PAMANTASAN NG LUNGSOD NG MAYNILA

(University of the City of Manila)

General Luna Street, Intramuros, Manila

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

Chemical Engineering Department

A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF COMPUTER-ASSISTED LEARNING IN GENERAL

CHEMISTRY I FOR GRADE 11 STUDENTS

A Research Paper presented to the Faculty of Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Engineering Data Analysis

Prepared By:
Acorda, Elinor A.
Alonzo, Pauline B.
Dacasin, Bryan Edgar A.
Daiz, Denisse P.
Dela Cruz, Hannah May D.
Lagmay, Melanie S.

BSChE 2 – 1

Submitted to:
Engr. Jenalyn Q. Macarilay

December 2019
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We, the researchers, hereby express our gratitude to the people who helped us in accomplishing this
research project. One of the most important people that helped us in doing the study was Mrs. Loreta L. Salvador,
our research adviser. With her and her pieces of advice, the research study became possible. She gave instructions
and assisted us in many helpful ways and we appreciated those so much.

We would like to thank Mrs. Mary Ann V. Dayrit, General Chemistry teacher for Senior High School, for her
kind consideration and for assisting us during the demonstration of the BASIX (Basic Application in Integrated
Chemistry) to the Grade 11 students. With her, we are able to conduct and finish the research successfully.

We express our gratitude greatly to the publishers, authors, researchers, and writers that have been
generous enough to post their own previous studies and studies for future use and development. Also for the
respondents, the Grade 11 students of Valenzuela City School of Mathematics and Science, who gave time and
accepted our invitation for the demonstration of BASIX application. They have been very helpful for us to come up
with another good research project.

We would also like to show appreciation to the following people: Mrs. Maria Christina C. Salonga, Mrs.
Juliana T. Alvarez, Mr. Ariel Cariaga and Mr. Michael Darilag. They have been helping us from the start, correcting
our mistakes, giving helpful advice, guiding us, suggesting ways and ideas to make our research study be more
interesting and be able to finish it within our capabilities.

Our family, especially our parents also gave effort and support in making this research possible. We would
like to express our gratitude to our parents who have been most helpful when it comes to some of the financial
support needed in the study.

Lastly, we would like to express our endless gratitude to the Lord, because He is the one guiding us from
the very beginning until the end. With Him, we accomplish the study successfully.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF GRAPHS
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Education is highly valued by Filipinos. For most of the Filipinos, education is the best thing a child could
acquire to secure a better future (Arimbuyutan et al., 2007). The importance of education in developing countries has
more profound implication on people's lives. It has a vital role to play for people living in developing countries.
Learning and knowledge are important factors, associated with people's perception of the economy as well as social
development. People who are highly educated have a higher competitiveness in receiving skilled jobs and this made
them have greater possibilities to improve their lives.

As a result of globalization, world trade, communication and economic structure in the 21st century has
been transformed and consequently, the complexion of higher education sector has also undergone changes in the
last two decades. Although higher education, including Science, and Technology had always been international
endeavors, of late, they had required new dimensions and features. In light of the interplay of these global changes
and emerging challenges, the majority of institutions offering higher education are making efforts to revise its
educational systems and the delivery strategies (Elango, Gudep, and Selvam, 2008).

In the Philippines, the development of E-Learning and other related programs became a crucial factor for
the students to obtain better learning (Arimbuyutan et al., 2007). Though not all the schools were provided with the
necessary equipment to assimilate these new technologies for their teachers and students, some of the schools were
pushing their efforts to employ these.

While most of the studies available online focused on E-Learning, other technological advancements are
noticeable— one of which is Computer Aided Learning (CAL). This CAL can be accessed with or without internet
connection while E-Learning is more directed with the use of internet connection. Also, E-Learning is available on
different kinds of technologies like phones, tablets, and computers; however, CAL only uses the computer to deliver
its contents. Thus, even though CAL is somehow similar to E-Learning through its purpose of giving knowledge, CAL
has different features compared to it.

Conventional Learning heavily depends on systematic demonstrations, lectures, and intensive hands-on
tasks. Nevertheless, CAL is increasingly used to enhance the learning experience even though it is only an
alternative. Although computers and educational packages are generally in use today, CAL in the future will be even
more vital and essential. Just like what happens these days, computers are used as big and fast encyclopedias, or as
data books, tape recorders, typewriters and videos (Abdullah, Hashim, and Yusof, 2014).
 Typically, people remember 20% of what they see, 40% of what they see and hear at the same time and
70% of what they see, hear and do simultaneously. The human mind wanders after a while if the information is
presented in solely one format. Hence, CAL is a multi-sensory delivery system that aids in greater retention of new
knowledge, information or learning.

Furthermore, learning from examples or step-by-step tutorials has been proven to be very effective
especially in initial skill acquisition. The goal for CAL is to explore a new way of attractive learning through the
multimedia approach. There are five noted initiatives for developing CAL application and these are: replace or usage
of papers, avoid scheduling of teachers, puts responsibility for learning in the hands of learners, fast and effective
learning as a competitive weapon and letting the student learn at the best time, place and pace. (Abdullah, Hashim,
and Yusof, 2014)

On the other hand, Chemistry is a branch of physical science that deals with matter; its composition,
structure, change, and properties. It is also known as the central science because it serves as a bridge to other
sciences including Biology and Physics.

Chemistry subject was chosen because it has a reputation as a difficult science to master. According to
Helmenstine (2017) from her article ―Why chemistry so hard?‖ she pointed out that there are several reasons why
Chemistry is considered difficult. First, Chemistry uses Mathematics. Chemistry has its own language. There are too
many concepts, formulas, chemical names, and elements that need to be studied in order to fully understand
Chemistry. To better understand Chemistry, you need to learn its vocabulary. There are too many concepts,
formulas, chemical names, and elements that need to be studied in order to fully understand Chemistry. And
students find these things hard to digest in just a matter of time. Students also need to learn how to interpret and
communicate the way Chemistry is described.

The researchers have decided to provide a CAL for Chemistry subject in Grade 11 of a senior high school
named Basic System Application in Integrating Chemistry (BASIX). This CAL is expected to increase the number of
students who will be interested in Chemistry for knowledge and understanding. In addition, there are several
exercises to test their learning. Nonetheless, each developed application can be evaluated differently by another
application. This study will be conducted not only to develop and evaluation the usability of CAL but also to contribute
to the increasing number of studies that demonstrated the importance of CAL.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

 The study aimed primarily to assess the needs of the Grade 11 students to a computer-based program in
Chemistry subject, to develop this program if there is a need for it, and to evaluate it. Specifically, this study wanted
to answer the following:

1. What was the implication of the results after conducting a survey to assess the needs of students in
Chemistry subject?

2. How did students assess the BASIX application? What was the average rating of usability?

3. Is the BASIX application ready for implementation?

4. What were the confidence intervals of each statement in the USE questionnaire after having a t-test at
different confidence level? What did it imply?

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study would potentially benefit the institution, individual, and group of people as follows:
Students could use the program to have a greater understanding in CAL and to learn more in chemistry
subject.
Parents could gain satisfaction when they saw that their children do not face at least minimal difficulty in
Chemistry subject anymore. Possibly, they could monitor the students in studying and helped them learn better by
providing enough resources and support.
Teachers would benefit in a way that they would use the program to deliver learning more efficiently. Thus,
helping them improved their teaching styles.
The institution itself could be a potential beneficiary from this study because the institution could implement
the program in different subjects and classes to develop their educational system. Additionally, it could exert efforts in
improving its academic structure that could satisfy both the students and teachers.

SCOPE AND DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The study would only target the grade 11 senior high school (SHS) students of the STEM strand of VCSMS.
The school was selected for two reasons. First, the fellow researchers were part of the said institution and went
through the Chemistry subject as well. Second, VCSMS offers STEM strand for SHS students having Chemistry as
one of their subjects. Whereas, grade 11 students were chosen because the application is designed for a chemistry
subject and only grade 11 students would encounter the subject as it is part of their curriculum. Furthermore, the
study would use survey forms that were already available online and open-source. Proper credits would be given to
these forms. Moreover, the gathered information and data from the respondents in any part of the study is under
strict confidentiality and anonymity.

