Faculty Teaching Competence - Revised Paper - 100647

PERCEPTION AND PREFERENCES OF ESSU GUIUAN HOSPITALITY
MANAGEMENT STUDENTS TOWARDS WORKING

IN THE HOTEL INDUSTRY
An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the

College of Hospitality Management
Eastern Samar State University
Guiuan Campus
Guiuan Eastern Samar
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management
By:
LAUZON,ANCEL M.
CADAYONG, CRISTEL C.
DESOLOC, ANNALIZA B.
DAGANIO, ENGRACIA S.
MAGSAYO, BARTON A.
APPROVAL SHEET
This thesis entitled HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT TEACHING COMPETENCE

AND STUDENTS’ ENGAGEMENT TO FLEXIBLE LEARNNG prepared and submitted
by __________________, _______________________, ________________________,
_________________________, _______________________ in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the degree Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management is hereby
accepted and approved with a GRADE of ___________.
JORDAN M. CABAGUING
Research Adviser
PANEL OF EVALUATORS
___________________________ _____________________________
Member Member
__________________________ _____________________________
Member Member
Accepted and approved in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management.
CECILIA G. LAGRAMADA, PhD

College Dean
ABSTRACT
The main objective of the study was to examine the relationship between faculty
teaching competence to students’ engagement in flexible learning. A descriptive
correlation research design was employed in the study. It was conducted in Eastern
Samar State University Guiuan Campus during the first semester, A.Y. 2021-2022. A
survey questionnaire with two (2) parts was the main tool in gathering for the data. Using
the simple random sampling, a total of 60 Hospitality Management students participated
on the study. Frequency counts, percentages, weighted mean was used in analyzing for
the data. While Pearson’s correlation in testing for the hypothesis of the study.
The study revealed that content knowledge and pedagogically skills are highly
perceived as an indicator of instructors’ competence in teaching. Moreover, it is
important to note the significance of applying different methods of teaching in the
conduct of instructions. There is a need to improve the way instructor’s breakdown the
subject matter. However, students are more engage in their test/quizzes as well as to
the different activities and exercises they find to have value to them. But there is a need
to consider on the level of enthusiasm of the students towards every class/course. Also,
on how they will be more engaged in the aspect of their cognitive especially on the area
of concentrating during class. Substantial evidence was postulated from the findings that
faculty competence in terms of content knowledge has a significant relationship to
students’ engagement to flexible learning along with skills, emotional, cognitive and
performance. However, only emotional aspect has a relation to faculty teaching
competence in terms of pedagogical skills.

Thus, faculty members may consider of applying different teaching methods in
the conduct of their instructors to enhance the level of students’ engagement to their
course. Also, of enhancing their competence through mastery of the content knowledge.
Action research maybe conducted to understand students learning behavior for faculty
members to devise plan or activities how they can enliven students’ enthusiasm and
cognitive engagement.
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
Hospitality Management is a highly competitive sector, fast-changing and vital,
therefore the best and only exceptional professionals prosper in this field. For one to be
the best in hospitality management, one must engage to one of the best universities and
state colleges offering Hospitality Management (Ylagan et al., 2014). With this
pandemic, the educational system in the world has gradually change. Universities across
the world have begun to accentuate on online platforms to provide courses. Although
there are many advantages to delivering education online, but it can be difficult to keep
students interested in online courses. Online student engagement is getting much of
attention. An essential criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of any educational
course is student involvement because it serves as a gauge of the quality of learning.
This puts the focus of any online course squarely on student interaction (Inder, 2022). In
flexible learning, students have to receive their classes through digital platforms (Das
and Ramakrishna, 2020), such as a smartphone, tablet, or computer, which according to
Santos and Ali (2012), is applied to education in informal. (Ochoa, 2022).
One of the cornerstones of good online training according to Everett (2015) is
student engagement; thus, paying close attention to how it provides value to student
learning is critical and worth the time and effort to improve learning results. Australasian
Survey of Student Engagement Survey (2011) refers student engagement as
“generating conditions that stimulate student involvement”. Also, Burch et al. (2015)
point that educator has both the desire and requirement to facilitate student learning.
Personal attitudes, thoughts, activities, and interactions with others make up

engagement. According to Dixson (2015), student engagement is described as students
giving their learning their time, attention, effort, and, to some extent, feelings. It also
includes participating in situations and activities that are likely to result in high-quality
learning (Ball & Perry, 2011). A key factor in describing student engagement is the
degree to which students engage in active learning. Active learning is promoted by
students' involvement in the creation of new knowledge and understanding (Ball & Perry,
2011).
Considering student engagement as a multidimensional phenomenon and
construct, it is suggested as a black box (Hatch, 2012). Additionally, the complexity and
incomplete discovery of the properties of construct can be highlighted (Astin, 1984;
Bryson, 2014). Further, Bryson et al. (2010) suggest student engagement as actions
taken by institution in ‘engaging students’ and the actions carried by students while
learning in ‘students engaging’. ‘Engaging student’ and ‘students engaging’ are indicated
as process and outcome, respectively. Kahu and Nelson (2018) suggest the exploration
of student engagement in different contexts.
Faculty motivation from a student’s perspective is sometimes referred to as
teaching presence (Eom et al., 2006; Otter et al., 2013; Sun et al., 2008). At a basic
level, it has to do with the degree to which the instructor is perceived as actively
coordinating and facilitating learning. In poorly implemented courses or where the
student-instructor interaction is less apparent, students feel they do more than the
instructors in the educational process (Otter et al., 2013). While online courses are
becoming more common, administrators, staff, teachers, and students all have different
ideas about operating (McGee, Windes, & Torres, 2017). Teaching in online and mixed
environments necessitates a different set of abilities than traditional teaching (Pulham &
Graham, 2018). The faculty who has previously taught in traditional face-to-face
classrooms suddenly find themselves in a completely different situation when teaching
online. They are discovering that shifting face-to-face classes to the Internet is not as
simple as they thought. The faculty cannot be assumed to know intuitively how to
develop and deliver excellent online classes since online teaching necessitates
specialized skills and competencies (Schmidt, Tschida, & Hodge, 2016).
Effective online teachers assist, connect, lead, and collaborate with students to
achieve quality indicators such as student success, student progress over time, and
student application of knowledge to a professional position (Frazer, Sullivan,
Weatherspoon, & Hussey, 2017).
It is believed that student engagement and teaching competence contribute to
the success of flexible learning. Learning process is becoming more accessible as a
result of online learning. With the advancement of online learning, competent teachers
will have more opportunities to support student engagement in learning. As a result, this
becomes a sustainable tool for assisting students in engaging in learning (Clarin &
Baluyos, 2021). Moreover, majority of prior studies have attempted to investigate
student’s satisfaction, or desire to use online learning while fewer studies have explored
the factors leading to student engagement.
Thus, this research is conducted to determine the competence of faculty teaching
towards students’ engagement to flexible learning, to determine if similar result with that
of the present literature will be concluded, and to contribute to the literatures regarding
students’ engagement in flexible learning, considering the teaching competence of the
faculty member.
Objectives of the study
The main objective of the study was to examine the relationship between faculty
teaching competence to students’ engagement in flexible learning. Specifically, it seeks
to attain the following:
1. To determine respondents’ perception towards faculty competence in terms of:
1.1. content knowledge, and
1.2 pedagogical skill.
2. To identify the level of respondents’ engagement to flexible learning along with
the following indicators:
2.1. skills engagement,
2.2. emotional engagement;
2.3. cognitive engagement; and
2.4. performance engagement.
3. To distinguish if relationship exists between perception towards faculty
competence and engagement to flexible learning.
Significance of the study
This study is about hospitality management faculty teaching competence and
students’ engagement to flexible learning. The findings of the study are beneficial to the
following:
To the teaching competency - The findings will give positive effect on students’
academic developments and skills and help teacher to improve teaching techniques.
To the Faculty members. The findings of this research will provide a significant
information to how they can improve their teaching competence for students to be more
engage in the flexible learning. Also, will enhance rapport between the faculty and
students.
To the Students. The findings will give positive effect on students’ academic
development and their skills, emotional, cognitive, and performance engagement for
holistic development.
To the University. This will be an avenue for the top management to plan for
program and activities that can enhance faculty members teaching competence.
To the future researchers. The findings of the study will help the future
researchers to have a good source, accurate and useful information that they can be
used for future discussion and references.
Scope and Delimitation of the Study
This study was conducted at Eastern Samar State University in Guiuan. This
research focused on examining the relationship between faculty teaching Competence
to Students Engagement in Flexible Learning. This will be conducted from October 2022
to December 2022 with the students as the respondents. In measuring for the teaching
competence of the faculty members the variables to be measured is focused only to the
content knowledge and pedagogical skills. However, for students’ engagement the
variables to be measured is delimited to skills, emotional, cognitive, and performance.

