Please cite as:

Goh, Lay Huah (2007). A case study of the integration of ICT in teaching and learning in a
smart school in Sabah. In: The 5th ASEAN Symposium on Educational Management and
Leadership (ASEMAL 5), 18-19 August 2007, Legend Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. (Unpublished)

Integrating ICT in Teaching and Learning: A Case Study

by
Dr. Goh Lay Huah (gohlayhuah@yahoo.com)
Institut Perguruan Gaya

Abstract
This research investigates in depth the thoughts, beliefs and opinions of the
teachers’ use of ICT in teaching and learning (T&LICT). The objective of this
research is to study T&LICT in the classroom in terms of the instructional practice,
the instructional roles and the instructional environment. A case study research
methodology is employed. The case is Sekolah Menengah Bestari (a pseudonym).
Analysis of data from survey questionnaires complemented the qualitative data from
the interviews and observations, as well as document analysis. Findings indicated
that technology infrastructure were available to support the T&LICT
implementation. Nevertheless, the teachers felt it was not enough. About half of
Sekolah Menengah Bestari staff, mainly Bestari and ETeMS teachers, implemented
T&LICT. Findings indicated that IT in teacher practices was used mainly to
support the existing teacher-directed and teacher-centered approach. There was
low ’take-up’ and ‘misfit’ in T&LICT implementation in Sekolah Menengah Bestari.

Keywords: Smart School, ICT in teaching and learning, innovation and change, instructional
practice, instructional roles, instructional environment

1.0 Introduction
The Malaysian education policy in relation to the integration of ICT in teaching and learning
(T&LICT) is aimed at addressing the need to create a knowledge society and a technology
literate workforce for the twenty-first century. Schools have a need to adopt an information-
literacy curriculum; and students have a need to develop their ICT and thinking skills and
take the responsibility for their own learning. Such needs would be met within a technology-
enabled teaching and learning environment that emphasizes student self-direction and self-
regulation. The Smart School Project is an example of a major educational change initiative
to improve classroom teaching and learning practice within such an environment (Smart
School Project Team, 1997).

1
1.1 Statement of the Problem
The massive scale of implementation of the Smart School project meant that the government
had a vested interest in making sure that it would succeed. Findings from a survey by the
Ministry of Education in 2001 reported that the use of technology as an enabler was not
optimized because teachers possessed low ICT literacy, and the Smart School pedagogy was
not widely practiced because of examinations constraints (Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia,
2001, p. 518). This study aims to report the condition of the implementation to T&LICT in
one of the Smart Schools six years later and ascertain the degree changes that have taken
place.

1.2 Research Objectives and Research Questions

The objective of this study is to explore the views of teachers’ from a Smart School,
(henceforth known as Sekolah Menengah Bestari) regarding how they have integrated ICT in
their teaching and learning. From the analysis of the T&LICT scenario, the degree of the
implementation and its fit to the desired T&LICT situation shall be ascertained.

The research questions are:

1. How do teachers integrate ICT in their instructional practice?
2. How does T&LICT influence teachers’ instructional roles?
3. How are the instructional resources utilized for T&LICT?

1.3 Importance of the Research

This research seeks to understand the nature of the change viewed from the teachers’
perspective. An analysis of the existing situation in the Sekolah Menengah Bestari
classrooms will provide a rich description and in-depth understanding of the dynamics of the
implementation of change within an organization. It is expected that all schools in Malaysia
will have assimilated the Smart School practice by the year 2010 (Bernama, 2005).
Knowledge of the T&LICT scenario in Sekolah Menengah Bestari may provide useful
insights to future implementers.

2.0 Literature Review

The Malaysian Smart School was visualized as "a learning institution that has been
systemically re-invented in terms of learning-teaching practices and school management in
order to prepare children for the Information Age" (Smart School Project Team, 1997, p. 10).

2
The Smart School pedagogy that integrates ICT would see a paradigm shift from the directed
to the constructivist teaching and learning (Figure 1).

