learning Program (DLP), which was asynchronous in nature, did not really meet the needs of the students.

In a survey conducted by the school, they found out that in a DLP, academic loads were difficult to manage considering screen time and resources of families at home, virtual presence of teachers in a synchronous learning environment as well as student interaction was totally absent, submissions were difficult for the teachers to manage and monitor and therefore assessments and feedback was delayed, and support programs to aid parents and students in looking after their well-being and mental health were not enough.

These gaps inspired the creation of another program that fostered the integration of information technology, innovative pedagogical approaches, and content that makes learning practical, fun, and meaningful for students.   This program is called BLINK or Berkeley’s link to the entire community. An academic program that is anchored on the school’s five core values of creativity, collaboration, character, compassion, and composure.

BLINK’s key features are the following:

Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment is based on four (4) Integrative Learning Clusters

1. Social Literacy

The fusion of English and Social Studies that provides the students with an intensive study of human society through literature and rules of grammar. Students are provided with opportunities to put into actual practice the rudiments of the English Subject, with its Grammar and literary concepts, into situational context as provided for by the Social Studies content. In this cluster, the students are trained to be servant leaders. As such, they must be socially aware, involved and advocates of transformation and development. They must also be compassionate and be active collaborators.

2. Logical Analysis

Science and mathematics, the integration of these two subjects will show how things work and why things function the way they do. Hence, teaching the students to be creative and collaborative problem solvers.

3. Wika at Pagpapakatao

Through the lens of Filipino grammar and literature, one will have a better appreciation for human values and character in today’s digital age. More importantly, this cluster trains the students with Filipino moral principles combined with Berkeley School Core Values that builds the good person (Mabuting Tao) in them.

4. Psychomotor

With a spirit of collaboration across the other clusters, skills in music, arts, physical education, health, and other practical skills to be applied at home will be further strengthened. Students are trained to not only focus on academics but overall health and wellness. They are guided to be confident and disciplined.

Figure 1: Berkeley School Framework for Enhanced Integrated Curriculum

Teacher Led and Parent Supported 2-3 synchronous sessions a week per cluster and two assigned asynchronous tasks, supplemented by real time teacher responses with these tasks.

BLINK is a virtual meeting place, online learning platform, where all learners and teachers will gain access to all content and resources online.

Robust online support system where an administrative team is deployed to assist via email, text, landline, or direct message through the school fakebook page. (Berkeley Project RECAST, p1)

During the School Year 2020-2021, Berkeley School rolled out a beginning survey where parents evaluated the program implementation in terms of Time allotment for synchronous and asynchronous classes, concepts covered, and general amount of workload. The parents were asked if these terms are too much, just right, or too little. Out of the 222 respondents 98% rated these terms just right.  Moreover, they were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with the learning cluster set up where 65.5% expressed fair satisfaction while 32% expressed that they are very satisfied. In terms of adapting to learning, 90% expressed to have adapted to the set up.  (Astudillo, A., Go, C., & Orosa, M., 2020).

To further check the effectiveness of the program, the second leg of appraisal was conducted. Another survey was sent out to the teachers to check the implementation of the program as intended and identify barriers to effective implementation especially along the learning clusters. Although the teachers saw the clear relationships between the concepts, three general themes that pose areas of concern emerged. First, Insufficient Content Knowledge (ICK). Teachers admitted in their self-report that their mastery of the integrated subjects (learning clusters) is low because it is not their specialization. They claim that insufficient knowledge in the content creates imbalance and constraints in preparing the learning plans and activities that fit the online learning environment. They suggested that professional development training on the clusters they handle will help them hurdle this barrier Second, Insufficient Pedagogical Knowledge (IPK). Pedagogical approaches vary according to discipline. The teachers expressed that they might have mastery of the methods in teaching their respective specialization however they find themselves lacking in the methods applied in the integrated subject. For instance, having difficulty in identifying the convergence in the standards and competencies.  Third, Insufficient Time for Educational Plan Preparation (ITEPP). All the teachers claim that time is a very important element in implementing the program since it requires deep learning, planning activities, and aligning the standards and competencies of the K-12 curriculum. (Berkeley Curriculum Development Completion Report, 2021).

