The Level of Readiness of Misamis University in the Implementation of New Curricula

Curriculum change is one of the processes that help the school maintain its quality education. This study assessed the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curricula on the different programs in Misamis University during the first semester of SY 2018-2019 using a descriptive research design. A modified survey questionnaire adapted from the work of Espique (2018) was used to assess the level of readiness of the programs in the institution. The respondents included 60 teachers and 298 students chosen through purposive and stratified random sampling. Mean, standard deviation, and ANOVA or F-tests were the statistical tools used in the study. Results showed that the university was very highly ready for the implementation of the new curricula. Teachers and students perceived the level of readiness differently. Information about the new curricula must be disseminated well to the teachers, students, and benefactors. Article History Received : January 2020 Accepted : February 2020 Published : April 2020


INTRODUCTION
The curriculum is the center of education (Priestley & Philippou, 2019), and curriculum studies are significant worldwide in the field of education (Subkhan, 2019). Implementing curriculum reform always entails the translation of new ideas into new educational practices, which involves complex sense-making processes (Tikkanen, Pyhältö, Soini, & Pietarinen, 2017).
Furthermore, curriculum implementation needs to consider many aspects of the educational system. But most of the teachers were not all familiar with the necessary principles in the implementation of the curriculum (Kidonia, 2016). Resources, lack of parents' involvement, and lack of follow-ups of school leadership found to be the factors that affect the curriculum implementation (Taole, 2015). Non-delivery of textbooks to schools was identified as a nuclear factor that hinders the effectiveness of the implementation of Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) (Musitha & Mafukata, 2018). Unequipped classrooms, and teacher quality (Rahman, Pandian, & Kaur, 2018), and lack of focus on planning for implementation (Walsh, 2016) were the challenges faced in the implementation of the curriculum.
According to the problems previously, there is a need to encourage teachers to engage in the implementation of the curriculum since their deep implementation facilitates their beliefs (Choi & Cho, 2017). Despite teachers lack focus on planning for implementation (Walsh, 2016), their perceptions in the curriculum implementation in the classroom activities are correlated with their perceptions of curriculum change (Yildirim & Kasapoglu, 2015). Therefore, teachers must be supported with enough resources. A classroom must have a ratio of one teacher for 30 students so that teachers can cater to the complex needs of the learners (Maharajh, Nkosi, & Mkhize, 2016). They have to be sent to seminars and training in doing classroom structure since some teachers have limited skill in implementing structure in teaching (Haris, & Ghazali, 2016); and they also should be encourage to develop instructional materials, i.e. syllabus, lesson plan, properly (Rahman, Pandian, & Kaur, 2018). Moreover, their teaching effectiveness can also be enhanced through professional exchanges (Cheng & Wu, 2018).
Teachers play a critical role in curriculum implementation (Superfine, Marshall, & Kelso, 2015), so they must be included in curriculum development (Yeni-Palabiyik & Daloglu, 2016). Further advancement for teachers is also suggested (Yeung, 2016). The needs of classroom teachers and the quality of teacher development facilities were also found significant in order to succeed the curriculum implementation (Rahman, Pandian, & Kaur, 2018).
There is no doubt that teachers need to develop and utilize their strategies in teaching to meet the learners' demands and parents' expectations since the curriculum provided them with little guidance (Stier & Sandström, 2018). Contextualization of tasks, collaborative learning, developing computational thinking, and scaffolding of programmed tasks should be addressed to help teacher become more effective on implementing the curriculum in practice (Sentence & Csizmadia, 2017). In other context, it is also necessary to prepare the faculty for this curriculum change since competency-based training program, and assessment methods differ in many ways (Mitra & Saha, 2016).
Teachers with insufficient competencies in designing and implementing lesson plans and assessment practices need to have further intensive training in improving their knowledge and skills (Maba &Bagus, 2018). They need pieces of training to ensure a high quality of curriculum implementation. They must understand that the social context that surrounds the curriculum affects the behavior and thinking of the individual. Thus, the curriculum still has a lot of flaws and needs some revision Zulhernanda (2018).