Directed Constructivist
Types of activities Lecture, demonstration, Group projects, hands-on exploration,
discussions, student practice, product development
Instructional
Practice

seatwork, testing
Learning goals Stated in terms of mastery Stated in terms of growth from where
learning and behavioral student began and increased ability to
competence in a scope and work independently and with others
sequence
Teacher roles Transmitter of knowledge; expert Guide and facilitator as students
source; director of skill/concept generate their own knowledge;
Instructional

development through structured collaborative resource and assistant

Roles

experiences as students explore topics

Student roles Receive information; demonstrate Collaborate with other; develop
competence; all students learn competence; students may learn
same material different material
Curriculum Based on skill and knowledge Based on projects that foster both
Environmen
Instructiona

characteristics hierarchies; skills taught one after higher level and lower level skills
the other in set sequence concurrently
l

Teaching and Text-based, exercises for direct Computer-based to facilitate self-

learning materials instruction directed learning
Figure 1: A paradigm shift from the directed to the constructivist teaching and learning
Adapted from: Roblyer & Edwards. (2002) Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching, p. 54

In the past instructional practices was mainly a one-way transfer of information from the
teacher to the student. Now, the constructivist approach to teaching and learning focuses on
learning through posing problems, exploring possible answers, and developing products and
presentations. The stress is more on group work and individualized work.

ICT facilitates active learning through self-accessed, self-paced and self-directed learning.
Consequently, the teacher has to change his role from “a sage on the stage” to “a guide by
the side”. There should be a shift from a predominantly ‘teacher-controlled’ paradigm to that
of empowering students to be more active and more independent learners.

3.0 Design and Procedures

A case study research design is employed. A Smart School was chosen as a case for this
study. Data was obtained via the questionnaire, interview, observation and document
collection techniques. A total of 52 respondents returned the questionnaire, of which 13 were
male teachers and 39 were female teachers. 13 teachers who had implemented T&LICT were
interviewed and three observations of T&LICT integration were made.

3
Descriptive statistics from the questionnaire was used to support the qualitative data and to
provide further details to the analysis. Ongoing inductive analysis led the research process,
and the data collected were reduced, displayed and discussed, and conclusions were drawn
and verified, both through computer program analysis and researcher analysis, according to
the data analysis process of Miles and Huberman (1994).

Direct quotations from the informants would be referred to by their pseudonyms followed by
the line number(s) where the quotes occurred in the primary document. For example the
reference “Laim, 23:24” indicated a direct quote from line 23 to line 24 of the transcribed
interview text with Laim (a pseudonym). “Sable:Obs” indicated that data was quoted from
an observation of Sable’s lesson. Comments from open-ended section of the questionnaire
were termed as “SME”.

The findings of this study draws deeply from the teachers’ thoughts, beliefs and views to
provide a rich and thick description in the analysis. Examining the teachers’ thoughts and
beliefs offer significant insights into what occurs in classrooms and provides as close as
possible a true picture of change taking place. In Cuban’s words (1993, p. 256), "The
knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes that teachers have…shape what they choose to do in their
classrooms and explain the core of instructional practices that have endured over time".

4.0 Report of Findings

4.1 The Instructional Practice
This section shall answer the research question “How do teachers integrate ICT in their
instructional practice?”

It was observed (Gray, Lavender and Sable: Obs) that the lessons that integrated ICT were
teacher directed strategies. Sable thought that teaching activity using ICT was “not so much
different from the usual teaching” (Sable, 93:93). According to Azura (68:68), “not use IT to
teach and using IT to teach, the strategies are the same. But use IT to teach not as much
explanation by the teacher”.

Data from the questionnaire (Table 1) also indicated that teachers often employed direct
instruction and sometimes did group work, drill and use of software. Some teachers still

4
preferred the traditional method of drill and practice (mean = 3.86, SD = 0.88) and chalk and
talk (mean = 3.48, SD = 0.86). There were certain issues that made teachers prefer teaching
in class. ITC (262:268) said, “many of the teachers have their own laptops, but still prefer to
teach using chalk and talk. Probably to them it is a bit tedious to carry the laptop with
them.”

Table 1: Teaching and Learning Strategies Used by Respondents

In class, do you use the following strategies? N Mean Std. Dev.