To mitigate these concerns, the administrators initiated a professional development training that focused on Digitagogy, Technological upskilling, and content loading.  The Teachers were provided intensive training on the different digital tools and applications that helped them provide a better delivery of instruction in the online learning space. They were trained to adopt digitagogical approaches like the Synchronous Online Flipped Learning Approach (SOFLA) that “ closely replicates actual classroom teaching and provides dynamic, interactive, spaces both asynchronous and synchronous to create fertile spaces for learning” (Marshall & Rodriguez Buitrago, 2017), and  training in the specialized discipline to equip the teachers with the content in the discipline they did not specialize in.  Although these initiatives addressed the areas of concern that came out in the survey, there are still gaps that need to be addressed. Students’ perspectives were not yet considered in the evaluation. Hence, this study focuses on the students’ evaluation of the program to complete the third leg of appraisal.

Rationale

The pandemic has made schools develop resilience and grit as they battle with the crisis. Administrators, teachers, students, and parents became more conscious of the learning standards that need to be met as they guide the students in accomplishing their learning tasks. Programs were developed, tried, tested, and or evaluated to validate their effectiveness in making delivery of learning more meaningful, and tailor fitted to the needs of the students. With the plethora of publications to support practitioners, administrators, and students as they seek success in alternate delivery modes of teaching and learning (Cameron-Stanford, et al., 2020), researchers were inspired to dig deeper into possibilities and opportunities to further investigate what worked and what could work better for their students since there are still conflicting perspectives, and gaps in knowledge found in the literature.

Some of the studies that provide perspectives include that of Thomas (2020) who used Community of Inquiry (COI) as a conceptual framework in flushing out tensions that influence online course design, and instructional approaches during the transition from face-to-face to online learning. However, study also revealed that this approach does not really address all areas of concern in the online learning environment. Coman et al. (2020), also analyzed student perceptions of the sudden pivot to online learning, through an online survey and semi structured questionnaire.  The study cited technical issues like learning multiple platforms, and lack of adequate technologies that greatly affect the pivoting of learning. Howe and Watson (2021) also discussed the teachers’ lack of technical skills particularly in using tools available in the Learning Management System (LMS) and a lack of interest in improving skills, and disorganization, and use of pedagogical styles that do not transfer well in the online learning environment. They also reported the lack of interaction between students and teachers. However, in the study of Thomas (2020), the student respondents reported that the beginning of the transition period was a struggle because of the disruption of their academic support structures, lack of routine of going to class, through-in class reminders and access to campus life, while others find the flexibility of self-paced study and self-disciplined learning as positive influence on their learning.

Loose and Ryan (2020) also studied how first year faculty navigated the challenges, and the learning opportunities they faced. Their study found out that there needs to be continuous practice of evaluating instructional practices based on the themes that emerged which are innovation in survival mode, reimagining instructions, and reimagining connections. Loose and Ryan’s study proves the vital role of evaluation in the continuous improvement of programs especially in a fast-changing educational landscape.

These are just a few of the studies that justify the need for continuous evaluation of programs to ensure quality of implementation and achievement of goals and objectives. These also inspire the researcher in conducting this study to complete the legs of appraisal and determine areas of more realistic improvements that are based on the student’ perspectives and experiences.

Statement of the Evaluation Questions

This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the BLINK as intended. Specifically, this seeks answers to the following questions:

1. Are teachers implementing the program within the same framework in terms of
   1. Time management
   2. Content Alignment
   3. Teaching-Learning
   4. Evaluation
2. Are there unique challenges encountered by the students as they learned through the BLINK?
3. What recommendations do students offer for program implementers?

Significance of the Study

The result of this study is deemed significant first and foremost to the administrators. This shall give them a more balanced view of the program implementation as intended and will guide them in reimagining better programs that shall benefit the whole learning community.

Second, to the faculty and staff because they will be properly informed of how the students assess their delivery of the BLINK, thereby inspitr more creative, innovative, and collaborative approaches in delivering instruction.

The Parents and Guardians, being the partners in delivering quality education. The result of this study shall provide them enough information on how to assist their children in their academic journey.

Finally, this is deemed significant to the research community as it shall serve as basis for identifying gaps that may be further investigated to improve the delivery of instruction and advocate integration of subjects to establish a more collaborative, interactive, cooperative, and deeper learning.

