CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
A mobile phone is a device that can basically make and receive calls
over a radio link while moving around a wide geographic area. (Pew Research
center, 2010). It does so by connecting to a cellular network provided by a
mobile phone operator, allowing access to the public telephone network. The
ancient types of Mobile phones support limited services and examples were
shown in Fig. 1.1. Such as, calling, sending messages and very few for
taking pictures. However, the modern phones support very wide range variety
of other services apart from making and receive calls and examples were
shown in Fig. 1.2. These include; text messaging, MMS, e-mail, internet
access, short range wireless communications [(Infrared, Bluetooth, File
Transfer Protocol, (FTP)], business applications, gaming and photography.
Fig. 1.1. The Ancient Types of Mobile Phones
Source: Olanrewaju (2014) Field Work
Mobile phone is one of the most rapidly growing new technologies in
the world (Rebello, 2010). In 2001, cell phone users were less than a
billion worldwide with the majority of the users from the developed
countries. By the end of 2010, however, mobile phone users had reached five
billion worldwide with subscriptions from developing countries outnumbering
that of the developed countries (Kelly, 2009; Rebello, 2010). Obviously,
this increase includes a sharp increase in the number of cell phones
used by the younger generations. This area of interest was chosen because
of the unregulated usage and over dependent attitude on these devices
especially among our secondary school students. Interestingly, this is
obviously imperative as Geser & Junco (2006); and Merson & Salter (2010)
had observed that the youth have consistently displayed higher
level of attachment to their mobile phones which could serve as
distractions to them because of the time channeled to the phones.
Fig. 1.2. Other Ancient Types of Mobile Phones
Source: Olanrewaju (2014) Field Work
However, in recent years, different types of mobile phones have been
produced by different phone manufacturers. Each comes with different
features for different/ specific function(s). We have different variety of
mobile phones as named by their manufacturers, they include, Nokia,
Samsung, Motorola, Sagem, Sendo, Siemens,T-mobile, Thuraya, Vodafone, Sony
ericsson, Bluebird, alcatel, Blackberry, and so on. We now have those that
can make video calling, ping, take clearer pictures/photographs, surf the
internet and lots more. They are also built/ installed in/ with different
capacities, mode of operation and features/applications. For example,
17mega Pixel phones normally will produce clearer pictures/photographs,
Skype is an application for video calling, Blackberry and other android
enabled devices can ping. Some are android enabled; examples are, HTC,
Tecno, and so on which are basically the latest of all kinds of mobile
phones widely used by both young and old, especially among students
(Olanrewaju, 2015).
This study therefore, attempts to find out the impact of mobile
phones use among students in both private and public schools on their
academic performance. Also, to check whether or not there will be
significant difference in the performance of students using mobile phones
in Public and Private Schools.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
In the past one decade, Mobile phone was not as rampant among users
compared to how it is now being used; especially among secondary Schools'
students. Recently, mobile phone which comes in different types/models each
for specific tasks/functions is one of the basic essential gadgets
possessed by an average school student which relatively might certainly
influence such students' academic performance. This study therefore, seeks
to address the impact of mobile phones on student performance in secondary
Schools.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The general objective of this study is to assess the impact of mobile
phones on student performance in secondary Schools.
The specific objectives are to:
1. ascertain the extent to which mobile phones are being utilized in
secondary Schools among the students.
2. find out the extent to which the use of mobile phones will affect
students' performance in secondary School.
3. comparison of student performance in Public and Private Schools using
mobile phones.
1.4 Research Hypotheses
1. There is no significant difference in the number of secondary Schools'
students using mobile phones and those who do not.
2. There is no significant relationship in the extent to which the use of
mobile phone affects students' performance in secondary School.
3. There is no significant difference in the academic performance of
students using mobile phones in Public and Private Schools.
1.5 Significance of the Study
This study is meant to reveal the impact of mobile phones on
student performance in secondary Schools. It would expose the
students to the implications of spending too much time on their mobile
phones. Also, can serve as precautionary measures towards achieving
good academic result for students.
1.6 Operational Definition of Terms
- Impact: The effect of something on another thing.
- Mobile: Anything that can be carried from one place to another.
- Phone: Electronic equipment that converts sound into electrical
signals that can be transmitted over distances and then converts
received signals back into sounds.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
This study reviewed related literature from books, journals, and
internet; organized under the following sub-headings:
i. Meaning and Concept of Mobile Phone
ii. Student Performance
iii. Impact of Mobile Phones on Students' Performance
iv. Review of Related Literature.
2.1 Meaning and Concept of Mobile Phones
A mobile phone is a phone that can make and receive telephone calls
over a radio link while moving around a wide geographic area. It does so by
connecting to a cellular network provided by a mobile phone operator,
allowing access to the public telephone network. In addition, modern phones
also support wide range variety of other services such as text messaging,
MMS, e-mail, internet access, short range wireless communications
(Infrared, Bluetooth), business applications, gaming and photography. (Pew
Research center, 2010)
Fig. 2.1. The Modern Types of Mobile Phones.