Directive : direct instruction 52 4.06 .461
Individual learning (self-accessed, self-paced, self-directed) 52 2.69 .579
Cooperative/Collaborative Learning (group work) 52 3.60 .603
Distance Learning (e-mail, video conferencing) 51 1.00 .000
Experiential Learning (simulation software and virtual reality) 52 3.71 .997
Research, Reference, and Data Search 50 2.58 .835
Electronic Assessment (On-line assessment) 50 1.50 .863
Drill and Practice 50 3.86 .881
Chalk and talk 50 3.48 .863
Valid N (list wise) 50
1 = never 2 = seldom 3 = sometimes 4 = often 5 = almost all the time

Most of the informants felt that they needed more ICT related knowledge and skills as well as
T&LICT skills. “Yes, already possessed knowledge and skills to teach. But (I) need skills on
new IT programs” (Azura, 80:80). Likewise Lavender (75:75), Gray (93:94), Ping (67:67),
Bron (65:65), Jade (60:61), Raed (126:127) and even ITC (98:102) shared similar views.

Informants said that T&LICT was implemented more by the Bestari subject teachers (Sable,
145:146; Laim, 215:217; Azura, 59:60; Flavian, 107:107; Lavender, 11:11; Ping, 13:13;
Iona, 148:151; Nelia, 140:140) than other teachers (Bron, 47:47; Azura, 59:60). This was
because there were “no facilities of other non-Mathematics and Science teachers to use IT”
(Azura, 34:34). Bron (39:40,18:18) said, “The constraints is that have to compete to use IT
facilities… Not convenient.” Questionnaire data showed that 28.8% of the respondents
never used ICT to teach (Table 2). All of them were non-Bestari subject teachers. Less than
20% of the Bestari teacher respondents implemented ICT weekly.

Table 2: Frequency of the use of ICT by subject teachers

Non-
Bestari
Frequency of use % Bestari % Total %
teachers
teachers
Not using 0 0.0 15 51.7 15 28.8

5
Once or twice a semester 13 56.5 11 37.9 24 46.2
Once or twice a month 6 26.1 1 3.4 7 13.5
Once or twice a week 2 8.7 1 3.4 3 5.8
Almost every day 2 8.7 1 3.4 3 5.8
Total 23 100.0 29 100.0 52 100.0

The frequency of use was also determined by time factor and the demands to complete the
syllabus. According to Raed, “During normal teaching time not so easy to spare time. At the
beginning of the year, almost every day, almost every lesson. Starting from after the mid-
year break, I found that I am far behind of the syllabus to complete. Using ICT takes up a lot
of time.”

4.2 The Instructional Roles

This section shall answer the research question “How does T&LICT influence teachers’
instructional roles?” The T&LICT scenario shall report the teacher’s role and the students’
role.

The teacher-directed instructional practices determined the teachers’ roles. Data from the
questionnaire (Table 3) reported that the teachers seldom allowed students to decide on the
tasks and resources for teaching and learning (mean = 2.75).

Table 3: Role as a teacher

Std.
In your class, do you……………..? N Mean
Deviation
allow students to decide on the tasks and resources for T&L 52 2.75 .905
allow students to decide on the objectives for T&L 52 2.21 .871
facilitate learning, not just teaching 52 3.44 .698
guide students in their tasks 52 3.90 .569
Valid N (list wise) 52
1 = never 2 = seldom 3 = sometimes 4 = often 5 = almost all the time

The teachers perceived that their role as a facilitator was basically that of going round the
class from group to group monitoring their task progress and mediating where it was deemed
necessary and guiding the students in their tasks. According to Raed (111:112), as a teacher,
I facilitate the students to understand more, and do translation. I help the students by walking
around.”

“The role of the student is to complete the work directed by the teacher” (Flavian, 92:92).
This statement reflected the views of teachers regarding their expectation of student role and

6
behavior. Group work and discussion appeared to be the preferred teaching-learning strategy
used by teachers. They expected the students to complete their task within their groups.
During an observation of Lavender’s lesson:

The students are generally working on their task. They accessed the text in the
computer and were reading the passage while completing their task. Students
know their roles and task within the bilik simulasi. Student appeared to accept
teacher’s decision and follow instructions. (Lavender:Obs).

