Assessing Students’ Perception towards Lecturer’s Online Teaching of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication using TPACK Framework

(1)

Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences e-ISSN: 2682-8502 | Vol. 5, No. 2, 19-32, 2023 http://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ajress

Assessing Students’ Perception towards Lecturer’s Online Teaching of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication using

TPACK Framework

Nur Aisyah Aqilah Mohd Fauzi^1*, Norshima Zainal Shah¹, Norashikin Sahol Hamid¹

1 Language Centre, National Defence University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

*Corresponding Author: [email protected] Received: 30 March 2023 | Accepted: 15 May 2023 | Published: 1 June 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2023.5.2.3

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic in Malaysia catalyses HEIs to fully utilise technology in teaching and learning, indirectly supporting one of the major shifts of the Malaysia Education Blueprint (Higher Education). Regardless, the readiness of lecturers in terms of their knowledge to teach online effectively is necessary to be investigated to enhance students’

learning and ensure the quality of online learning is at par with traditional learning during the pandemic, as the full adoption of online learning is a new norm in education. This study assesses students’ perception of applying the Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework in teaching Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication by lecturers in their online teaching. A quantitative approach and a correlational research design were conducted, and data were collected from 445 UPNM undergraduates through a questionnaire and then analysed using SPSS Version 25.0. The finding reveals that lecturers have a high level of content knowledge to provide relevant issues in selected case studies for students to evaluate critically in line with the course learning outcomes (CLO) outlined by this course. However, lecturers need to be more competent in resolving their technical problems instantly when dealing with digital platform compatibility issues. Additionally, the effectiveness of online teaching can be determined using student achievement as the indicator. These findings support the TPACK framework to describe the lecturers’ technology integration, and it assists lecturers in improving their knowledge. The study implies that a high level of lecturers’ TPACK creates quality online learning and enhances student achievement.

Keywords: COVID-19, English communication, higher education, online learning, TPACK

1. Introduction

The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) that first broke out in China in December 2019 has spread rapidly worldwide (Zhu, Wei & Niu, 2020) and impacted various sectors and industries.

Education was one of the high-risk sectors that were hard hit due to the spread and severity of COVID-19. For instance, all education systems across the globe were disrupted and affected at all levels, including preschool to tertiary education (Dhawan, 2020). Consequently, these educational institutions were closed, and their traditional educational practices were reformed to keep providing learning opportunities for students despite the challenging situation. Hence, online learning has become an immediate solution for teaching and learning sessions to continue with the new norm of social distancing.

(2)

In Malaysia, the sudden COVID-19 outbreak in first quarter of 2020 was the starting point for fully utilising online learning in the HEIs as all physical or face-to-face activities were suspended after enforcing closures were implemented to minimise the exposure of COVID-19.

In line with the global education system trends, Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) also accelerated online learning to ensure the continuity of teaching and learning.

Moreover, the use of digital platforms such as Moodle is not a recent platform in UPNM as it was adopted together with traditional learning before the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, it was assumed that UPNM lecturers were able to teach online learning efficiently during the COVID- 19 pandemic.

However, various issues and challenges have surfaced due to the full implementation of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic replacing traditional learning. Lecturers and students were unprepared for the sudden shift to online learning (Coman, Ţîru, Meseşan-Schmitz, Stanciu & Bularca, 2020), and lecturers were also primarily unready to shift from their regular teaching mode to a new one due to insufficient preparation (Selvananthan, Hussin & Azazi, 2020). These circumstances have challenged their readiness (Bao, 2020; Chung, Subramaniam

& Dass, 2020; Demuyakor, 2020; Ilias, Baidi, Ghani & Razali, 2020; Scherer, Howard, Tondeur & Siddiq, 2021). Therefore, the level of lecturers’ knowledge of technology, pedagogy and content is deemed necessary to be investigated in creating effective online learning and enhancing student learning despite the expected issues and challenges that arise throughout online learning during the pandemic.

In furtherance of this study, it is more pertinent to understand the technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge of lecturers based on students’ notions rather than the lecturers assessing themselves using a survey such as the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) assessment instrument developed by Schmidt et al. (2009).

Additionally, student achievements during the pandemic were measured to determine the effectiveness of lecturers’ online teaching. Therefore, this study is carried out to fulfill the following research objectives.

