Effects of Gadgets to the Academic Performance of Junior High School

Students of Holy Rosary SY 2019-2020

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Subject Practical Research I

Panisigan, Limery, P.

April 27, 2020

Background of the Study

According to Nora Volkow director of the National Institute of Drug Abuse and one of the world’s leading
brain scientist state that “technology is re writing our brain”. If young children are exposed to technology at
very young age, it can be damaging to their developing brains. Researchers are now worried that constant use
of computers, tablets, or laptops creates attention problems for the students that are still developing. Since
children are exposed to digital native to technology, it is changing the way children think, and they soon will
be thinking differently from previous generations. The internet and gadgets has an effect to student’s attention
pan and focus.Using the internet students cannot focus on one thing, using their imagination I unnecessary, and
their memory is inhibited. Thus, technology is having serious effect on student’s brain that can be detrimental
for their future. Children need to be able to develop their skills while using computer does not allow them to
do that.

In quality terms gadgets addiction is a waste of educational resources, time and human potential. Also,
cause rework and wasted time for teachers. Gadgets has revolutionized the field of education. The importance
of gadgets in schools can be ignored. In fact, with the onset gadgets in education, it has become easier for
teachers to impart knowledge and for students to acquire it.The use of technology has made the process of
teaching and learning enjoyable. (Muir –Her zig, 2008).

In Matt Rihtel’s articles “Growing up Digital, Wired for Distraction” he states that across the country,
schools are equipping themselves with computers and mobile devices. On average children between the ages,
8-11 have at least four electronic devices such as cellphones, game console and stereo (WATT). As children,
grow older such as ages began to get older they are over consumed with electronic devices. He also states that
understanding of the human brain has changed. He believed that the brain would stop developing once you are
adult but that changed since the new developments in gadgets. Brains are changing due to the use of
technology, as we are fully developed adults.

Chris Rowan, a Pediatric Occupation Therapist states today on average students use 7.5 hours of
technology a day. A growing concern that parents and teachers have is that if student continue to use gadget
more, more, and more on it they are going to rely on it. The use of gadget in the classroom may sound
appealing in keeping the students interactive with what they are learning, but what cost to do the students pay?

In Nicholas Carr’s article stated, “Is Google makes us stupid? He states that using the web changes
reading habits. That is what the internet is doing to our children. Children are no longer to read-to-read
passages without a distraction. Thus, children who have less social interaction may have trouble with their
literacy. Being able to speak words can affect how a child can read and write. An important aspect of reading
that children are losing is their critical thinking skills.

Foreign literature, Jessica White (2005) said that, gadget has completely change the scope of
education in America. Most states require a technology aspect their school improvement plans. They have
embraced the idea that using gadget in their classroom makes the subject anything from math to anti-more
accessible to many kinds of students.

Kukulsa-Hulme and Traveler (2008) believe that gadgets are form of multiple literacy, which
provides a bridge between the real texts of the community and formal learning thereby providing a multimodal
literary approach to learning.
 Hoof (2006) found gadgets as important resources with make teaching more relevant and
meaningful thereby improving students literary and numeracy skills. In another study Atterwel (2007) reported
bow gadget use encourages both independent and collaborative learning experiences and in the process raising
self-esteem and self-confidence.

Technology motivates students for their study and more students are more stimulated and apt to
learning if they have learning tools like gadgets. It also gives additional resources for students especially if the
gadget they are using has educational applications, videos and search engines (Ishtique Ahmed). Nevertheless,
others rely on technology too much causing them lack of physical activities and might cause obesity. Overuse
of technology can change how individual thin for example a child who is always use search engine may
become good at finding things but not memorizing it. Children who use too much technology may not have
enough opportunities to use their imagination or to read and think deeply about the material (Pamela Deloatch
2015).