Source: Olanrewaju (2014) Field Work
The use of technology is a global imperative due to its contributions
to human existence and has enhanced the socio economic relations globally.
Wireless communication has emerged as one of the fastest diffusing media on
the planet, fuelling an emergent "mobile youth culture" (Castells,
Fernandez-Ardevol, Qiu, and Sey, 2007). Thus, increased popularity of cell
and smart phones in recent years has attracted research attention. Cell
phones are seen as a mixed blessing. Teens say phones make their lives
safer and more convenient. Yet they also cite new tensions connected to
cell phone use (Pew Research Center, 2010).
As cell phones have become more available, they are increasingly
owned and used by teens. Further, as handsets become more loaded with
capabilities ranging from video recording and sharing, to music
playing and internet access, teens and young adults have an ever-increasing
repertoire of use. Indeed, we are moving into an era when mobile devices
are not just for talking and texting, but can also access the internet and
all it has to offer (Pew Research Center, 2010).
2.2 Student Performance
Students academic gain and learning performance is affected by
numerous factor including gender, age, teaching faculty, students
schooling, father/guardian social economic status, residential area of
students, medium of instructions in schools, tuition trend, daily study
hour and accommodation as hostelries or day scholar. Many researchers
conducted detailed studies about the factors contributing student
performance at different study levels. Graetz (1995) suggested "A student
educational success contingent heavily on social status of student's
parents/ guardians in the society. Considine and Zappala (2002) noticed the
same that parent's income or social status positively affects the student
test score in examination. According to Minnesota (2007) "the higher
education performance is depending upon the academic performance of
graduate students. Durden and Ellis quoted Staffolani and Bratti, (2002)
observed that "the measurement of students previous educational outcomes
are the most important indicators of students future achievement, this
refers that as the higher previous appearance, better the student's
academic performance in future endeavours.
Lot of studies have been conducted in the area of students achievement and
these studies identify and analyze the number of factors that affect the
academic performance of the student at school, college and even at
university level. Their finding identify students' effort, previous
schooling, parent's educational background, family income, self motivation
of students, age of student, learning preferences and entry qualification
of students as important factors that have effect on student's academic
performance in different setting. The utility of these studies lies in the
need to undertake corrective measures that improve the academic performance
of graduate students.
It is generally assumed that the students who showed better or
higher performance in the starting classes of their studies also performed
better in future academic years at degree level. Everyone can be surprised
with this assumption if it could be proved scientifically. From the last
two decades it has been noticed significantly that there is great addition
in research literature and review material relating to indicators of
academic achievement with much emphasis on this dialogue, whether
traditional achievement measures of academic performance are best
determinants of future academic gain at university or higher level or
innovative measures. However, it is also observed that many of the
researchers are not agree with this view point or statement. Reddy and
Talcott (2006) looks disagree with these assumptions that future academic
gains are resolute by preceding performance. In their research on the
relationship between previous academic performance and subsequent
achievement at university level, they found that students learning or
studying at graduate level and the score secured did not predict any
academic achievement at university level. They also cited Pearson and
Johnson (1978) who observed that on the whole grade association of only
0.28 between graduate level marks and university degree achievement.
It is also confirmed in the study of Oregon State University (2003) on
graduate admissions that normal measures of educational potential and
academic performance such as high school GPA (Grade Point Average) scores
showed only 30% of the deviation in initial or starting (first) year at
college. It is important to note that even these studies do not agree with
the former studies who explored that previous achievement affect the future
performance of the students in studies, they confirmed that the admission
scores are related to academic performance at university level but to a
very minimal extent. McDonald et.al (2001) also suggested that the scores
of graduate level studies still out perform any other single measure of
cognitive aptitude in predicting success at university level.
Parent's socio-economic condition, which includes parents'
academic and professional qualification, revenue and occupational
affiliation, is also associated with academic gain of students. The results
of many studies confirmed that academic achievement of students is
contingent upon parent's socio-economic condition. So the students
belonging from higher social economical backgrounds will perform better
than other students associated with low social economic backgrounds.
"Social and economical status of student is generally determined by
combining parents' qualification, occupation and income standard" (Jeynes,
2002). Among many research studies conducted on academic achievement, it is
not very surprising to observe that Socio-economic status is one of the
main elements studied while predicting academic performance.
Graetz (1995) conducted a study on socio-economic status of the parents of
students and concluded that the socio economic background has a great
impact on student's academic performance, main source of educational
imbalance among students and student's academic success contingent very
strongly on parent's socio economic standard. Considine and Zappala (2002)
also having the same views as Graetz (1995), in their study on the
influence of social and economic disadvantage in the academic performance
of school students noticed, where the parents or guardians have social,
educational and economical advantage definitely strengthen the higher level
success in future. But it is also noted that these parents make available
sufficient psychological and emotional shore up to their children by
providing good educational and learning environment that produce confidence
and the improvement of skills needed for success.