Data from questionnaire (Table 4) indicated that the respondents thought the students were
seldom self-accessed, self-paced and self-directed (mean = 2.85) and independent learners
(mean = 2.87).

Table 4: Student Roles in Teaching and Learning

Are your students ………………………? N Mean Std. Dev.
self-access, self-paced and self-directed learners 52 2.85 .802
Independent learners 52 2.87 .742
Active learners 52 3.12 .832
Able to cooperate and collaborate in group work and
52 3.25 .653
projects
Valid N (list wise) 52
1 = never 2 = seldom 3 = sometimes 4 = often 5 = almost all the time

4.3 The Instructional Environment

This section shall answer the research question “How are the instructional resources utilized
for T&LICT?”

Under the Smart School Project, the schools were allocated with computer-integrated
classrooms (Bilik Simulasi) and specially designed learning coursewares for the use of the
teaching and learning of the four Bestari subjects, namely, English, Bahasa Melayu, Science
and Mathematics from Forms One to Five (Laim, 136:137; Ping, 126:126; Lavender, 39:39).
This restricted the school’s capability to accommodate the whole school requirements.

It was felt that ICT facilities in the bilik simulasi were not optimized for constructivist
learning. “Students worked on the exercises in the TLM on ‘Description of Places’. This is
basically an interactive drill and practice software with some preliminary tutorial input.
Students are not producing any original work.” (Sable:Obs). In the classroom, the computer
was usually used by the teacher (Laim, 255:255). The students had little chances of using the

7
computer. The students’ limited access to ICT in the classrooms meant that they had little
opportunities to develop their ICT skills. According to Jade (102:103), “Student’s knowledge
in using IT is low. Teachers had to teach them how to use the computer at the same time
teaching the topic.”

In terms of T&LICT resources, there were on-line Teaching and Learning Materials for the
Bestari subjects (Laim, 184:184; Lavender, 11:11). The ETeMS project provided stand alone
CDs (Laim, 190:191; Raed, 29:29). There were also stand alone courseware CD supplied by
BTP as well as CDs that came with textbooks (Azura, 35:37; ITC, 40:41; Sable, 38:40; Laim,
190:190), and Science for Form six (Laim, 26:26).

The BTP and TSS produced learning materials appeared to be suitable for modes such as drill
and practice, simulations, instructional games and electronic book. Lavender (26:26) used
the TLM to give exercises to the students. Raed (108:112) found the courseware in the CD
“…complete already, including all the induction set, and the objective. Everything inside
there. When we put on the CD on the screen, basically we don’t do much. Let the CD talk
everything and then the only thing that I do in the class is to facilitate the students to
understand more.”

Informants found the TLM useful: “…in the Bestari program they got all these courseware
that can use to teach the students” (Laim, 22:23), and “we find the stand alone CD helpful”
(Laim, 192:192).

Despite the ready supply of learning courseware for Bahasa Melayu, English Language,
Mathematics and Science, these teachers still said that there was a need for more courseware
(Gray, 156:156; Lavender, 75:76; Jade, 30:31). (Raed, 247:248) said, “We need the
courseware and softwares. Cannot expect teacher to prepare courseware and software”

5.0 Discussion of Findings

5.1 Low take-up in Implementation
Findings indicated that although the teachers’ reception of the T&LICT innovation was
positive, there was ‘low take-up’ (Handal, 2003) in its implementation, evidenced by its
mediocre density and low frequency of use. Only an estimated 50% of the teachers in
Sekolah Menengah Bestari implemented T&LICT. There was a lack of uniform

8
participation. All the Bestari subject teachers had implemented T&LICT, whereas about half
of the non-Bestari teachers have not used ICT. Therefore, the density of T&LICT use was
mediocre.

From the mediocre density of use, the low frequency of use exacerbated the situation. It was
found that about two-thirds of the estimated 50% users implemented T&LICT only once or
twice a semester. Less than 20% of the Bestari teacher respondents implemented ICT
weekly. Most informants admitted that they were weak in IT skills. The fear of failure in
using the technology in front of their students could be a barrier (Hannafin & Savenye, 1993)
to its increased use. Other researches (Ting, 1998; Arafah, 2000, Woo, 2003) have also
highlighted inadequate knowledge and skills as a cause for such concern.