Definition of Terms
The following variables are defined conceptually and operationally to shade more
understanding on the present study conducted.
Cognitive Engagement. Students’ cognitive engagement involves the students
to think during academic task, they must have motivated to improve their ability in
learning and also, they have to participate and active in the classroom Sesmiyanti
(2018). It is defined similarly in this study.
Content Knowledge. Defined as the body of understanding, knowledge, skills,
and dispositions that a teacher needs to perform effectively in a given teaching situation
(Wilson, Shulman, & Richert, 1987). In this study, it is defined as the ability of the faculty
members to deliver his/her lesson with mastery and competency.
Emotional Engagement. Defined as behavior or students towards learning such
as persistence, effort, attention) and attitudes including motivation, positive learning
values, enthusiasm, interest, and pride in success (Akey , 2006). It is defined similarly in
this study.
Faculty Competence. The combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes, values,
and personal, characteristics, enabling the teacher to act professionally and
appropriately. It is defined similarly in this study.

Flexible Learning It is a set of educational philosophies and systems, concerned
with providing learners with increased choice, convenience, and personalization to suit
the learner. Flexible learning provides learners with choices about where, when, and
how learning occurs Shurville et al. (2008). It is defined in this study, as the method used
by the faculty members in the new way of instruction delivery.
Pedagogical Skill. It is a reflexive concept in which reading and writing (through
a knowledge-transforming model) about pedagogical content knowledge is the essential
means through which the teacher's pedagogical reasoning develops (Maclellan, Effie,
2008). It is defined in this study as to the methodological teaching competence,
classroom management, and problem-solving.
Performance Engagement. Performance engagement points towards the
student’s efforts in getting good grades and performing well on assignments. In this
study it is defined as to the performance provided by the students to the different
performance tasks given by the faculty members.
Skills engagement. The ability to construct an argument, present an idea and
provide background information of something and engages in performance of literary. It
is defined in this study as to the obtained skills from the different major subjects taken in
every semester.
Chapter II
REVIEW RELATED OF LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This portion presents the literature and studies reviewed by the researchers to
have an in-depth discussion of the different variables to be measured in this study.
Related Literature
One of the factors that has been identified that could be key in transforming
students’ approach to their studies is student engagement. The concept of student
engagement can be traced back to 1930s where Student engagement is presented as
time spent on work and effect on learning by Ralph Tyler (Axelson & Flick, 2011). Earlier
studies focused on ‘Student Departure Theory’ (Tinto, 1975), ‘Quality of Student’s
efforts’ (Pace, 1980), ‘Student Involvement Theory’ (Astin, 1984). Thus, engaged
students seek out activities, inside and outside the classroom, that lead to success or
learning. Student engagement can improve students’ academic performance, promote
school attendance, and inhibit risky youth behaviors (Al-Alwan, 2014; Weiss and Garcia
2012).
Past research has studied engagement as a multidimensional construct
consisting of three main subtypes: behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement;
each of which have their own distinct markers (Appleton et al., 2006; Jimerson et al.,
2003; Ladd & Dinella, 2009; Sinclair, Christenson, Lehr, & Anderson, 2003). Some of the
markers of behavioral engagement include class participation (Chapman, 2003;
Jimerson et al., 2003) and exertion of effort on task (Skinner et al., 2008); whereas those
of cognitive engagement consist of self-regulation and use of learning strategies
(Chapman, 2003; Fredricks et al., 2004).
Fredrick, Blumenfeld, and Paris (2004), emotional engagement refers to the
feelings, interests, and attitudes that students have toward learning and school.
Emotionally engaged students display curiosity, a desire to know more and positive
emotional responses to learning and school. Existing literature on student engagement
point to the fact that even though it is hypothesized to be one of the strongest factors
affecting achievement, emotional engagement is the least frequently studied form of
engagement in motivation research (Wormington, Corpus, & Anderson, 2011; Martin &
Dowson, 2009; Sagayadevan & Jeyaraj, 2012; Fredricks et al., 2004). When students
find course interesting and gain the ability to apply it to their own lives (Handelsmann et
al., 2005; Dixson, 2015), then they feel more emotionally engaged with the course.
Engaging students emotionally brings in more effort, makes the courses more interesting
to students and increase the desire to learn (Dixson, 2015). Moreover, the assignment
appears to be more engaging and unique to students (Purinton & Burke, 2019). Positive
emotions stimulate learning and enhance cognition, attention and lead to action
(Williams et al., 2013); and, instructors can cultivate emotional engagement among
students (Black & Allen, 2018).
Skills engagement as a construct for student engagement focuses on the efforts
put in by student during the course. It refers to making efforts regularly to study, reading
the course material, making class notes, organizing the content of course, listening and
reading carefully, taking notes, making presentations and attending video sessions
(Dixson, 2015). Handelsman et al. (2005) suggest skills engagement as what students
“do”, and include reading course material, and making efforts to learn. It gets reflected in
questions raised in class, receiving of tutor lectures and attendance in supplemental
review sessions. Subsequently, students prefer to earn their degree and thus,
engagement tends to hold positive association with time taken to complete the degree.
Greater the efforts put in by student in the course, greater would-be retention and
achievement.
Cognitive Engagement considers how students approach learning and how their
experiences lead to learning (Biggs 1987). It refers to how student interpret their
environment and their own selves (Corno & Mandinach, 1983); integration of student
motivation and strategies towards learning course objectives (Richardson & Newby,
2006). Cognitive engagement indicates behavioral perspective which refer to student’s
response to self-regulation and effective use of deep learning strategies (Fredricks et al.,
2004; Park & Yun, 2017). Further, taking more responsibility for learning (Richardson &
Newby, 2006), extending investment in learning and active participation require cognitive
interpretations (Meyer, 2014). Therefore, Cognitive engagement may encourage greater
student engagement across all dimensions of learning process.
Performance engagement points towards the student’s efforts in getting good
grades and performing well on assignments. Student’s desire and goal to achieve
success in the course reflects the participation engagement (Dixson, 2015; Handelsman
et al., 2005). Participation involves all the suspense, excitement, opportunity of earning
grades and being successful in course. Higher levels of participation engagement
motivate students to earn good grades (Dixson, 2015; Hofer, 2004; Rocca, 2010).
Subsequently, it indicates towards the student’s desire to perform well and achieve
successful completion of course.
Talking about students’ engagement in online learning, faculty members play a
decisive role in pivoting the growth and the direction of education. They are the most
important cog in the educational machine and are highly instrumental to the success of
any educational program embarked upon by any government. This is because apart
from being at the implementation level of any educational policy, the realization of these
programs also depends greatly on teachers’ dedication and commitment to their work
(Adeniji, 2014). Teacher quality is widely thought of as essential determinants of
academic performance, yet there is little agreement as to what specific characteristics
make a good teacher (Hanushek & Rivkin, 2016). With their relevant behavioral traits
have been recognized as the hearth and most vital resource in the educational system.
Teachers interpret the aims and goals of education and ensure that the students are
educated in line with them. Without teachers with relevant competence, educational
facilities cannot be used to facilitate academic performance of students (Fehintola, 2014)
Faculty abilities can have a substantial impact on student performance because
a competent faculty can manage the classroom, employ a variety of instructional
materials, assure instructional efficacy, adopt appropriate pedagogies, and use effective
communication for teaching and learning, all of which are necessary for student
achievement. According to Adodo (2014), it consists of subject topic knowledge,
pedagogical abilities of the teacher, classroom communication skills, and competent
appraisal of instructional objectives. Subject content knowledge is the most recent
knowledge and mastery in the teacher's subject area of competence. One of the most
significant characteristics of a teacher is mastery of relevant knowledge (Lee & Luft,
2008). Teachers utilize pedagogical skills to teach students, and these abilities allow
students to learn knowledge and skills.
One of the most significant characteristics of faculty competence is subject
mastery (Ebiringa, 2012). Faculty content/subject matter competency was characterized
by Omoogun (2009) and Onuoha (2010) as extensive, up-to-date understanding of the
faculty's subject area. It is important to emphasize that a faculty member should be
informed about his or her subject matter, as well as familiar with the beliefs and concepts
that underpin it. According to Gaji (2014), professors with greater topic knowledge
produced better students than those with shallow subject knowledge. As a result, a
competent faculty member is required to have rudimental knowledge and abilities in the
subject, as well as the ability to transmit these knowledge and skills. They should also be
able to make decisions and organize the subject matter within the context of societal
developments (Omoogun, 2009). According to Offorma and Ogah (2013), effective
teaching necessitates that the faculty have a thorough understanding of all that the
students must know, as well as the capacity to adapt material, method, and sequencing,
as well as the tempo of his work, to the unique requirements of the students. They were
adamant that a teacher of a specific subject required specific skills and competencies
that are unique to that subject.
Faculty members' pedagogical skills refer to the instructional methods and
activities they employ. Designed to allow students to obtain specific knowledge and skills
in several academic areas Several strategies are utilized during instruction to instill and
provide students with insights Ololube (2005). Teaching methods, according to Gutek in
Ebiringa (2012), are the means or procedures that teachers employ to assist students in
having an experience, learning a skill or process, or obtaining knowledge. Furthermore,
methodological competences can be classified based on their functional elements:
adapting to effective work techniques; analyzing the task to be completed; starting the
process; performing the task; and analyzing one's processes.
Different pedagogies could be employed in for lesson presentations. Classroom
discussion, discovery/inquiry, lecture/exposition, demonstration, collaboration, critical
thinking, problem solving approaches, role play method, individual/group project,
simulation and games, instructional scaffolding, and excursions are examples of such
methods. To attain a specific goal, the discussion/question and answer technique
employs the art of finding information and inspiring thinking and elaboration at all levels
of human reasoning. The demonstration technique of teaching necessitates exhibiting
the instructional setting along with an audio-visual description of an idea, procedure, or