DEFINITION OF TERMS
Defining important terms is one of the necessary tools in every paper. The following terms were listed below
to clarify their operational definition that was used in the entire paper.
BASIX is the name of researchers' prospect CAL. It stands for Basic Application System in Integrated
Chemistry that offers the wide range of functions to develop one's skill and knowledge in Chemistry subject. The
name BASIX had no direct meaning to the application itself. It was invented to add impact to the application itself.
Chemistry is a branch of Science that deals with the structure of substances and with the changes that they
go through. In this paper, Chemistry indicates the General Chemistry I subject of the target Grade 11 students.
Computer-aided learning or CAL, also known as computer-assisted instruction is a programmed instruction
or electronic learning in a form of self-instruction wherein materials are presented through text, visual, sound and
motion digital files. In this study, CAL also denoted the BASIX and was used interchangeably, though CAL more
often appears in this paper for formality.
Development refers to creating a product to target users. In this paper, it just simply means creating the
prospect CAL based on the background information of the researchers as well as on the results of the needs-
assessment survey.
Usability is the extent to which specified users used CAL to achieve specified goals with effectiveness,
efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use. In this paper, usability appears to consist of usefulness and
ease of use, and usefulness and ease of use are correlated. Each factor, in turn, drives user satisfaction and
frequency of use. Users appear to have a good sense of what is usable and what is not, and can apply their internal
metrics across domains.
Evaluation is a systematic method of collecting information and makes a good judgment to product based
on suggested criteria. In this paper, evaluation is the result of the USE questionnaire survey.
 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

RELATED THEORIES

According to J L. (2007), learning theories, the theory of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism are
theories about how an individual acquire knowledge and information. In the theory of behaviorism, a learner is viewed
as a blank and clean slate and its behavior will be shaped by different experiences. Cognitivism, on the other hand,
oppose behaviorism in the aspect that students are not programmed animals that just respond to the environmental
stimuli but rather are rational beings that need to have an active interaction and participation in order to learn. While,
the theory of constructivism states that a student does not acquire knowledge, but construct it through personal
experiences and assumptions to the environment. In this study, students were seen in the perspective of cognitivism,
that is, they needed active interaction and participation to learn. Cognitivism was applied in creating the application
by considering the factors necessary to yield the highest possible chance that a student would be engaged on it
actively.
Moreover, a theory of human-computer interaction arises and one of them is the theory by Robert (2011),
Ergonomic Aspects of Human-Computer Interaction. This explains that the development of different competent
interfaces of computer systems like BASIX is the fundamental objective of research on human-computer interface.
Another is the GOMS model or the Goals, Operators, Methods, and Selection Rules model from Card, Moran, and
Newell (David 2014). GOMS is a theory of the cognitive skills that are involved in the HCI. It is an information process
that uses different types of memory e.g., sensory, long-term and working memory. These types of memories include
separated perceptual, motor and cognitive processing. In developing the application, techniques in improving these
memories should be taken into account.
Furthermore, Mediated Learning Experience Theory (MLE) and Structural Cognitive Modifiability Theory
(SCM) are the theories made by Feuerstein (NAFA 2016). MLE states that there is a mediation of experience by
selecting framing, focusing, intensifying, and giving feedbacks to the environmental experience to produce
appropriate learning sets and habits in the interaction between the learner who is the individual that is developing,
and the mediator who is an experienced and intentional person.
 Still, according to Feuerstein, the human intelligence is a dynamic system where the cognitive faculty of a
human is flexible and not fixed. In SCM, a theory rooted from MLE, it is stated that the structural changes, which is
the cognitive modifiability, refer to the organism's manner of interacting with the source of information. When it is set
in motion, it will determine the future path of the development of an individual. In other words, individuals' state
changes when brought about by a deliberated program of intervention.

RELATED LITERATURE

Computer-aided Learning (CAL)

CAL or Computer-aided learning is a programmed instruction or electronic learning is a form of self-
instruction wherein materials are presented through text, visual sound, and motion digital files giving a more
multimedia approach to learning and an animation that illustrates images on how to perform a certain task (Harun &
Tasir, 2005). These integrations of multimedia facilitate a lot in the learning process. It uses computer and software to
deliver instructions and guide the learner through an instructional program. Multimedia technologies and modern
authoring systems have become common tools in the preparation and design of CAL.
According to Naiyana Eakburanawat (1992), as cited in Eamthanakul et al. (2015), CAL is one of the
learning media that can interact with a learner because of a computing system by itself such as receive a command
to operate, answer a question, ask a learner, etc. Still as cited in Eamthanakul et al. (2015), CAL is applying of a
computer to help in a learning system by developing any software to present a learning content in various types such
as Tutorial, Simulation, Problem Solving, etc. (Sirichai Sanguankaew, 1991) and programming preparation for a
learning system by using a computer as a medium to transfer knowledge to a learner. (Wutichai Prasarnsorn, 2000).

Concept of Usability in Assessing a CAL

This section would introduce the idea of usability as the main consideration in assessing the CAL. It would
have introduced a range of ideas that assist developers in the creation of CAL. With all these information, someone
proficient in their use will obtain the best results. However, anyone planning to contribute to the evaluation should not
be deferred by the complexity of the situation but should start with simpler expert-based evaluations and simple user-
centred evaluations.
Developers worked to create the application, software, and alike that is easy and straightforward for people
to use. Terms such as user-friendly and easy to use often indicate these characteristics, but the overall technical
term for them is usability (Petri & Bevan, 2009). The ISO 9241 standard on Ergonomics of Human System Interaction
(1998) defined usability as ―the extent to which specified users use a product to achieve specified goals with
effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use (section 3.1).‖ On the other hand,
effectiveness is defined as the ―accuracy and completeness with which users achieve specified goals (section 3.2);‖
efficiency is defined as the ―resources expended in relation to effectiveness (section 3.3);‖ while satisfaction is
defined as ―freedom from discomfort, and positive attitudes towards the use of the product (section 3.4).‖
Lund (2001) developed a tool called the USE Questionnaire. USE stands for Usefulness, Satisfaction, and
Ease of use. These three dimensions emerged most strongly in the early development of the USE Questionnaire. For
many applications, Usability appears to consist of Usefulness and Ease of Use, and Usefulness and Ease of Use are
correlated. Each factor, in turn, drives user satisfaction and frequency of use. Users appear to have a good sense of
what is usable and what is not, and can apply their internal metrics across domains. Subjective reactions to the
usability of a product or application tend to be neglected in favor of performance measures, and yet it is often the
case that these metrics measure the aspects of the user experience that are most closely tied to user behavior and
purchase decisions.
In this study, the Lund’s USE questionnaire would be used to evaluate the usability of the developed CAL
because this questionnaire is easy to use and are already validated.

Technology and Its Advancement in Education

According to Intel (n.d.), technology has been integrated into supporting education for a long time now as
part of the fundamental approach in coordinating technology into instruction. Personal Computer programs also are
known as PC programs gave support and financial aid to educators to help them coordinate Information Technology
(ICT) into their teaching system. Computer labs are also frequently used to odder access to technology and the web
when resources are minimal.

RELATED STUDIES

Students Perception in Chemistry

Reynante (2012) had conducted an examination of third-year high school students' perception in chemistry
in his research ―Perception in Chemistry of Secondary Students‖ which was conducted in Zamboanga City. The
relationship of the students' perception in chemistry, chemists, chemistry jobs, chemistry experiments, chemicals and
chemical industries, to gender and ethnicity was discussed in the paper; the common words related to chemistry
were identified, and the sources of the students' perception were elicited. The result of the study has implications for
chemistry education as well as posing challenges to chemistry teachers. The majority of 354 students that were
surveyed have positive perception towards chemistry which was clearly shown in the results and was affected by the
students’ gender and ethnicity. The words that topped the list of common words related to Chemistry were
chemical(s), matter, and experiment(s) or laboratory experiment(s). While the most common sources of information
regarding chemistry were the teachers, books, the internet, national/local TV reports, and magazines/periodicals.
 On the other hand, a study was conducted in Dire Dawa and Haromaya Universities in Ethiopia entitled
―What makes chemistry difficult?‖ Woldeamanuel, et al. (2014) constructed an initial free-response survey for 100
students and then a second survey was given to approximately 93 students, derived from the first survey given.
Teaching assistants were also asked to participate in the second survey. It was shown in the study that the
perception of the students to the difficulty of chemistry is different from the perception of the teachers and technical
assistance but they have agreed to the factor that scientific language literacy, having no motivation or interest and
the difficulty in scientific reasoning influence the most of students' achievement success in chemistry.
The aforementioned study only showed that most of the students perceived Chemistry subject as a difficult
subject. Researchers then decided to select chemistry as the subject to be aided by the prospected CAL.