On other hand Pedrosa et.al (2006) in their study on social and educational
background pointed out those students who mostly come from deprived socio-
economic and educational background performed relatively better than others
coming from higher socio-economic and educational area. They named this
phenomena educational elasticity. It is obvious and true that the criteria
for categorizing socio-economic standard in different countries are
different depending of their norms and values. The criteria for low socio-
economic status for developed country will be different from the criteria
of developing nations and same will be in the case of developing and under
developing countries. "The total income of families, monthly or annually
and their expenditures also put a great effect on the learning and academic
opportunities accessible to youngsters and their chances of educational
success. Furthermore, he also pointed that due to residential
stratification and segregation, the students belonging to low-income
backgrounds usually attend schools with lower funding levels, and this
situation reduced achievement motivation of the students and high risk of
educational malfunction in future life endeavors" (Escarce, 2003).
Considine & Zappala (2002) observed that children comes from those families
having low income make known more subsequent models in terms of learning
outcomes; low literacy level, low retention rate, problems in school
behaviour and more difficulty in their studies and mostly display negative
attitude towards studies and school. The view point of Considine and
Zappala is more strengthen by this statement of Eamon, According to Eamon
(2005) "Those students usually come out from low socio-economic status or
area show low performance in studies and obtained low scores as compared to
the other students or their counter parts".
It is also assumed that children learning outcome and educational
performance are strongly affected by the standard and type of educational
institution in which students get their education. The educational
environment of the school one attends sets the parameters of students'
learning outcomes. Considine and Zappala (2002) quoted Sparkles (1999)
showed that schools environment and teachers expectations from their
students also have strong influence on student performance. Most of the
teachers working in poor schools or schools having run short of basic
facilities often have low performance expectations from their students and
when students know that their teachers have low performance expectations
from them, hence it leads to poor performance by the students. Kwesiga
(2002) approved that performance of the students is also influenced by the
school in which they studied but he also said that number of facilities a
school offers usually determine the quality of the school, which in turn
affect the performance and accomplishment of its students. Sentamu (2003)
argue that schools influence educational process in content organization,
teacher and teaching learning and in the end evaluation of the all. All
these educationists and researchers agreed with this principle that schools
put strong effect on academic performance and educational attainment of
students.
Students from elite schools are expected to perform good because they
attend these elite schools and the main reason behind is that these schools
are usually very rich in resources and facilities. Some researchers have
the view that school ownership and the funds available in schools do indeed
influenced the performance of the student. Crosne and Elder (2004) noticed
that school ownership, provision of facilities and availability of
resources in school is an important structural component of the school.
Private schools due to the better funding, small sizes, serious ownership,
motivated faculty and access to resources such as computers perform better
than public schools. These additional funding resources and facilities
found in private schools enhance academic performance and educational
attainment of their students. It is also very pleasing that students from
Govt schools colleges and universities in Punjab Pakistan are providing the
laptops by the Punjab Government, so that the students could interact with
the whole world and know about the latest developments and innovations.
2.2 Impact of Mobile Phones on Students' Performance
Apart from the negative effect through the usage of these phones
by the students, it also have some other effects; which maybe
psychological. The addictive nature of cell phones has concerned
psychologists for years.
Recently, psychologists have warned that phone users are especially
at risk of becoming addicted to their devices. In a recent study by Wargo,
(2012), the subjects checked their phones 34 times a day. People may
check their phones out of habit or compulsion, but habitually
checking can be a way to avoid interacting with people. Some people can
experience withdrawal symptoms typically associated with substance abuse,
such as anxiety, insomnia, and depression, when they are without their
phones and all these are embedded to the course of academic relapse of
students who fall into this category. Surprisingly, these addictions take
strong toll on the student without them noticing it and some of them find
it hard to believe that they are addicted to their phones. Thus, giving
more credence to the amount of time meted out to these phones than
academics. Chóliz, (2010) pointed out that excessive use of and dependency
on the cell phone may be considered an addictive disorder. In order to
address some of the issues attached to cell phones researchers chose
different area of interest and teasing them out.
Theory on adolescent egocentrism, pointed out heightened self-
consciousness during adolescence. The theory adolescent egocentrism stated
that it is a stage of self-absorption where the world is seen only from
one's own perspective. Thus adolescents are highly critical of authority
figures, unwilling to accept criticism, and quick to find fault
with others. Adolescent egocentrism helps explain why teens often think
they are the focus of everyone attention. Also, adolescence is a time of
considerable physical and psychological growth and change, which falls in
line with the study of the student in the secondary Schools being
examined, on cell phone usage and acquisition among other. Most
students like to keep track ahead of their peers or to have an
ontological balance in their peer group which they find
themselves. At the expense of their notions, they try to live the life
which is expected of them in the social settings which they find themselves
instead of the ideal life; thereby pushing them to the limit.
