Multi-Purpose Teaching Implements
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsis.V1.I2.99Keywords:
Classroom Organization, Educational Technology, Flexible Learning Environment, Instructional Facility, Multi-Purpose Teaching Implements, Product Development, Smart TV, UsabilityAbstract
This study developed and evaluated the acceptability of Multi-purpose Teaching Implements designed to integrate classroom organization, instructional presentation, storage, mobility, and multimedia functions within a single movable structure. Guided by learning and instructional design principles and an input-process-output approach, the study employed a project development approach and quantitative research design. The prototype incorporated detachable sliding whiteboards, storage compartments, an extendable working table, caster wheels, and a motorized Smart TV lift. A researcher-made, expert-validated questionnaire using a four-point Likert-type scale was administered to 40 purposively selected respondents consisting of teachers, Junior High School learners, and Senior High School learners from Malasila National Vocational and Technological High School. Frequency count and mean were used to analyze the data. Findings showed that the prototype was rated Highly Acceptable in terms of design, with an overall mean of 3.96; materials used, with 3.92; and usability, with 3.94. Respondents considered the implement useful for classroom organization, collaborative activities, multimedia presentations, storage, mobility, and additional workspace. However, limitations were identified regarding the height of the whiteboard frame, limited storage, structural weight and aesthetics, placement of components, television security, hinge mechanism, and lifting arrangement. Recommended improvements included adjusting the whiteboard height, increasing storage, using lighter and more durable materials, improving component placement and locking mechanisms, and refining the lifting system. The study supports SDG 4: Quality Education through flexible and technology-supported classroom resources and SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure through the development of an integrated instructional product. Its sustainability contribution is primarily educational, technological, and institutional by promoting adaptable learning spaces, purposeful technology integration, and more efficient use of classroom resources.
References
Andrade, C. (2021). The inconvenient truth about convenience and purposive samples. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 43(1), 86–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620977000 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620977000
Çeken, B., & Taşkın, N. (2022). Multimedia learning principles in different learning environments: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 9, Article 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00200-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00200-2
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us2.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/research-design/book270550
Fullerton, S., & Nicholls, C. D. (2026). Engaging the disengaged: Investigating the built environment in a secondary FlexiSpace. Learning Environments Research, 29, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-026-09571-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-026-09571-6
Kühl, T., & Wohninsland, P. (2022). Learning with the interactive whiteboard in the classroom: Its impact on vocabulary acquisition, motivation and the role of foreign language anxiety. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 10387–10404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11004-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11004-9
Madadizadeh, F., & Bahariniya, S. (2023). Tutorial on how to calculating content validity of scales in medical research. Perioperative Care and Operating Room Management, 31, 100315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcorm.2023.100315 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcorm.2023.100315
Makaremi, N., Yildirim, S., Morgan, G. T., Touchie, M. F., Jakubiec, J. A., & Robinson, J. B. (2024). Impact of classroom environment on student wellbeing in higher education: Review and future directions. Building and Environment, 265, 111958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2024.111958 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2024.111958
McDonald, J. K. (2024). Using theory as a learning and instructional design professional. In J. K. McDonald & R. E. West (Eds.), Design for learning: Principles, processes, and praxis. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/id/future_views_of_theory_in_learning_and_instructional_design
Morris, J. E., & Imms, W. (2025). Flexible furniture to support inclusive education: Developing learner agency and engagement in primary school. Learning Environments Research, 28(2), 223–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09522-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09522-z
Philippine Health Research Ethics Board. (2022). National ethical guidelines for research involving human participants 2022. Philippine Council for Health Research and Development. https://www.pchrd.dost.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/2022-NEGRIHP_Official-Gazatte_Ver-5-1.pdf
Sathish, S., & Lau, S.-K. (2026). Spatial flexibility and 21st-century education: A review-informed synthesis of learning-oriented classroom design attributes. Educational Research Review, 52, 100820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100820 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100820
Taufique, K. M. R., Sabbir, M. M., & Rabbanee, F. K. (2026). A guide to key decision criteria for Likert-scale use in survey research. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 45(5), 493–508. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.70032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.70032
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501 DOI: https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2025). The Sustainable Development Goals report 2025. United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2025/
Valverde-Berrocoso, J., Acevedo-Borrega, J., & Cerezo-Pizarro, M. (2022). Educational technology and student performance: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 7, 916502. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.916502 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.916502
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Angel Grace Arciaga Datulayta, Joel Vocales Misanes, PhD (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License. This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the journal, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