Insufficient technology-enabled rooms also meant that many classes had to share the
facilities. Although ICT teaching and learning resources were available to all Bestari
teachers and certain other subject teachers, it was generally perceived as not enough. This
affected the frequency and density of T&LICT implementation.

Other studies have also reported the low take-up in T&LICT implementation. Looi (2002)
found that CAI readiness of Smart School teachers were moderate. Woo’s (2003, p. 244)
research study examined the teachers’ levels of technology use. She found that the diffusion
of innovation in technology integration was “very slow and stretches over a long period”. In
this present study, the implementation of T&LICT through the Smart School Project is
already into its sixth year and yet the practice was still experiencing low take-up.

5.2 Implementation ‘Mis-fit’

Analysis of findings revealed that Sekolah Menengah Bestari teacher’s instructional
strategies did not fit the desired T&LICT practices that prescribed constructivist approaches.
In fact, the teachers’ T&LICT strategies did not vary much from the traditional modes. As
Sable said, teaching activity using ICT was “not so much different from the usual teaching”
(Sable, 093:093). The strategies were teacher directed and teacher-centered.

Similarly, Fox & Henri (2005, p.161) reported that while the teachers in their study had
indeed taken up the challenge to use IT in their teaching, their practices were little changed.
IT in the Hong Kong situation was also used mainly to support the existing teacher-centered

9
approach. Fox and Henri’s finding was similar to the findings in this study. Other findings
of the slow development towards constructivist practices were reported in other technology
innovations research (Dwyer et al., 1995; Handal, 2003).

Insufficient ICT facilities in the classrooms might partially explain the implementation ‘mis-
fit’ of the teachers’ T&LICT instruction. Because only the teacher had laptop, the whole
class method with one computer was often employed for delivery of instruction. There was
little opportunity for constructivist teaching and learning.

Another possible explanation could be that because T&LICT was viewed as time consuming;
most teachers revert to the traditional classroom teaching and learning strategy which was
seen as less time consuming and as a more efficient method for syllabus completion. Azura
said, “No time to prepare, so use chalk and talk” (Azura, 54:54). Such a perception thwarted
the sustained use of ICT in teaching and learning “Once in a while teaching and learning
with ICT Ok. But difficult to teach everyday” (Azura, 56:60).

Mediocre knowledge and skills also resulted in the implementation ‘misfit’ of the T&LICT
practice. Teachers realized that the intention of T&LICT was the emphasis on independent
and self-directed modes of learning, but such awareness was not translated into the action
because the extent of their knowledge and skills only allowed them to employ T&LICT
strategies that further supported teacher control and teacher directed repertoire. In fact, the
teacher still assumed the directed role as transmitter of knowledge and acted as an expert
source.

This was a parallel finding with the ACOT (Dwyer et al., 1995) study. It was found that
while teachers were personally dedicated to the investigation of the potential of modern
technology, they were, however, held in check by the principles of 19th century instruction.

It is also possible that the educational software distributed by BTP and TSS could have
reinforced the implementation ‘mis-fit’. These learning materials employed modes such as
drill and practice, simulations, instructional games and electronic book. Such prescribed
pedagogies to support this learning software could have contributed to the protracted use of
the traditional modes of teaching within a technology-enabled environment.

10
6.0 Recommendations and Conclusion
In order for Sekolah Menengah Bestari to achieve the national objective, the T&LICT
scenario and conditions in the school needed to be more dynamic than its current mediocre
level.

Bajunid mentioned the need to “learn, unlearn and relearn in order to function effectively in
all the domains of life” (Bajunid, 2001, pp. 118-119). Studies (Pelgrum & Law, 2003) have
reported teachers’ lack of ICT knowledge and skills to be a major obstacle to implementation
and consequently pointed to the need for further training for teachers. Therefore the training
and re-training of teachers should encompass a broad spectrum of T&LICT strategies so that
teachers’ skills and knowledge of T&LICT are not limited to the teacher-directed, student-
centered repertoire.