It was observed that most of the students using the Internet enabled
phones get to pay some bills at the end of the month, which is however paid
with the little monthly allowance money given to them by their sponsors or
parent for upkeep in school and their studies. Some go as long as to
upgrade their phone, by buying the current ones and selling of the old ones
at a giveaway price or "trunking" as the word is widely used, just to meet
up with the current trend. (Elkind, 1967).
These ostentatious mode of using and disposing of mobile phones
especially, the internet enabled phones at will, in order to be abreast
of current trends may inhibits the student from focusing on their
academics and allowing them to do better in their studies which
is their primary target as students in the secondary schools. Their
academic performance is a fulcrum for their future roles and the roles that
will be vested upon them by their predecessors as the new generations.
In an attempt to discuss about the issue of this topic on mobile
phones and its impact on students performance, personal observations has
been seen among student using the phones for visiting social platform, such
as the Facebook, Twitter, 2go, Myspace and instant messengers (yahoo
messengers, msn messengers and blackberry pinging instant messengers)
especially the internet enabled ones, during academic periods and off
academic periods indicating that the internet phones have a strong
effect on the students. Calling to mind the judicious gap which has been
mended by technology, it should be noted that the usage of phones are not
intended for negative purpose and influence; however, the attitude and time
channeled towards these devices has enslaved the student, thereby making
them addicts, Also, they affirmed that young people between 15 and 19
admitted being addicted to their cell phones (Naval, Sádaba and Brigué,
(2004). Also, British scientists noted that more and more people are
getting addicted to their cell phones, causing stress and irritability
(BBC, 2006). While specialists indicate that the abuse of the use of cell
phones could be typified as 'a disorder of addiction that has to be
stopped as soon as possible' (Paniagua, 2005). Reawakening, to the
recalcitrant mode of the student academic prowess in the academic 'world'
there is a need to address the students prerogative in the society
which serves as issues in empowering them towards helping to the
development of the society which also address the issue of gender
equality, if we are looking towards positive changes in the
society and development.
2.3 Review of Related Literature
Some of the common mobile phone related research topics
include cell phone use while driving (Caird, Willness, Steel, and
Scialfa, 2008; Horrey and Wickens, 2006; McCartt, Hellinga, and
Braitman, 2006), cell phone etiquette (Lipscomb, Totten, Cook, and
Lesch, 2007), cell phone cultures and behaviors (Campbell and Park,
2008; Bakke, 2010; Ling, 2004), text messaging (Pettigrew, 2009),
health risks from cell phone radiation. Some other studies reported
that the presence of cell phones provide a higher sense of security in
potentially harmful situations. This has contributed to an increase
in cell phone value, leading cell phone users to perceive cell
phones as a must-have tool (Nasar, Hecht, and Wener, 2007; Walsh et al.,
2008). The use of Mobile Phones has also been addressed with other
focuses, such as enhancing Academic performance in Distance Education.
Jean-Marie, Viljoen and Carl, (2009). On Semen Analysis in men attending
infertility Clinic: an observational study. During the study, their
objective was to investigate the effect of cell phone use on various
markers of semen quality, and in their conclusion stated that "Use of cell
phones decrease the semen quality in men by decreasing the sperm count,
motility, viability, and normal morphology. The decrease in sperm
parameters was dependent on the duration of daily exposure to cell phones
and independent of the initial semen quality" Costly Cell Phones: The
Impact of Cell Phone Rings on Academic Performance. During the study,
"Findings indicated that cell phone rings during a video presentation
impaired academic performance" (Ashok, End, Worthman, Mathews, and
Katharina, 2008).
However, this study therefore seeks, to find out the impact of the use of
mobile phones on students performance. Taking students of secondary
schools as case study at both private and public secondary schools.
The study was carried out in order to understand and bring to fore if the
students' academic performance is affected due to the time channelled to
the phone during class hours which has a general perception as a
medium of distractions to students. The retrieval of the information
gotten from this study was done with structured questionnaires
administered to 200 students to obtain their personal opinions, while 15
in-depth interviews were conducted to have a grounded knowledge
opinions of the students simultaneously with the data gathered
during the course of this study. The analysis of the students'
perception showed that the internet enabled phone usage does not affect
the academic performance of the students but distractions by the usage of
phone were notably admitted.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter described the research design, area of the study,
population and Samples, instrument for data collection, validation and
reliability of research instrument, administration of instrument, data
collection method and data analysis technique.
3.1 Research Design
This research work adopted the descriptive survey research design to
find out the impact of mobile phones on student performance in secondary
Schools.
3.2 Area of the Study
This study was carried out in Ife-East Local Government Area, State
of Osun. It has an area of 172km2 and a population of 188,087 (National
Populations' Commission Census NPC, 2006).
3.3 Population and Samples
The population of the study were made up of Two (2) Schools, one
Private secondary School in Ile-Ife and the other Public School in
Modakeke, State of Osun. However, Two Hundred (200) students in the two
Schools as samples.