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

This study evaluates the implementation of the BLINK as intended. Specifically, this study investigated

1. Whether or not teachers implement the program within the framework in terms of

1. 1. 1. Time management
      2. Content Alignment
      3. Teaching-learning
      4. Evaluation.
2. If there are unique challenges encountered by the students as they learned through the BLINK
3. Recommendations students offer for the program implementers.

Since this study is focused on the implementation of the BLINK, data shall be

Gathered within the confines of Berkeley School Inc. Only Senior High School Students who are currently enrolled and have completed at least one academic year at Berkeley School were involved in this study. All students who did not complete one academic year were excluded. Although students are onsite, google form was used to gather the data to facilitate efficiency. In analyzing the data, only descriptive statistics was employed.

METHODOLOGY

Evaluation Model

This study employs the process-based evaluation model. Process-based evaluation according to Boothroyd (2018), documents the process of a program’s implementation. It helps stakeholders see how a program outcomes or impacts are achieved. Furthermore, it focuses on the types and quantities of services delivered, the beneficiaries of those services, the resources used to deliver the services, the practical problems encountered, and the ways such problems were resolved. Hence, this study focused on the implementation of BLINK as intended.

Research Design

This study employed quantitative descriptive research. According to Glass and Hopkins (1984), descriptive research involves gathering data that describe events and then organizes, tabulates, depicts, and describes the data collection. It often uses visual aids such as graphs and charts to aid the reader in understanding the data distribution.  With this definition in mind, a descriptive survey was rolled out to evaluate the implementation of BLINK as intended.

Locale of the Study

BLINK is an academic program that was conceptualized by the administrators of Berkeley School Incorporated as a response to the challenges of the pandemic. Its implementation has been rigorous as it was also tested by several challenges as discussed in the introduction. However, it has evolved, and is still evolving as new ideas are developed, new challenges come in, and demands of time are constantly changing. Although the program has been evaluated at the parents/guardian’s level, and at the faculty level, evaluation. Hence this study was conducted to complete the third level of evaluation.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of this study are senior high school students who are currently enrolled at Berkeley School during the Academic Year 2022-2023 and must have completed at least one academic year at Berkeley.  Of the 80 students, 58 decided to participate. Table 1 show the distribution.

Table 1: Distribution of participants according to years of studying in Berkeley.

Instrumentation

To answer the first evaluation question A short 4-point, scale questionnaire was rolled out to students to evaluate the implementation of the BLINK.  The students were asked to indicate their level of agreement to the list of statements which are classified into four areas: Time management, alignment of content, teaching-learning, and evaluation.

The said questionnaire is a modified version of the questionnaire used in the studies of Kim, et al. (1997); Lee et al., (2000); and Oh, et al.,(2007)  which measured the students’ perception of  learning clusters.  Some items were modified to fit the purpose of this study.

Hence, validity and reliability need not be tested. Evaluation questions 2 and 3 were also included in the google form to gather the responses of the students on the challenges they faced as they learned through the BLINK and the recommendations they can offer to the implementers of the program.

Data Gathering Procedure

To gather the data, the survey questions were entered in the google form. To protect the students’ privacy, emails, or contact details were not required. Students were given the choice not to participate in the study without their parents’ consent. Should be allowed, they can proceed with the survey and submit.  The survey was rolled out from November 28 to December 7, 2022, and retrieved on December 8, 2022.  Since the researcher is the Academic Head of the department, request for permission was not necessary.

Data Analysis

To analyze the quantitative data, the descriptive statistics, specifically average mean, was used.  The range and interpretation is reflected in the table below.

Table 2: Range and interpretation

The qualitative data on the other hand were coded and analyzed using the Gioia methodology ( 2010). The first order concepts were classified and unpacked to form the 2^nd order themes.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter deals with the presentation, discussion, and interpretation of results.

Students’ Evaluation of Teachers’ Implementation of the BLINK in terms of Time Management.

Table 3 shows the students’ agreement of how BLINK is implemented in terms of time management. It could be gleaned from the table that students gave time management a mean of 2.66, which indicates that they agreed that time efficiency increased due to the reduction of overlapping standards and competencies, appropriate time was assigned for every cluster, timetable is properly sequenced, and time allotted for the synchronous and asynchronous classes per week were suitable. Although the teachers claim that time has always been their problem in the preparation of educational learning plans, this result proves the positive impact of  what they have prepared. Indeed, “if teachers want to teach the content properly and efficiently according to the needs, requirements and the interests of the students, then it must be done through good and advanced planning, procedure, regularity and punctuality, time schedule and effective procedure.” (Sahito, et al., 2016). This result resonates with Sahito et.al. ‘s (2016) conclusion that teachers’ time management affects the students’ perception and performance in learning.