1.1 Research Objectives

There are two research objectives for this study:

a) To evaluate the student’s perception of applying the Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework in teaching Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication by lecturers in their online teaching.

b) To identify the additional actions taken by Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers’ in enhancing students’ learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

1.2 Research Questions

Based on the research objectives, the study seeks to answer the following research questions:

a) What are the students’ perceptions of the technological knowledge (TK) of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers?

b) What are the students’ perceptions of the pedagogical knowledge (PK) of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers?

c) What are the students’ perceptions of the content knowledge (CK) of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers?

d) What additional actions were taken by Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers to enhance students’ learning during the COVID-19 pandemic?

(3)

2. Literature Review

The term online learning is extensively used but with a multiplicity of meanings. Online learning can be defined as instruction delivered through different multimedia and digital platforms (Maddison, Doi, Lucky & Kumaran, 2017). Comparably, Darkwa and Antwi (2021) stated that online learning is the instruction delivered via digital resources using electronic devices. Furthermore, online learning is described as educational experiences that take place in synchronous or asynchronous settings that allow students to interact with peers and teachers while learning on their own utilising a variety of devices, including computers and mobile phones. In terms of its effectiveness, Makarova (2021) found that online learning has no severe disadvantages compared to traditional teaching and learning and discovered that students had a favourable attitude towards online learning. Additionally, online learning has gained popularity as a result of its capacity to offer flexible access. Hence, it shows that students positively perceived online learning due to its usability and flexibility that accommodate them.

However, students faced various issues and challenges with online learning during the COVID- 19 pandemic. For example, despite the percentage of households with access to the internet is 95.5%, while the percentage of individuals using the internet is 96.8% in Malaysia (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2022), internet connectivity has been the biggest challenge among students in implementing online learning (Asio, Gadia, Abarintos, Paguio & Balce, 2021; Ilias et al., 2020). Moreover, some parents cannot afford to buy devices for their children’s online learning due to a lack of income (Gurung, 2021; Zainol, Hussin, Othman & Zahari, 2021). In addition, the issue of accessibility arises due to some devices that may not support the digital platforms used by the lecturers (Aboagye, Yawson & Appiah, 2020). Hence, these disadvantages were among the technical problems faced by the students.

Besides, the limitation of students’ interaction with their lecturers and peers restricted their learning experience (Barrot, Llenares & del Rosario, 2021). Plus, a lack of motivation has resulted from the absence of face-face interaction (Chung et al., 2020). Consequently, the study by Oyedotun (2020) noted that the engagement between lecturers and students was lessened in online learning since students no longer participate in class discussions as they do in traditional learning and often receive scant or no responses to questions. Furthermore, students also might experience decreased motivation due to the unavailability of lecturers when the students need help with learning (Yusuf & Al-Banawi, 2013). Therefore, selecting proper digital platforms for live lectures and choosing suitable teaching approaches can be solutions to improve the engagement between lecturers and students.

2.1 Theoretical Framework

The technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework was built on Shulman’s construct of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to include technology knowledge as situated within the pedagogical and content knowledge (Schmidt et al., 2009).

This framework was developed by Mishra and Koehler (2006) to comprehend teachers’

knowledge of integrating technology in the educational research field. According to Schmidt et al. (2009), TPACK is the understanding required for incorporating technology into education in any subject area with an intuitive grasp of the three main components (TK, PK, and CK) by delivering content using suitable methods and tools.

(4)

Pedagogical knowledge (PK) Technological knowledge (TK)

Content knowledge (CK)

Student achievement Figure 1: TPACK Framework

Based on Figure 1, the three-circle Venn diagram represents seven components within the TPACK framework. Technological knowledge (TK), pedagogical knowledge (PK), and content knowledge (CK) are the three main components of the TPACK framework, which lecturers require for effective technology integration (Meirovitz, Russak & Zur, 2022;

Nuangchalern, 2020). In addition, only these three main components are used in this study context, and they are defined as follows:

Table 1: Definition of the Main Components of TPACK Framework

Terms Definition

TK Understanding of both more complex technologies, such as the internet and digital video, as well as more basic ones, like books, chalk, and whiteboards (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).

PK A thorough understanding of the methods, approaches, and styles utilised in teaching and learning, especially how they consider the overall objectives, principles, and purposes of education (Mishra

& Koehler, 2006).