Inappropriate infrastructure, incomprehensive curriculum, lack of professional mentors, short admission process of students, and lack of skilled laboratory staff influenced the context formation of the curriculum (Ashghali-Farahani, Ghaffari, HoseiniEsfidarjani, Hadian, Qomi, & Dargahi, 2018). In Africa, curriculum planners faced challenges like the necessity to shift toward competency-based curriculum; and the related issues and problems, like adopting such approach from informative to transformative learning, the limited involvement from many stakeholders in curriculum development process, lack of training for educators, and unsuitable resources (Muraraneza, Mtshali, & Mukamana, 2017).
More importantly, student involvement in the crafting of the curriculum is necessary. The students realized upon program completion the importance of their voices in curriculum construction and course design (Nguyen & Laws, 2019). According to the study conducted by Ayodele (2016) 75.8% agreed that the curriculum they enrolled covered the essential aspects needed as the foundation; 32.0% believed that the curriculum was not detailed enough, and 24.6% thought that there were inappropriate topics in the curriculum. It means students experienced their curriculum and know what the essential aspects of the curriculum are they need.
In crafting the curriculum, stakeholders have to be included, especially their point of view should be added to develop a more theoretically robust approach to self-reflection (Patrick, 2017). There was also a need for higher capacity building among principals and further research into continuous curriculum changes in the educational system (Mohapi & Netshitangani, 2017).
Such teacher training before the curriculum implementation and an intensive effort from all stakeholders should be practiced to ensure a successful curriculum implementation. Limited capacity and willingness on the part of the local stakeholders, unfavorable perceptions about the development policy, and unsupportive implementation environments appear to have prevented the local stakeholders from taking a more active role in shaping their school-based curriculum (Akrom, 2015). Moreover, wide dissemination of information for educational settings ensures quality in the curriculum implementation (Luo, 2018).
New curriculum reforms in higher education are a necessity to respond to the changing needs of the time. In China, the new curriculum reform of higher teacher education is sufficient. Still, for instance, the curriculum reform, specifically the College of Chinese Language and Literature, is not tight enough, lack of indepth questioning, and the theoretical basis is rarely mentioned (Zhao, 2016). In Hong Kong, the implementation of the liberal studies and teacher training to support radical curriculum innovation fell short of expectation, even after considering both desirability and feasibility angles in their curriculum planning (Fok, 2016). In Taiwan's technology curriculum, a gap between education reform policy and curriculum implementation was noticed by both teachers and students. Technology teachers observed several issues on the content of the curriculum, learning activities, and teaching strategies upon implementing the ideas of the curriculum reform plan (Lin, Chang, Tsai, & Kao, 2015).
In South Africa's educational system, educators are plagued by the challenges on the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS). These challenges were attributed to a lack of resources and poorly trained teachers (Maharajh, Nkosi, & Mkhize, 2016). In another context, Taiwan has a Curriculum Development Program (CDP) and government policy towards the Privately-managed Public Pre-schools (PMPs) that harmonized the tensions between external impact and internal resistance. The difficulties for the external impact included: educational policy reforms, competition in the education market, and parents' right to choose. In contrast, the internal resistance included: changes in the curriculum power structure, limitations on in-school resources, and conflicts of interests among organizational members (Lin, 2016).
In Victoria, Australia, teachers still need more awareness, resources, and guidance to increase their confidence in implementing the new curriculum (Nanayakkara, Margerison, & Worsley, 2018). Teachers' attitudes towards curriculum and attendance at the curriculum training workshop had a direct impact on teachers' implementation, which had an immediate effect on student outcomes (Wang, Stanton, Deveaux, Lunn, Rolle, Adderley, & Gomez, 2017).
Furthermore, also in other context, Greece implemented the experiential curriculum to some extent since there were teachers who were not familiar with the principles needed in the implementation of the curriculum (Kidonia, 2016). Non-delivery of textbooks to schools, lack of parental involvement, unavailability of follow-up visits from subject specialists, and school leadership were factors cited that affect the curriculum implementation (Taole, 2015). In the United States, the kindergarten curriculum implies the high possibility of considerations in all areas (Kim & Sung, 2017).