product. It entails demonstrating, doing, and telling students about the point of attention,
as well as completing an activity so that students can witness how things are done in
order to assist prepare them to transfer theory to practical application (Ibid,2005).
According to Sonia (2015), most research distinguish between declarative
("knowing that") and procedural knowledge ("knowing how"). This approach is relevant
because it focuses on understanding how information is related to behavior, or, more
specifically, the quality of teaching performance. An inquiry into teachers' knowledge as
"learning experts" entails understanding how this information functions in the teaching-
learning process; especially, how teachers utilize their knowledge in making decisions,
such as lesson planning or making on-the-spot judgments in the classroom.
Related Studies
A good grasp of students’ involvement in the compulsory education sector in
face-to-face settings, the same cannot be said for online and remote learning
environments. Louwrens, & Hartnett (2015) investigated students’ involvement in an
online middle school in New Zealand distance education context. According to the
findings, students tended to engage behaviorally (that is, do what was expected of them)
in all required activities. The giving and receiving of feedback, the interest, and the
relevance that specific exercises provided for learners all demonstrated cognitive
engagement (i.e., students' personal investment in their learning). The activities' design
and facilitation, as well as the continual creation of a learning community in which
students felt comfortable to contribute, aroused emotional engagement.
However, an instrument was created based on important attributes and skills
required for proficiency in online teaching in three areas: online teaching experience and
attitudes, learning management system competency, and access to technology (Rhode,

Richter, & Miller, 2017). A paper set out to discover what activities and interaction
channels might be expected to lead to more highly engaged students. The findings show
that there is no single activity that can automatically increase student engagement in
online classes. However, the findings imply that various communication channels may
be linked to increased engagement. Both student-student and instructor-student
communication are linked to higher overall student involvement with the course (Gray &
Diloreto, 2016).
Amie-Ogan & Omunakwe (2020) stressed from their findings that teachers
subject content knowledge and pedagogical skills influence students’ academic
performance. From the findings, it was recommended that teachers should be
encouraged to go for both long term and short-term training to boost their quality in
subject content knowledge teaching skills. On the other hand, government should also
ensure adequate selection of competent and qualified teachers to teach in all senior
secondary schools. Most experts, such as Nwafor and Ebiringa (2011); Udeinya (2008);
and Omoogun (2009), have stated that the traditional teacher-centered approach, which
is the lecture or expository way of teaching, dominates most classroom instructional
delivery in most areas. According to the researchers, it does not allow students to
generate their own ideas and test theories. As a result, it was determined that this
method of instruction and learning inhibits creativity and does little to promote intrinsic
ability for problem solving and decision making (Ajibola, 2008).
According to Jadamas (2014), teachers' in-depth pedagogical expertise allows
them to use a variety of approaches to present a lesson. Their complete mastery of the
material gives them confidence in selecting the finest teaching tactics and skills for
student understanding. Teachers must also exhibit a thorough mastery of the content of
their curricular topics. They should be able to communicate this subject to students using
approaches suited for the learners' age and skills (Igbokwe & Eze, 2009). In a similar
vein, Amie-Ogan and Omunakwe (2020) discovered in an empirical study that
pedagogical skills influence students' academic performance to a large extent, and that
there is no significant difference between the mean responses of male and female
students on the extent to which teachers' pedagogical skills influence students'
performance in public senior secondary schools in Port Harcourt Metropolis, Rivers
State. This was translated to mean that the teacher's pedagogical skills improve
students' academic performance.
Existing research on student engagement indicates that, although being
hypothesized to be one of the most powerful factors influencing accomplishment,
emotional engagement is the least frequently investigated kind of engagement in
motivation research (Wormington, Corpus, & Anderson, 2011). Among the researchers
in this field, Mo and Singh (2008) did a study that found that emotional engagement has
a substantial overall effect on academic achievement. Rodriguez and Boutakidis (2013)
discovered that emotional engagement was a significant positive predictor of GPA for
second generation (p =.003) and third generation (p =.029) students, but not for first
generation students (p =.641). While Mauro (2014) conducted a qualitative research
survey in the United States, S. Gray and DiLoreto (2016) discovered a substantial
association between student happiness and perceived learning (r =.85,.01) among
students who received encouragement and empathy from teachers.
Sagayadevan and Jeyaraj (2012) discovered that emotional engagement
significantly predicted perceived learning, like Kamla- Raj and Ugur (2015), who used a
correlational design in their study with 578 students and discovered that academic
performance had a positive relationship with emotional engagement (r =.19). Mai and
Alhoot (2016) conducted a study in which the path analysis results revealed a significant
positive relationship between the students' engagement and their achievement in
science (=11.491; CR= 4.196; P =.000.05), and Afzal and Afzal (2015) discovered that
the satisfaction level of public school students was high but their achievement scores
were low, whereas the satisfaction level of private school students was low but their
achievement scores were high. Kpolovie, Joe, and Okoto (2014) used the multiple
prediction design in a study in Nigeria to determine the size of the link and prediction that
students' interest in learning and attitude toward school had on their academic
achievement, both individually and collectively. The findings demonstrated that students'
attitudes toward school and motivation in learning significantly predicted their academic
achievement, accounting for up to 21.6% of the variance in the criterion.
On the other hand, Clarin & Baluyos (2021) concluded that students' level of
engagement in terms of community support and the effectiveness of online distance
learning, as well as teachers' teaching competence, influenced the effectiveness of
online distance learning implementation in terms of active learning, prompt feedback,
high expectations, and diverse talents and ways of learning. The efficiency of online
distant learning implementation is highly influenced by teachers' instructional
competency.
Theoretical Framework
This study is anchored to Self-System Model of Motivational Development
(SSMMD). This theory provides a relevant framework in examining the pathway linking
teacher student interaction, engagement, and academic outcomes (Skinner et al., 2008).
According to this model, features of a particular context (e.g., characteristics of teacher-
student interaction) are posited to influence the three basic psychological needs of
individuals (i.e., need for competence, autonomy, and relatedness) (Ryan & Deci, 2000;
Skinner et al., 2008). The extent to which these needs are fulfilled is in turn expected to
predict the level of engagement of individuals, which then predicts their academic
outcomes (Skinner et al., 2008).

The SSMMD is mainly a modelization of the self-determination theory. According
to the SDT, humans have three basic psychological needs: feeling competent,
autonomous and in relationship. Based on this premise, the SSMMD posits that
opportunities to experience autonomy, competence and relatedness are essential for
optimal student engagement. When the social context (e.g., teacher and peers) is
supportive, the basic needs are fulfilled, so the level of engagement in learning activities
ultimately increases (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Skinner et al., 2008). Conversely, when
the social context is not nurturing, the basic needs are not fulfilled, and the level of
engagement is undermined. Students’ need for competence is satisfied when the
environment provides structure; their need for autonomy is fulfilled when the
environment leaves them responsibilities and choices; and their need for relatedness is
fulfilled when they experience concern and affection from the environment. So, this
model does not posit crossed associations between dimensions of social context and
self-perceptions variables (Connell & Wellborn, 1991). Within this theoretical framework,
the most proximal predictors of student engagement are perceived autonomy,
competence and relatedness (Skinner & Belmont, 1993; Skinner et al., 2008) and each
self-perception is considered as having a unique and direct effect on engagement
variables (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Furrer & Skinner, 2003). In addition, the self-
perceptions also mediate the relationships between the social context and student
engagement (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Skinner et al., 2008). In the following sections,
we will review studies that already tested some of the relationships proposed in the
SSMMD.
However, a longitudinal study by Roeser, Midgley and Urban (1996) showed that,
contrary to SSMMD’s theoretical assumptions, provision of structure was related to
students’ perceived relatedness. In this case, there was no correspondence between the
dimension of the social context and the fulfillment of a basic psychological need.
Moreover, another study found that involvement was associated with perceived
relatedness, but also with perceived competence and autonomy (Taylor & Ntoumanis,
2007). This result suggests that crossed relationships between dimensions of the social
context and self-perception can also be observed when all the dimensions are
considered at the same time. In addition, structure and autonomy support were found to
be highly correlated, and associated with self-regulation strategies, but when these two
dimensions were both included in a regression to predict self-regulation strategies, the
effect of autonomy support on self-regulation disappeared (Sierens et al., 2009). As few
studies have investigated the concurrent impact of the three dimensions of the social
context on engagement, this last result suggests that the effect of a dimension of the
social context found in some studies reviewed above could be better explained by
another dimension of the social context.
According to the SSMMD, self-perceptions are durable personal resources that
students construct over time in response to their interactions with the social
environment; they are organized around the three basic psychological needs, i.e.,
autonomy, competence, and relatedness. These self-perceptions are considered as the
most proximal predictors of student engagement, as well as the mediators of the
relationships between the social context and student engagement (Connell & Wellborn,
1991; Skinner & Belmont, 1993; Skinner et al., 2008). Perceived autonomy refers to the
individual’s need for action that emanates from oneself, rather than being controlled by
others. According to SDT, it is expressed by feeling of self-determination and personal
interest when the student undertakes an activity (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
In addition, studies have shown that perceived competence was a meditator of
the relationship between social context and student engagement (Connell, Halpern-
Felsher, Clifford, Crichlow & Usinger 1995; Skinner et al., 2008). Perceived relatedness
is also a mediator of the relationship between social context and student engagement
(Connell et al., 1995; Skinner et al., 2008).
Conceptual Framework
Figure 1 shows how the study will measure the teaching competence of the
faculty members and students’ engagement to flexible learning. The variables content-
knowledge and pedagogical skills will be used as indicators in measuring the teaching
competence of the faculty members. However, skills, emotional, cognitive, and
performance engagement are the indicators for measuring students’ engagement to
flexible learning. All the mentioned variables and indicators will be correlated to
determine the degree of its association.
The independent variables are the teaching competence of the faculty members
while, the dependent variable is the engagement of the students to flexible learning. As
such, the findings of the study will serve as a baseline information in coming up plans
and programs that the university can devise to improve the teaching competence of the
faculty members which is a great tool for the university to attain its goals of providing
quality education to its stakeholders.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable
Faculty Teaching Students Engagement