CK Understanding of the material that has to be taught or mastered (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).

2.4 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework depicts the expected relationship between variables. In this conceptual framework, the independent variables are the main components of the TPACK framework: TK, PK, and CK, while the dependent variable is student achievement. As depicted in Figure 2, student achievement is the expected effect that depends on the lecturer’s knowledge as the expected cause.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Figure 2: Conceptual Framework

Thus, this study intends to discover the effectiveness of online teaching based on student achievement by assessing students’ perceptions of lecturer knowledge based on the following research hypotheses:

H01: There is no significant positive correlation between technological knowledge (TK) and student achievement.

H02: There is no significant positive correlation between pedagogical knowledge (PK) and student achievement.

(5)

H03: There is no significant positive correlation between content knowledge (CK) and student achievement.

3. Methodology

3.1 Research Design

This study used a quantitative approach and a correlational research design, conducted at UPNM, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

3.2 Population and Sampling

The target population of this study was UPNM undergraduates who have enrolled in Al- Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication course during the COVID-19 pandemic. The undergraduates came from different UPNM faculties and centres (i.e., Faculty of Engineering (FKJ), Faculty of Defence Science and Technology (FSTP), Faculty of Defence Studies and Management (FPPP), Faculty of Medicine and Defence Health (FPKP), Language Centre (PB), and Defence Fitness Academy (AKP)). Based on the sample size table by Krejcie and Morgan (1970), the sample size for this was 346 respondents, as there are about 3500 UPNM undergraduates. It is further confirmed using the sample size calculator on http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html, in which the minimum sample size for the survey is 347. For this study, stratified random sampling was employed to select the respondents, and the respondents for this study were 445 undergraduates.

3.3 Data Collection

The research instrument used in this study is a questionnaire which the content was adopted and adapted from Schmidt et al. (2009) and Idrus, Salleh, and Abdullah (2011). This questionnaire comprised 39 items and was sorted into six sections. Section A is first to gather the respondents’ demographics. Next, Section B, Section C and Section D assess respondents’

perceptions of the main components of the TPACK components. Then, section E examines the respondents’ achievements and performances in the Al-Ghazali Dialogue: English Communication online course. These sections were formatted using a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Lastly, with two closed-ended questions, Section F relates to the lecturers’ additional actions toward enhancing students learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Content validity, pilot test, and reliability were conducted before distributing the questionnaire.

3.4 Data Analysis

The collected data were analysed quantitatively using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 25.0. A descriptive analysis was performed to summarise the data, while an inferential analysis using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was employed to test the hypotheses.

4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Respondents’ Demographic

Table 3 shows the summary of the demographics of the 445 students who were involved in this study. The respondents comprised 271 (60.9%) male and 174 (39.1%) female students who had enrolled in Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication (LLE3032) online course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of the respondents involved are 127 (28.5%) students from the FPPP, and the least is 35 (7.9%) from the AKP. In addition, they are 193 (43.4%)

(6)

second-year students, followed by 146 (32.8%) third-year students and 106 (23.8%) first-year students.

Table 3: Summary of Respondents’ Demographics (n=445)

Demographics Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender Female 174 39.1

Male 271 60.9

Faculty and Centre AKP 35 7.9

FKJ 46 10.3

FPKP 55 12.4

FSTP 84 12.4

PB 98 18.9

FPPP 127 28.5

Year of Study Year 1 106 23.8

Year 2 193 43.4

Year 3 146 32.8

Note: n = number of respondents

Table 4 summarises the general information of the 445 students on using digital platforms in Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication (LLE3032) online course.

Table 4: Summary of Respondents’ General Information

General Information Frequency Percentage (%)

Number of Digital Platforms Used

1 99

2 152

3 136

4 50

5 7

6 1

Types of Digital Platforms Used Padlet 53 11.9

Facebook 54 12.1

Moodle 132 29.7

WhatsApp 338 76

Microsoft Teams 379 85.2

Others 88 19.7

Technical Problems Yes 262 58.9

No 183 41.1

Number of Technical Problems 0 183 41.1

1-3 196 44

4-6 43 9.7

7-9 12 2.7

10 and above 11 2.5

Technical Problems Faced Issues with digital

platforms 64 14.4

Lack of devices or limited access due to gadget sharing

71 26

Unstable network 245 55.1

Others 3 0.6

Regarding the use of digital platforms in online classes, most of the respondents representing 152 (34.2%) students, responded that the number of digital platforms utilised by the lecturers is two while the least is six platforms. Among the various types of digital platforms, 379 (85.2%) students responded that the most used is Microsoft Teams, followed by WhatsApp.