A study conducted in South Korea used strategies to test the quality of curriculum implementation. Among the five strategies, only three strategies (step-by-step analysis, free production, and analogy) showed significant associations with the quality of curriculum implementation, and the step-by-step re-view was the most potential strategy used to assess the quality of curriculum implementation (Kim, 2016). However, Hong Kong used a technique to evaluate the degree of implementation of the higher order thinking (HOT) curriculum in the schools. The method of Innovation Configuration Mapping (IC Mapping) to assess the implementation of innovation revealed that some lessons were ideally taught and implemented, while many were less implemented (Yeung, 2016).
In Pakistan, the missing role of teachers' involvement in the curriculum development process needs to be recognized, and an updated curriculum is required to meet the educational needs of college students (Syeda, 2015). In Queensland secondary school, a lack of coordinated cross-curricular approaches to numeracy was found. Curriculum authorities failed to acknowledge the challenges for teachers in implementing cross-curricular arithmetic that includes an adequate understanding of arithmetic, a lack of dedication, and poor skills of teachers (Carter, Klenowski, & Chalmers, 2015). Factors that need more consideration in community colleges include the diverse student population and varied levels of student preparedness. Additionally, the diminishing resources for academic support and professional development and the disproportionate staffing faculty to many students formed part of the factors (Tinberg, 2015).
Recently, the Philippines has taken significant steps towards the attainment of Education for All (EFA) goals, which include the implementation of the Enhanced Basic Education Program or the K to 12, enacted as the Republic Act No.10533. With these educational reforms, the quality of education in the country needs to be enhanced (Llenaresas, Bercasio, & Oyales, 2015). The goal of this curriculum is to equip the Filipino learners with twenty-first-century skills such as expertise in learning, information, know-how in using media and technology, practical communication skills, and life and career skills.
Various schools and institutions are implementing the new curriculum, and one of these educational institutions is Misamis Uni-versity. All the programs in Misamis University were adjusting as the university adapts to the implementation of the new curriculum by offering new subjects that would cater to the knowledge acquired by the Senior High School (SHS) students in the track they choose as a preparation for the tertiary level. It helps address the students' job-skills mismatch in the country (Mocon, 2016) and provides students access to educational resources (Pierce & Cleary, 2016), which are helpful to students, teachers, and school systems.
The school year 2018-2019 has the first batch of students affected by the K to 12 curricula entering the tertiary level. However, the preparedness of the programs at Misamis University for the implementation of the new curriculum is still not evaluated. This study assessed the level of readiness of the different programs at Misamis University for the implementation of the new curricula. The result of this study serves as the basis for the enhancement of each program offered at Misamis University. There are three objectives of this research, (1) determine the level of readiness of the curriculum as perceived by teachers and students, (2) explore the significant difference between the perception of teachers' and students' level of readiness for the new curricula, and (3) explore the significant difference in the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curricula when grouped by the program.

METHOD
The study used a descriptive research design. It aimed to describe a phenomenon and its characteristics. The descriptive research design is appropriate for this study, which assessed the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curricula on the different programs at Misamis University during the school year 2018-2019. This study took place in Ozamiz City, Philippines, particularly in Misamis University, with 12 colleges offering a total of 29 programs, including the graduate programs.
Misamis University has undergone the most extensive academic transformation in its academic pursuit of excellence. The university has undergone a rigid Institutional Sustainability Assessment or ISA by Commission on Higher Education (CHED), awarded as Centers of Development for Teacher Education, Criminology, and Information Technology programs. The university also received awards from the Philip-pine Association of Colleges and Universities [PACUCOA] with the most substantial part of accredited programs for two years, recertified by DNV as having conformed to ISO 9001:2015 with an excellent rating.
The respondents of this study were 60 teachers and 298 students from the nineteen different undergraduate programs at Misamis University. Teachers were chosen using purposive sampling because there were teachers who refused to be part of the survey. At the same time, students were selected using stratified random sampling using an online Raosoft sample size calculator.