Competence
 Skills engagement
 Content knowledge
 Emotional
 Pedagogical skill engagement
 Cognitive
engagement
 Performance
engagement
Figure 1. Framework of the study

Hypothesis
Based on the study, the researcher constructed an overall hypothesis that:
1. There is no significant relationship between faculty teaching competence and
students’ engagement to flexible learning.

Chapter III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter is about the methodology that will use during the research process.
It includes the research design, locale of the study, respondents of the study, research
instrument, data gathering procedure, measurement of variables, analysis of data. This
is focused on the hospitality management faculty teaching competence and student
engagement to flexible learning. The study will be conducted at Eastern Samar state
university of Guiuan (ESSU) particularly to 2nd year and 3rd students taking up Bachelor
of science in hospitality management.
Research Design
In this study descriptive- correlational was used as the research design.
Descriptive correlational was used because it describes the hospitality management
instructor teaching competence and determining if significant relationship exists to
students’ engagement to flexible learning. Descriptive- correlational was employed in the
research to determine the association of the variables. The design allowed the collection
of data using questionnaires at a particular point in time from a sample of participants
from a target population. Descriptive design help in identifying the questions to be
answered by the respondents in the survey and directly getting primary data to
determine the status of the population concerning the identified variables (Mugenda &
Mugenda, 2009). A survey design describes people's responses to questions about a
phenomenon or situation with aim of understanding respondents’ perception from which
truism is constructed (KIM, 2009).
Locale of the Study
The study was conducted at Eastern Samar State University Guiuan campus,
with seven (7) colleges and 15 programs.
The university is located at Barangay Salug, Guiuan, Eastern Samar in a
commercial area along the highway across Guiuan Public Cemetery surrounded by
some residential places, hospitals, and stores. It is one kilometer away from the town
proper. It can be easily reached by public vehicles.
The university is managed by a male campus administrator and assisted by eight
college deans, and 15 program heads, and administrative staff.
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of the study were the Hospitality Management students of
ESSU Guiuan who are officially enrolled in the campus for the First Semester, A.Y.
2022-2023. The researchers used simple random sampling in determining the number of
respondents. According to Smith (2015) in simple random sampling, each member of

the population is equally likely to be included in the sample and every possible sample is
equally likely to be selected.
Research Instrument
The survey instrument that the researchers used was adopted from Amie Ogan
and Friday (2020); and Inder, (2021). The instrument is composed of two (2) parts. The
first part is all about the teaching competence of the faculty members considering its
content knowledge and pedagogical skills, having a total of 10 questions. While, the
second part measures students’ engagement to flexible learning having the skills
engagement, emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, and performance
engagement as the measuring variables. The instrument was slightly modified by the
researchers to suit to the local environment.
Data Gathering Procedure
Permission to conduct the study was secured from the office of the Dean of the
College of Hospitality Management of this campus. Upon giving the permission to
conduct the study, the respondents were requested to answer the questionnaire
personally handed to each of the researchers. They were given at least twenty (20)
minutes to answer the questionnaire. The direction on how to answer the survey will be
explained thoroughly by the researchers.
Upon the retrieval of the accomplished questionnaires, the data was tallied,
computer-processed and interpreted in preparation for the interpretation of the results
which was further discussed on the analysis of data section.
Measurement Variables
The first set of variables concerning the teaching competence of the faculty
members considering content knowledge and pedagogical skills. While the second
variable is the students’ engagement with skills engagement, emotional engagement,
cognitive engagement, and performance engagement as the measuring variables.
This study used the four (4) likert scale, 4 is the highest with a description as
Strongly agree, 3 as Agree, 2 as Slightly Disagree, and 1 as Disagree. All the
concerning variables to be measured will be using the same measurement.
Data Analysis
In analyzing the result of the study, the researchers employed simple frequency
counts, percentages, mean, and standard deviation in presenting the different variables
assessed.
To answer the hypotheses posed by this study, the researchers used the
Pearson’s correlation, as the most appropriate statistical tool.
The following interpretation will be used in the analysis of the data concerning
faculty teaching competence:
Indicators Scale Description Interpretation
3.26-4.00 4 Strongly Agree Highly Perceived
2.51-3.25 3 Agree Perceived
1.76-2.50 2 Disagree Not Perceived

1.00-1.75 1 Strongly Disagree Highly Not Perceived
For students’ engagement, the following indicators will be used in the analysis of
the results:
Indicators Scale Description Interpretation
3.26-4.00 4 Strongly Agree Highly Engage
2.51-3.25 3 Agree Engage
1.76-2.50 2 Disagree Not Engage
1.00-1.75 1 Strongly Disagree Highly Not Engaged
Chapter IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapters presents the findings of the study and the discussion of each as
well as its interpretation as a basis in making the conclusions and recommendations.
The presentation is presented chronologically based on the objectives of the study.
Faculty Teaching Competence. The tables below present the findings of the
perception of the students on the faculty teaching competence according to Content
Knowledge and Pedagogical Skills.
Content Knowledge. Table 1.0 shows the result of the faculty teaching
competence in terms of content knowledge.
Table 1.0
Faculty Teaching Competence in terms of Content Knowledge
Items Mean Interpretation

Mastery of the subject matter is one of the most 3.55 Highly Perceived
important aspects of teachers' competence.
A competent teacher should possess the ability to 3.22 Perceived
break down the subject matter.
Competent teachers allow their students to clearly 3.55 Highly Perceived
understand the content of what is taught.
Competent teachers are expected to possess the 3.30 Highly Perceived

rudimental knowledge.
Effective teaching demands that the teacher should 3.50 Highly Perceived
have a sound knowledge of all that the students
must know in and outside the school curriculum.
Overall Mean 3.42 Highly Perceived
Legend:
3.26 – 4.00 Highly Perceived
2.51 – 3.25 Perceived
1.76 – 2.50 Not Perceived
1.00 – 1.75 Highly Not Perceived
It can be glanced in table 1.0 that the items “Master of the subject matter is one
of the most important aspects of teachers’ competence” and Competent teachers allow
their students to clearly understand the content of what is taught” got the highest mean
rating of 3.55 which is interpreted as “Highly Perceived”. While the item “A competent
teacher should possess the ability to break down the subject matter” got the lowest
mean rating of 3.22 which is interpreted as “Perceived” in the qualitative description.
The overall mean rating of 3.42 is interpreted as “Highly Perceived” in the
qualitative description which means that faculty members content knowledge is highly
perceived by the students as an important component of their competence. It is further
denoted in the findings that master of the subject matter as well as giving students the
chance to clarify the content of the lessons as an important component in the content
knowledge of the faculty members. However, there is a need to improve the way they
breakdown the subject matter as being shown in the table of having the least mean
score rating.
One of the most significant characteristics of faculty competence as stipulated by
Ebiringa (2012) is subject mastery. Faculty content/subject matter competency was
characterized by Omoogun (2009) and Onuoha (2010) as extensive, up-to-date
understanding of the faculty's subject area. It is important to emphasize that a faculty
member should be informed about his or her subject matter, as well as familiar with the
beliefs and concepts that underpin it. According to Gaji (2014), professors with greater
topic knowledge produced better students than those with shallow subject knowledge.
As a result, a competent faculty member is required to have rudimental knowledge and
abilities in the subject, as well as the ability to transmit these knowledge and skills. They
should also be able to make decisions and organize the subject matter within the context
of societal developments (Omoogun, 2009).
Pedagogical Skills. Table 1.1 shows the result of the pedagogical skills of the
faculty members of the Hospitality Management.
Table 1.1
Faculty Teaching Competence in terms of Pedagogical Skills