Development CAL on different subject

A study entitled ―A Development of Computer Assisted Instruction in English Subject of Third Level
Primary Students Named Child’s a Nice Day‖ was conducted in Primary Demonstration School of Suan Sunandha
Rajabhat University, Bangkok, Thailand in which a computer-assisted instruction for an English subject was
developed. According to Eamthanakul, et al. (2015), this CAI was said to have good efficiency according to experts
and that it could be used in an English class. The efficient value that was procured was higher than the expected. To
have this result, 30 students had undergone with a pre-test, an exam during a lesson, and a post-test. A
questionnaire for experts was also given for the evaluation of the content and the technical method.
Moreover, in a case study by Abdullah, et al. (2010) with the title of ―The development of computer-aided
learning for computer numerical control machine: A pilot study,‖ a CAL software was developed in computer
numerical control (CNC) milling machine at CNC lab, Faculty of Engineering, University-Industry Selangor that is
named as VMC- 1000. This software is produced by GATE Company and it can be generally seen in the promotion,
advertisement and marketing a product effectively and it facilitates in supplying the step- by- step tutorials and
machine specification details. The software produced is interactive and user- friendly as well as attractive that people
or users are hardly bored and is keen to explore. The development of this CAL software aims to replace or reduce
usage of papers so save cost and to assist customers to avoid from overlooking necessary information. Macromedia
Director, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Premiere Pro and Gold Wave are the some of the software used in order to
develop the CAL.
While, Caday (2004), from the study entitled, Effectiveness Of Computer-Simulated Experiments (CSE) In
Teaching High School Physics, found that Computer-Simulated Experiments Package or CSE is an effective tool in
apprehending the interest of the students towards the learning of Physics as a subject while the traditional method of
teaching laboratory physics remains to be effective technique in imparting the basic science concepts and science
process skills. Even though the CSE provided positive outcomes there is no significance to claim that it is more
effective than the traditional method. Yet it can be one of the best alternative teaching methods. The study used an
experimental- control design, wherein two groups of students from Sarrat National High School became the
experimental and control group. The experimental group had undergone with the CSE strategy and the control group
with the traditional strategy. Pre-tests were given to both group to evaluate the students' Physics' academic
performance and the same set of post-tests was given after they were exposed with the different strategy.
Another study was conducted in Maritime Academy of Asia and Pacific entitled "Effectiveness of Simulation
and Computer- Aided Instruction or CAI on the Performance of Students under regimental training on Selected
Topics in Physics II‖. The study comprised of an experimental group in which students utilize the simulation and CAI
during classroom instruction and the control group had undertaken the traditional or face to face lecture method. A
total of 239 students were subjected in the study. After taking an assessment of pre-test and post-test and
analyzation of the mean, gain score analysis, t-test and standard deviations using the Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS), it is concluded that the performance of both the experimental and controlled group had increased
significantly from pre-test to post-test and that both traditional and CAI method are effective in teaching the students.
In addition, a study entitled ―Evaluation of the Effectiveness of CAI Modules in Mathematics for
Intermediate Grade Schools" was conducted wherein a Computer- Aided Instruction or CAI courseware modules in
Mathematics were distributed to 18 willing teachers and 843 students from grades four to six after a survey was given
to 25 schools in 3 divisions of Metropolitan Area. According to Gonzales (2014), the evaluation of the said CAI is
sought to determine specifically the perception of the pupils and teachers, the extent of the CAI modules, the extent
of pupils' engagement in using the CAI module, if there's a significant improvement in pupil's Mathematics
performance caused by the CAI module, and if there is a significant relationship between the CAI's motivational
design and its Mathematical content reflected to pupil's performance. The findings said that the teachers agree that
the CAI has management interactivity and it has motivation interactivity. Pupils perceived that the CAI has the ability
to draw attention that sustains curiosity as well as interest, and that the modules are better perceived in all aspects of
motivational design. There was not enough basis to conclude that there was an improvement in grade four pupil's
performance but there was a 20% to 30% significant improvement in grade five pupils and 40% to 50% improvement
to grade sic pupils' performance in certain topics and areas. It was acknowledged that the CAI was highly successful
in capturing the interest of the pupils that made them participate actively.
The above studies indicate that there are already many studies concerning the development of CAL in
different parts of the world. It is also possible for a developing country like the Philippines to develop one that will aid
students in learning their difficulties. Thus, this research wants to contribute to the increasing bodies of studies in
CAL.

Impacts of CAL
Yeager and Glaser (1968) conducted a study entitled The Learning Research and Development Center at
the University of Pittsburgh. It is composed a faculty from the different academic department of the University of
Pittsburgh The purpose of the center is to discover the problems of learning and instruction especially with the
required nature of the educational and psychological environment in maximizing the potential of a learner. Theoretical
studies of the learning process, development of procedures as well as the materials and equipment and the
development of educational programs to be implemented to schools are the activities of the Center. There are four
major programs namely, Basic Learning Studies, Computer-Assisted Instruction Studies, Field Research, and
Experimental School Development. Each of the programs one or two projects is described.
Moreover, still according to the aforementioned study, highlighting the Computer- Assisted Instruction, the
program is concerned with the analysis of learning processes as students work in partially automated environment,
the study and development of effective CAI courses, the evaluation of the potential role of CAI in a range of
educational applications and the design of experimental student stations. It is made for the learners to be provided a
highly responsive learning environment in which the learner can manipulate the subject matter for a more interactive
way. A cathode- ray tube displays and visual displays and a variety of other interface devices were experimented on.
On the other hand, a study that involves issues or factors that affects the development of a CAL was
conducted by Ferguson, et al. (1995), entitled as ―Issues in using computer-aided learning programs to enhance
engineering teaching - a case study.‖ The said case study deals with the evaluation of four CAL programs but the
results of the CAL named as Metrolog is the only one reported. Metrolog, a course requirement for Manufacturing
and Mechatronics students is a program produced by Deakin University in Geelong Australia that aims to expose
their students to workshop practices to enable them to recognize the difficulties in the production of engineering
components. The paper discusses factors such as the use of graphic and animation, the video game effect, the
effectiveness of color and text, screen resolution, peer interaction, user control and friendliness, program errors and
how the program is integrated into the teaching situation. According to the results, the method of teaching with
computers is directly related to student achievement. And that computer or any tools can be used either correctly or
incorrectly and that teachers should attempt to maximize the positive impact of it and minimize the negative impact of
it. At the end of the paper, the researchers provided a few guidelines for future CAL program development.
Baker (2004), conducted a research entitled "Computer-aided learning and assessment of critical path
analysis" about the interaction of a student and a CAL program. The researcher developed a computer-aided
learning and assessment program integrated with spreadsheets. This CAL program is used by students of Coventry
University who are Business related and IT students. After this, an assessment version of the program will then be
given after the students had judged themselves to be ready. The purpose of the program is to overcome difficulties in
teaching a large group of students with different abilities and to provide them a more satisfactory experience of
learning by letting them have the privilege in varying with their practice time to suit their needs. It also helps
facilitators in an error-free and consistent method of marking. After evaluating it is said that 75% of the students
found the CAL programs to be excellent, 94% thought that the programs are at least fair, and 77% of them preferred
the CAL programs than the traditional paper-and-pencil exercises.
 It must be noted from the above studies shows the impacts CAL. Most of these are positive and these
demonstrate the importance of CAL in delivering education to the students. That is why; one of the aims of this study
is to demonstrate the importance the CAL to the students, specifically its capability to aid students in learning difficult
subjects like Chemistry.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
This study would make use of the Input-Process-Output model of McGrath (1984) that would explain the
development of an application system that aids students in learning Chemistry. The IPO model was used to state the
general structure of the system. It would describe the causal relationship between the input and output and what
requires the process to be conducted.