The Level of Readiness of Curriculum Questionnaire, a modified survey questionnaire adapted from the work of Espique (2018), was used to assess the level of readiness of the programs in the implementation of the new curriculum. The instrument is a 5-point Likert scale with 32 indicators and eight constructs. In this study, the research instrument was validated in terms of content and face validity. The content validation was expected to measure the degree to which the items reflected the specific covered areas. Five experts validated the instrument in the field of education and curriculum to find out if items were to be retained, revised, or rejected and to determine whether the set of items accurately represents the variables being examined. The experts were requested to read, judge, make recommendations, and give feedback to the researchers. The suggestions provided were incorporated to validate the instruments.
To establish the reliability of the questionnaires used in the study, the researcher carried out a pilot test of the instrument. A similar group with the same characteristics as the first sample of the study was selected. The reliability of the questionnaires was computed using multivariate item analysis with the help of Minitab software. Cronbach's alpha technique was used to determine the reliability of the survey. If the value found falls within the accepted levels from 0.5 and above, the questionnaires were held reliable (George & Mallery, 2003). If otherwise, the instruments would be improved to meet the accepted level of reliability. This instrument yielded a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.9565; hence it was reliable in this study.
The following continuum was used to determine the readiness level in the implementation of the new curricula. Before the conduct of the study, the researchers asked permission from the Dean of the College of Education. Then letters were sent to all the deans in the different colleges in Misamis University to seek approval before conducting the research. The researchers personally did the actual data gathering. Other essential research activities like tallying of responses, the organization of data, analysis, and interpretation of data followed.
The principles of ethical considerations by Bryman and Bell (2007) complied within this study. First, the research respondents were not subjected to harm in any way. Respect for the respondents' dignity was prioritized. Full consent was obtained from the respondents before the study. Protection of the privacy of research respondents, an adequate level of confidentiality of the research data, and the anonymity of individuals participating in the research was ensured.
The data were analyzed using the following statistical tools, (1) Mean and Standard Deviation. These were used to describe the level of readiness for the implementation of the new curricula in the university, (2) T-Test. It was used to compare the significant difference between the teachers' and students' perceptions of the level of readiness for the implementation of the new curricula, dan (3) Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) or F-Test. It was used to compare the significant the difference in the level of readiness of implementation of the new curricula of the different programs at the University.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The following section consist three part of the result and discussion based on the finding and analysis of this research, i.e. (1) level of rea-diness on the implementation of new curricula, (2) significant difference in the perception of teachers and students on the level of readiness, and (3) significant difference in the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curricula when grouped by program.

A. Level of Readiness on the Implementation of the New Curricula
The data in table 2 revealed that the overall level of readiness of the university in the implementation of the new curricula was very high (M= 4.25; SD= 0.70). The teachers and the students gave the highest mean rating, very high level of readiness on the adequacy of conditions for the realization of the new curriculum (M= 4.34; SD= 0.56); while the lowest rating, with the high level of readiness, was given for areas on the sufficiency of training for teachers and all personnel involved of the curriculum (M= 4.10; SD= 0.69); and the provision of adequate laboratory equipment and instructional materials (M= 4.10; SD= 0.74). The information dissemination of the outcomes (M= 4.15; SD= 0.69) was also rated by teachers and students second to the lowest, with a high level of readiness in this area. All other areas are rated the very high level of readiness for the implementation of the new curricula.
The findings imply that the teachers and students perceived that the university is highly ready for the implementation of the new curricula. They saw that the school has adequate preparations for the new curriculum implementation; the teachers are very prepared for the structure of the curriculum; administrators are highly efficient in managing circular implementations, teachers and heads are very ready in the monitoring of the teaching process and in connecting to the educational partners in the industry. However, the respondents only perceived the three areas (information dissemination of the outcomes, sufficiency of training for teachers and all personnel involved in the curriculum, and provision of adequate laboratory equipment, and instructional materials) with a high level of readiness.