Table 3: Students’ level of agreement to the implementation of BLINK in terms of Time Management.

Students’ Evaluation of the Teachers’ Implementation of the BLINK in terms of Content Alignment

Table 4 shows that in terms of content alignment, the students expressed higher level of agreement, with the Mean of 2.878. It should also be noted that with the five areas presented under content alignment, proper sequencing of topics was rated the highest with the mean of 2.98, interpreted as Agree. This implies that even with the integration of the different learning clusters, the students have a clear view of how the topics in the BLINK are presented. The results also imply that teachers plan around what students should know before they arrive for the day’s class, and provide ways to let the students know ahead of time what they’ll be learning and track progress throughout the year.  (Curriculum Mapping and lesson planning for K-12 schools., 2021).

Table 4: Students’ evaluation of the Teachers’ implementation of the BLINK in terms of Content Alignmen

Students’ Evaluation of the Teachers’ Implementation of the BLINK in terms of Teaching-Learning

Table 5 shows that the students rated the implementation of the BLINK in terms of teaching-learning 2.87 which is interpreted as agree. Leading the items is that which expresses that learning objectives were presented and achieved, with an average of 3.03, interpreted as agree. This implies that in terms of teaching and learning, the teachers get the student involved in the construction of knowledge and transform them into active learners. With the use of various teaching-learning methods, instructional platforms, and encouraging active participation in class and team sessions, there is a high possibility of achieving the learning objectives.

Table 5:  Students’ evaluation of Teachers’ implementation of the BLINK in terms of Teaching -Learning.

Students’ evaluation of Teachers’ Implementation of the BLINK in Terms of Evaluation

Evaluation is one of the most critical parts of the learning clusters as it requires seamless integration of the concepts. It demands critical analysis of how the concepts should be blended and converted as you evaluate the students. It should cut across subject matter lines to attain a meaningful association of focus and holistic measurement of  students’ academic, and social aspect of being.

It should not just be a measurement of how much knowledge they have acquired, but also a measurement of how they applied this knowledge in real life grind. Normally, students would complain about how assessment/evaluation is being conducted in the classroom.  However, in the results that are presented in table 6, students rated the implementation of BLINK in terms of evaluation a 2.83 which is interpreted as agree. A relatively high rating.

The result also highlights that items 1 and 4 got relatively high scores of 2.88 and 2.89 respectively. These results indicate that in terms of evaluation, frequencies of items are appropriate, holistic, and integrated, reflects objectives and content, and matches with the content, competencies, and standards of the cluster.

These results communicate the ideas of Godding, Smith, Patterson and Perry, (2013) that exercises should target the development of manipulative skills, understanding phenomenon, development of scientific inquiry, and ability to solve problems. The results imply that evaluation activities are properly designed and implemented.

 Table 6: Students’ level of agreement to the implementation of the BLINK in terms of Evaluation.

Unique Challenges encountered by students as they learn through the BLINK.

When students were asked of the unique challenges they encountered as they learned through the BLINK, two second order themes emerged (as presented in table 7):

First, Technological Challenges. These challenges as reported by the respondents would include the lack of notification, difficulty in accessing it through their mobile, and the auto-submission of tasks when it goes beyond the time limit. These challenges are connected with how the learning management operates and connectivity problems.

Second, Challenges in teaching-learning. These challenges include ungraded submission because teachers don’t see it. Lack of learning material, and restrictions in collaboration activities because of the distance.

Table 7: Unique challenges encountered by the students as they learned through the BLINK.

Suggestions for the implementers of the program.

When the students were asked to write down their suggestions for the implementers of the program, many of them said they did not have any suggestions, while others wrote 2-3 items. These suggestions are classified based on the themes that emerged when they were asked to identify the unique challenges they encountered. If we look at their suggestions, some striking points stand out. For instance, under teaching learning, one respondent wrote the removal of open notes during assessment, and encouraged students to take notes and review diligently so that they can learn.