The use of Microsoft Teams is the highest as it is one of the official digital platforms implemented by UPNM for online learning. Meanwhile, WhatsApp has been used together for

(7)

academic purposes, in which it is a medium for group discussion about course assignments, course-related announcements from lecturers, examination preparation, and research publication groups (Buriro, Abro, Shahzeb, Ahmedani & Rahoo, 2021). Besides those stated in Table 4, some of this course’s lecturers also adopted Zoom, Google Meet, YouTube, and Telegram.

However, the majority of students (58.9%) faced technical problems during this online course.

In one class, the average number of technical problems students face during this online course is one to three times. The most recurring technical problems are unstable networks during online classes, followed by lack of devices or limited access due to gadget sharing, and issues with the digital platforms used during an online class. Additionally, students faced other technical problems, such as the storage of devices.

4.2 Respondents’ Perceptions

The level of lecturers’ knowledge in teaching online classes is interpreted using the mean score by Pimental (2019). A high score means the students agree with the statement in the questionnaire, which implies the lecturers have a high level of knowledge, and a low score means they agree less. Table 6 shows the respondents’ perceptions of lecturer’s technological knowledge.

Table 6: Respondents’ Perceptions of Lecturer’s Technological Knowledge

Code Statements Mean Standard

Deviation

Level of Knowledge TK1 The lecturer knows about a lot of different technologies. 3.826 0.897 High TK2 The lecturer keeps up with important new technologies. 3.845 0.831 High TK3 The lecturer uses different technologies to teach the course. 3.777 0.852 High TK4 The lecturer gives alternatives to students who have

difficulty accessing a particular digital technology platform in the course.

3.835 0.871 High

TK5 The lecturer uses technology easily. 3.961 0.795 High

TK6 The lecturer has the technical skills needed to use technology.

3.865 0.841 High

TK7 The lecturer can fix his/ her technical problems in a short time when facing any compatibility issues.

3.749 0.899 High

Average Mean 3.837 High

Based on Table 6, the average mean is 3.837, which means all respondents perceived that the lecturers have a high level of technological knowledge to teach the course online. Two statements with high mean scores are TK5 (3.961) and TK6 (3.865), where respondents considered that the lecturers could use technologies easily and have the technical skills needed to use them. However, the lowest mean score is TK7 (3.749) which suggests that the lecturers need to be more competent to resolve their technical problems instantly when dealing with digital platform compatibility issues. Overall, it can be concluded that the lecturers teaching Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication course have good technological knowledge since they had joined digital platform training such as Moodle and adopted it with traditional learning before the COVID-19 pandemic. This shows that adequate training on digital platforms fits lecturers to teach online. In contrast, insufficient prior training on online teaching requirements for lecturers affected their technology competency (Oyedotun, 2020).

Table 7 shows the respondents’ perceptions of lecturer’s pedagogical knowledge.

(8)

Table 7: Respondents’ Perceptions of Lecturer’s Pedagogical Knowledge

Deviation

Level of Knowledge PK1 The lecturer recognises students’ common understandings

and misconceptions.

3.820 0.880 High

PK2 The lecturer adapts his or her teaching based-upon what students understand.

3.896 0.755 High

PK3 The lecturer adapts his or her teaching based-upon what students do not understand.

3.890 0.819 High

PK4 The lecturer adapts suitable teaching styles to different learners.

3.861 0.843 High

PK5 The lecturer uses a wide range of teaching approaches in online learning setting.

3.851 0.833 High

PK6 The lecturer knows how to assess student performance during online class.

3.883 0.825 High

PK7 The lecturer assesses students learning in multiple ways. 3.921 0.809 High PK8 The lecturer knows how to organise and maintain online

classroom management.