These imply that the areas should be emphasized by the curriculum committee. Moreover, curriculum committee reviews conducted periodically emphasizes the development of activities that would enhance wide dissemination of learning outcomes in the different programs, training of teachers and staff involved in the implementation, and having adequate laboratory equipment and instructional materials.
These findings confirm the study reflecting the need for teachers to ensure a high quality of curriculum implementation (Zulhernanda, 2018). Added to this, teachers also recognize that they need time to learn and acknowledge new development plans, room to explore, and resources to take out their responsibilities care- fully (Taole, 2015). Sending the teachers through seminars and training (Haris, & Ghazali, 2016) and doing professional exchanges (Cheng & Wu, 2018) can help the teachers become better prepared in the curriculum implementation.
Teachers and students should be prepared and equipped with the new trends to ensure alignment of the new curriculum (Rumahlatu, Huliselan & Takaira, 2013). Thus, in implementing the new curriculum, both teachers and students need to be informed. Dissemination is one of the consistent actions that must be done to achieve the curriculum (Rumahlatu, Huliselan & Takaira, 2013). Disseminating the information prepares the teachers and students in adapting and practicing the new curriculum inside the school.
The university needs collaboration of the teachers, staff, students, educational partners, and parents in implementing the new curriculum. They have to work in hand and act as partners in all their effort to help the school implement the new curricula. Teachers as curriculum implementers must always see the different needs of themselves, like updating oneself in their field of specialization through seminars and workshops and using appropriate teaching strategies that fit the learners' nature, styles, and intelligence. Program and learning outcomes have to be oriented to all teachers and students and even school personnel to ensure wide dissemination of the new curricula. School administrators have to consider the needs of teachers and students in the classroom, like instructional materials and other laboratory equipment that may help them achieve the competencies set in every program.

B. Significant Difference in the Perception of Teachers and Students
The data in table 3 revealed that there was a highly significant difference in the perception of teachers and students on the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curriculum (T= 3.01; p-value=0.003) with a p-value less than 0.01 on the sufficiency of training for teachers and all personnel involved in the curriculum. Some variables have a significant difference with a p-value less than 0.05 on information dissemination of the outcomes (T=2.07; p-value=0.041); and provision of adequate laboratory equipment and instructional materials (T=2.49; 0.015). It means that teachers and students perceived differently in the three areas. However, all other areas have p-values greater than 0.05. Thus, no significant difference is seen in the perception of teachers and students on the level of readiness for the implementation of the new curricula.
Teachers and students themselves differed in their rating on the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curricula in the areas of the sufficiency of training for teachers and all personnel involved in the curriculum, information dissemination of the outcomes, and provision of adequate laboratory equipment and instructional materials. The teachers and students have different perceptions because teachers are the ones disseminating the information.
Since students are the first year, they were more informed on the outcomes in their Orientation Course subject. In the areas of laboratory equipment and instructional materials needed in their class, teachers, and students rated differently.
Since teachers are more exposed to the needs in instruction, they gave ratings different from the students. Teachers know that there are laboratory equipment and instructional materials available but are not enough for all the students. In the sufficiency of training for teachers and all personnel involved in the curriculum, both teachers and students have different perceptions in the areas to which teachers still need more training and workshops on how each course in the programs is carried out in the classroom.
So that a program can be well implemented, it requires the maximum and wellplanned preparation (Rumahlatu, Huliselan & Takaira, 2013). Yildirim & Kasupoglu (2015) stated that the more the teachers were involved, the more effective the curriculum was. Furthermore, the benefits of participating teachers in curriculum decisions are highlighted as a means of promoting more active involvement in curriculum change (Yildirim & Kasupoglu, 2015). Every teacher should cooperate and help each other on the implementation of the new curriculum since the curriculum is essential in guiding and organizing the learning activities.