Ryan T. Gartner in 2011, on his studies about the effects of gadget on learning, he conclude that
gadget gives light on some possible effects of its learning of o students. This means that gadget may affects
the learning performance of students.
 Chapter I

Introduction

We are living in a world where technology is becoming more and more important every day.
The word E-Learning has become the most significant word among the students, teachers and in every
educational environment. E-mails, instant messaging, blogs and wikis have transformed the way we
communicate and share information with each other. This also allows learners and teachers to gather
knowledge and information. It involves some form of interactivity, which may include online interaction
between the learner and their teacher. The new technologies like Skype, You tube, twitter, blogs, mobile
phone apps will definitely improve the proficiency of language learning and teaching. Many devices
have become popular across generations, with a majority now owning cell phones, laptops and desktop
computers for a variety of functions, including internet, email, music, games, and video. In terms of
generations, Millennials, meanwhile, a majority use their phones also for going online, sending email,
playing games, listening to music, and recording videos.15 Therefore, the researcher concludes that
gadget is usually used by the students.

Dehmler asserts that children today are growing up in an interconnected, networked world. The you th
have unprecedented access to modern technologies and use them in expected and unexpected ways. Teens all
over the world are growing up in a world in which the Internet, cellphones, text messaging, television and video
games, and other technologies dominate their communication and are an integral part of everyday life. Children
are immersed in a world abounding with information.17 Honey et al go further to say young people are taking
advantage of the new powerful technology. Threequarters of online teens use instant messaging, representing
close to 16 million youth. Of these 16 million, 78% say they use instant messaging to talk about homework,
tests or schoolwork.1Subrahmanyam et al posits that cognitive researchers suggest that for example, playing
computer games can be an importantuilding block in enhancing children’s ability to read and visualize images.

According to Yelland, learning with technology needs more than making learning activities digital, it is also
about creating ‘contexts for authentic learning that use new technologies in integrated and meaningful ways to
enhance the production of knowledge and the communication dissemination of ideas’.20 Social network sites,
online games, video-sharing sites and gadgets, such as iPods and mobile phones are now fixtures of youth
culture.

.Barak et al. (2008) conducted a meta-analytic review of 64 studies involving interventions that addressed a
variety of behavioral health concerns and found Web-based interventions to be about as effective as those
delivered in person. Of the interventions included in that meta-analysis, those using CBT appeared to be the
most effective compared with those using psychoeducational or purely behavioral approaches.

Dorstyn, Mathias, and Denson (2011) conducted a meta-analytic review of telephone-based counseling
interventions for people with acquired physical disabilities (e.g., spinal cord injuries, severe burns) but not, for
the most part, people with mental or substance use disorders; they found that such interventions were associated
with significant improvements in the use of coping skills, in community integration, and in symptoms of
depression immediately following telephone counseling as well as more modest, but lasting, improvements in
quality of life
 García-Lizana and Muñoz-Mayorga (2010b) conducted a review of randomized controlled trials of
video conferencing interventions for mental illness, of which they found 10. Although they found the research
insufficient to draw a strong conclusion, the data that were available indicated that this approach was about as
effective as in-person services and was an appropriate option, especially with clients who had difficulties
accessing in-person services.

Gadgets is defined as a small technological object that has a particular function, but is often thought of as a
novelty. The modern gadgets have a great impact on the learner’s academic performance. As they go home,
they do not open their books, they do not do their homework and projects, they play games using computers,
and these games have effects on learning experience of the students. Effects of the gadgets to the students is
one of the major concerns for teachers at institutions of higher learning. Students who do not participate in
classes create dead, tiresome, unpleasant classroom environment that makes students who in oppose participate
actively in class discussion become uncomfortable and the teacher irritable. When the students busy
manipulating their gadgets, they miss valuable information resulting from peer lecturer interaction and the
benefits of the specific examples that the teachers use to clarify difficult concepts. This valuable part of the
learning experience cannot be replicated when lecturers re-teach the material to gadget-addicted students
( Ebert 25).

The gadgets are very useful, they help us connect to each other, they make us learn new things and
discover new things. The reason why computer technologies are invented is to help people’s life easier and to
improve their way of life, especially the students. Modern computer technologies make studies easier fun to
the students. The gadgets make our life better in many ways. Let’s take for example the cellphone, many of
you are “lost” without it and when it to comes to students this device is more than just a cellphone, is a chat
opportunity, an internet connection, a camera and more. Because mobile phones have today a lot of features
and they are not just devices made for communication between people. Otherwise, most gad4gets have
positive effects because they enable us to do things faster and easier and they are also good when it comes to
learning new things and, let’s face it, they make our life a lot easier ( Bill and Winn, 2000).