3.998 0.815 High

Based on Table 7, the average mean is 3.890, which means all respondents perceived that the lecturers have a high pedagogical knowledge to deliver the course online. Two statements with high mean scores are PK8 (3.998) and PK7 (3.921), where respondents considered that the lecturers could organise and maintain online classroom management and assess students learning in multiple ways during online learning. However, the lowest mean score of PK1 (3.820) suggests that the lecturers require to recognise students’ common understandings and misconceptions. Overall, it can be concluded that the lecturers teaching Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue:

English Communication course have good pedagogical knowledge as they efficiently manage online classes. This shows that the lecturers have implemented proper practices to enhance student’s learning which fits the study by Hermosa (2022) that effective classroom management practices improve students’ learning environment and performance. Table 8 shows the respondents’ perceptions of lecturer’s content knowledge.

Table 8: Respondents’ Perceptions of Lecturer’s Content Knowledge

Deviation

Level of Knowledge CK1 The lecturer has sufficient knowledge about Al-Ghazali’s

Dialogue: English Communication.

4.099 0.905 High

CK2 The lecturer uses an analytical way of thinking in his or her teaching.

4.121 0.788 High

CK3 The lecturer is well versed with the course content and give meaningful examples to enhance student’s comprehension.

4.094 0.768 High

CK4 The lecturer helps the student to correctly identify the strategies for effective communication, presentation skills and literary element.

4.065 0.807 High

CK5 The lecturer guides the student to apply appropriate strategies for effective communication, presentation skills and analytical tools to select case studies effectively.

4.128 0.765 High

CK6 The lecturer provides relevant issues in selected case studies for their student to evaluate critically.

4.130 0.757 High

Based on Table 8, the average mean is 4.106, which means all respondents perceived that the lecturers have a high level of content knowledge to teach the course online. Two statements with high mean scores are CK6 (4.130) and CK5 (4.128), where respondents considered that the lecturers provided relevant issues in selected case studies for them to evaluate critically.

(9)

Respondents also acknowledged that lecturers guided them to effectively apply appropriate strategies for effective communication, presentation skills, and analytical tools to selected case studies. However, the lowest mean score is CK4 (4.065), which suggests that the lecturer needs to assist the students as much as possible in correctly identifying the strategies for effective communication, presentation skills, and literary element, as Ho, Sa’adi, He and Hoon (2023) found that the students rarely have the confidence to speak out in online class. Overall, it can be concluded that the lecturers teaching Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication course have good content knowledge as they give their all to achieve the course learning outcomes (CLO) outlined by this course. Plus, the students are satisfied with the course objective (Ng, 2018).

4.3. Respondents’ Achievement (Online Teaching Effectiveness)

Table 9 shows the grade achievement for Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication online course.

Table 9: Respondents’ Grade Achievement (n=445)

Grade Frequency Percentage (%)

A 289 64.9

B 137 30.8

C 19 4.3

D 0 0

E 0 0

Based on Table 9, most respondents, presenting 289 (64.9%) students, scored A, 137 (30.8%) students scored B, while another 19 (4.3%) students scored C for this course. Hence, most respondents have performed ably throughout this online course as, referring to the grading system in UPNM, A indicates excellent. In addition, grades are one of the standard measures of academic success concerning academic achievement (York, Gibson & Rankin, 2015).

Table 10 shows the achievement of respondents throughout the Al-Ghazali Dialogue’s: English Communication online course.

Table 10: Respondents’ Self-Achievement

Deviation

Level of Knowledge SA1 I use English language in daily conversation. 3.571 0.993 High SA2 I do not find oral communication in the English language

hard to do.

3.640 0.778 High

SA3 I feel confident about my ability to speak clearly in the English language.

3.653 0.790 High

SA4 I enjoy communicating with others in the English language. 3.847 0.741 High SA5 I have improved my presentation skills in the English

language.

3.942 0.724 High

SA6 I develop a critical thinking and problem-solving skill in the English language.

3.922 0.712 High

Based on Table 10, the average mean is 3.763, which means all respondents achieved a high level of knowledge for the online course. A statement with the highest mean score is SA5 (3.942), where respondents considered that they had improved their presentation skills in the English language. However, the lowest score is SA1 (3.571), which suggests that lecturers should create a rule to only speak in the English language during the classes since they seldom use it in daily conversation. Overall, it can be concluded that the respondents have

(10)

accomplished well throughout Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication online course by improving their presentation skills despite learning it virtually. This fits the study by Mahdi (2022) revealed that interactive multimedia environments positively impact students’

presentation skills.

