Seoul Accord Annual General Meeting

The Seoul Accord’s Annual General Meeting (SAGM2016) was held last June 3-5, 2016 at the Royale Chulan, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. Read more

PSITE National Board (AY 2016-17)

Due to the recent developments with the PSITE National Board, the board met and reconvened in Manila on 15-March-2016 and held another election. Congratulations to the new set of officers listed below, they will bring PSITE into even greater heights! Soar high, PSITE! Mabuhay!!! Read more

Thailand Educational Benchmarking

Last May 23-28, 2015, I joined the Benchmarking Educational Tour of the PSITE National Board in Bangkok, Thailand. Read more

(ACTIS 2014, Japan) Asian Conference on Technology, Information and Socity

Last November 20-23, 2014, I attended and presented a paper entitled “Best Practices and Challenges of Information Technology Education in the Philippines. Read more

SEOUL ACCORD General Membership Meeting

The Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea (ABEEK) invited me to attend the Seoul Accord General Meeting (SAGM2013(Seoul)), Millennium Seoul Hiiton, Seoul, Korea last June 21 to 23, 2013. Read more

Indonesia Educational Benchmarking

Last May 18-25, 2014, I joined the Benchmarking Educational Tour in Jakarta, Indonesia. Read more


Philippine Information and Computing Accreditation Board -- MOA signing Read more

2013 NESRC

Pix taken during the 2013 National Engineering and Science Research Conference (2013 NESRC) held at the Heritage Hotel, Roxas Blvd, Pasay City last March 7, 2013 Read more


PSITE NatCon 2013 Opening Remarks; Read more


A team of four students from the Institute of Computing of the University of Southeastern Philippines clinched the Ideaspace Award and a PhP 100,000 cash prize; Read more

Hongkong Benchmarking Educational Tour

I joined the PSITE National Board Hongkong Benchmarking Educational Tour last January 03-06, 2013; Read more

eGOV Awards 2012

From a shortlist recommended by DOST-ICTO, i was invited to be one of the judges of the eGOV awards final judging last November 8, 2012 at Oxford Hotel, Clark Freeport Zone, Pampanga; Read more

10th National Conference on Information Technology Education

Delivered by Dr. Randy S. Gamboa, PSITE President, during the NCITE 2012 October 19, 2012 in Laoag City; Read more

Top 10 Finalists for the 9th SWEEP Innovation and Excellence Awards!

Two entries from the Institute of Computing had been shortlisted as top 10 finalists for the 9th SWEEP Innovation and Excellence Awards!; Read more

10th Philippine Youth Congress on Information Technology(Y4IT)

The Philippine Youth Congress on Information Technology or "Y4iT" (Youth for IT) is an annual event hosted by UP ITTC and UP SITF in cooperation with the UP ITTC Student Volunteer Corps, JICA, PSITE, CSP, PCS, PSIA, GDAP, EITSC, HSF, and Cyberpress. … Read more

Board Meeting

pix taken during the national board meeting last August 17-19, 2012 at Club Balai Isabel, Barangay Banga, Talisay Batangas.; Read more

Certificate of Recognition: Best Paper

The University of Southeastern Philippines held its 25th University Wide In-House Review; Read more

IBM Web Application Development Training

The Institute of Computing through its extension office with IBM and the Philippine Society of Information Technology Educators-Region X1 … Read more


Konnichiwa , On behalf of the participants both from the Philippines and from other countries, I would like to thank the Association for Overseas Technical Scholarship or ….Read more

Friday, June 29, 2007



Romanian hacker charged with breaching NASA computers
Agence France-Presse
Last updated 07:05am (Mla time) 06/27/2007

BUCHAREST -- A young Romanian has been charged with hacking into NASA computers and causing more than 1.5 million dollars (1.1 million euros) of damage for the US space agency, prosecutors said Tuesday.

Victor Faur, 26, from the western town of Arad, was also accused of breaking into the computers of the US navy and the Department of Energy between November 2005 and September 2006, a statement said.

Romanian police alerted NASA in July last year that its servers had been breached by unknown people based in Romania.

An ensuing probe, launched jointly by Romanian police and the FBI, led to Faur.
NASA had to rebuild its systems and scientists and engineers had to manually communicate with spacecraft, resulting in huge losses for NASA.

Faur, meanwhile, said in television interviews that his action was aimed at "proving that several computers are vulnerable to attack," and underlined that he had not tried to make any "material gains."

