Institutional Readiness and Faculty Awareness for Ethno-STEM and Augmented Reality Pedagogy: A Descriptive-Correlational Study in Masbate, Philippines
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.07.01.09Keywords:
institutional readiness, Institutional readiness faculty awareness, Faculty awareness Augmented Reality, Augmented Reality Ethno-STEM, Ethno-STEM Teacher educationAbstract
This descriptive–correlational study examined institutional readiness for integrating Augmented Reality (AR) in teaching and faculty awareness of Ethno-STEM pedagogy in a state college in Masbate Province, Philippines. Institutional readiness was assessed in terms of technological infrastructure, technical and administrative support, faculty digital competence, and organizational culture, while faculty awareness of Ethno-STEM was examined through conceptual understanding, perceived pedagogical value, and contextual application. Data were gathered from thirty-five (35) full-time faculty members using a validated survey instrument and analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson’s product–moment correlation through Jamovi. Results indicated that institutional readiness for AR integration (M = 3.02) and faculty awareness of Ethno-STEM pedagogy (M = 3.18) were both at a moderate level. While technological infrastructure and organizational culture were generally adequate, technical and administrative support emerged as a key area needing improvement. Faculty members demonstrated greater appreciation of the pedagogical value of Ethno-STEM than their capacity to apply it effectively in culturally contextualized instruction. Correlation analysis revealed that faculty digital competence (r = .482, p = .004) and organizational culture (r = .356, p = .041) were significantly associated with Ethno-STEM awareness, whereas technological infrastructure and technical support were not. These findings suggest that human and cultural dimensions of institutional readiness play a more decisive role than material resources in advancing culturally responsive, technology-enhanced pedagogy. The study provides empirical evidence to inform capacity-building initiatives that emphasize faculty professional development, supportive organizational cultures, and enabling institutional policies for effective AR and Ethno-STEM integration in teacher education.
Downloads
References
Akçayır, M., & Akçayır, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augment-ed reality for education: A systematic re-view of the literature. Educational Re-search Review, 20, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002
Aikenhead, G. S., & Elliott, D. (2022). Bridging Indigenous and Western science knowledge systems. Science Education, 106(2), 259–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21685
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2021). Mapping research in student engagement and edu-cational technology: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00249-1
Chinn, P. W. U. (2021). Decolonizing science education: The role of indigenous knowledge. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 16(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-020-09989-8
De la Cruz, J. P. (2020). Contextualizing science instruction in Philippine classrooms. Asia-Pacific Journal of Education, 40(3), 356–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1725421
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and cul-ture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digi-tal competence: The teacher digital com-petency framework. Journal of Educa-tional Technology & Society, 23(2), 244–257.
Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educa-tional change (5th ed.). Teachers College Press.
Garzón, J., Pavón, J., & Baldiris, S. (2020). Sys-tematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings. Educational Research Review, 30, 100334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100334
Gonzalez-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2019). Culturally relevant pedagogy in science classrooms: Addressing academic success and cultural competence. Science Educa-tion, 103(2), 349–376. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21488
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2020). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes (5th ed.). Pearson.
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2013). The technolog-ical pedagogical content knowledge framework. In M. J. Spector et al. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 101–111). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9
Lucas, M., Bem-Haja, P., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2023). Teachers’ digital competence and educational innovation: A large-scale study. Computers & Education, 191, 104640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104640
Makransky, G., & Petersen, G. B. (2019). Im-mersive virtual reality and learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 31(4), 999–1030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09492-2
OECD. (2023). Innovating education and edu-cating for innovation. OECD Publishing.
Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2021). Culturally sus-taining pedagogies: Teaching and learn-ing for justice in a changing world (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic re-view of immersive virtual reality applica-tions for higher education. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
Redecker, C. (2021). European framework for the digital competence of educators (DigCompEdu). Education and Infor-mation Technologies, 26(3), 3565–3587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10392-1
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Santos, M. E. (2023). Ethno-STEM education and indigenous knowledge integration: Implications for curriculum design. Inter-national Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00398-5
Scherer, R., & Teo, T. (2019). Unpacking teachers’ digital competence: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 137, 226–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.018
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance of teachers: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2021). The technology acceptance–competence nexus in teaching. Computers & Educa-tion, 165, 104101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104101
Teo, T., Milutinović, V., & Zhou, M. (2021). Modelling teachers’ technology ac-ceptance: A structural equation modeling approach. Teaching and Teacher Educa-tion, 105, 103400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103400
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ot-tenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2017). Under-standing the relationship between teach-ers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 403–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12029
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alvin M. Mahawan, John Rey B. Quiñones
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).