4.4. Respondents’ Opinions

Table 11 shows the opinion of respondents on the lecturers’ knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content in teaching Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication online course.

Table 11: Respondents’ Opinions on Lecturers’ TPACK (n=445)

Lecturers’ TPACK Frequency Percentage (%)

Yes 213 47.9

No 232 52.1

Based on Table 11, most respondents, presenting 232 (52.1%) students, perceived that they would only understand the content of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication if the lecturer had adequate knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content. On the other hand, 213 (47.9%) students felt they could understand the course despite the lecturer’s lack of knowledge.

Therefore, it can be concluded that respondents considered that lecturers must have adequate TK, PK and CK to teach this online course effectively. Additionally, it shows that the main components of the TPACK framework are applicable to be used to determine the quality to be a good lecturer as Koehler, Mishra, Kereluik, Shin and Graham (2014) stated that the framework describes knowledge required by a teacher for effective technology integration.

Table 12 shows the opinion of respondents on whether lecturers give attention or not toward the students during online learning.

Table 12: Respondents’ Opinions on Lecturers’ Attention (n=445)

Lecturers’ Attention Frequency Percentage (%)

Yes 407 91.5

No 38 8.5

Based on Table 12, almost all the respondents, presenting 407 (91.5%) students, perceived that Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers gave their total energy to make the students’ learning easier, but the other 38 (8.5%) students felt otherwise. Hence, it can be concluded that lecturers have given full attention to the students during online learning. Indeed, students desire lecturers who show more interest in them, approach them positively and employ various teaching methods based on their level (Cicekci & Sadik, 2019).

4.5 Spearman’s Rank Correlation

Before choosing the statistical test to examine the correlation of the variables, a normality test is applied to ascertain if the data were normally distributed. As a result, it was found that there is no normal distribution. Hence, the hypotheses were measured using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and interpreted as suggested by Akoglu (2018).

(11)

Table 13: Correlation between Dependent Variable and Independent Variable

Variables Student Achievement

Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed)

TK .308** .000

PK .345** .000

CK .343** .000

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01level (2-tailed)

The null hypotheses are rejected for the two-tailed test because the p-value is more than (or the same as) a significant value (Jain & Chetty, 2020). Based on Table 13, the correlation can be summarised as follows:

a) There was a weak, positive correlation between technological knowledge and student achievement, which was statistically significant (rs(443) = .308, p = .000).

b) There was a weak, positive correlation between pedagogical knowledge and student achievement, which was statistically significant (rs(443) = .345, p = .000).

c) There was a weak, positive correlation between content knowledge and student achievement, which was statistically significant (rs(443) = .343, p = .000).

The results of the study suggest that all the null hypotheses are rejected, which is supported by statistical evidence. To conclude, the correlation between the dependent variable and independent variable of this study does exist.

5. Conclusion

The finding of this study shows that Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers’

knowledge in implementing online teaching was perceived by students as at least high for the three main components (TK, PK, and CK) of the TPACK framework. This infers that these lecturers are well-prepared and have adequate knowledge to teach online during the COVID- 19 pandemic. Moreover, this study discovers that the lecturers have a high content knowledge of this online course among those components. In contrast, technological knowledge received the lowest rating, consistent with a study by Fabian, Clayes, and Kelly (2019).

Regarding the use of digital platforms, the study finds that most students face unstable networks. It is among the critical challenges of online learning, as Pokhrel and Chhetri (2021) found that many countries have significant problems with reliable internet connection and access to digital devices. However, the students believed the lecturers had the technical skills to utilise various digital platforms, and lecturers also provided alternatives for those who were having trouble using a specific platform during the online course. Hence, it is clear that Al- Ghazali's Dialogue: English Communication lecturers possess adequate technological knowledge to lessen the challenges faced by the students concerning technical problems.

Besides that, students acknowledged that the lecturers are adept at managing online classes.

Indeed, it is essential to understand how these students viewed the lecturers’ instructional adaption of online learning during the pandemic, as Parsons and Vaughn (2016) pointed out, this may be able to reveal the level of the lecturers’ efficacy. In addition, considering the above findings, the students also have achieved excellent performance in this online course, proving that lecturers of Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication have sufficient knowledge and are eligible to deliver instruction online during the COVID-19 pandemic.