"I had neither modified nor erased the files, nor destroyed the communications systems," said Faur, who was formally put under investigation in December and has been barred from leaving the country.

An earlier indictment by the US Attorney's Office charges Faur with leading a hacking group called the "WhiteHat Team," which broke into the systems because of their reputation of being among the most secure in the world.

Instruction :

Please make your comment/s on the news article above in no less than 300 words.
Use this thread for your softcopy comment/s. Hardcopy answer should reach my table on July 02, 2007 (Monday) on or before 09:30am.

Check this BLOG everyday … new case study might be uploaded

Saturday, June 23, 2007

Research Capsule Proposal -1

I. Program / Project Title:


II. Proponent:

Institute of Computing
RANDY S. GAMBOA – Project Leader

III. Significance of the Project/Study:

Several sectors of society will benefit from this study. In general, this study will be significant to the academic community in Region XI.

Specifically, this research will be significant to:

· Administrators of SUCs. The results of this study will guide the administrators of SUCs in selecting IS leaders in their SUC.

· Researchers. Since there are only few studies related to gender in relation to IS Leadership in Region XI and the Philippines, this study will lead to future related researches. Thus, eventually making this topic thoroughly researched.

· NCRFW. The results of this study will provide the NCRFW additional information about gender equality and/or differences.

· Stakeholder of SUCs. The results of this study will provide stakeholders of SUCs to assess their IS leaders’ competency as well as development of the IS leaders.

IV. Objectives:

This study has the basic intention of collecting empirical information about IS leadership roles. These information will be processed so that gender differences on IS leadership will be determined.

Specifically, this study is conducted to:

1. Determine the profile of the Information System leaders of SUCs in terms of:
· Age;
· Gender;
· Educational attainment;
· Organizational years;
· IT years; and
· Position years

2. Determine the extent of the participation of IS leaders of SUCs to the following social aspects of leadership
· Informational Role;
· Decisional Role; and
· Interpersonal Role

3. Determine the extent of the participation of IS leaders of SUCs to the following technical aspects of leadership
· Chief Architect;
· Change Leader;
· Product Developer;
· Technology Provocateur;
· Coach; and
· Chief Operating Strategist

4. Determine the significant difference in the IS leadership roles when grouped by gender

V. Review of Literature

IS Leadership Roles

IS leadership functions have been studied by a number of academics. Among the studies made was that of Harvey Mintzberg wherein he came up with a Mintzberg topology. It suggests that all leaders play three kinds of roles which are considered as social aspect – informational, decisional and interpersonal. CSC (1996) also came up with a study suggesting that in order to execute IS’s future agenda, technical aspects of IS leader are required, namely: chief architect, change leader, product developer, technology provocateur, coach and chief operating strategist.

Information Systems Leadership should gain credibility in order to achieve business growth goals, rather than creating technical impediments to implementing business strategies. It must determine how to reduce product development and launch cycle times, create better strategic and operational decision making, support increased productivity, and improve client services.

A more precise focus on IS leadership role is given by the six leadership roles defined by the Computer Science Corporation in 1996.

Chief Architect- The primary work of the chief architect is to design and evolve the IT infrastructure so that it will expand the range of future possibilities for the business, not define specific outcomes. The infrastructure should not provide not just today’s technical services, such as networking, databases and desktop operating systems, but an increasing range of business-level services, such as workflow, portfolio management, scheduling, and specific business components or objects.

Change Leader – The essential role of the change leader is to orchestrate all those resources that will be needed to execute the change program. This includes providing new IT tools, but it also involves in place teams of people who can redesign roles, jobs and workflow, who can manage beliefs about the company and the work people do, and who understand human nature and can develop incentive systems to coax people into new and different behaviors. The role is somewhat akin to that of a reengineering team leader before reengineering-like change became the norm in most industries, however, the contribution of the change leaders is in leadership, rather than management of the process.

Product Developer – It helps the organization to understand key pieces of the emerging digital economy. They introduce business partners to the opportunities of creating profitable new IT-based products and services. For example, a product developer might recognize the potential for performing key business processes over electronic linkages such as the internet. The product developer must sell the idea to business partner, and together they can set up and evaluate business experiments, which are initially operated out of IS.

Technology Provocateur – It works with senior business executives to bring IT and the realities of the IT marketplace to bear on the formation of strategy for the business. The technology provocateur is a senior business executive who understands both the business and IT as deep enough level to integrate the two perspectives in discussions about the future course of the business.

Coach – Coaches have two basic responsibilities: teaching people how to learn, so that they become self-sufficient, and providing team leaders with staff able to do the IT-related work of the business. Coaches are solid practitioners of the competence that they will be coaching, but need not be the best at it in the company. They are motivated to keep up with the discipline, and pursue their vision of how the competence is evolving. Coaches assemble and promulgate a consistent set of best practices in the discipline they are coaching. Coaches also encourage staff within the center to share experiences and information, and help each other improve their work.

Chief Operating Strategist – the top IS executive who focuses on the future agenda of the IS organization. It has parallel responsibilities related to helping the business design the future and then delivering it. The chief operating strategies is primarily a conceptual thinker and strategist, as opposed to an active doer. They are responsible and accountable for assembling the IT capabilities. They are responsible for determining the sourcing strategy.

The CSC typology could be compared to others, notably the study of D.F. Feeny in 1997 entitled “The Five year Learning of ten I/T Directors”. He stated that Technical Virtuoso (chief architect) focuses on technology, technical infrastructure and technical competence. Relationship Builder (Change leader, coach-mentor, chief operating strategist) builds relationship with senior management, within department, across organization and with relevant outside parties, and develop share IT understanding. The Systems Thinker (Technology Provocateur) position IT within the larger context of the business, and plan and support business development, business transformation and business process re-engineering in a holistic manner. The Supply Manager (Product Developer) focus on IT delivery and operations.

Henry Mintzberg’s Typology of Management Functions

Within the past twenty years the idea of managerial roles has become popular. Henry Mintzberg (1975), a professor at McGill University in Canada, decided that Fayol’s functions did not tell the whole story. He developed a more detailed framework consisting of ten managerial roles that managers play, involving interpersonal, information, and decisional activities.

Interpersonal Roles
· Figurehead. The manager performs ceremonial duties, such as giving visiting dignitaries tours of the facilities
· Leader. The Manager maintains the unit by hiring and training the staff and providing motivation and encouragement.
· Liaison The manager makes contacts with persons outside the manager’s own unit-peers and others in the unit’s environment for the purpose of attending to business matters.

Informational Roles
· Monitor. The manager constantly looks for information bearing on the performance of the unit. The manager’s sensory preceptors scan both the internal activity of the unit and its environment.
· Disseminator. The manager passes valuable information along to others in the unit.
· Spokesperson. The manager passes valuable information along to those outside the unit - superior and persons in the environment.

Decisional Roles
· Entrepreneur. The manager makes rather permanent improvements to the unit, such as changing the organizational structural.
· Disturbance Handler. The manager reacts to unanticipated events, such as the devaluation
of the dollar in a foreign country where the firm has operations.
· Resource Allocator. The manager controls the purse strings of the unit, determining which subsidiary units get which resource.
· Negotiator. The manager resolves disputes both within the unit and between the unit and its environment.

Mintzberg believes that all managers perform all roles, but the orientation is different on each level. One of the decisional roles is that of negotiator. He gives the examples of a top-level manager negotiating merger, and a lower-level manager negotiating a delivery date with a supplier. Both negotiate, but with different orientations. Mintzberg found in his study of CEOs that they did not spend equal amounts of time discharging the decisional roles. They concentrated on making long-range, entrepreneurial improvements to the firm and responding to unanticipated disturbances, while leaving much of the resource allocating and negotiating to managers at lower levels.

Gender and Development

A concern for gender and development emerged on the international scene in the 1970s. As this concern matured, linkages developed between this and other major development concerns such as science and technology (S&T), development information, and, most recently, information systems, as a focus in the development community.

According to the UN Office of the Special Advisor on Gender Issues and the Advancement of Women, gender is defined as being as "the social attributes and opportunities associated with being male and female. These attributes, opportunities and relationships are socially constructed and are learned through socialization processes." Hence, in the international scenario, gender equality is being promoted in almost all aspects including that of leadership roles.

In the Philippines, by virtue of Presidential Decree 633, the National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women (NCRFW) was formed to review, evaluate and recommend measures, including priorities, to ensure the full integration of women for economic, social and cultural development at national, regional and international levels to ensure further equality between men and women. However, the roles that both gender play as subordinate or leader are not very well looked into not only by the NCRFW but also by the different schools and universities such as the SUCS in Region XI.