It was observed that the educational software provided by BTP and TSS and its prescribed
pedagogies could have partially explained the continued use of the traditional modes of
teaching. More study needed to be conducted on the structuredness of the Smart School
courseware design and its implications for teaching and learning. At the same time, increased
flexibility in the courseware use that allow for more self-directed and independent learning
should be explored.

This was a case study of a Smart School’s implementation of T&LICT as a technology

innovation. As such, findings should not be generalized and extrapolated to other Smart
Schools in Sabah or the rest of Malaysia. Findings should serve to advise Sekolah Menengah
Bestari teachers of the need to increase their repertoire of T&LICT. Findings should inform
the policy makers of a detailed situation in a representative school. Future implementation
policy for the school should consider such factors as time constraints, examination-oriented
curriculum, teacher knowledge and skills, and the need for ICT facilities.

References

Arafah, Salleh. (2000). The Role of Computers in the Enhancement of Accounting Education.
Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of East Anglia, United Kingdom.

11
Bajunid, Ibrahim Ahmad. (2001). The Transformation of Malaysian Society through
Technological Advantage: ICT and Education in Malaysia. Journal of Southeast
Asian Education, Singapore:SEAMEO, Volume 2(Number 1 ).

Bernama. (2005, May 31, 2005). 10,000 Smart Schools By 2010 Retrieved March 29 2006,
from http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:-SG8_kis7Q4J:www3.bernama.com/
bernama/v3/news.php%3Fid
%3D137168+ETeMS+and+ict&hl=en&gl=my&ct=clnk&cd=4

Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms:
1890-1990 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. H. (1995). Teacher Beliefs and Practices Part I:
Patterns of Change The Evolution of Teachers’ Instructional Beliefs and Practices in
High-Access-to-Technology Classrooms First-Fourth Year Findings. Retrieved
March 13, 2006, from http://164.83.2.51/ACOT%20reports/study1.pdf

Fox, R., & Henri, J. (2005). Understanding Teacher Mindsets: IT and Change in Hong Kong
Schools. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 161-169.

Handal, B. (2003). Teacher's Instructional Beliefs about Integrating Educational Technology

[Electronic Version] from
http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/Vol7_No1/Commentary/ Teachers_
ins_beliefs.htm

Hannafin, R. D., & Savenye, W. C. (1993). Technology in the classroom: The teachers' new
role and resistance to it. Educational Technology, 33(6), 26-31.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2001). Pemantauan Kolaboratif Pelaksanaan Projek

Rintis Sekolah Bestari 2001. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Sekolah-Sekolah

Looi, C. Y. (2002). Smart Schools: Factors Associated with the use of Computer Aided
Instruction in Science Subjects. University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis : An Expanded

Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pelgrum, W. J., & Law, N. (2003). ICT in Education Around the World : Trends, Problems
and Prospects [Electronic Version], UNESCO Paris: International Institute for
Educational Planning. Retrieved March 13, 2006 from
www.educa.ch/files/13858/136281e.pdf.

Perkins, D. (1992). Smart Schools Better Thinking and Learning for Every Child. New York:
The Free Press.

Roblyer, M. D. (Ed.). (2002). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (3rd ed.).

Rusimi, Ku Ahmad & Syed Putra, Syed Ali. (2004). Integrating Technology into teaching
and learning. Concepts and Applications: A Malaysian Perspective. Institut
Aminuddin Baki. Paper presented at SEAMEO-UNESCO Education Congress &

12
 Expo, May 27 – 29, Bangkok, Thailand. Last retrieved 25 April 2007 from
http://www.iabu.moe.gov.my/IABUTARA/rusmini/public/Intergrating%20ICT2.doc

Smart School Project Team. (1997). Smart School Conceptual Blueprint. Kuala Lumpur:
Government of Malaysia.

Ting, K. C. (1998). Attitudes of Teachers Towards Information Technology in Education in

Miri. Unpublished Masters dissertation, University Malaysia Sarawak.

Woo, T. K. (2003). The Adoption, Diffusion and Use of Computer Technology in Instruction
in Pilot Smart Schools: A Case Study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University
of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.

Yin, R. K. (Ed.). (2002). Case study research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

13