ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 10 no. 6 (2023)

Digital Competence of Bachelor of Physical Education Students

Jeniffer Anne Caguioa | Marlon Lipa

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study determined the digital competence of Bachelor of Physical Education students at Pangasinan State University (PSU), Bayambang campus. It determined selected profile variables of BPEd students and their level of digital competence with internet connectivity and opportunity, information and communication facility, and digital content. It also determined significant relationships and significant differences between and among variables. It employed Google Forms for distribution and data collection from the BPEd students and used the descriptive-correlational study approach. The study found that the majority of the students are predominantly females with age 21 and below. Most of them are from families where the father works as a farmer, and the mother is a stay-at-home mom. Their monthly family income is between 10,000 and less, and they primarily utilize cell phones and commonly available pocket wifi to access the internet. The students are highly competent in digital competence along with information and communication facility. They are competent concerning internet connectivity and opportunity, and digital content. A significant difference exists in the digital competence of BPEd students concerning family monthly income and available gadgets. There is no significant difference in digital competence concerning sex, age, parent's occupation, and internet connectivity. A significant relationship exists between the digital competence of BPEd students along internet connectivity and opportunity, information and communication and facility, and digital content, and the profile variables, sex, age, family monthly income, and available gadget. There are no significant relationships. Between the digital competence of BPEd students and the profile variables, parents' occupation and internet connection. It is strongly recommended that the respondent students provide their own necessary gadgets to improve their digital competence. They should focus on their studies to become highly competent in digital competence with internet connectivity, opportunity, and digital content. The BPEd students should help budget their needs considering their family's monthly income and adjusting their situation with the available gadget. Further, the students should start realizing the importance of their high-profile variables that could help improve proficiency concerning digital competence with internet connectivity and opportunity, information and communication and facility, and digital content.



References:

  1. Aginaldo, J. C. (2021). Challenges Encountered by Physical Education Teachers in
  2. Online Learning. DLSU Research Congress 2021. De La Salle University,
  3. Manila, Philippines.
  4. Anderson, T. (2011). The theory and practice of online learning, 2nd Edition.
  5. Edmonton, AB: AU Press. 
  6. Apriyanto, R. (2021). Effectiveness of Online Learning and Physical Activities
  7. Study in Physical Education During Pandemic Covid 19. Kinestetik: Jurnal
  8. Ilmiah Pendidikan Jasmani, 5, 1.
  10. Aydemir, M. et al. (2015). A Theoretical Framework on Open and Distance
  11. Learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174 (2015), 1750-1757.
  12. .
  13. Belleza, S.S. et al. (2021). Challenges of PE Teachers to Educational Technologies
  14. in New Normal: The Changing Role of Teachers. International Journal of
  15. Research Publications, 86(1), 74-81; doi:.10.47119/IJRP1008611020212320
  16. Belgica, C., Calugan J., Dumo, J., & Simber, L. (2020). Online Distance Learning:   
  17. Thematic Study on the Challenges Faced by Educare College Inc. Primary
  18. Pupils. University of Cordilleras, Baguio City, Benguet, Philippines, Teaching
  19. and Learning, 1-18
  20. Blackmon, S.J. and Major, C. (2012). Student Experiences in Online Courses. The
  21. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, Vol. 13 (2), 77-85.
  22. Blasko, Z. et al. (2020). Learning Losses and Education Inequalities in Europe:
  23. Mapping the Potential Consequences of the Covid-19 Crisis. Journal of
  24. European Social Policy, 32(4), 361-375.
  26. Carretero, S. et al. (2017). The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens.
  27. Publications Office of the European Union.
  28. ,
  29. Chauhan, S. (2017). A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Technology on Learning
  30. Effectiveness of Elementary Students. Computers & Education, 105, 14-30.
  32. Delgado, A. et al. (2015). Educational Technology: A Review of the Integration,
  33. Resources, and Effectiveness of Technology in K-12 Classrooms. Journal of
  34. Information Technology Education Research, 14, 397.
  36. Diciano, J. (2021). Students Experiences in Learning Physical Education in an
  37. Online Environment. Edu Sportivo:Indonesian Journal of Physical Education.
  39. Escomes, E.L. et al. (2021). Factors Affecting Distance Learning of the Physical
  40. Philippines.
  41. European Commission. (2019a). The Digital Competence Framework
    1. Retrieved November 15, 2020
    2. from .
  42. Gomez, S. (2018). DigComp into Action: Get inspired, make it happen. A user
  43. guide to the European Digital Competence Framework, EUR 29115 EN,
  44. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
  45. Ghazi-Saidi, L. et al. (2020). Moving from face-to-face to remote instruction in a
  46. higher education institution during a pandemic: Multiple case studies.
  47. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 370-383.
  48. Jeong, H. and So, W. (2020). Difficulties of Online Physical Education Classes in
  49. Middle and High School and an Efficient Operation Plan to Address them.
  50. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
  51. Ilomaki, L. et al. (2011). What is digital competence?
  53. Kalati, A.T. & Kim, M.S. (2022). What is the Effect of Touchscreen Technology
  54. on Young Children’s Learning? A Systematic Review. Education and 5
  55. Kaya, H.B. (2021). Views of Physical education Teachers on Distance Education
  56. during the Covid 19 Pandemic Period: A Qualitative Study. International
  57. Education Studies, 14 (9).
  58. Lapitan, L. DS. Jr. et al. (2021). An Effective Blended Online Teaching and
  59. Learning Strategy during the Covid 19 Pandemic. Education for Chemical
  60. Engineers, 35; 116-131.
  61. Lawrence, J.E. & Tar, U.A. (2018). Factors that Influence Teachers’ Adoption and
  62. Integration of ICT in Teaching/Learning Process. Educational Media International, 55(1), 79-105.
  63. Li, Z. et al. (2022). Role of Digitalization, Digital Competence, and Parental
  64. Support in the Performance of Sports Education in Low-Income College
  65. Students. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 13.
  66. Marusic, T., & Viskovic, I. (2018). ICT competencies of students. Journal
  67. ITRO, 115(56), 13.
  68. Meng, L., Qiu, C., & Boyd-Wilson, B. (2019). Measurement invariance of the ICT
  69. engagement construct and its association with students’ performance in China
  70. and Germany: Evidence from PISA 2015 data. British Journal of Educational
  71. Technology, 50(6), 3233–3251. 
  72. Sebbani, M. (2021). Implementation of Online Teaching in Medical Education:
  73. Lessons learned from Students’ Perspectives during the Health Crisis in
  74. Marrakesh, Morocco. Educational Research International.
  76. Shin, M., and Hickey, K. (2021). Needs a little TLC: Examining college students’
  77. emergency remote teaching and learning experiences during COVID-19.
  78. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(7), 973-986.
  79. Sopa, I.S. and Pomohaci, M. (2021). Study regarding the development process of
  80. motor qualities endurance and strength of physical education lessons during
  81. the pandemic period. Geosport for Society, 15 (2), 101-109.
  83. Sung, Y.T. et al. (2016). The Effects of Integrating Mobile Devices with Teaching
  84. and Learning on Students’ Learning Performance: A Meta-Analysis and
  85. Research Synthesis. Computers and Education, 94, 252-275.
  87. Suwanroj, T. et al. (2018). Development of digital competency domains for
  88. undergraduate students in Thailand. International Journal of the Computer,
  89. the Internet and Management, 27(2).
  90. Timotheou, S. et al. (2022). Impacts of Digital Technologies on Education and
  91. Factors Influencing Schools’ Digital Capacity and Transformation: A
  92. Literature Review.
  93. Tzafilkou, K., Perifanou, M. & Economides, A.A. Development and validation of
  94. students’ digital competence scale (SDiCoS). Int J Educ Technol High
  95. Educ 19, 30 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00330-0
  96. Burgos-Videla, C.G. et al. (2021). Digital Competence Analysis of University
  97. Students Using Latent Classes. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 385.
  98. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci11080385
  99. Zheng, B. et al. (2016). Learning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-
  100. Analysis and Research Synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 86(4),
  101. 1052-1084.

Tools


Copyright © 2025   ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø