Authors : Art Cedrick P. Arandez; Jackelyn I. Eroja; Vina P. Antonio; Arman D. Nuezca; Moonyeen Lilleth V. Antonio; Lleomar Japuz; Adelina O. Antonio

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 5 - May

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26may056

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Technology integration in education has become increasingly prominent, with mobile devices offering new opportunities to enhance learning. The study aimed to investigate the relationship between student’s acceptance of technology and their English language proficiency in the Bachelor of Elementary Education program at IBA College of Mindanao for the academic year 2024–2025. Specifically, it evaluated students' perceptions of using mobile devices for learning English, utilizing the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), focusing on system characteristics, material characteristics, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude toward use, and behavioral intention. Additionally, the study assessed students’ English proficiency levels using a standardized assessment tool. The study employed a quantitative research design, specifically descriptive-correlational, and utilized the Pearson product-moment correlation. Participants were randomly selected from third-year Bachelor of Elementary Education students. The results revealed a moderate positive correlation between technology acceptance and English proficiency . Students demonstrated favorable attitudes toward using mobile devices to enhance their English skills in terms of (a) system characteristics, (b) material characteristics, (c) perceived ease of use, (d) perceived usefulness, (e) attitude toward use, and (f) behavioral intention. A significant relationship was found between students’ positive attitudes toward mobile device use and their English language proficiency. A comparative analysis between English proficiency achieved through technology-enhanced learning and traditional book-based learning is recommended for future research.

Keywords : Technology Acceptance, English Proficiency, Mobile Devices, Language Learning, Education, TAM (Technology Acceptance Model), System Characteristics, Material Characteristics, Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived of Usefulness, Attitude About Use and Behavioral Intention.

References :

1. Abduh, M., & Rosmaladewi, M. (2018). Collaborative speaking activities to improve learners’ engagement and language accuracy. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11223a
2. Abu-Al-Aish, A., & Love, S. (2015). Factors influencing students’ acceptance of m-learning: An investigation in higher education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(5), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i5.2355
3. Adebayo, O. (2017). English language proficiency of Nigerian university students: Curriculum-content mismatch and academic challenges. International Journal of English Language Education, 5(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v5i1.10923
4. Adora, R. B. (2015). English language proficiency of regular third-year students of Tabuk City National High School. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(2), 45–53.
5. Ahn, L. V. (2016). Duolingo: Learn a language for free while helping to translate the web. Communications of the ACM, 59(6), 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1145/2854146
6. Ahmed, S. (2016). Peer interaction and speaking tasks in improving English language skills. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(3), 543–551. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0703.25
7. Al-Aish, A., & Love, S. (2015). Factors influencing students’ acceptance of M-learning: An investigation in higher education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i2.2031
8. Al Mamun, M., Hoque, M. M., & Rahman, M. (2018). English language proficiency among undergraduate students in Bangladesh: Challenges and solutions. International Journal of English Linguistics, 8(5), 45–
9. 54. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v8n5p45
10. Al Mamun, M., Rahman, M., & Hoque, M. (2020). Grammar-focused teaching versus communicative fluency: Effects on students’ English proficiency. Asian EFL Journal, 22(3), 120–138.
11. Al-Emran, M. (2018). Investigating students’ adoption of mobile learning in higher education: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1553185
12. Al-Emran, M., & Shaalan, K. (2017). Academics’ awareness towards mobile learning in Oman. International Journal of Computing and Digital Systems, 6(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.12785/ijcds/060101
13. Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56,         93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.033
14. Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., & Kamaludin, A. (2018). Technology Acceptance Model in M-learning context: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 125, 389–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.008
15. Almaiah, M. A., Jalil, M. A., & Man, M. (2016). Extending the TAM to examine the effects of quality features on mobile learning acceptance. Journal of Computers in Education, 3(4), 453–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-016-0074-1
16. Almurashi, W. A. (2016). The effective use of YouTube videos for teaching English language in classrooms as supplementary material at Taibah University in Alula. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 4(3), 32–47.
17. Alzahrani, M., & Althaqafi, A. (2020). The impact of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) on learners’ confidence and communication skills in English. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(22), 4–15
18. Alzieni, A. (2020). Mobile-assisted learning for improving EFL listening skills: Evidence from higher education. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 11(4), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1104.05
19. Andújar, A. (2016). Benefits of mobile instant messaging to develop ESL writing.    System, 62,  63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.07.004
20. Andújar, A. (2019). Mobile learning applications in language education: Benefits and limitations. Education and Information Technologies, 24(5), 3433–3441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09927-3
21. Baleghizadeh, S., & Oladrostam, E. (2020). The effect of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) on grammar performance of EFL students. Teaching English with Technology, 20(2), 56–71.
22. Bidin, S., & Ziden, A. A. (2017). Adoption and application of mobile learning in the education industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,           90,          720–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.145
23. Burston, J. (2015). Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27(1), 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000159
24. Cabigon, M. (2015). State of English in the Philippines: Should we be concerned? British Council Philippines. https://www.britishcouncil.ph/teach/state-english-philippines
25. Carbonilla, A. G., Dela Cruz, L. M., & Pangan, R. J. (2016). Integrating ICT tools in Philippine classrooms: Opportunities and challenges. Philippine Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 23–34.
26. Cakmak, F. (2019). Mobile learning and constructivist theory in language education: A review of empirical studies. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(1), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547640
27. Chen, C. (2016). The use of Duolingo app in language learning: Exploring motivation and learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 9(1), 1–12.
28. Chen, C., Zou, D., & Xie, H. (2020). Effects of mobile-assisted language learning on vocabulary and grammar acquisition in EFL contexts. Computers & Education, 150, 103850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103850
29. Chen, J., Yang, Y., & Lai, W. (2020). The use of Google Assistant in EFL learning: Students’ perceptions and experiences. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 21(2), 50–64.
30. Chen, X.-B., & Li, G. (2017). The effect of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) on learner autonomy and engagement in EFL contexts. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 11(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMLO.2017.081025
31. Churchill, D., Fox, B., & King, M. (2018). Mobile learning design: Theories and applications. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0027-0
32. Crompton, H. (2015). A historical overview of mobile learning: Toward learner-centered education. In D. G. Sampson, J. M. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, & P. Isaías (Eds.), Digital systems for open access to formal and informal learning (pp. 3–14). Springer.
33. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
34. EF Education First. (2021). EF English Proficiency Index (EF EPI) 2021 – Philippines ranking.
35. Gaerlan, M. J. (2016). Motivational factors affecting English language proficiency among Filipino ESL learners. Philippine ESL Journal, 17, 45–60.
36. Gafni, R., Achituv, D. B., & Rachmani, G. (2017). Learning foreign languages using mobile applications. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 301–317. https://doi.org/10.28945/3833
37. Garcia, I. (2015). Learning a language for free while translating the web: Does Duolingo work? International Journal of English Linguistics, 5(6), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v5n6p19
38. Garcia, P. M., & Santiago, R. S. (2020). The impact of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) on students’ English language proficiency and motivation. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(17), 132–145.
39. Gaon, L., & Zhang, L. J. (2020). Teacher learning in difficult times: Examining foreign language teachers’ online teaching experiences during COVID-19. System,96,   102–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102435
40. Hashemi, M., & Azizinezhad, M. (2016). The impact of mobile phone on vocabulary learning of EFL learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 323–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.028
41. Hashim, H., Yunus, M. M., & Hashim, H. (2017). Mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) in ESL classrooms: Teachers’ and learners’ perspectives. Asian EFL Journal, 19(3), 232–246.
42. Hernandez, J. R., & Cuevas, J. M. (2021). Students’ attitudes toward mobile learning and their impact on English language performance.International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 17(3), 45–59.
43. Hoi, V. N. (2020). Understanding higher education learners’ acceptance and use of mobile devices for language learning: A self-determination perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(7), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1650780
44. Huang, L. L., Zhang, H., & Chen, J. (2019). The impact of mobile learning on learner engagement and motivation in English language education. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(4),      567–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653
45. Jaramillo, E. (2013). English language proficiency test for non-native learners: Development and validation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(2), 382–390. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.2.382-390
46. Jaramillo, E. (2015).                       English proficiency test            answers. Scribd. https://www.scribd.com/document/287191178/English- proficiency-test-answers-pdf
47. Karademir, C. (2019). The effects of online foreign language learning on learners’ motivation and engagement. Journal of Language and Education, 5(4), 106–115. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2019.9754
48. Khan, M., Rahman, A., & Siddiqui, F. (2018). Enhancing English proficiency through communicative teaching methods: Evidence from university classrooms. Journal of Education and Practice, 9(15), 22–30.
49. Kim, H., Lee, J., & Kim, M. (2017). Designing pedagogically sound mobile learning applications for language education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(6), 1399–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9531-8
50. Kim, H., Rueckert, D., Kim, D. J., & Seo, D. (2016). Students’ perceptions and experiences of mobile learning in language education. Computers in Human                                       Behavior, 63, 701–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.054
51. Krashen, S. D. (2017). The case for Duolingo as a tool for second language acquisition. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 12(2), 23–29.
52. Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2015). Language as a bridge connecting formal and informal language learning through mobile devices. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 7(2), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2015040104
53. Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Viberg, O. (2018). Mobile collaborative language learning: State of the art. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(2), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12580
54. Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2016). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Routledge.
55. Lestari, I., & Wahyudin, A. (2020). English language proficiency of senior high school students in Indonesia: Challenges in teacher-centered classrooms. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 256–268. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v10i2.24567
56. Leyaley, R. (2016). English language proficiency of freshmen students in the Institute of Teacher Education, Kalinga-Apayao State College. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 5(1), 23–34.
57. Li, T. Y., Tan, T. H., & Chu, Y. L. (2015). Evaluating mobile learning applications in English education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12133
58. Liu, T.-Y., Lin, T.-C., & Tsai, M.-J. (2015). Investigating the effectiveness of mobile-assisted language learning applications. Computers & Education, 81, 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.09.012
59. Mariñas, J. E. (2021). English proficiency in the Philippines: Trends, challenges, and opportunities. Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 9(1), 101–115.
60. Marcial, D. E. (2017). Mobile learning readiness among college students in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 12(2), 69–81.
61. Miangah, T. M., & Nezarat, A. (2016). Mobile-assisted language learning. International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems, 7(2), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijdps.2016.7203
62. Morat, W. W., Shaari, A. H., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2016). Enhancing students’ motivation in language learning through mobile-assisted language learning (MALL). International Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Society, 4(1), 50–62.
63. Muthusamy, C., & Kamarudin, N. (2021). English communicative proficiency among Malaysian university students: Challenges and interventions. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 12(4), 45–58.
64. Mustafa, R. (2018). Impact of English proficiency on students’ confidence and employability. International Journal of English Studies, 18(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.33.1.321113
65. Naveed, Q. N., Alam, M. M., Qahmash, A., Ahmad, N., & Alqahtani, M. A. (2023). Understanding mobile learning acceptance in higher education: Extending the technology acceptance model. Education and                                Information Technologies, 28(5), 6117–6134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11955-2
66. Nalliveettiil, G. M., & Alezani, T. H. (2016). Mobile-assisted language learning: Students’ perceptions and experiences. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 12(3), 108–127.
67. Ningsih, T., & Mahfud, T. (2020). Students’ acceptance of technology in learning English during the COVID-19 pandemic: A TAM-based analysis. Asian ESP Journal, 16(5.1), 97–115.
68. Noytim, U. (2021). Investigating EFL learners’ attitudes toward mobile-assisted language learning: Implications for practice. English Language Teaching, 14(5), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v14n5p111
69. Odabaş, H., Yılmaz, R., & Usta, E. (2023). Exploring factors affecting students’ adoption of mobile learning: An extended technology acceptance model approach. Journal of Computers in Education, 10(2), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-022-00257-9
70. Ong, C. S., & Lai, J. Y. (2021). An extended TAM model for mobile English learning application adoption. Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 15–28.
71. Oz, H. (2015). An investigation of preservice English teachers’ perceptions of mobile-assisted language learning. English Language Teaching, 8(2), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n2p22
72. Pallant, J., & Tait, A. (2017). Online language learning and the Technology Acceptance Model: A study of learner readiness. Journal of Learning Design, 10(2), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v10i2.283
73. Pham, H. H., & Nguyen, T. T. (2020). The impact of multimedia on English language learning: A case study of Vietnamese students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(17), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i17.14595
74. Rahimi, M., & Miri, S. S. (2018). The impact of mobile learning on EFL learners’ attitudes and performance. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11213a
75. Rahman, M. M., & Alam, S. S. (2019). The impact of technology acceptance on English language learning: Evidence from university students. Asian EFL Journal, 23(3.3), 180–200.
76. Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. M. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement, and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 604–612.
77. Raza, S. A., Qazi, W., & Khan, K. A. (2021). Examining the impact of interactivity and perceived ease of use on students’ technology acceptance in higher education. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(8),          1241–1255.
78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619590
79. Razali, S., & Jupri, A. (2020). Enhancing oral proficiency through digital storytelling and peer discussion. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.1318a
80. Saidouni, K., & Bahloul, A. (2016). The effect of using mobile applications on English vocabulary learning among university students. Arab World English                                  Journal, 7(4), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol7no4.7
81. Shadiev, R., & Yang, M. (2020). Review of studies on technology-enhanced language learning and teaching. Sustainability, 12(2), 524–545. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020524
82. Suarez, K. (2020, February 18). Why Filipinos’ English skills are declining. CNN Philippines. https://www.cnnphilippines.com/life/culture/2020/2/18/english-decline-philippines.html
83. Sung, Y.-T., Chang, K.-E., & Liu, T.-C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252–275.
84. Taherdoost, H. (2018). A comprehensive review of the Technology Acceptance Model and its applications. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1), 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.09.013
85. Tesfaye, T., & Berhanu, B. (2019). English proficiency of Ethiopian college students: Speaking and writing challenges. English Language Teaching, 12(5), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n5p34
86. Traxler, J. (2018). Learning with mobiles in developing countries: Technology, language, and literacy. In J. Traxler & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Mobile learning: The next generation (pp. 9–24). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315631582
87. Tuncay, N., & Uzunboylu, H. (2020). English language learners’ acceptance of mobile learning applications. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 1071–1089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10012-7
88. Vázquez-Cano, E. (2015). Mobile learning with smartphones and apps in higher education: Impact on student motivation and learning outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1–11.
89. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2015). TAM 3 and the evolution of the Technology Acceptance Model. In Y. Dwivedi, M. Wade, & S. Schneberger (Eds.), Information systems theory (pp. 389–417). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6108-2_22
90. Vongsila, V., & Reinders, H. (2016). Making Asian learners talk: Encouraging willingness to communicate. ELT Journal, 70(3), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw009
91. Wu, W. C. V., & Marek, M. (2018). Developing intercultural communication competence through online English teaching: Applying TAM to Taiwanese EFL learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(3), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1399910
92. Yang, Y. F., & Chen, Y. J. (2022). Using mobile-assisted learning to improve English oral proficiency: Learners’ acceptance and perceptions. Language Learning & Technology, 26(2), 65–84.
93. Zainuddin, Z., & Perera, C. J. (2019). Exploring students’ competence, autonomy, and relatedness in the flipped classroom: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(1), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1356916
94. Zhang, L., & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2019). Technology acceptance and mobile-assisted vocabulary learning: Insights from higher education students. ReCALL, 31(3), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344019000035
95. Zou, D., & Xie, H. (2019). Flipping an English course with technology-enhanced active learning: The role of mobile applications. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(7), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1553186