All by Myself with Mr. Google: The Pandemic Education from the Lenses of Secondary School Students

Robert G. Pastores¹, Jerico DV. Dacanay¹, Michael A. Mayoya², Maricris V. Nanglihan³ and Romiro G. Bautista^{2, 3,}

¹Student Teachers, College of Teacher Education, Quirino State University-Diffun Campus, Philippines

²Office of the University Director for Instruction, Quirino State University, Philippines

³Faculty, College of Teacher Education, Quirino State University-Diffun Campus, Philippines

Cite this paper:
Robert G. Pastores, Jerico DV. Dacanay, Michael A. Mayoya, Maricris V. Nanglihan and Romiro G. Bautista. All by Myself with Mr. Google: The Pandemic Education from the Lenses of Secondary School Students. American Journal of Educational Research. 2021; 9(11):660-664. doi: 10.12691/education-9-11-1

Abstract

Flexible, online, and modular learning approaches are the main modalities offered to continue education in this CoViD-19 pandemic. This study is designed to document the experiences of High School students in their pandemic education during the SY 2020-2021: describing their experiences and identifying factors contributing to their experiences are ways of analyzing this phenomenal issue in our educational state. Employing the Qualitative Research design using Narratology as point of inquiry, 15 high school students eloquently narrated their experiences in this pandemic education. The following experiences were documented: modules are not enough; no teacher, no discussion; learning by myself; and internet, Mr. Google: they are dependable. On the other hand, the known factors affecting the experiences of the informants in their pandemic education include communication is made through Group Chat and messenger, and online discussion is meager and superficial. Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that students in this pandemic education are laid all alone by themselves in the ordeal of doing their modules with the help of Mr. Google as teachers are not physically present to guide them.

Keywords:
flexible learning modular learning online learning pandemic education

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Anderson, T., Upton, L., Dron, J., & Malone, J. (2015). Social Interaction in Self-paced Distance Education. Open praxis, 7 (1), 7-23.
[2]	Bautista, RG. (2012). Reconstructing classroom instruction though online instructional delivery technique. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(9), 104-111.
[3]	Bautista, R.G. (2013). The reciprocal determinism of online scaffolding in sustaining a community of inquiry in Physics. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 3(2), 89-97.
[4]	Kintu, M.J.,Zhu, C.,Kagambe, E., “Blended Learning effectiveness: The Relationship between Student Characteristics, design Features and outcomes”, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2-20, 2017.
[5]	Bautista, R.G. (2015). Optimizing classroom instruction through self-paced learning prototype. Journal of Technology and Science Education (JOTSE), 5(3), 184-193.
[6]	Dabbagh, N., Kitsantas, A, “Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning”The Internet and Higher Education, Volume 15, pp. 3-8 2017
[7]	Wang, Y., Han, X., & Yang, J. (2015). Revisiting the blended learning literature: Using a complex adaptive systems framework. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 380–393.
[8]	Hoshmand, L., “Narratology, Cultural Psychology, and Counselling Research”, Journal of Counselling Psychology, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp. 178-186, 2005.
[9]	Leung, L., “Validity, Reliability, and Generalizability in Qualitative Research”, Research and Audit, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 324-327, 2015.
[10]	Malterud, K., “Qualitative Research: Standards, Challenges, and Guidelines”, The Lancet, Vol. 358, pp. 483-488, 2001.
[11]	Houghton, C., Murphy, K., Meehan, B., Thomas, J., Brooker, D., & Casey, D., “From Screening to Synthesis: Using NVIVO to Enhance Transparency in Qualitative Evidence Synthesis”, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26, 873-881, 2016.
[12]	Nowell, L., Norris, J., White, D., & Moules, N., “Thematic analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria”, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 11, pp. 248-258, 2017.
[13]	Wondifrow, Dejene, “The Practice of Modularized Curriculum in Higher Education Institution: Active Learning and Continuous Assessment in Focus” Cogent Education.
[14]	Khadije, Abbasi., Maryam, Hazrati., Narsin, P.M., Abdolreza, Rajaeefard, “The effect of learning via module versus lecture teaching methods on the knowledge and practice of Oncology Nurses about Safety Standards with Cytotoxic drugs in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,Iranian”, Journal of Nursing And Midwifery Research 18(6): pp.483-487.
[15]	Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. (2014). The Systematic Design of Instruction (8th edition). Pearson Publishing.
[16]	Fine, A.B., Jaeger, T.F., Farmer, T.A., & Qian, T. (2013). Rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension. PLoS ONE, 8, e77661.
[17]	Lee, J.-K. (2003). The Effects of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies and System Satisfaction regarding Learner’s Performance in e-learning Environment. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 11(3), 30-45.
[18]	Yusuf, H.O., Guga, Ayuba., Ibrahim, A, “Discussion Method and it’s Effect on the Performance of Students in Secondary Schools in Plateau State”, The Online Jounal of Quality In Higher Education, Volume 3, pp. 1-7, 201.
[19]	Dorgu, T.E, Ekeke, J.T, “Effectiveness of Discussion Method of Teaching in Curriculum Delivery in Secondary Schools in Bayelsa State of Nigeria”, Saudi Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2019.
[20]	Padsing, R., “Effectiveness of Modularized Instruction in Teaching a Literature”, Global Scientific Journals, Volume 9, pp. 725-733, 2021
[21]	Malik, S.K., “Effects of Modular and Traditional Approaches on Student’s General Comprehension”, Elixer Social Studies, Volume 42, pp 6228-6231, 2012.
[22]	Zheng, F.,Khan, N.A., Husain, S., “The COVID 19 pandemic and digital higher education: Exploring the impact of proactive personality on social capital through internet self-efficacy and online interaction quality” Children and Youth Services Review, Volume 119, 2020.
[23]	Mahdy M. (2020). “The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Academic Performance of Veterinary Medical Students”, Frontiers in veterinary science, 7, 594261.
[24]	Ramos, RJM., Ramos, RGA., Espaldon, RN., Olano, DGD., Laranang, SE., & Bautista, RG. (2021). Online Education in the midst of CoViD-19 Pandemic: Evidences from the Lenses of IT Students. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 12(7), 5193-5201.
[25]	Bautista, RG. (2015). Online Learning Community: Is it a Boon or a Bane? QSU Research Journal, 4, 1-8.
[26]	Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
[27]	Jibrin, M.A., Musa, M.N., Shittu, T, “Effects of Internet on the Academic Performance of Tertiary Institutions’ Students in Niger State Nigeria, Vol. 2, pp. 57-67.