The methods they apply in teaching are of 3.48 Highly Perceived
immense importance in determining their
competencies.
Methodological competencies could further be 3.38 Highly Perceived
characterized based on their functional elements.
Demonstration method which involves teaching by 3.42 Highly Perceived
displaying the instructional situation with an audio-
visual explanation of an idea, process, or product
influence academic performance of students.
Classroom instructional delivery in most subjects 3.28 Highly Perceived
are dominated with the traditional teacher-centered
approach.
The problem-solving form of instruction and 3.38 Highly Perceived
learning enhances creativity and fosters innate
abilities for problem solving and decision making.
Overall Mean 3.39 Highly Perceived
Legend:
3.26 – 4.00 Highly Perceived
2.51 – 3.25 Perceived
1.76 – 2.50 Moderately Perceived
1.00 – 1.75 Not Perceived
Looking to the different items in table 1.1 the item “The methods thy apply in the
teaching are of immense importance in determining their competencies” got the highest
mean score of 3.48 with qualitative interpretation of “Highly Perceived”. And the item
“Classroom instructional delivery in most subjects is dominated with the traditional
teacher-centered approach” got the lowest mean rating of 3.28 which is also interpreted
as “Highly Perceived”.
The overall mean rating score of 3.39 with a qualitative interpretation as “Highly
Perceived” indicates that faculty members competence in pedagogical skills is highly
perceived by the study specifically on the different methods they apply in the teaching
and learning. From this finding it is important to note, the importance of applying different
methods of teaching in the conduct of instructions.
The findings is supported by the conclusion made by Jadamas (2014) that
teachers' in-depth pedagogical expertise allows them to use a variety of approaches to
present a lesson. Their complete mastery of the material gives them confidence in
selecting the finest teaching tactics and skills for student understanding. Furthermore,
Amie-Ogan and Omunakwe (2020) discovered in an empirical study that pedagogical
skills influence students' academic performance to a large extent, and that there is no
significant difference between the mean responses of male and female students on the
extent to which teachers' pedagogical skills influence students' performance. This was
translated to mean that the teacher's pedagogical skills improve students' academic
performance.
According to Gutek in Ebiringa (2012) teaching methods are the means or
procedures that teachers employ to assist students in having an experience, learning a

skill or process, or obtaining knowledge. Furthermore, methodological competences can
be classified based on their functional elements: adapting to effective work techniques;
analyzing the task to be completed; starting the process; performing the task; and
analyzing one's processes.
Students Engagement to Flexible Learning. The number two (2) objective of
the study is to determine the level of students’ engagement to flexible learning.
The succeeding tables is the presentation of the result of the study starting from
skills, emotional, cognitive, and performance.
Skills. Table 2.0 present the result of the students’ engagement to flexible
learning in terms of skills.
Table 2.0
Students Engagement to Flexible Learning in terms of Skills

I feel intensified in working with my major subjects. 3.33 Highly Engaged
I put in my full efforts in my academic loads. 3.42 Highly Engaged
I devoted efforts and energy in accomplishing my 3.45 Highly Engaged

performance tasks.
I give my all to perform in any tasks given to me by 3.32 Highly Engaged

my professors both online and offline.
I work hard to complete the tasks. 3.55 Highly Engaged
Overall Mean 3.41 Highly Engaged

Legend:
3.26 – 4.00 Highly Engaged
2.51 – 3.25 Engaged
1.76 – 2.50 Not Engaged
1.00 – 1.75 Highly Not Engaged
It is shown in table 2.0 that the item “I work hard to compete the task” got the
highest mean score of 3.55 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged” in the qualitative
description. While item “I give my all to perform in any tasks given to me by my
professors both online and offline” obtained the lowest mean rating of 3.32 which is also
interpreted as “Highly Engaged”.
The overall mean rating of 3.41 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged” denote
that students are highly engaged in flexible learning in terms of skills. Students are
putting much effort in completing all the tasks given to them by their instructors and
professors. According to literatures, one of the factors that has been identified that could
be key in transforming students’ approach to their studies is student engagement. Those
engaged students seek out activities, inside and outside the classroom, that lead to
success or learning. Student engagement can improve students’ academic performance,
promote school attendance, and inhibit risky youth behaviors (Al-Alwan, 2014; Weiss
and Garcia 2012).
Emotional. Table 2.1 presents the findings of students’ engagement in flexible
learning in terms of emotional.
Table 2.1
Students Engagement to Flexible Learning in terms of Emotional

I have enthusiasm towards every class/ course. 3.15 Engaged
I Feel interested in learning. 3.45 Highly Engaged
I Feel proud on completing tasks and assignments. 3.57 Highly Engaged
I feel excited in attending all sessions/feel energetic 3.33 Highly Engaged

during class.
I Find assignments and tasks engaging. 3.28 Highly Engaged
Legend:
2.51 – 3.25 Engaged
The item “I feel proud on completing tasks and assignments” obtained the
highest mean rating of 3.57 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged”. And the item “I
have enthusiasm towards every class/course” got the lowest mean rating of 3.15 which
is interpreted as “Engaged”.
The overall mean score of 3.36 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged”
indicates that students are highly engaged in flexible learning in terms of emotional.
They are proud if they were able to accomplish all the tasks and assignment given to
them by their instructor and professors. Nonetheless, there is a need to consider on the
level of enthusiasm of the students towards every class/course. Faculty members may
consider in this aspect of looking ways how they can improve the enthusiasm of the
students towards their class/course.
The findings of the study were supported from the conclusions made Mo and
Singh (2008) when they found out that emotional engagement has a substantial overall
effect on academic achievement. Rodriguez and Boutakidis (2013) discovered the same
findings that emotional engagement was a significant positive predictor of GPA for
second generation and third generation students. Moreover, Sagayadevan and Jeyaraj
(2012) discovered that emotional engagement significantly predicted perceived learning,
like Kamla- Raj and Ugur (2015), who used a correlational design in their study and
discovered that academic performance had a positive relationship with emotional
engagement.
Cognitive. Table 2.2 shows the result of students’ engagement to flexible
learning in term of Cognitive.
Table 2.2
Students Engagement to Flexible Learning in terms of Cognitive

I feel focused during class. 3.30 Highly Engaged
I can easily absorb the ideas during class 3.22 Engaged
discussions.
I can concentrate well during class. 3.15 Engaged
I devote attention to discussion and activities. 3.17 Engaged
I find the course relevant to my life. 3.37 Highly Engaged
Overall Mean 3.24 Engaged

Legend:
2.51 – 3.25 Engaged
In table 2.2 it can be glanced that item “I find the course relevant to my life” got
the highest mean rating of 3.37 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged”. While the item
“I can concentrate well during my class” got the lowest mean score of 3.15 which is
interpreted as “Engaged”.
The overall mean score is 3.24 which is interpreted as “Engaged” directed a
need to consider how the students will be more engaged in this aspect of their cognitive
especially on the area of concentrating during class.
Accordingly, a good grasp of students’ involvement in the compulsory education
sector in face-to-face settings, the same cannot be said for online and remote learning
environments. Louwrens, & Hartnett (2015) investigated students’ involvement in an
online middle school in distance education context. According to the findings, students
tended to engage behaviorally (that is, do what was expected of them) in all required
activities. The giving and receiving of feedback, the interest, and the relevance that
specific exercises provided for learners all demonstrated cognitive engagement (i.e.,
students' personal investment in their learning). The activities' design and facilitation, as
well as the continual creation of a learning community in which students felt comfortable
to contribute, aroused emotional engagement.
Performance. Table 2.3 shows the result of the study on students’ engagement
in flexible learning in terms of performance. Performance is defined as to the
performance provided by the students to the different performance tasks given by the
faculty members. This the last indicator to be measured in relation to students’
engagement to flexible leaning.
Table 2.3
Students Engagement to Flexible Learning in terms of Performance

I’am doing well on the tests/quizzes. 3.35 Highly Engaged
I interact to our instructors/professors for a more 3.32 Highly Engaged
engaging activity.
I find the participation in class activities as 3.32 Highly Engaged
satisfactory.
The clarity about the core concepts has been 3.28 Highly Engaged
attained.
The exercises given in the class hold value to me. 3.35 Highly Engaged