VI. Analytical Framework/Methodology

A descriptive-evaluative method of research will be used in the study. A descriptive method of research involves the description, recording, analysis and interpretation of the present condition, composition or processes of phenomena. The focus is on prevailing conditions or how a person, group or thing behaves or functions in the present (Calderon, 1993). It is valuable in providing facts on which scientific judgment may be based (Calmorin, 2001).

A researcher-made survey design will be used in describing the profile of the SUCs IS leaders. There are also items in the survey that captures the perception of the IS leaders. In a survey, the researcher seeks verbal or written responses to questions or statements. Surveys can be very effective in gathering data about individual preferences, expectations, past events, and private behaviors. The versatility of this method is its greatest strength. According to Emory (1980) survey can be the only practical way to learn many types of information and the most economical way in many other situations.

To validate and clarify further some items in the survey, interviews will be performed by the researchers to some of the respondents to further validate some answers. Secondary data will also be collected from the SUCs. These data are necessary in explaining the organizational characteristics like revenue and personnel.

The main instrument in the study is the researcher-made questionnaire. Part I of the questionnaire, Personal Profile, aims to gather data pertaining to the position and individual characteristics. Part II (Organizational Characteristics) determines the level of implementation of information system. On the other hand, Part III, Leadership roles aims to find out the leadership roles that IS Leaders are performing.

This is to be pre-tested to faculty members of the Institute of Computing of the University of Southeastern Philippines, Barrio Obrero Campus, Davao City. All were chosen on a convenience basis since they are in close contact with the researcher. This pre-test will be conducted in order to: a) elicit comments from the respondents regarding the questions; b) clarify ambiguous questions; and c) determine the time allotted in the actual survey. The responses will be collected and modifications in the wording of questions, appearance of the survey, and general flow of the questionnaire will be made in accordance with the respondents’ suggestions.

VII. Expected Outputs

The expected output presents the findings on a) individual characteristics of information system leaders of State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) in Region XI; b) position characteristics of information system leaders in terms of personnel and level of reporting; c) position characteristics of information system leaders in terms of the level of operating and strategic responsibility; d) organizational characteristics of SUCs in terms of revenue and number of personnel; e) organizational characteristics of SUCs in terms of IS usage; f) organizational characteristics of SUCs in terms of information system stages; g) extent of participation of information system leaders of SUCs in terms of the social and technical aspects of leadership roles; h) gender differences of IS leadership roles among State Universities and Colleges in Region XI.

VIII. Workplan

Preliminary plan for the project implementation consist of 5 work tasks which will be fulfilled for a period of 1 year

WT1. Conceptualization of the Study
· Collection of Related Literature and Studies
WT2. Writing the Proposal
· Background of the Study
· Objectives
· Review of Literature
· Analytical Framework/Methodology
· Significance of the Study
· Drafting of the Survey Instrument
WT3. Data Collection
· Distribution of Questionnaire
· Collection of Questionnaire
WT4. Processing of Data
· Data Encoding
· Preparation of Tables, Chart, Graphs, etc.
· Data Analysis
WT5. Submission of Final paper
· Writing the Final Paper
· Submission of Edited Copy
· Submission of Terminal Report

X. Budget

Personnel Services
Project Leader - 12,000.00
Researcher - 8,000.00
Supplies - 2,000.00
Communication/ Transportation - 2,000.00
Documentation and Reproduction - 4,000.00
GRAND TOTAL - 28,000.00

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Joyjoy's Biology Poem

B- Been there, done that
That is what they usually say
Always here, always there
No matter where, we’ll find it in any way.
I- In this world so big and green
Everywhere we look there is always this special thing
What is this you ask?
This is life, animals, plants, and human being.
O- Observe the trees, birds, and the life around it
Isn’t it astonishing?
Notice the people around you, the crowds you pass by
Don’t you think each has its own special thing?
L- Listen to the birds chirping
They all sound so sweet
Hear the people sing so well
Doesn’t it make our life complete?
O- Odd as we think it is
The deeper we go, the harder it gets
Tough as we think it is,
Working for mother earth, you’ll have no regrets.
G- Growing children as we are,
We must know, what we must do
Young as we are, we must’ve already knew
That polluting we’ve done are not a few.
Y- Year after year, we study science
But nothing compares to biology
The study of life cannot be replaced
Not astronomy, astrology, nor chemistry.

Rachelle Joy N. Gamboa 2-Opal