3.4 Research Instrument for Data Collection
Structured questionnaire was used to gather information from the
respondents. The questionnaires were designed in 3 sections. Section 'A'
consist of the respondents' socio-demography, section 'B' contain questions
based on the set objectives and the research hypothesis and section 'C'
contain records of student performance accordingly. The questionnaire is a
close ended one, whereby respondents were only allowed to choose their
answers from the boxes provided.
3.5 Validation of Research Instrument
The questionnaires were constructed by the researcher and validated
by the project instructor who made face validation and also ascertained the
stability of the instrument.
3.6 Reliability of Research Instrument
To ascertain the reliability of the instrument, test re-test method was
adopted.
3.7 Administration of Instrument and Method of Data Collection
Two Hundred (200) copies of the questionnaires were produced and
administered by the researcher to the randomly selected students in the
selected public and private Schools in Ife East Local Government of State
of Osun. To minimize errors in the completion of the questionnaire,
difficult items on the questionnaires were explained by the researcher to
the respondents. The filled copies were collected immediately and kept
saved to avoid loss in transit.
8. Data analysis Technique
The researcher used Descriptive, Correlation, Cross Tabs and ANOVA
(Analysis of Variance).
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Interpretation of Results
4.2 Discussions of the Findings:
Table 4.1: Test responses based on socio demography of respondents and set
objectives.
"SEX "Frequency "Percentage (%) "
"Male "94 "47.0 "
"Female "106 "53.0 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"AGE " "
"13-15years "98 "49.0 "
"16-18years "97 "48.5 "
"Above 19years "5 "2.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"RELIGION " "
"Islam "36 "18.0 "
"Christianity "164 "82.0 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Do you have access to mobile phones? " "
"Yes "194 "97.0 "
"No "6 "3.0 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"If yes, how do you get access to it? " " "
"Through; " " "
"Parents "100 "50.0 "
"Friends "4 "2.0 "
"Personal "90 "45.0 "
"Total "194 "97.0 "
"Do you use mobile phones frequently? " " "
"Yes "189 "94.5 "
"No "11 "5.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"What do you use it for? " " "
"Night calling " " "
"Often "38 "19.0 "
"Rarely "67 "33.5 "
"Not often "95 "47.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Browsing " " "
"Often "111 "55.5 "
"Rarely "51 "25.5 "
"Not often "38 "19.0 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Charting( 2go, whatsapp, etc) " " "
"Often "103 "51.5 "
"Rarely "54 "27.0 "
"Not often "43 "21.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Face booking " " "
"Often "83 "41.5 "
"Rarely "68 "34.0 "
"Not often "49 "24.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Gaming " " "
"Often "91 "45.5 "
"Rarely "64 "32.0 "
"Not often "45 "22.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Do you spend too much time in any of " " "
"the above mentioned? " " "
"Yes "59 "29.5 "
"No "141 "70.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Apart from the above mentioned, do you" " "
"use mobile phones to get your " " "
"assignment get? " " "
"Yes "174 "87.0 "
"No "26 "13.0 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Do you bring mobile phones to school? " " "
"Yes "23 "11.5 "
"No "177 "88.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"Is the use of mobile phones in school " " "
"premises prohibited? " " "
"Yes "147 "73.5 "
"No "53 "26.5 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
"How long have you been using mobile " " "
"phone? " " "
"1-3 Months "31 "15.5 "
"4-6 Months "43 "21.5 "
"Above 1year "126 "63.0 "
"Total "200 "100.0 "
Fig 4.1: The respondents' gender frequency chart.
Fig 4.2: The respondents' age frequency chart.
Fig 4.3: The respondents' Religion frequency chart.
Fig 4.4: The respondents' frequency charts showing their access to
mobile phones.
Fig 4.5: The respondents' frequency charts showing how they got access
to mobile phones.
Fig 4.6: The respondents' frequency charts showing how frequent they
use mobile phones.
Fig. 4.7: The respondents' frequency charts of those making night calls
with their mobile phones.
Fig. 4.8: The respondents' frequency charts of those that browse with
their mobile phones.
Fig. 4.9: The respondents' frequency charts of those that chart with
their mobile phones.
Fig. 4.10: The respondents' frequency charts of those that are
facebooking with their mobile phones.
Fig. 4.11: The respondents' frequency charts of those that play games
with their mobile phones.
Fig. 4.12: The respondents' frequency charts of those that play games
with their mobile phones.
Fig. 4.13: The respondents' frequency charts of those who bring their
mobile phones to school.
Fig. 4.14: The respondents' frequency charts showing how long they have
been using mobile phones.
Fig.4.15: Cross tabulation of respondents' Religion and their Sex.
Fig.4.16: Cross tabulation showing Age of respondents and their Sex
Fig.4.17: Cross tabulation of respondents' Age and their access to
mobile phones.
Table 4.2: The correlations showing the relationships between the average
performances of the respondents and usage of mobile phones.