Legend:
2.51 – 3.25 Engaged
Looking to table 2.3 both items “I’am doing well on the test/quizzes” and “The
exercises given in the class hold value to me” obtained the highest mean score of 3.35
which is interpreted as” Highly Engaged”. While the item “The clarity about the core
concepts has been attained” got the lowest mean of 3.28 which is interpreted as “Highly
Engaged.
The overall mean score of 3.35 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged” posits
that students are highly engaged to performance in the flexible learning. The more
engage they are in their test/quizzes as well as to different activities and exercises given
by the instructors and professors that they find has value to them.
Performance engagement points towards the student’s efforts in getting good
grades and performing well on assignments. Student’s desire and goal to achieve
success in the course reflects the participation engagement (Dixson, 2015; Handelsman
et al., 2005). Participation involves all the suspense, excitement, opportunity of earning
grades and being successful in course. Higher levels of participation engagement
motivate students to earn good grades (Dixson, 2015; Hofer, 2004; Rocca, 2010).
Subsequently, it indicates towards the student’s desire to perform well and achieve
successful completion of course.
Relationship between faculty competence and students’ engagement. Table
3.0 shows the Pearson’s correlation between faculty competence and students’
engagement.
Table 3.0
Person’s Correlation Between Faculty Competence and Students’ Engagement
Faculty Students’ r Interpretation p Interpretation
Competence Engagemen
t
Skills 0.66 Moderate 0.00 Highly
Content Knowledge Correlation Significant
Emotional 0.55 Moderate 0.00 Highly
Correlation Significant
Cognitive 0.49 Low 0.00 Highly

Performance 0.48 Low 0.00 Highly

Pedagogical Skills 0.21 Negligible 0.13 Not

Emotional 0.23 Negligible 0.05 Significant

Correlation
Cognitive 0.19 Negligible 0.14 Not

Performance 0.20 Negligible 0.12 Not

Note: N=60, r = Pearson Correlation *p >.05
Table 3.0 shows substantial evidence that faculty competence in terms of content
knowledge has a significant relationship to students’ engagement to flexible learning
considering the skills (r = 0.66, p>.05), emotional (r = 0.55, p>.05), cognitive (r = 0.49,
p>.05), and performance (r = 0.48, p>.05). However, on the aspect of pedagogical skills
of the faculty members, only emotional aspect of students’ engagement to flexible
learning is significant having the value of (r = 0.23, p≥.05).
This result indicates that faculty competence in term of content knowledge is
significantly related to students’ engagement in the flexible learning considering their
skills, emotional, cognitive, and performance. However, only to emotional engagement
thus pedagogical skills has a relationship.

Clarin & Baluyos (2021) concluded that students' level of engagement in terms of
community support and the effectiveness of online distance learning, as well as
teachers' teaching competence, influenced the effectiveness of online distance learning
implementation in terms of active learning, prompt feedback, high expectations, and
diverse talents and ways of learning. The efficiency of online distant learning
implementation is highly influenced by teachers' instructional competency.
Chapter V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions and
recommendations drawn from the results of the study.
Summary of Findings
This study aimed is to examine the relationship between faculty teaching
competence to students’ engagement in flexible learning. Specially, it seeks to attain the
following:
1. To determine respondents’ perception towards faculty competence in terms of:
1.1 content knowledge, and

1.2 pedagogical skill.
2. To identify the level of respondents’ engagement to flexible learning along with the
following indicators.
2.1 skill engagement,
2.2 emotional engagement
2.3 cognitive engagement, and
2.4 performance engagement
3. To distinguish if relationship exists between perception towards faculty competence
and engagement to flexible learning.
The study utilized the descriptive-correlational research design. This was
conducted at Eastern Samar State University Guiuan Campus with seven (7) colleges
and 15 programs. The university is located Barangay Salug, Guiuan, Eastern Samar in
commercial area along the highway across Guiuan Public Cemetery surrounded by
some residential places, hospitals, and stores. It is one kilometer away from the town
proper. It can be easily reached by vehicles. The university is managed by a male
campus administrator and assisted by eight college deans, and 15 programs heads, and
administrative staff. It used the simple random sampling to determine the number of
samples, there were a total of 60 students of the BSHM program of the campus who
participated on the study. One set of questionnaires was used in gathering for the data.
The first set concerning the teaching competence of the faculty members considering
content knowledge and pedagogical skills. While the second variable is the students’
engagement with skills engagement, emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, and
performance engagement as the measuring variables slightly modified to suit to the
current study. Upon the retrieval of the data, it was tallied, computer-processed and
interpreted using a statistical tool.

The result on the teaching competence of the faculty members in terms of
content was rated generally as “Highly Perceived”. The items “Master of the subject
matter is one of the most important aspects of teachers’ competence” and Competent
teachers allow their students to clearly understand the content of what is taught” got the
highest mean rating of 3.55 which is interpreted as “Highly Perceived”. While the item “A
competent teacher should possess the ability to break down the subject matter” got the
lowest mean rating of 3.22 which is interpreted as “Perceived” in the qualitative
description. For the pedagogical skills the item “The methods thy apply in the teaching
are of immense importance in determining their competencies” got the highest mean
score of 3.48 with qualitative interpretation of “Highly Perceived”. And the item
“Classroom instructional delivery in most subjects is dominated with the traditional
teacher-centered approach” got the lowest mean rating of 3.28 which is also interpreted
as “Highly Perceived”. The overall mean rating score of 3.39 with a qualitative
interpretation as “Highly Perceived”.
In terms of students’ engagement to flexible learning considering the skills; the
item “I work hard to compete the task” got the highest mean score of 3.55 which is
interpreted as “Highly Engaged”. While item “I give my all to perform in any tasks given
to me by my professors both online and offline” obtained the lowest mean rating of 3.32
which is also interpreted as “Highly Engaged”. The overall mean rating of 3.41 which is
interpreted as “Highly Engaged” denote that students are highly engaged in flexible
learning in terms of skills.
For emotional engagement the item “I feel proud on completing tasks and assignments”
obtained the highest mean rating of 3.57 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged”. And
the item “I have enthusiasm towards every class/course” got the lowest mean rating of
3.15 which is interpreted as “Engaged”. The overall mean score of 3.36 which is
interpreted as “Highly Engaged”. While for cognitive, the item “I find the course relevant
to my life” got the highest mean rating of 3.37 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged”.
While the item “I can concentrate well during my class” got the lowest mean score of
3.15 which is interpreted as “Engaged”. The overall mean score is 3.24 which is
interpreted as “Engaged”. The items “I’am doing well on the test/quizzes” and “The
exercises given in the class hold value to me” obtained the highest mean score of 3.35
which is interpreted as” Highly Engaged” in the performance engagement aspect. While
the item “The clarity about the core concepts has been attained” got the lowest mean of
3.28 which is interpreted as “Highly Engaged. The overall mean score of 3.35 which is
interpreted as “Highly Engaged”.
However, there is substantial evidence that faculty competence in terms of
content knowledge has a significant relationship to students’ engagement to flexible
learning considering the skills (r = 0.66, p>.05), emotional (r = 0.55, p>.05), cognitive (r =
0.49, p>.05), and performance (r = 0.48, p>.05). However, on the aspect of pedagogical
skills of the faculty members, only emotional aspect of students’ engagement to flexible
learning is significant having the value of (r = 0.23, p≥.05).
Conclusions
The following are the conclusion made by the researchers along with the findings
of the study:
1. Content knowledge and pedagogically skills are highly perceived as an indicator
of instructors’ competence in teaching. The mastery of the subject matter and
allowing students to clarify content of the lesson are significant factors for
instructor’s competence in content knowledge. Moreover, it is important to note,
the importance of applying different methods of teaching in the conduct of

instructions. However, there is a need to improve the way instructor’s breakdown
the subject matter.
2. Students are putting much effort in completing all the tasks given to them by their
instructors and professors. They are proud if they were able to accomplish all the
tasks and assignment assigned to them. Students are more engage in their
test/quizzes as well as to the different activities and exercises they find to have
value to them. However, there is a need to consider on the level of enthusiasm of
the students towards every class/course. Also, on how they will be more
engaged in the aspect of their cognitive especially on the area of concentrating
during class.
3. Substantial evidence posed that faculty competence in terms of content
knowledge has a significant relationship to students’ engagement to flexible
learning along with skills, emotional, cognitive and performance. However, only
emotional aspect has a relation to faculty teaching competence.
Recommendations
The following are the recommendations of the researchers:
1. Faculty members may consider of applying different teaching methods in the
conduct of their instructors to enhance the level of students’ engagement to their
course. Also, of enhancing their competence through mastery of the content

knowledge. The administration may consider of providing trainings, symposia,
immersion, and other means to enhance the level of faculty competence.
2. Action research maybe conducted to understand students learning behavior for
faculty members to devise plan or activities how they can enliven students’
enthusiasm to their class/ course. Also, their cognitive engagement.
3. Faculty members and the top management may work hand in hand to enhance
the content knowledge of the faculty as it has a strong relationship to students’
engagement in the flexible learning considering their skills, emotional, cognitive
and performance.
4. A further study maybe conducted in relation to students’ engagement and other
factors for teaching competence. Also, a similar study maybe created having a
larger scope and bigger number of respondents and other variables to measure.
Chapter IV
REFERENCES
Akey, T. M. (2006). School Context, Student Attitudes and Behavior, and Academic
Achievement: An Exploratory Analysis. New York. MDRC.
Al-Alwan A. F. (2014). Modeling the Relations among Parental Involvement, School
Engagement and Academic Performance of High School Students. International
Education Studies; 7(4) pp 47-56.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.