(12)

Furthermore, students felt that throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the lecturers had enhanced their learning and paid close attention to them. Additionally, although the course is entirely online, the student’s presentation skills have improved, demonstrating that lecturers can cater to their different learning needs. Hence, it is assumed that Al-Ghazali’s Dialogue: English Communication lecturers have executed various teaching styles and digital platforms to determine the best styles and tools for enhancing the online course, even though Siddiquei and Kathpal (2021) claimed that picking a teaching style is complicated because it depends on the student’s learning needs.

In conclusion, the main components of the TPACK framework assist in assessing lecturers’

competence to deliver online courses during the COVID-19 pandemic and act as a guide for lecturers to enhance their proficiency. Meanwhile, the findings on student perceptions of lecturers’ knowledge in online teaching play a significant role in raising the calibre of future education, ultimately benefiting the students. Therefore, the HEIs are proposed to join hands in increasing the quality of their education systems by providing more training on digital platforms for lecturers and upgrading university facilities.

References

Aboagye, E., Yawson, J. A., & Appiah, K. N. (2020). COVID-19 and E-Learning: The Challenges of Students in Tertiary Institutions. Social Education Research, 2(1), 1-8.

https://doi.org/10.37256/ser.212021422.

Akoglu, H. (2018). User’s guide to correlation coefficients. Turkish Journal of Emergency Medicine, 18, 91-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjem.2018.08.001.

Asio, J. M. R., Gadia, E. D., Abarintos, E. C., Paguio, D. P., & Balce, M. (2021). Internet Connection and Learning Device Availability of College Students: Basis for Institutionalizing Flexible Learning in the New Normal. Studies in Humanities and Education, 2(1), 56-59. DOI: 10.48185/she.v2i1.224.

Bao, W. (2020). COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Hum Behav& Emerg Tech., 2, 113-115. DOI: 10.1002/hbe2.191.

Barrot, J. S., Llenares, I. I., & del Rosario, L. S. (2021). Students’ online learning challenges during the pandemic and how they cope with them: The case of the Philippines.

Education and Information Technologies, 26, 7321-7338.

Buriro, M. A., Abro, I. A., Ahmedani, A. A., & Rahoo, L. A. (2021). The Impact of WhatsApp Usage on Academic Purposes among the Students of Higher Education Institutes of Sindh Province. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 27(6), 1054-1065. DOI: 10.47750/cibg.2021.27.06.089

Chung, E., Subramaniam, G., & Dass, L. (2020). Online Learning Readiness among University Students in Malaysia amidst COVID-19. Asian Journal of University Education, 16(2), 46-58. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v16i2.10294.

Cicekci, M. A. & Sadik, F. (2019). Teachers’ and Students’ Opinions About Students’

Attention Problems During the Lesson. Journal of Education and Learning, 8(6), 15- 30. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v8n6p15.

Coman, C., Ţîru, L. G., Meseşan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., & Bularca, M. C. (2020). Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during the Coronavirus Pandemic:

Students’ Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10367.

Darkwa, B. F. & Antwi, S. (2021). From Classroom to Online: Comparing the Effectiveness and Student Academic Performance of Classroom Learning and Online Learning.

Open Access Library Journal, 8, 1-22. DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1107597.

Demuyakor, J. (2020). Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Online Learning in Higher Institutions

(13)

of Education: A Survey of the Perceptions of Ghanaian International Students in China. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 10(3), e202018.

https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/8286.

Department of Statistics Malaysia. (28, April 2022). ICT Use and Access by Individuals and Households Survey Report, Malaysia, 2021. https://www.dosm.gov.my/portal- main/release-content/ict-use-and-access-by-individuals-and-households-survey- report-malaysia-2021.

Dhawan, S. (2020). Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22. DOI: 10.1177/0047239520934018.

Fabian, K., Clayes, E., & Kelly, L. Putting design into practice: An investigation of TPACK scores of lecturers in a networked institution. Research in Learning Technology, 27.

https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v27.2296.

Gurung, S. (2021). Challenges faced by teachers in online teaching during COVID-19 pandemic. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 9(1), 8-18.