"Do you use mobile " "Do you use mobile "AVERAGE "
"phones? " "phones? " "
" "Correlation "1.000 ".067 "
" "Coefficient " " "
" "Sig. (2-tailed) ". ".346 "
" "N "200 "200 "
"AVERAGE "Correlation ".067 "1.000 "
" "Coefficient " " "
" "Sig. (2-tailed) ".346 ". "
" "N "200 "200 "
Table 4.3: The ANOVA statistics of Private and Public School
" "PRIVATE "PUBLIC "F "P "
" "MEAN±SEM "MEAN±SEM " " "
"FIRST TERM "57.79±1.37 " "1.13 "0.737"
" " "54.51±1.35 " " "
"SECOND TERM "58.87±1.38 "42.50±1.16 "13.63"0.000"
"AVERAGE "58.50±1.22 "48.91±1.06 "5.56 "0.190"
4.2 Discussion of the Findings
Based on the above Table 4.1, it showed that, 94 (47%) respondents
were male while 106 (53%) were female. 98 respondents were between 13-
15years, 97 between 16-18years while just 5 were above 19years.
Consequently, based on the respondents' religion, 36 were Muslims while 164
were Christians. 194 students have access to mobile phones while those who
did not were just 6. Also, 100 students got access to mobile phones through
their parents, 4, through friends and 90, personal. Then, 189 respondents
make use of their phones frequently while 11 did not. However, 38 often use
theirs for night calls while 95 do not.
It was recorded that, 141 respondents do not spend too much time in
using their mobile phones for specific functions. And, 174 said, their
mobile phones was being used mainly to get their assignments done. 177
responded that, the use of mobile phones in the school premises is
prohibited but, we still have some stubborn 23 students who bring theirs to
school. However, 126 respondents have been using their phones for more than
1 year.
The Table 4.2 above showed a positive relationship between the
average performance of students and their extent of use of mobile phones
because, as average performance increases, their phone level usage
increases.
The Table 4.3 above showed that, the mean performance of private
school students (57.79±1.37) was higher than the mean performance of public
school students (56.91±1.02) in first term of the academic session but
there is no significant difference (f= 1.13, P=0.737, at p>0.05).
Therefore, the higher mean of performance of private school students
recorded could be because there were restrictions in the use of mobile
phones among the students.
Also, there was a significant difference in the second term
academic session where mean±sem performance of private school (58.87±1.38)
was higher than the mean±sem of public school (48.36±1.34). At (f= 13.63,
P=0.000, p<0.05) as shown in Table 4.3. Therefore, the significant
difference between mean of performance of private school students could be
because students make use of their mobile phones while teaching is on-
going, thereby making them lose concentration or get distracted.
Meanwhile, the average mean performance of the private school
students in their first and second term (58.50±1.22) and Public, mean
performance (52.94±1.11) at (f= 5.56, P=0.190, p>0.05). However, there was
no significant difference as shown in Table 4.3. Therefore, the higher mean
of performance of private school students recorded could also be because
there were restrictions in the use of mobile phones among the students.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary of the Principal Findings
This study focused on the impact of mobile phones on the
performance of secondary schools students' in Ife East Local Government
Area, State of Osun, Nigeria. However, the following findings were made
from the study:
1. Ninety Seven 97 (%) of the secondary school students have access to
mobile phones either through their parents, friends or personal.
2. The performance of the secondary schools students is not significantly
affected by their access to mobile phones.
3. There was no significant difference in the performance of both private
and public secondary schools students.
5.2 Suggestions for Further Research
This study covered Ife East Local Government Area, State of Osun.
Therefore, replication of the study could still be carried out on a broader
scope.
5.3 Conclusion
In conclusion, mobile phones which are in different types/models each
for specific tasks/functions are essential gadgets possessed by an average
school student. This concluded research has strongly showed there was no
vast influence on students' academic performance in the secondary schools.
5.4 Recommendations
Based on the findings of this work, the following recommendations
were formulated:
1. Secondary school students need to be re-orientated on the need to set
their priorities right. This drive towards reorientation must be
championed by the school management in conjunction with the
parents/guardians of the students. While the usage of mobile
phones by students cannot be outlawed drastically, they need to be
continuously informed on the positive and negative effects of their
usage and of the problems deriving from the over-dependency and
unregulated use of their mobile phones.
2. Similarly, the school management must be more alive to their
responsibilities by ensuring conformity to the school laid down rules
and regulations on student's use of mobile phone device during class
session.
REFERENCES
Ashok A., (2008). "The use of Mobile Phones in enhancing Academic
performance in Distance Education: An African Perspective" American
Society for Reproductive Medicine. Elsevier Inc. pp. 47-51.
BBC World Service. (2006). "La adicción al teléfonomóvil."
Best, S.G. (2006). "Conflict Analysis" in S.G(ed). Introduction to peace
and conflict studies in West Africa, Ibadan: Spectrum Books. Ltd. Pp.
62-66.
Caird, J.K., Willness, C, R., Steel, P., and Scialfa, C. (2008). "A meta-
analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance". Accident
analysis and prevention, 40, 1282-1293.
Campbell, S.W., and Park, Y.J. (2008). "Social implications of mobile
telephony": The rise of personal communication society. Sociology Compass,
2, 371-387.