Journal of college student personnel, 25(4), 297-308.
Ylagan, A. P., & Laguador, J. M. (2014). Tourism Studies in the Province of Batangas,
Philippines: A Literature Review, International Journal of Management Sciences
Vol. 4, No. 10, 2014, 421-428.
Inder, Shivani (2022). Factors Influencing Student Engagement for Online Courses: A
Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Contemporary Educational Technology.
https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11373
Wilson S. M., Shulman L. S., Richert A. E. (1987). “150 different ways” of knowing:
Representations of knowledge in teaching, In. Calderhead J. (Ed.), Exploring
teachers’ thinking (pp. 104–124). London, England: Cassell.
Maclellan, Effie. (2008). Pedagogical literacy: What it means and what it allows.
Teaching and Teacher Education - TEACH TEACH EDUC. 24. 1986-1992.
10.1016/j.tate.2008.05.009.
Sesmiyanti, Sesmiyanti. (2018). Student’s Cognitive Engagement in Learning Process.

Journal Polingua : Scientific Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Education. 5. 48-
51. 10.30630/polingua.v5i2.34.
Axelson, R. D., & Flick, A. (2010). Defining student engagement. Change: The
magazine of higher learning, 43(1), 38-43.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2011.533096
Tinto, V. (1975). Tinto’s South Africa lectures. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa, 2(2),
5-28. https://doi.org/10.14426/jsaa.v2i2.66
Pace, C. R. (1980). Measuring the quality of student effort. Current Issues in Higher
Education, 2(1), 10-16.
Weiss, C. C. & García, E. (2012). Student Engagement and Academic Performance in

México: Evidence and Puzzles from PISA. New York: Columbia University
Appleton, J.J., Christenson, S.L., Kim, D., and Reschly, A.L. (2006). Measuring cognitive
and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument.
Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427-445. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
Jimerson, S.J., Campos, E., and Grief, J.L. (2003). Toward an understanding of
definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California
School Psychologist, 8, 7-27.
Ladd, G.W., Birch, S.H., and Buhs, E.S. (1999). Children's social and scholastic lives in
kindergarten: Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70 (6), 1373-
1400.
Sinclair, M.F., Christenson, S.L., Lehr, C.A., and Anderson, A.R. (2003). Facilitating
student engagement: Lessons learned from Check & Connect longitudinal studies.
The California School Psychologist, 8, 29-41.
Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates.

Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(13). Retrieved from
http://PAREonline.net/
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of
the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109
Wormington, S. V., Corpus, J. H., and Anderson, K. G. (2011). A Person-Centered

Investigation of Academic Motivation, Performance, and Engagement in a High
School Setting. A Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Reed College,New Orleans, LA, USA.
Sagayadevan, V & Jeyaraj, S. (2012). The Role of Emotional Engagement in Lecturer-

Student Interaction and the Impact on Academic Outcomes of Student
Achievement and Learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
12(3), (pp. 1 – 30).
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of
college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3),
184-192. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The Online
Student Engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning, 19(4), n4.
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561
Purinton, E. F., & Burke, M. M. (2019). Student Engagement and Fun: Evidence from the
Field. Business Education Innovation Journal, 11(2).
Williams, K. H., Childers, C., & Kemp, E. (2013). Stimulating and enhancing student
learning through positive emotions. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 13(3),
209-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2013.813320
Black, S., & Allen, J. D. (2018). Part 4: Academic self-concept and emotions. The
Reference Librarian, 59(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2017.1349022
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Research monograph.
Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd.
Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom
learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(2), 88-108.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461528309529266
Richardson, J. C., & Newby, T. (2006). The role of students’ cognitive engagement in
online learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 23-37.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde2001_3
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential
of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-
109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Park, S., & Yun, H. (2017). Relationships between motivational strategies and cognitive
learning in distance education courses. Distance Education, 38(3), 302-320.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1369007
Meyer, K. A. (Ed.). (2014). Student engagement online learning: What works and why.
ASHE higher education report, 40(6), 1-114. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018
Adodo S. O. (2014). School teachers‟ competency in evaluating students cognitive and

psychomotor achievement in basic science and technology. Journal of emerging
trends in educational research and policy studies 5(3), 48-53
Lee, E., & Luft, J. A. (2008). Experienced secondary sciences teachers‟ representation
of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30,
1343-1363.
Ebiringa, A. I. (2012). Assessment of the instructional competencies of teachers of

accounting for implementation of senior secondary school curriculum. Unpublished
M.Ed Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Omoogun, A. C. (2009). The challenges of university as agent of social change. Journal

of curriculum studies 16-258-266
Onuoha, J. C. (2010). Influence of school location on students‟ achievement in social

studies using concept mapping as instructional strategy. Nigerian social science
education review 3(1), 116- 126
Gaji, A. A. (2014). Perception of the relationship between teachers‟ quality and students‟
academic performance in Hausa language of senior secondary schools in Kano
Metropolis. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, Kano State University.
Offorma, G. C. & Ogah, M. E. U. (2003). Teachers‟ perception of competencies for

effective teaching of secondary school French Language. The Journal of world
council. 4(2), 216-224
Ololube, N. P. (2005). Benchmarking the motivational competencies of academically and
professionally qualified teachers in Nigerian Secondary Schools. African
Symposium Journal of Africa Educational Research Network, 5:17-37.
Sonia, G. (2015). Teachers’ Pedagogical Knowledge and the Teaching Profession

Background Report and Project Objectives. OECD press
Louwrens, N., & Hartnett, M. (2015). Student and teacher perceptions of online student
engagement in an online middle school. Journal of Open, Flexible, and Distance
Learning, 19(1), 27-44. Retrieved on October 30, 2022 from
https://www.learntechlib.org/p/151619/
Rhode, J., Richter, S., & Miller, T. (2017). Designing personalized online teaching
professional development through self-assessment. TechTrends, 61(5), 444-451.
Retrieved on October 28, 2022 from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11528-017-0211-3
Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student
satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International
Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1. Retrieved on October 28,
2022 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1103654
Amie-Ogan, T. O. & Omunakwe, F. B. (2020). Perceived influence of teachers‟ quality

on students‟ academic performance in public senior secondary schools in Port
Harcourt Metropolis of Rivers State, Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative
Social & Science Education Research 8(3): 146-161
Nwafor, O. M. & Ebiringa, A. I. (2011). Assessment of e-learning competence of

teachers of accounting education in Onyegegbu N. and Eze, U. (eds) optimizing e-
learning opportunities for effective educational service delivery, University of
Nigeria, Nsukka.
Udeinya N. N. (2008). Evaluation of teachers‟ competencies in implementation of

secondary school geography curriculum, unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of
Nigeria, Nsukka.
Ajibola, M. A. (2008). Innovations and curriculum implementation for basic education in

Nigeria. Policy priorities and challenges of practices and implementation,
Research Journal of international studies issue 8(2008), 51-58
Jadamas, M. E. (2014) Student perspective on teaching techniques and outstanding

teachers. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Vol. 7(2).
Igbokwe, U. L. & Eze, U. N. (2009). Overview of curriculum: classroom management for

curriculum implementation, apply of psychological principles. Enugu: Timex
Publishing Coy.
Wormington, S. V., Corpus, J. H., and Anderson, K. G. (2011). A Person-Centered

Investigation of Academic Motivation, Performance, and Engagement in a High
School Setting. A Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Reed College,New Orleans, LA, USA.
Rodriguez, J., & Boutakidis, L. P. (2013). The Association between School Engagement
and Achievement across Three Generations of Mexican American Students.
Association of Mexican-American Educators (AMAE) Journal 7(1). Pp 5-12
Sagayadevan, V & Jeyaraj, S. (2012). The Role of Emotional Engagement in Lecturer-

Student Interaction and the Impact on Academic Outcomes of Student
Achievement and Learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
12(3), (pp. 1 – 30).
Kamla-Raj & Ugur Dogan(2015). Student Engagement, Academic Self-efficacy, and

Academic Motivation as Predictors of Academic Performance. Anthropologist,
20(3): 553-561
Afzal, M. T. & Afzal, M. (2015). Comparison of Students’ Satisfaction and Achievement

at Secondary Level in Islamabad. American Journal of Educational Research,
3(12), 1524-1527.
Kpolovie, P. J. Joe, A. I. & Okoto T.(2014). Academic Achievement Prediction: Role of