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Application-Need USE Questionnaire Initial Development
Assessment Usability evaluation and Evaluation of
BASIX of the BASIX by the BASIX
students
Observation on the
hands-on experience
of the students
Statistical Treatment
Analysis and
Interpretation of the
results of the
evaluation.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework: Input-Process-Output

As presented in Figure 1, the input is composed of the needs-assessment survey to a chemistry-based

computer program and the BASIX application that would be evaluated based on its usability. The process which is
the second frame includes the USE questionnaire survey conducted in order to determine the usability of the BASIX
to the students, the statistical treatment using the mean score of each criterion in the USE questionnaire if the
standard deviation is small, and the analysis and interpretation of these values. The last frame or the output frame
contains the initial development and evaluation of BASIX.

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH DESIGN
This research was designed to obtain ratings and comments as well as empirical information in relation to
the facts that need to be taken into consideration for future studies in the CAL area and its quality factors and issues.
The research design used was exploratory evaluation design and descriptive evaluation design. Exploratory
evaluation study designs could help at the beginning of the study to identify what CAL to provide and the best
approaches to providing this CAL (Aguirre Divisions 2006). It could also help determine what outcomes will be
appropriate to measure, given the type of CAL you offer, and the best way to measure them. The descriptive study
design would also be used because it can help the researcher to show whether the program is operating as planned,
provide the study with feedback about the developed CAL, determine whether the program is producing the types of
outputs and outcomes users want, and help clarify program processes, goals and objectives (Aguirre Divisions
2006).

RESPONDENTS OF THE STUDY

Subject participants were students in a formal education system. Grade 11 senior high school students of
STEM strand of VCSMS were the chosen target student participants because they take general chemistry as their
subject in which the CAL is intended for. VCSMS has 129 Grade 11 STEM strand SHS students in total from its five
sections. Depending on the data collection method required for each phase of this study, the researchers either use
random sampling or stratified sampling in selecting the sample students from the population. In both cases, Slovin’s
formula was used to compute the number of samples needed.

INSTRUMENTATION
 To obtain a clear idea of how the developed CAL is perceived by students– enabling analysis of the data
generated and draw conclusions – surveys and evaluation forms were used. The open questions in the survey and
evaluation form made it possible to identify students’ attitudes, views, and understandings about the produced CAL.
These surveys and evaluation forms were most appropriate – compared to interviews – because the purpose of the
study was to evaluate the CAL and it was best obtained if represented numerically. Different surveys and evaluation
forms were used depending on what the procedure aimed for. The surveys and evaluation forms that are most suited
in the research were obtained from an extensive literature review and were used to collect the relevant data. These
forms are available online and open-source. These could be used for any purpose as long as these were given
credit. There were two forms were used. First is the need assessment survey of SurveyMonkey (see Appendix A) to
assess the need of students in a CAL for chemistry. Note that researchers did some changes in these surveys to fit in
the research need. Second is the USE questionnaire (see Appendix B) of Lund (2001) that was used by students to
evaluate the usability of the CAL.

DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE

The entire study procedures were divided into three main phases namely: educational technology needs
assessment, CAL creation, and CAL evaluation using USE questionnaire for students.
In the first phase, a needs-assessment survey was conducted with 129 students from different sections
chosen randomly. Random sampling technique was used for the every element of the population have equal chances
to be part of the sample. Probability sampling was used to achieve representativeness, which is the degree to which
the sample accurately represents the entire population (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2003). The number of required
number of students was obtained using the Slovin’s formula at 0.05 significance (see Appendix C for the
computation). The assessment is necessary to guarantee that students need a CAL that the researchers were
planning to create. The needs assessment was then analyzed.
After the researchers conducted the needs assessment and were successful to show that there is a need of
CAL in chemistry subject, researchers take into consideration the gathered data in this assessment in creating CAL
to suit the student's interest. Note that the analysis of whether or not there is a need in CAL is only based on how the
researchers understand the answers of students from the needs assessment and were not subjected to further
analysis of an expert. Then a flowchart to specify a guideline for the CAL development was created as shown below:

Figure 2. CAL Development Flowchart

Figure 2 describes the flow chart of CAL development methods in step by step. First, the user enters to the
main title of CAL. Second, the user learns each lesson with quick notes, content, and game from the main menu. And
third, the user can repeat to the lessons or quit the CAL when finishes.
Additionally, the researchers design a GUI that any users can learn the CAL by themselves fluently. Also,
the researchers scope the steps for learning in the CAL including do a graphic design for any colors, sizes, and
special techniques in the CAL. The CAL includes a total of 17 topics namely: Matter, Significant Figures, Atomic
Structure, Naming and Writing Compounds, Molar Mass, Mole Concept, Percentage Composition, Balancing
Equations, Mass Relationships, Limiting and Excess Reactant, Gases, Percentage Yield, Gas Laws, and Gas
Stoichiometry. The development of CAL took about three weeks (see Appendix D for some snapshots of the CAL).
Researchers decided to ask 66 students chosen in stratified random method to assess the usability of the
CAL. Cluster sampling technique was used because of lack conflicts to the time schedule of the respondents. Cluster
sampling occurs when the sampling unit is not an individual but a group or cluster that occurs naturally in the
population such as neighborhoods, hospitals, schools, or classrooms (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2003). Cluster in this
study is the entire sections of the STEM strand. The number of required number of students was obtained still using
the Slovin’s formula at 0.10 significance level (see Appendix C for the computation). Since 66 students were needed,
there is at most two sections needed out of the five sections. The significance level was lowered to decrease the
number of respondents since the capacity and availability of computer laboratory is limited. The students were invited
in the computer laboratory of the school for the application demonstration and for the students to experience the
CAL. An evaluation is then administered. The USE questionnaire is used.
Another method used in this research was observation. Researchers observed students when they are
inside the computer laboratory and experiencing the CAL. The reason for using observation was to gain better insight
on how students at VCSMS are using CAL while discovering it. The intention was to explore the natural work
environment for a view of how the technology is integrated how they are interacting with it.
Observations were not used as the main method for collecting empirical data for the research. They should
rather be understood as the method for gaining important understandings and knowledge about the context of the
study as well as to enable notes that could support and guide the building of the assessment and evaluation guide.
Thus, the observations had served as a central pillar for designing of the assessment and evaluation.
Surveys and evaluation forms were administered to the respondents directly by the researchers by visiting
them in their respective classes. The survey data collection took place on July 4, 2017, in the respective classes of
the respondents. After that, an application demonstration was conducted in the school's computer laboratory on
August 22, 2017, where students experienced the application hands on. Then, finally, on August 29, 2017, the USE
questionnaire was given to the students. The data was analyzed through reviews of each transcript for which the
most important aspects were identified and selected for further analysis.

DATA PROCESSING AND STATISTICAL TREATMENT

The technique for data analysis, that is, for the journey between raw data and analyzed data, was one that
was applied to all the data sets collected for this and comprised the following steps:
1. All raw data were typed in statistical software. This software is an Excel-based type designed by the
researchers to analyze the results of the surveys and the evaluation forms by computing percentages of
common answers and the average mean score of each criterion depending on the surveys and evaluation
forms used. The percentages and the mean score were used as a basis to describe the results of the two
surveys conducted. Also, a t-test for each statement in the USE questionnaire would also be used to
determine the confidence interval that the population means would likely to fall.
2. For any item that is in a 4 point scale format, e.g. 4- strongly agree, 3-agree, 2-slightly disagree, 1- strongly
disagree, the interval of the range for each description must be equal. So the interval should be 0.75. Thus,
3.25 – 4.00 strongly agree, 2.50 – 3.24 agree, 1.74 – 2.49 slightly disagree, 1.00 – 1.74 strongly disagree.
Each data set was then examined individually for comparison, either similarities or differences within the
responses or for themes emerging from the data. This was done by tabulating the data in order to get a
clearer picture of the emergent results.
3. Once this had been completed for the individual data sets, a table was drawn up that comprised all data
sets to examine any inter-dataset themes.
 CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

SAMPLE SIZE AND SAMPLING OF RESPONDENTS

Table 1. Sample Size and Sampling of Respondents

Type of survey Number of Participants Margin of Error Nature of Participants

Needs assessment survey 129 5% Randomized sample

USE Questionnaire 66 10% Cluster sample

Shown in Table 1 is a summary of the nature of the participants involved in each survey. There were a total
of 127 randomly selected participants who took the needs assessment survey. It has 95% confidence interval. On the
other hand, a total of 66 cluster selected participants took the USE questionnaire. It has 10% confidence interval.
Note that the two surveys are independent of each other. Meaning, the result of the needs assessment survey had
nothing to do with the result of the USE questionnaire survey, and vice-versa.

ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES: NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY

The Needs Assessment survey is given to the selected participants to help the researchers learn the prior
knowledge of the students on computer-aided learning and to see if there is a need to develop one. Upon knowing a
positive outlook on this CAL, the researchers may use it as a basis for creating the application that suits the student.
The table below shows the results of the needs assessment survey. For the frequency table of the survey, refer to
Appendix E.

Table 2. Needs-Assessment Survey Results

Questions Description
1. How would you rate your overall skill in using educational technology? 2.85 Proficient
4- Advanced 12%
3- Proficient 60%
2- Basic 27%
1- Below Basic 0%
2. Which of the following statements for you is T?
An educational application is worth using. 74%
I have an educational application on my computer. 41%
I am visiting educational websites to learn more about a topic. 68%
I am willing to learn through a computer-based application. 69%
I prefer offline application to online application. 47%
3. Which of the following educational technologies you currently use in
studying?
Educational websites 74%
Online Libraries 27%
Social networking 57%
Audio, video, and other multimedia 84%
Computer Software 49%
Other 3%
4. Rate your interest in learning more about using CAL. 3.01 Interested
4- I'm very interested. 19%
3- I'm interested. 59%
2- I'm slightly interested. 21%
1-I'm not interested. 1%
5. Rate your interest if there will be an application that suits your curriculum. 2.97 Interested
4- I'm very interested. 21%
3- I'm interested. 57%
2- I'm slightly interested. 19%
1-I'm not interested. 2%
6. Rank the Chemistry topics based on their difficulty.
Matter 1.47 Least Difficult
4 2
3 14
2 27
1 86
Measurements 2.42 Slightly Difficult
4 18
3 36
2 57
1 18
Atoms 2.29 Slightly Difficult
4 10
3 45
2 46
 1 28
Naming & Writing Compound 3.55 Most Difficult
4 91
3 25
2 6
1 7
7. Which of the following for you is T.
I have difficulties in familiarizing myself with the periodic table of elements. 40%
I have difficulties in learning chemistry topics. 43%
I need CAL to help me learn chemistry more. 43%
If there will be an application about chemistry, then I'm going to use it. 71%
If I will use a chemistry CAL, then it will improve my knowledge on chemistry. 68%
A chemistry CAL will help me with my troubles. 76%
A chemistry CAL will help me improve my academic performance. 74%
Legend: Legend:
For item no. 1 For item no. 6
3.25 – 4.00 Advanced 3.25 – 4.00 Most Difficult
2.50 – 3.24 Proficient 2.50 – 3.24 Difficult
1.75 – 2.49 Basic 1.75 – 2.49 Slightly Difficult
1.00 – 1.74 Below Basic 1.00 – 1.74 Least Difficult
For items no. 4-5
3.25 – 4.00 Very Interested For items no. 2-3, and 7
2.50 – 3.24 Interested Top two statements Red
1.75 – 2.49 Slightly Interested Bottom two statements Blue
1.00 – 1.74 Not Interested

The survey includes seven questions— four of which are questions in a four-scale format and three of which
are questions asking them if the specified items are applicable to them. The charts below summarize and show the
analysis of their answers in each question in the needs-assessment survey.

Chart 1. Frequency Distribution for Item 1

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1. How would you rate your overall skill in using educa-

12% 60% 27% 0%
tional technology?

Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic

 Based from Table 2, the average rating of their skill in using educational technology is 2.85 and this average
falls in the description “Proficient.” Students are proficient in using educational technology. They might have regularly
accessed on these technologies and are using them for a long time.

Chart 2. Frequency Distribution for Item 2

Which of the following statements for you is true?
80%
60%
40% 74% 68% 69%
20% 41% 47%
0%

Based from Table 2 and Chart 2, 74% answered that an educational application is worth using and 69%
answered that they are willing to learn through a computer-based application. While 47% answered that they prefer
offline application to online application and 41% answered that I have an educational application on my computer.
Students are looking forward to the use of educational application consider it as worthy. Also, most of the students
are willing to use this education application to aid them in their studies. On the other hand, less than half of them
would prefer offline application to online application. It might be inferred that about more than half of them has
accessed on the internet that they prefer an online application to an offline one. Lastly, about 40% of them that they
do not have the educational application installed on their computer. It might have concluded that they do not need to
install one since it is available over the internet, or one other case is that the said application is only available online.
 Chart 3. Frequency Distribution for Item 3
Which of the following educational technologies you cur-
rently use in studying?
80%
40% 74% 84%
57% 49%
27%
0% 3%

For item 3, based from Table 2 and Chart 2, 84% are using Audio, video, and other multimedia and 74% are
using educational websites. Moreover, only 27% are using online libraries and some 3% are using other educational
technologies that were not mentioned in the choices. Most of the students are using audio, video, and other
multimedia to study their lessons. It might be inferred that students learned more effectively if there are visual
displays and sounds explaining the topic just like when they are having classes with their teachers. Moreover, most
of them also used educational websites. This includes blogs and HTML pages that can easily be accessed once type
the link or search it over the Google search engine. On the other hand, few of them are using online libraries primary
because most of these required an online account and an occasional payment for subscription. While about 3% of
them answered other educational technologies, these students might just do not know on which category it would fall.
For example, one answered others and specified it as purple math which best falls under educational websites.

Chart 4. Frequency Distribution for Items 4 and 5

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4. Rate your interest in learning more about using CAL. 19% 59% 21%1%

5. Rate your interest if there will be an application that

21% 57% 19%2%
suits your curriculum.

Very Interested Interested Slightly Interested Not Interested

Average rating of interest in learning more about using CAL is 3.01 and this average falls in the description
“Interested.” Almost the same in the average rating in application that suits the students’ curriculum which is 2.97 and
falls also in the description “Interested.” Students are interested in learning more about CAL. Though the reasons are
not implied, it could be inferred that using CAL might increase their knowledge and learning. Moreover, Students are
interested in an application that suits their curriculum because maybe they will benefit to this application more
because they can use this in their subject efficiently.

Chart 5. Frequency Distribution for Item 6

Rank the Chemistry topics based on their difficulty.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Matter2% 11% 21% 67%
14% 28% 44% 14%
Atoms 8% 35% 36% 22%
71% 19% 5% 5%

Most Diffficult Difficult Slightly Difficult Not Difficult

Based from Table 2, the average difficulty of the topic on Matter, Measurements, Atoms, and Naming and
Writing compound is 1.47 (least difficult), 2.42 (slightly difficult), 2.29 (slightly difficult), and 3.35 (most difficult)
respectively. Based on their average rank, the topic on naming and writing compound is the most difficult, followed by
measurements and atoms, and lastly, matter. The topics on the top of the list involve simple math computation and
memorization. Students might be having a hard time memorizing elements and dealing with this math-related topics

Chart 6. Frequency Distribution for Item 7

Which of the following for you is true?
80%
60%
40% 71% 68% 76% 74%
20% 40% 43% 43%
0%

Lastly, for item 7, 76% answered that chemistry CAL will help me with my troubles and 74% answered that a
chemistry CAL will help them improve my academic performance. While 43% answered that they have difficulties in
learning chemistry topics and 43% answered that they need CAL to help me learn chemistry more. In addition, 40%
answered that they have difficulties in familiarizing myself with the periodic table of elements. Most of the students
believed that a CAL chemistry will help them with their troubles and will help them improve their academic
performance. Thus, students are looking forward to a CAL chemistry. On the other hand, less than half of them have
difficulties in learning chemistry topic. This is somewhat alarming because 43%, nearly half of the respondents, are
having a hard time in chemistry. Lastly, around 43% need CAL to help them learn chemistry more.