Extensive dissemination about the new curricula has to be done to all personnel involved in the curriculum. Teachers, students, and stakeholders need to know the changes brought about by the implementation of the new curricula. The procurement of facilities and other laboratory equipment and the training of teachers and staff on the use of each technology necessary for the smooth implementation of the curricula is a necessity. efficiency in managing the curricular implementation process, monitoring of teaching process realization, and connecting with educational partners. Though the institution's level of readiness in the implementation is very high, with clear learning outcomes, qualified teachers and professional support staff, and necessary information, all are implemented in different degrees for each program. The efficiency in managing and monitoring of teaching for the implementation of the new curricula also varies in each program in the way that some programs are being managed, monitored, and even have partners and linkages for the implementation of the new curricula while others are not. It means that various programs in the university have a different level of having an in-depth understanding and readiness to implement the learning outcomes of the new curricula.

C. Significant Difference in the Level of Readiness on the Implementation of the New Curricula when Grouped by Program
The data revealed that there was a highly significant difference on the level of readiness on the implementation of the new curriculum when grouped by programs in the institution with pvalues less than 0.01 on all the variables, except for the readiness of teachers on the structure of the curriculum, which has a significant difference, with a p-value 0.043. But overall, all variables in the curriculum implementation were significantly different. It means that the programs have a different level of readiness for the implementation of the new curricula.
Each program implemented the new curriculum differently on the adequacy of conditions for the realization of the new curriculum, Note: ** means p-value is significant at 1% level, * means p-value is significant at 5% level Note: ** means p-value is significant at 1% level Curriculum reform always involves translating the new ideas into new learning practices to check suitable conditions for the implementation of new curricula and to spread information among teachers, students, parents, and other staff of schools (Tikkanen, Pyhältö, Soini & Pietarinen, 2017).). The sufficient training for all teachers and monitoring of the teaching process is in line with the findings of Nanayakkara, Margerison & Worsley (2018), which stated that teachers must be aware, equipped with adequate resources, and must have enough guidance in implementing the new curriculum. Lin, Tsai, and Kao (2015) stated that practical problems with the curriculum content, learning activities, and teaching methods were unique for each program when implementing the ideas of the curriculum reform plan. They all require teachers to have an in-depth understanding of the learning outcomes of the new curricula.
To implement the new curricula fully to the whole system, the institution needs to consider many aspects of the educational system. These include resources, parents' involvement, and follow-ups of school leaders (Taole, 2015), textbooks (Musitha & Mafukata, 2018), equipped classrooms and teacher quality (Rahman, Pandian, & Kaur, 2018), and the focus on planning for implementation (Walsh, 2016). Contextualization of tasks and collaborative learning and teaching for every program emerged to be the approaches or strategies helpful to curriculum implementation (Sentance, Csizmadia, 2017). The preparation of faculty and other school staff for this curriculum change is important since competency-based training programs, and assessment methods differ in many ways (Mitra, & Saha, 2016).
Curriculum implementation needs the help of not just one person but all the school staff for it to be effective. Teachers and students of each program offered in the university have to be given adequate information about changes in the curriculum for them to understand the new terms and conditions and can help with the effectiveness of its development. On the other hand, the institution must provide all programs the necessary equipment that is needed for the practice of teaching and developing knowledge of students to be active and for the teachers to reach its desired outcome. Each program in the university has to be considered in the planning and carrying of activities relating to the changes in the new curricula.

CONCLUSION
Implementation of a new curriculum requires a lot of considerations in certain factors, which must be observed by the curriculum committee to be effectively implemented. Misamis University is well prepared in implementing the new curricula in all programs. Teachers and students have different perceptions on the readiness level of the implementation in the areas of information dissemination of the outcomes, the sufficiency of training for teachers and all personnel of the curriculum, and the provision of adequate laboratory equipment and instructional materials. Each program in the university has implemented the curriculum in different degrees.
The study recommends that information about the new curricula has to be extensively disseminated well to the teachers, students, benefactors, and educational partners, and even parents for them to understand the structure and outcomes required for the new curriculum. The thrust of the Human Resources Department is the development of the training program and workshops to equip the teachers and non-teaching personnel with the knowledge, skills, and values needed in the implementation of the new curricula. The school administrators include in their annual operational plans the procurement of facilities, laboratory equipment, and instructional materials as requisites to the smooth implementation of the new curricula. Another research will be conducted to assess the impact of the new curricula on the students' performance.