Castells, M., Fernandez-Ardevol, M,.Qiu, J., and Sey, A. (2007)."Mobile
Communication and society: A global perspective." Cambridge, MA: MIT
press. Retrieved, April 2015.
Chóliz, M. (2010). "Mobile phone addiction: Point of issue Addiction".105,
374. Christian M. End, ShayeWorthman, Mary Bridget Mathews, and
Katharina Wetterau 2010 "Costly Cell Phones: The Impact of Cell Phone
Rings on Academic Performance", Xavier University.
Jarrat, J. and Coates, J.F. (1990). "Future Use of Cellular Technology."
Some Social Implications', Telecommunications Policy. pp 78–84.
Jean-Marie, Viljoen and Carl, Du Preez (2009)."The use of Mobile Phones in
enhancin Academic performance in Distance Education."An African"
Perspective. Pp.33-38.
Kelly, M. (2009). Mobile Phones; pros and cons. Retrieved from
http://www.educatorsabout.com/ School violence/phones.htm. Accessed on
8th November, 2013.
Lipscomb, T. J., Totten, J. W., Cook, R. A., and Lesch, W. (2007)."Cellular
phone etiquette among college students." International Journal of Consumer
Studies, 31,46-56.
Nasar, J., Hecht, P., and Wener, R. (2007). "Call if you have trouble':
Mobile phones and safety among college students". International Journal
of Urban and Regional Research, 31, 863-873
Naval C, Ch. Sádaba Y J Brigué. (2004). "Impacto de las TIC (Tecnologías
de la Información Comunicación) en lasrelacionessociales de los
jóvenesnavarros." Universidad de Navarra. The usage and impact of
Internet enabled phones on academic concentration. P.,173.
Paniagua A. (2005). "El 38% de los niñossientenansiedadsi no llevansumóvil.
El Norte de Castilla" Colpisa
Pettigrew, J. (2009)."Text messaging and connectedness within close
interpersonal relationships."Marriage and Family Review, 45, 697-716.
Pew Research center, (2010). "Teens and Mobile Phones." Text messaging
explodes as teens embrace it as the center piece of their communication
strategies with friends.
Wargo, J, Wargo, L. (2012) "Cell Phones: Technology, Exposures, Health
Effects." Environment and Human Health Monograph 7: 65.
Elkind, D. (1967). Egocentrism in adolescence. Child Development, 38, 1025-
1034. Elkind, D. (1978). Understanding the young adoles-cent. Adolescence,
13, 127-134
Horrey, W.J. and Wickens, ... Phone Conversations on Driving Using Meta-
Analytic Techniques," Human Factors, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 196-205, 2006.
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS
THE IMPACT OF MOBILE PHONES ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS
This questionnaire is designed to find out relevant information about
the above topic. Please, respond to questions objectively. The information
you supply will be for the purpose of this research only.
SECTION A: Personal Data
Instruction: Please fill and tick (() as appropriate in the space provided.
Sex: Male ( ), Female ( ).
Age: 10-12 years ( ), 13-15 years ( ), 16-18 years ( ),
Above 19 years ( ).
Class: S.S 2
Religion: Islam ( ), Christianity ( ), Others,
Specify................................
SECTION B- Availability of Mobile Phones.
1. Do you have access to mobile phones? Yes ( )
No ( )
2. If yes, how do you get access to it? Through; Parent ( ) ,
Friends ( ), Personal ( )
3. Do you use mobile phones? Yes ( ), No (
)
4. If yes, what do you use it for?
Often Rarely
Not Often
a. Night Calling
b. Browsing
c. Charting (2go, Whatsapp, e.t.c )
d. Face booking
e. Gaming
5. Do you spend too much time in any of the above mentioned? Yes (
) No ( )
6. Apart from the above mentioned, do you use mobile phone to get your
assignments done? Yes ( ) No ( )
7. Do you bring mobile phone to school?
Yes ( ) No ( )
8. Is the use of mobile phones in the school premises prohibited? Yes (
) No ( )
9. How long have you been using mobile phone? 1-3months ( ), 4-
6months ( ), 1year and above ( ).