Technological

• An Automated reminder notifying the students 24 hours before a given task is due
• Remove unnecessary parts of the website that the students do not use and make BLINK
• The Main think I would like to see reinstated would be the ability to see my grades
• BLINK should be mobile friendly
• To freely customize and organize your dashboard

Teaching-Learning

• Removal of open notes during quizzes and exams to properly assess students and for the school to encourage students to take notes and review diligently so that they may learn properly.
• Coordinate tests with other subjects so that there won’t be too many tests at a time
• I would prefer if the students would be able to see their grades on the website.
• Organize every lesson page and every chapter for each cluster to make it easy to navigate.
• A syllabus for each cluster should be provided to be guided better.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In the light of the results of this study, the researchers arrived at the following conclusions:

First, BLINK is being implemented as intended. Learning activities are accessible, fun, collaborative, creative, and promotes compassion, character, and composure,

Second, the teachers are implementing the BLINK at the same frame in terms of time management, content alignment, teaching-learning, and evaluation.

Third, that the respondents are challenged by technology, and teaching-learning. These challenges include, lack of automatic notification, redirection of links, and timed exercises.

Lastly, the respondents suggested that in terms of technology, the notifications of the BLINK should be automated, unnecessary parts should be removed, it should be mobile friendly, and customizable. In terms of teaching-learning, the removal of open notes during assessments, streamlining of schedules, and lessons and a provision for textbooks.

RECOMMENDATIONS

            Based on the results, the researcher makes the following recommendations:

1. 1. The result of this evaluation should be shared to all the teachers considering they are the implementers of the program, so that they will be further motivated to be creative, innovative, and compassionate in delivering instruction.
   2. An embedded mechanism for automatic notification in the BLINK or learning management system to foster expediency in reprogramming activities.
   3. Further training and development should be conducted to allow further navigation of pedagogical or digitagogical approaches that will make learning more fun, deep, and meaningful.
   4. Another round of evaluation should be conducted to check the effectiveness of the program in a hyflex modality.

REFERENCES

1. Astudillo, A., Go, C., Orosa, M., (2020). Berkeley School’s Beginning Survey for School Year 2020-2021.
2. Boothroyd, R., (2018). Process and Outcome Evaluation Approaches. University of South Florida- Mental Health Institute.
3. Cameron-Standerford, A., et al. (2020). The Phenomenon of Moving to Online/distance Delivery as a Result of COVID -19: Exploring Initial Perception of Higher Education Faculty at a Rural Midwestern University. doi:10.3389/feduc.2020.583881
4. Curriculum Mapping and Lesson planning for K-12 Schools, (2021). Chalk.com Education Inc. https://www.chalk.com/resources/vertical-alignment/
5. Coman, C., Ţîru, L. G., Meseşan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., and Bularca, M. C. (2020). Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during the Coronavirus Pandemic: Students’ Perspective. Sustainability 12, 10367. doi:10.3390/su122410367
6. Glass, G. V & Hopkins, K.D. (1984). Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology, 2nd Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
7. Gioia D. A., Price K. P., Hamilton A. L., Thomas J. B. (2010). Forging an identity: An insider-outsider study of processes involved in organizational identity formation. Administrative Science Quarterly, (1), 16. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2010.55.1.1
8. Howe, E. R., and Cope Watson, G. (2020). “S-STEP in Comparative and International Education: Comparative Ethnographic Narrative,” in Textiles and Tapestries. https://edtechbooks.org/textiles_tapestries_self_study/chapter_116.
9. Howe ER and Watson GC (2021) Finding Our Way Through a Pandemic: Teaching in Alternate Modes of Delivery. Front. Educ. 6:661513. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.661513
10. Loose, C. C., and Ryan, M. G. (2020). Cultivating Teachers when the School Doors Are Shut: Two Teacher-Educators Reflect on Supervision, Instruction, Change and Opportunity during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Front. Educ. 5, 582561. doi:10.3389/feduc.2020.582561
11. Sahito, Z., et al. (2016). Teachers’ Time Management and the Performance of Students: A Comparison of Government and Private Schools of Hyderabad, Sindh, Pakistan. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wje.v6n6p42
12. Thomas, M. B. (2020). Virtual Teaching in the Time of COVID-19: Rethinking Our WEIRD Pedagogical Commitments to Teacher Education. Front. Educ. 5, 595574. doi:10.3389/feduc.2020.595574