Interest in Learning and Attitude towards School. International Journal of
Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Volume 1, Issue 11, pp 73-
100.
Clarin, Analyn & Baluyos, Esther (2021). Students Engagement and Teaching
Competence in Relation to the Implementation of Online Disatnce Learning. IEE-
SEM, Vol. 9, Issue 8, pp. 37-73.
Skinner, E.A., and Belmont, M.J.(1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects
of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.
Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., and Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and
disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of
Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765-781. doi: 10.1037/a0012840
Ryan, R.M., and Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist,
55(1), 68-78. doi: 10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68
Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A

motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe
(Eds.), Self processes and development (Vol. 23, pp. 43 - 77). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children's academic
engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148-162.
doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148 .
Roeser, R. W., Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. C. (1996). Perceptions of the school
psychological environment and early adolescents’ psychological and behavioral
functioning in school: The mediating role of goals and belonging. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 88, 408– 422. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.88.3.408
Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Dochy, R. (2009). The
synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the
prediction of selfregulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79,
57-6. doi: 10.1348/000709908X304398
Everett, D. R. (2015). Adding value: Online student engagement. Information

Systems Education Journal, 13(6), 68. Retrieved on October 30, 2022 from
http://isedj.org/2015-13/n6/ISEDJv13n6p68.html
Burch, G. F., Heller, N. A., Burch, J. J., Freed, R., & Steed, S. A. (2015). Student
engagement: Developing a conceptual framework and survey instrument. Journal
of Education for Business, 90(4), 224-229.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2015.1019821
Ball, I., & Perry, C. (2011). Differences in student engagement: investigating the role
of the dominant cognitive processes preferred by engineering and education
students. Education research international, 2011.
Hatch, D. K. (2012). Unpacking the black box of student engagement: The need for
programmatic investigation of high impact practices. Community College Journal
of Research and Practice, 36(11), 903-915.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2012.690319
Bryson, C., Cooper, G., & Hardy, C. (2010). Reaching a common understanding of the
meaning of student engagement [Paper presentation]. Society of Research into
Higher Education Conference, Celtic Manor, Wales, 14-16, December 2010.
Bryson, C. (2014). Clarifying the concept of student engagement. In C. Bryson (Ed.),

Understanding and developing student engagement (pp. 21-42). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813691
Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2018). Student engagement in the educational interface:
understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research &
Development, 37(1), 58-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197
Appendix A
October 20, 2022
DR. CECILIA G. LAGRAMADA

College Dean
College of Hospitality Management
This Campus
Dear Dr. Lagramada ,
May we have the honor to request permission from your good office to conduct
our study entitled “HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT FACULTY TEACHING
COMPETENCE AND STUDENTS ENGAGEMENT TO FLEXIBLE LEARNING”. This is
in partial fulfilment of the course requirements in Hospitality Research.
The undersigned will utilize a survey-questionnaire as the instrument in collecting
essential data for the study.
The employees working in the different restaurants in Guiuan are the
respondents for this research. All responses will be treated with utmost confidentiality.
Hoping for your favorable approval in this regard.
Thank you so much.
Respectfully yours,
Researchers Name please encode it

here.
Appendix B
October 20, 2022
Dear Respondents:
The undersigned is currently conducting a study entitled “HOPSITALITY

MANAGEMENT FACULTY TEACHING COMPETENCE AND STUDENTS
ENGAGEMENT TO FLEXIBLE LEARNING”. This is in partial fulfilment of the course
requirements in Hospitality Research.
We wish to solicit your valuable assistance on the identified aspects of the subject to
provide with the needed data through the attached survey-questionnaire.
You are assured that every response made will be treated with utmost confidentiality and
will only be used for the purpose of the study.
Respectfully yours,
RESEARCHERS NAME PLEASE TYPE HERE

SURVEY INSTRUMENT
HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT TEACHING COMPETENCE AND STUDENTS’

ENGAGEMENT TO FLEXIBLE LEARNNG
Part I. Faculty competence
Directions: The following statement indicates to faculty competence, put a check on the
number that corresponds to your choice using the indicators below:
4 Strongly Agree
3 Agree
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree
A. Content Knowledge
Items Scale
4 3 2 1
1. Mastery of the subject matter is one of the most
important aspects of teachers' competence.
2. A competent teacher should possess the ability to break
down the subject matter
3. Competent teachers allow their students to understand
clearly the content of what is taught
4. Competent teachers are expected to possess the
rudimental knowledge
5. Effective teaching demands that the teacher should
have a sound knowledge of all that the students must
know in and outside the school curriculum
B. Pedagogical skills
Items Scale
4 3 2 1
1. The methods they apply in teaching is importance in
determining their competencies.
2. The methods used in teaching are one of the
competencies in measuring faculty teaching competence.
3. Demonstration method which involves teaching by
displaying the instructional situation with an audio-visual
explanation of an idea, process or product influence
academic performance of the students.
4. Classroom instructional delivery in most subjects are
dominated with the traditional teacher-centered approach.
5. The problem-solving form of instruction and learning
enhances creativity and fosters innate abilities for problem
solving and decision making.
Part II. Engagement to Flexible Learning
Directions: The following statement indicates to engagement in flexible learning, put a

check on the number that corresponds to your choice using the indicators below:
4 Strongly Agree
3 Agree
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree
a. Skills Engagement
Items Scale
4 3 2 1
1. I feel intensity in working my major subjects.
2. I put in my full efforts in my academic subjects.
3. I devoted efforts and energy in accomplishing my
performance tasks.
4. I give my all to perform in any tasks given to me by my
professors both online and offline.
5. I work hard to complete the tasks.
b. Emotional engagement
Items Scale
4 3 2 1
1. I have enthusiasm towards every class/ course.
2. I Feel interested in learning.
3. I Feel proud on completing tasks, assignments.
4. I Feel excited in attending all session/Fell energetic
during class.
5. I Find assignments and tasks engaging.
c. Cognitive engagement
Items Scale
4 3 2 1
1. I feel focused during class.
2. I can absorb easily the ideas during class discussions.
3. I can concentrate well during class.
4. I devote attention to discussion and activities.
5. I find the course relevant to my life.
d. Performance engagement
Items Scale
4 3 2 1
1. I am doing well on the tests/quizzes
2. I interact to our instructors/professors for a more
engaging activity.
3. I find the participation in class activities as satisfactory.
4. The clarity about the core concepts has been attained.
5. The exercises given in the class hold value to me.
Thank you!

Faculty Teaching Competence - Revised Paper - 100647

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Faculty Teaching Competence - Revised Paper - 100647

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Faculty Teaching Competence - Revised Paper - 100647

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PERCEPTION AND PREFERENCES OF ESSU GUIUAN HOSPITALITY

MANAGEMENT STUDENTS TOWARDS WORKING

An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

This thesis entitled HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT TEACHING COMPETENCE

CECILIA G. LAGRAMADA, PhD

teaching competence to students’ engagement in flexible learning. A descriptive

the simple random sampling, a total of 60 Hospitality Management students participated

perceived as an indicator of instructors’ competence in teaching. Moreover, it is

important to note the significance of applying different methods of teaching in the

faculty competence in terms of content knowledge has a significant relationship to

performance. However, only emotional aspect has a relation to faculty teaching

competence in terms of pedagogical skills.

Hospitality Management is a highly competitive sector, fast-changing and vital,

students interested in online courses. Online student engagement is getting much of

attention. An essential criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of any educational

course is student involvement because it serves as a gauge of the quality of learning.

and Ramakrishna, 2020), such as a smartphone, tablet, or computer, which according to

Santos and Ali (2012), is applied to education in informal. (Ochoa, 2022).

One of the cornerstones of good online training according to Everett (2015) is

Survey of Student Engagement Survey (2011) refers student engagement as

Personal attitudes, thoughts, activities, and interactions with others make up

degree to which students engage in active learning. Active learning is promoted by

Considering student engagement as a multidimensional phenomenon and

incomplete discovery of the properties of construct can be highlighted (Astin, 1984;

of student engagement in different contexts.

Faculty motivation from a student’s perspective is sometimes referred to as

coordinating and facilitating learning. In poorly implemented courses or where the

specialized skills and competencies (Schmidt, Tschida, & Hodge, 2016).

student application of knowledge to a professional position (Frazer, Sullivan,

Weatherspoon, & Hussey, 2017).

It is believed that student engagement and teaching competence contribute to

the success of flexible learning. Learning process is becoming more accessible as a

Baluyos, 2021). Moreover, majority of prior studies have attempted to investigate

the factors leading to student engagement.

Thus, this research is conducted to determine the competence of faculty teaching

students’ engagement in flexible learning, considering the teaching competence of the

teaching competence to students’ engagement in flexible learning. Specifically, it seeks

to attain the following:

1. To determine respondents’ perception towards faculty competence in terms of:

1.1. content knowledge, and

1.2 pedagogical skill.

2. To identify the level of respondents’ engagement to flexible learning along with

the following indicators:

2.1. skills engagement,

2.2. emotional engagement;

2.3. cognitive engagement; and

2.4. performance engagement.

3. To distinguish if relationship exists between perception towards faculty

competence and engagement to flexible learning.

Significance of the study

This study is about hospitality management faculty teaching competence and

used for future discussion and references.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

research focused on examining the relationship between faculty teaching Competence

variables to be measured is delimited to skills, emotional, cognitive, and performance.

understanding on the present study conducted.