Based on the tables and charts presented above, students had prior knowledge when it comes to the use of
educational technologies. Students used these technologies when studying and most of these are accessible online.
In a way, they perceived these technologies as worthy, aiding them with their difficulties in a subject. They were
interested to learn more about CAL and to an application that suits their curriculum. Moreover, in their chemistry
subject, they find memorization-and-math-related topics difficult and are looking forward to a chemistry-based CAL.
Though only 43% of the participants stated that they need CAL to help them to learn chemistry more, the researchers
are taking it as an alarming situation since this percentage is high. Taking into consideration that the needs
assessment survey was held before they would about to take lessons regarding stoichiometry calculations, which
require more memorization and math basic skills; researchers inferred that this percentage will increase dramatically
as the lessons become more memorization-and-math-related. Nevertheless, through the use of deep analysis, the
researchers decided to develop chemistry based CAL and used the result as a basic in creating this CAL.

ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES: USE QUESTIONNAIRE

The USE questionnaire survey was given to the selected participants to evaluate the usability of the CAL
and used it as a basis whether the CAL is to be implemented or not. This was done by gathering the selected
students to a computer laboratory and letting them experience the CAL. The table below shows the results of the
USE questionnaire survey. The column P% which stands for positive percentage, tabulates the percentage of
strongly agree and agree responses while %N which stands for negative percentage, tabulates the percentage of
disagree and strongly disagree. For the frequency table of the survey, refer to Appendix F.

Table 3. USE Questionnaire Survey Results: Part I

P% N Descriptio
Statements Mean SD
% n
5 Strongly
EASE OF USE 95% 3.45
% Agree
0
1 It is easy to use. 100% 3.71 0.46
%
 2
2 It is simple to use. 98% 3.76 0.47
%
0
3 It is user-friendly. 100% 3.67 0.48
%
It requires the fewest steps possible to 0
4 100% 3.53 0.50
accomplish what I want to do with it. %
5
5 It is flexible. 95% 3.52 0.59
%
2
6 Using it is effortless. 98% 3.52 0.53
%
9
7 I can use it without written instructions. 91% 3.36 0.65
%
14
8 I don't notice any inconsistencies as I use it. 86% 3.09 0.65
%
Both occasional and regular users would like 3
9 97% 3.44 0.61
it. %
1 I can recover from mistakes quickly and 9
91% 3.33 0.69
0 easily. %
1 8
I can use it successfully every time. 92% 3.45 0.64
1 %
1 Strongly
EASE OF LEARNING 99% 3.71
% Agree
1 2
I learned to use it quickly. 98% 3.71 0.49
2 %
1 0
I easily remember how to use it. 100% 3.86 0.35
3 %
1 0
It is easy to learn to use it. 100% 3.80 0.40
4 %
1 2
I quickly became skillful with it. 98% 3.45 0.53
5 %
3 Strongly
SATISFACTION 97% 3.52
% Agree
1 5
I am satisfied with it. 95% 3.52 0.59
6 %
1 0
I would recommend it to a friend. 100% 3.64 0.48
7 %
1 0
It is fun to use. 100% 3.70 0.46
8 %
1 8
It works the way I want it to work. 92% 3.26 0.59
9 %
2 2
It is wonderful. 98% 3.61 0.52
0 %
 2 6
I feel I need to have it. 94% 3.36 0.60
1 %
2 0
It is pleasant to use. 100% 3.58 0.50
2 %
3 Strongly
Overall 97% 3.57
% Agree
Legend: Legend:
3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree %P – percentage of strongly agree and agree
responses
2.50 – 3.24 Agree
% N – percentage of disagree and strongly disagree
1.75 – 2.49 Disagree responses
1.00 – 1.74 Strongly Disagree SD – sample standard deviation

Table 4. USE questionnaire survey results: Part II

Percentag
Specified aspects of the CAL from the respondents. Frequency
e
Positive
1 It is easy to use. 32 48%
2 It is user friendly. 20 30%
3 It is fun and entertaining. 15 23%
4 It can be used as a reviewer tool. 15 23%
5 It is easy to learn. 8 12%
6 It was made brilliantly. 8 12%
7 It is very helpful. 5 8%
8 It is informative and educational. 4 6%
9 It is portable and easy to install. 4 6%
10 It is very useful and reliable. 4 6%
11 It is interactive. 2 3%
12 It is relevant. 2 3%
13 It is efficient and effective. 2 3%
121
Negative
1 Some questions are repeating. 17 26%
2 The time for every question is not enough. 17 26%
3 The design of the application is poor. 9 14%
 4 It has some bugs. 9 14%
5 It is time-pressure. 8 12%
6 The questions are inconsistent. 8 12%
7 It has unclear instruction. 4 6%
8 It was confusing. 4 6%
9 Some questions are hard. 4 6%
10 The quick notes are cannot be accessed easily. 3 5%
11 The structure of the questions is poor (e.g. wrong grammar). 3 5%
12 It has no answer key 2 3%
88
Legend:
Top two aspects Red
Bottom two aspects Blue

The survey is divided into two parts. The first part is composed of 22 4-point scale questions apportioned
into three criteria, namely, ease of use, ease of learning, and satisfaction, while the second part is an open response
question asking for the positive and negative aspects they saw in the CAL. The charts below summarize and show
the analysis of their answers in each statement in the USE questionnaire.

Chart 7. Ease of Use Ratings

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
It is easy to use. 100% 0%
98% 2%
It is user friendly. 100% 0%
100% 0%
It is flexible. 95% 5%
98% 2%
I can use it without written instructions. 91% 9%
86% 14%
Both occasional and regular users would like it. 97% 3%
91% 9%
I can use it successfully every time. 92% 8%

Positive Negative

Students claimed that the developed CAL is simple and easy to use. They became familiar with it primary
because of the simple and common design it has. On the other hand, they were not at ease when it comes to their
recovery after getting mistakes either on the questions or on the interface. Moreover, they noticed some
inconsistencies to it primarily because the CAL they used is still the initial version but hopefully researchers could find
a way to fix these inconsistencies. Nevertheless, the average rating of it is 3.49 which is the lowest among the three
criteria and is sufficient enough to tell that the application is easy to use.

Chart 8. Ease of Learning Ratings

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I learned to use it quickly. 98% 2%
I easily remember how to use it. 100% 0%
It is easy to learn to use it. 100% 0%
I quickly became skillful with it. 98% 2%

Positive Negative

In the criteria ease of learning, students claimed that it is easy to learn and remembered how to use the CAL
primarily because it is like any other application that the users only need to click or type the answer. There were also
tutorial and instruction available to help the user to be more familiar with its surrounding. Based on this, they quickly
learned to use it and become skillful to it. Yet, the average rating of it is 3.71 which is the highest among the three
criteria and is sufficient enough to tell that the application is easy to learn.

Chart 9. Satisfaction
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I am satisfied with it. 95% 5%
I would recommend it to a friend. 100% 0%
It is fun to use. 100% 0%
It works the way I want it to work. 92% 8%
It is wonderful. 98% 2%
I feel I need to have it. 94% 6%
It is pleasant to use. 100% 0%

Positive Negative

Students claimed that the CAL is simple and fun to use. And if possible, they would even recommend it to
their friend. They find the application as an entertaining tool while helping them to refresh their previous lessons. On
the other hand, their need to have it has an average 3.36. Moreover, they somehow see the application works the
way they want it. Nevertheless, the average rating of it is 3.52 which is sufficient enough to tell that the application
has a positive satisfaction.

Chart 10. Overall USE Rating

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
EASE OF USE 95% 5%

EASE OF LEARNING 99% 1%

SATISFACTION 97% 3%

Positive Negative

The chart above tells that almost all of the students were positive in each criterion of the USE questionnaire
as they were all agree on that the application is easy to use, easy to learn, and satisfying. Moreover, the criterion
ease of learning yield the highest mean, followed by the criterion satisfaction, and lastly the criterion of ease of use.