Hermoso, M. L., Jr., J. C. E., Gonzaga, D. I., Lepasana, M. C. S., Lumen, N. J. C., & Sanchez, J. M. P. (2022). Science teacher as classroom manager in online classes. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11(3), 1268-1277. DOI:

10.11591/ijere.v11i3.22641.

Ho, D. G. E., Sa’adi, M., He, D. & Hoon, C-Y. (2023). Silence over the wire: student verbal participation and the virtual classroom in the digital era. Asia Pacific Education Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09834-4.

Idrus, H., Salleh, R., & Abdullah, M. R. T. L. (2011). Oral Communicartion Ability in English:

A Essential Skill for Engineering Graduates. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 26(1), 107-123.

Ilias, A., Baidi, N., Ghani, E. K., & Mohd Razali, F. (2020). Issues on the Use of Online Learning: An Exploratory Study Among University Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11), 5092-5105. DOI:

10.13189/ujer.2020.081109.

Jain, R. & Chetty, P. (2020, Jun 15). How to accept or reject a hypothesis?. Knowledge Tank;

Project Guru. https://www.projectguru.in/how-to-accept-or-reject-a-hypothesis/

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework. In: J. Spector, M.

Merrill, J. Elen, & M. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp.101-111). Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9

Krejcie, R. V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities.

Educational dan Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.

Maddison, T., Doi, C., Lucky, S., & Kumaran, M. (2017). Literature Review of Online Learning in Academic Libraries. In T. Maddison, & M. Kumaran (Eds.). Distributed Learning (pp. 13-46). Chandos Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08- 100598-9.00002-7.

Mahdi, D. A. (2022). Improving Speaking and Presentation Skills through Interactive Multimedia Environment for Non-Native Speakers of English. SAGE Open.

https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221079811.

Makarova, E. (2021, April 6-9). Effectiveness of traditional and online learning: comparative analysis from the student perspective [Conference session]. SHS Web of Conferences,

99 (2021) 01019, Ekaterinburg, Russia.

https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20219901019.

Meirovitz, T., Russak, S., & Zur, A. (2022). English as a foreign language teachers’ perceptions regarding their pedagogical-technological knowledge and its implementation in

(14)

distance learning during COVID-19. Heliyon, 8(4), e09175.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09175.

Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teacher College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Ng, C. G. (2018). The Impact of Lecturers’ Competencies on Students’ Satisfaction. Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 1(2), 74-86.

Nuangchalern, P. (2020). TPACK in ASEAN perspectives: Case study on Thai pre-service teacher. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(4), 993- 999. DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20700.

Oyedotun, T. D. (2020). Sudden change of pedagogy in education driven by COVID-19:

Perspectives and evaluation from a developing country. Research in Globalisation, 2.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2020.100029.

Parsons, S. A. & Vaughn, M. (2016). One Teacher’s Instructional Adaptations and Her Students’ Reflections on the Adaptations. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 51(1), 4-17.

Pimental, J. L. (2019). Some Biases in Likert Scaling Usage and its Correction. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research, 45(1), 183-191.

Scherer, R., Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., & Siddiq, F. (2021). Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching and learning in higher education: Who’s ready? Computers in Human Behaviour, 118, 106675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106675.

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009).

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.

Selvananthan, M., Hussin, N. A. M., & Azazi, N. A. N. (2020). Students learning experiences during COVID-19: Work from home period in Malaysian Higher Learning Institutions. Teaching Public Administration, 1-10.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739420977900.

Siddiquei, M. I., & Kathpal, S. (2021). Challenges of online teaching during COVID‐19: An exploratory factor analysis. Hum Behav Emerg Technol., 3(5), 811-822. DOI:

10.1002/hbe2.300.

York, T. T., Gibson, C., & Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and Measuring Academic Success.

Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 20(5).

Yusuf, N. & Al-Banawi, N. (2013). The Impact of Changing Technology: The Case of E- Learning. Contemporary Issues in Education Research –Second Quarter 2013, 6(2), 173-180. 117.

Zainol, S. S., Hussin, S. M., Othman, M. S., & Zahari, N. H. M. (2021). Challenges of Online Learning Faced by the B40 Income Parents in Malaysia. International Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 3(2), 45-52.

Zhu, H., Wei, L., & Niu, P. (2020). The novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China. Global Health Research and Policy 5, 6(2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-020-00135-6.