SECTION C- Student over-all Students Performance
"S/N "1ST TERM "2ND TERM "AVERAGE "
" "58 "60 "59 "
" "61 "62 "62 "
" "52 "42 "47 "
" "40 "32 "36 "
" "70 "61 "66 "
" "52 "51 "52 "
" "49 "50 "50 "
" "53 "62 "58 "
" "60 "71 "66 "
" "58 "62 "60 "
" "61 "59 "60 "
" "80 "79 "80 "
" "62 "56 "59 "
" "55 "62 "58 "
" "52 "59 "56 "
" "60 "62 "61 "
" "59 "61 "60 "
" "50 "62 "56 "
" "62 "58 "60 "
" "46 "51 "49 "
" "61 "58 "60 "
" "62 "52 "57 "
" "63 "62 "61 "
" "58 "62 "60 "
" "62 "52 "57 "
" "46 "51 "49 "
" "50 "69 "60 "
" "59 "60 "60 "
" "49 "62 "56 "
" "71 "51 "61 "
" "59 "61 "60 "
" "60 "62 "61 "
" "45 "52 "49 "
" "80 "76 "78 "
" "59 "62 "61 "
" "53 "59 "56 "
" "59 "69 "64 "
" "60 "55 "58 "
" "64 "25 "45 "
" "55 "32 "44 "
" "76 "43 "60 "
" "67 "20 "44 "
" "67 "43 "65 "
" "81 "26 "54 "
" "48 "24 "36 "
" "76 "73 "75 "
" "34 "27 "31 "
" "74 "45 "60 "
" "56 "30 "43 "
" "40 "16 "28 "
" "44 "26 "35 "
" "80 "30 "55 "
" "68 "35 "52 "
" "46 "21 "34 "
" "77 "32 "55 "
" "58 "34 "46 "
" "43 "26 "35 "
" "66 "50 "58 "
" "74 "35 "55 "
" "70 "43 "57 "
" "64 "52 "58 "
" "33 "57 "45 "
" "78 "92 "85 "
" "43 "46 "45 "
" "40 "44 "42 "
" "43 "57 "58 "
" "70 "53 "64 "
" "27 "24 "26 "
" "31 "34 "33 "
" "40 "39 "40 "
" "46 "34 "40 "
" "21 "37 "29 "
" "56 "41 "49 "
" "71 "38 "55 "
" "21 "30 "26 "
" "57 "32 "45 "
" "4 "20 "12 "
" "36 "25 "31 "
" "52 "59 "56 "
" "65 "37 "51 "
" "53 "40 "47 "
" "44 "28 "36 "
" "76 "54 "65 "
" "53 "48 "51 "
" "88 "61 "75 "
" "30 "28 "29 "
" "75 "49 "62 "
" "15 "26 "21 "
" "43 "21 "32 "
" "40 "22 "31 "
" "44 "32 "38 "
" "53 "34 "34 "
" "41 "16 "29 "
" "75 "44 "60 "
" "49 "50 "50 "
" "53 "62 "58 "
" "60 "71 "66 "
" "58 "62 "60 "
" "61 "59 "60 "
" "80 "79 "80 "
" "62 "56 "59 "
" "55 "62 "58 "
" "52 "59 "56 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "62 "51 "57 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "49 "50 "50 "
" "53 "62 "58 "
" "60 "71 "66 "
" "58 "62 "60 "
" "61 "59 "60 "
" "80 "79 "80 "
" "62 "56 "59 "
" "55 "62 "58 "
" "60 "30 "45 "
" "58 "40 "49 "
" "74 "24 "49 "
" "45 "24 "35 "
" "68 "20 "44 "
" "71 "47 "60 "
" "47 "60 "54 "
" "76 "53 "65 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "68 "51 "60 "
" "59 "49 "54 "
" "62 "48 "55 "
" "41 "43 "42 "
" "45 "43 "44 "
" "72 "55 "64 "
" "64 "66 "65 "
" "51 "65 "54 "
" "81 "85 "83 "
" "77 "59 "68 "
" "45 "47 "46 "
" "56 "33 "45 "
" "73 "39 "56 "
" "36 "51 "44 "
" "68 "51 "60 "
" "55 "46 "50 "
" "56 "45 "51 "
" "84 "61 "73 "
" "40 "41 "41 "
" "68 "50 "59 "
" "84 "66 "75 "
" "60 "68 "64 "
" "69 "49 "59 "
" "74 "63 "69 "
" "46 "58 "52 "
" "67 "44 "56 "
" "74 "54 "64 "
" "75 "55 "65 "
" "85 "65 "74 "
" "40 "31 "36 "
" "55 "26 "41 "
" "29 "33 "31 "
" "54 "51 "53 "
" "40 "56 "48 "
" "56 "51 "54 "
" "56 "41 "49 "
" "44 "46 "45 "
" "73 "69 "71 "
" "63 "69 "66 "
" "40 "55 "48 "
" "50 "38 "44 "
" "67 "56 "62 "
" "47 "55 "51 "
" "61 "49 "55 "
" "49 "50 "50 "
" "43 "59 "51 "
" "33 "45 "39 "
" "40 "24 "32 "
" "48 "40 "44 "
" "36 "6 "21 "
" "69 "57 "63 "
" "45 "57 "51 "
" "58 "55 "57 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "70 "80 "75 "
" "53 "65 "64 "
" "62 "55 "59 "
" "61 "42 "52 "
" "47 "41 "44 "
" "49 "51 "50 "
" "66 "55 "61 "
" "53 "47 "50 "
" "61 "51 "56 "
" "67 "31 "54 "
" "20 "40 "30 "
" "53 "55 "54 "
" "60 "50 "55 "
" "62 "45 "54 "
" "57 "44 "51 "
" "61 "54 "58 "
" "26 "59 "43 "