Chart 11. Frequency Distribution for the Positive Aspects of the

CAL
60%

40%

20%

0%
e. y. g. l. n. .
tly pfu
l. l. ll . e. e. t. e.
us n dl n in t o o l ear n l o na sta a bl t iv v an t iv
to i r a i in l i c le c
rie ta e o
ril
li he ca
t re ra re ef
fe
e as
y
e rf t er i ew sy t b e ry d u y
to
n d i n te i s d
is
s en ev s ea e v e s a is It n
It s u nd ar ad is nd ea ul It ta
tI i a s It i m It a d e f
ie
n
un sed
a s e an us
wa t iv ble y fic
si f u I t a e r e f
It be rm orta is
v is
n n fo p It It
ca i is
It is It
It

The top two statements it is easy to use and it is user-friendly have a relative frequency of 48% and 30%
respectively. While the bottom two statements it is relevant and it is efficient and effective have a relative frequency
3%. Out of all the positive aspects given by the respondents, researchers were able to group it to 13 groups and has
a total frequency of 121. Students find the CAL easy to use and user-friendly. It was already justified by the some
items of the first part of the survey that asks about the application's ease of use and user-friendliness. On the other
hand, only a few students mentioned that the application is relevant, efficient, and effective, though it is not clear in
the respondent's answer in what extent the aspects of relevance, efficiency, and effectiveness covers with. Some
positive aspects were also implied like it is fun and entertaining, a good reviewing tool, and was made brilliantly. In
addition, the application was able to receive a total of hundred twenty-one positive outcomes from the students with
some of which falls in the same category.

Chart 12. Frequency Distribution for the Negative Aspects of the

CAL
40%

20%

0%

The top two statements both having a relative frequency of 26% were statements: some questions are
repeating and the time for every question is not enough . While the bottom two statements both having a frequency of
3% were statement: the structure of the questions is poor and it has no answer key. Out of all the negative aspects
given by the respondents, researchers were able to group it to 12 groups and has a total frequency of 88. Students
notice that some questions are repeating and might made the students to do trial and error while answering and just
memorize the question and answer since it will be repeated in some time after. Also, since the questions are
designed to have a timer for every question based on its difficulty, the students were time-pressured and mentioned
that the time allocated for every question is not enough for them. On the other hand, only few students mention that
the structure of the question is poor. This poor structure includes wrong grammar, syntax, and format. Moreover, two
students mentioned that there are no answer key available. Some negative aspects were also implied like poor
design, the presence of some bugs, and time-pressured. In addition, the application was able to receive a total of
eighty-eight negative outcomes from the students with some of which falls in the same category.

Based on the information above, students find the application easy to use, easy to learn, and at satisfactory
level. The overall average rating of the application after combining these three criteria is 3.57 which falls under the
description strongly agree. This only means that the usability of the application is high and students looked positive
on it. Nevertheless, the USE questionnaire is not enough to tell if the application is ready for implementations since
there are also other factors to be considered. On the other hand, researchers were able to poll the positive and
negative aspects they noticed while using the application. In the positive aspect, it was found out that 32 of them tell
that it is easy to use and 20 of them tell that it is user-friendly. Whereas, in the negative aspect, 17 students claim
that some questions are repeating and the time for every question is not enough. Moreover, some more aspects
were mentioned by the students and were shown in the tables presented above.

Table 5. Population Mean Approximation using T-Test

Statements Mean Confidence Level

    90% 95% 99%
EASE OF USE 3.45 3.37 < μ <3.60 3.35 < μ <3.63 3.31 < μ <3.67
1 It is easy to use. 3.71 3.62 < μ <3.80 3.60 < μ <3.82 3.56 < μ <3.86
2 It is simple to use. 3.76 3.66 < μ <3.86 3.65 < μ <3.87 3.61 < μ <3.91
3 It is user friendly. 3.67 3.57 < μ <3.77 3.55 < μ <3.79 3.52 < μ <3.82
It requires the fewest steps possible
4 to accomplish what I want to do with 3.53 3.43 < μ <3.63 3.41 < μ <3.65 3.37 < μ <3.69
it.
5 It is flexible. 3.52 3.40 < μ <3.64 3.38 < μ <3.66 3.33 < μ <3.71
6 Using it is effortless. 3.52 3.41 < μ <3.63 3.39 < μ <3.65 3.35 < μ <3.69
I can use it without written
7 3.36 3.23 < μ <3.49 3.20 < μ <3.52 3.15 < μ <3.57
instructions.
I don't notice any inconsistencies as I
8 3.09 2.96 < μ <3.22 2.93 < μ <3.25 2.88 < μ <3.30
use it.
Both occasional and regular users
9 3.44 3.32 < μ <3.56 3.29 < μ <3.59 3.25 < μ <3.63
would like it.
I can recover from mistakes quickly
10 3.33 3.19 < μ <3.47 3.16 < μ <3.50 3.11 < μ <3.55
and easily.
11 I can use it successfully every time. 3.45 3.32 < μ <3.58 3.30 < μ <3.60 3.25 < μ <3.65
EASE OF LEARNING 3.71 3.62 < μ <3.79 3.60 < μ <3.81 3.56 < μ <3.85
12 I learned to use it quickly. 3.71 3.61 < μ <3.81 3.59 < μ <3.83 3.55 < μ <3.87
13 I easily remember how to use it. 3.86 3.79 < μ <3.93 3.78 < μ <3.94 3.75 < μ <3.97
14 It is easy to learn to use it. 3.8 3.72 < μ <3.88 3.70 < μ <3.90 3.67 < μ <3.93
15 I quickly became skillful with it. 3.45 3.34 < μ <3.56 3.32 < μ <3.58 3.28 < μ <3.62
SATISFACTION 3.52 3.42 < μ <3.63 3.40 < μ <3.65 3.35 < μ <3.69
16 I am satisfied with it. 3.52 3.40 < μ <3.64 3.38 < μ <3.66 3.33 < μ <3.71
17 I would recommend it to a friend. 3.64 3.54 < μ <3.74 3.52 < μ <3.76 3.49 < μ <3.79
18 It is fun to use. 3.7 3.61 < μ <3.79 3.59 < μ <3.81 3.55 < μ <3.85
 19 It works the way I want it to work. 3.26 3.14 < μ <3.38 3.12 < μ <3.40 3.07 < μ <3.45
20 It is wonderful. 3.61 3.50 < μ <3.72 3.48 < μ <3.74 3.44 < μ <3.78
21 I feel I need to have it. 3.36 3.24 < μ <3.48 3.22 < μ <3.50 3.17 < μ <3.55
22 It is pleasant to use. 3.58 3.48 < μ <3.68 3.46 < μ <3.70 3.42 < μ <3.74
Overall 3.57 3.43 < μ <3.65 3.41 < μ <3.67 3.37 < μ <3.71
Legend:
1.75 – 2.49 Disagree
3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree
1.00 – 1.74 Strongly Disagree
2.50 – 3.24 Agree
μ – population mean

The table above shows result after testing which population mean would fall in the t-test confidence interval
(see Appendix G for computation and detailed test table). For instance in item 1 at 90% confidence level, using t-test,
has a confidence interval of 3.62< μ< 3.80 (see Appendix G). Therefore, the population mean for item 1 would more
likely fall in the interval with 90% assurance. Noting that the lower boundary of the interval is 3.62, whereas the lower
boundary for the description strongly agree is 3.25, researchers could 90% assure that the population would more
likely to agree strongly that the CAL is easy to use.

In the above table, notice that none of the interval at any confidence level have a lower boundary lower than 2.50.
Thus, researchers were at least 99% confident to claim that the population would agree with the statements of each
criterion and with the usability of the CAL. However, researchers could not claim that the population would strongly
agree with every statements.

For example, for item 7, at any confidence level, there is a small chance that the population mean would not
strongly agree with the statement. Note that the lower bound at 90% confidence level is 3.23, and the lower boundary
for the description strongly agree is 3.25, there would still a chance that the population mean is around 3.24,3.233,
and so on and these values would not fall under the description of strongly agree. The same thing applies for items 8,
10, 19, 21. This might show the necessary points to be consider when improving the current CAL.

Nevertheless, though some items have a chance to not fall under strongly agree, they do not have sufficient
effect on the rating of each criterion. The rating of each criterion is still under the strongly agree, the same as the
overall rating of CAL. Thus, researchers were at least 99% confident to claim that the population would strongly
agree that the CAL as a whole is easy to use, easy to learn, and satisfying.

OBSERVATIONAL ANALYSIS

To support the claims and the responses of the students, observation analysis was used. It was easy to
have this kind of research method because the researchers were able to let the students experience the application
on hand while observing them. The gathered information through observation was listed below:
 1. Most of the students read the quick notes. Then afterward, answer the questions. Some even take a picture
of the notes and video it since the quick notes are not downloadable.
2. Most of the students were enthusiast on using the application.
3. Most of the students were having fun while using it.
4. About half of the students were collaborating with one another, while the rest are using the application
alone.
5. Some students easily gave up a certain level in the application if they find it difficult while some students
strive hard until they answer the question correctly or finished the level completely.
6. Some students wanted to download the application.
7. Only a few students read the instruction and tutorial. This made them occasionally asks the researchers on
how to use it.

CALCULATIONS USING PAIRED T-TEST

√
∑ (x )
2

x −x ∑ 2
x−
n
t= 2 1 ; S D =
sD n−1
√n
n1 n2 x2-x1
Mean 2.8181 3.484848 0.667
Standard Deviation 0.4298 0.4074 0.7712

4 ( 36 )+ 3 ( 27 )+ 2 ( 2 ) +1
x 2= =3.484848
66

4 ( 8 )+ 3 ( 39 )+2 ( 18 ) +1
x 1= =2.818181
66

X2-X1 = 0.6666666667

∑ X D =1+2+1+0+1+1+1+1+2+1+1+0+1+0+ 2+ 0+1+2+2+2+1+2+0+1+1+1+1+1+0+2+1+1+0+1+1+
= 44

∑ X D =1+4 +1+0+1+1+1+1+ 4+1+1+0+1+0+ 4+ 0+1+4 +4 +4 +1+4 +0+1+1+1+1+1+0+ 4+1+1+0+ 1+ 1+

= 68

√
2
44
68−
66
S D=
65

= 0.7712

x2 −x1 0.66667
t= =
sD 0.7712
√n √ 66
= 7.022

T0.05 , 62= 1.98

Since 7.022>1.98 , we reject Ho.

n1 n2 x2-x1
Mean 2.9846 3.7538 0.7692
Standard Deviation 0.5193 0.2452 0.8469

4 ( 13 ) +3 ( 38 ) +2 ( 13 ) +1(2)
x 2= =2.9846
65

4 ( 47 ) +3 ( 18 ) +2 (1 ) + 0
x 1= =3.7538
65

X2-X1 = 0.7692

∑ X D =1+2+1+1++2+1+1+0+1+2+0+ 0+1+1+ 1+ 0+2+0+2+3+ 1+ 0+0+1+1+1+1+1+0+1+1+0+1+2+2

= 49

∑ X D =1+4 +1+1++4 +1+1+0+1+ 4+0+ 0+1+1+1+ 0+4 +0+2+ 9+1+0+0+1+1+1+1+1+0+1+1+ 0+1+ 4+ 4

= 83
 √
2
49
83−
66
S D=
65

= 0.8469

x2 −x1 0.7692
t= =
sD 0.8469
√n √66
= 7.38

T0.05 , 62= 1.98

Since 7.122>1.98 , we reject Ho.

n1 n2 x2-x1
Mean 2.6 3.56 0.9545
Standard Deviation 1.2962 0.4074 1.3177

4 ( 18 ) +3 ( 17 )+2 ( 15 ) +1(16)
x 2= =2.6
65

4 ( 36 )+3 ( 28 )+ 2 ( 2 ) +0
x 1= =3.56
66

X2-X1 = 0.6667

∑ X D =3+2+0+ 2+ 3+2+1+3+0+2+ 0+ 1+ 2+ 2+ 2+ 0+0+1+1+0+ 1+ 3+3+0+2+3+1+1+ 0+3+0+2+0+ 3+3+

= 63

∑ X D =9+ 4+ 0+4 +9+ 4+1+9+ 0+4 +0+1+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 0+0+1+1+0+1+9+ 9+0+ 4+ 9+1+1+ 0+9+ 0+4 +0+9+ 9
= 173

√
2
63
173−
66
S D=
65
= 1.3177

x2 −x1 0.9545
t= =
sD 1.3177
√n √66
= 5.88

T0.05 , 62= 1.98

Since 5.88>1.98 , we reject Ho.

CALCULATIONS IN SPSS

1 IN TERMS OF TECHNICALITIES AND EASE OF USE

2 INTERESTED VS SATISFACTION
3 DIICULTY VS EASE OF LEARNING
 CHAPTER V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The research problem that had been established was answered through utilizing surveys and observations.
The findings of the research were as follows:

1. Students were already aware of the existence of educational technology, considering it a worthy tool
and are occasionally using it to aid them in studying Most of these technologies are available online.
Moreover, they are interested to have an application that suits their curriculum and will aid them in their
academic problems. In their chemistry subject, students find memorization-and-math-related topics
difficult. Though only 43% of the participants answered that they need CAL to help them to learn
chemistry more, the researchers believe that this percentage will increase dramatically as some more
 memorization-and-math-topics are included in their curriculum like stoichiometry calculations.
Nevertheless, based on the results of the needs assessment, researchers decided to develop chemistry
based CAL.
2. Students find the application easy to use, easy to learn and at the satisfactory level. The overall
average rating of the application is 3.57 which falls under the description strongly agree. This value
implies that the usability of the application is high and students looked positive on it. On the other hand,
some of the positive aspects implied are ease of use, user-friendliness, fun and entertaining, and a
good reviewer tool. While, some negative aspects include repeating questions, insufficient time, poor
design, and time-pressured.
3. When it comes to usability, user experience, and satisfaction, the application is having a positive
aspect. However, the USE questionnaire is not enough to tell if the application is ready for
implementations since there are also other factors to be considered like the efficiency and effectiveness
of this CAL. Nevertheless, researchers already uploaded the initial version of CAL over the internet and
students are free to download it.
4. Researchers were at least 99% confident to claim that the population would agree with the statements
of each criterion and with the usability of the CAL. However, researchers could not claim that the
population would strongly agree with every statements. Moreover, if CAL is viewed as a whole,
researchers were at least 99% confident to claim that the population would strongly agree that the CAL
is easy to use, easy to learn, and satisfying.

CONCLUSION

By using surveys and observation, researchers had formed the necessary conclusion on the needs of the
students in chemistry CAL and the initial stage of evaluating this CAL. Students find chemistry difficult at the point the
needs-assessment survey was conducted especially when the topic needs memorization and basic math skills. This
made the researchers decide to develop one that suits their curriculum and use the results of the survey as a basis.
After the CAL is developed and ready for testing, researchers start the initial stage of evaluating the CAL through the
use of USE questionnaire to assess its usability. It was found out the application easy to use, easy to learn, and at t
satisfactory level and receives an overall average rating of the application is 3.57 which falls under the description
strongly agree, meaning students strongly agree that the application made them do the necessary task in an easy
and satisfactory way. Also, using a t-test to approximate the population mean, researchers were at least 99%
confident to claim that the population would agree with the statements of each criterion and with the usability of the
CAL and if viewed as a whole, researchers were at least 99% confident to claim that the population would strongly
agree that the CAL is easy to use, easy to learn, and satisfying. Nevertheless, the USE questionnaire is not enough
to tell if the application is ready for implementations since there are also other factors to be considered like the
efficiency and effectiveness of this CAL. However, researchers are looking forward to improving the previous version
of the application and hopefully evaluate it deeply.

RECOMMENDATION

To improve the content of this paper, researchers recommended the following:

1. Conduct an expert evaluation to assess the content and technical aspects of the application. This is a
crucial part in determining whether the application is ready for implementation or not.
2. Conduct a pre-test-post-test experiment to test the effectiveness of the application then use a statistical test
or any quantitative method.
3. Perform a similar study and know the subjects which need special attention.
4. Perform a qualitative research regarding the study to see a deeper perception of the needs of students in
CAL.
On the other hand, researchers recommended the following to the readers and teachers:
1. Teachers should encourage students to find a way to learn them like visiting an educational website,
watching videos, and others.
2. Though a CAL might be a good tool to aid the students in learning, students should not forget the traditional
method of learning such as reading books.