The modern gadgets have a great impact on learners’ academic performance. The year where electronic
gadgets are not yet invented like computers, students are not yet engage in activities using technologies.
Learners rely on books and visit library facilities to study, read their notes and review their lessons. Now that
the gadgets are available to all pupils, learners achieve low academic grades ( Coffey 2012)

Advancing technology can have an impact on the developing child. There has been an “increase of
physical and psychological behavior disorders that the health and education system are just beginning to
detect. In the over, use of technology has brought diabetes and obesity among young children, which are
national epidemics in United States. The increase of obesity and diabetes is due to the no physical activity;
instead, students are spending most of their time on the gadgets. There are also other dis orders such as sleep
disorders, anxiety, depression, unintelligible speech and developmental delay and the list goes on due to
technological over use ( App Store Metrics, 2002)

As we continue to use more gadget in the classroom children are losing their critical thinking skills.
Instead of reading passage and being analyze it, they are using their fingers click on pictures or the correct
answer. They are no thinking critically. The students are just following procedure rather than learning some
new. The increase use of technology has changed the way communicate. Everything is changing to the
computers, laptops, and tablets. Since more and more technology is placed in the classroom, students are no
longer writing as they use to. The more time they spend using they electronic devices the less they spend using
paper and pencil. This can have a serious effect on future generations ( Grohol 2004).

It was observe that students now days are spent much time on electronic gadgets which affect the study habits
and academic performance. Due to the upgrade of this gadgets in entertainment, student most likely focused on
what entertains them than on what may help them in their studies or for the good of their knowledge. Students
often spend more time on using gadgets than studying or doing different types of physical and spiritual
activities. Students usually use gadgets for media and social interactions in particular Facebook, Twitter, and
other sorts of social networks. Gadgets affects as in various sort of ways, being one of those effects is how it
affects students in their academics. Gadgets, from simple tools powered by electricity such as light bulbs
evolved to gadgets ( Morland et. al 2002)

Gadget enhanced learning (GEL) aims to design, develop and test socio-technical innovations that will
support and enhance learning practices of both individual and organizations. It is therefore on application
domain that generally covers gadgets that support all form of teachings and learning activities. Since the
information retrieval (in terms of searching for relevant learning resources to support teachers or learners) in a
pivotal activity in GEL, the deployment to recommender systems as attracted increase interest. This chapter
attempts to introduce recommender systems for GEL settings, as well as to highlight their particularities
compared to recommender system for other application domains.

In the current world, we can see gadgets has been an integral part of our lives. It is definitely plays an
important role in our day-to-day life. Gadget has drastically increased at a fast pace developing new gadgets
frequently. From a young age to old, we see everyone using electronic gadgets. Technology has replaced a
human life in various ways including studying. Hence, this is an initial warning for children using too many
electronic gadgets. It is not mandatory that using gadgets have to be stopped immediately. Instead, use it in
mind (Honey et al. 2003)

Archer and Savage (2014) undertook a meta-analysis to reassess the outcomes presented in three previous
meta-analyses considering the impact of digital learning on language and literacy learning: Slavin et al (2008
and 2009) and Torgenson and Zhu (2003). Overall they found a relatively small average positive effect size of
0.18, with a few of the studies having a negative effect and three studies showing moderate to large effect
sizes. The authors found that programmes with a small number of participants tended to show larger effect
sizes than larger programmes but that not all were statistically significant.

Somekh et al (2007) evaluated the Primary School Whiteboard Expansion (PSWB) project in England. They
found that the length of time learners were taught with interactive whiteboards (IWBs) was a major factor in
learner attainment at the end of primary schooling, and that there were positive impacts on literacy (and
numeracy) once teachers had experienced sustained use and the technology had become embedded in
pedagogical practice. This equated to improvements at Key Stage 2 writing (age 11), where boys with low
prior attainment made 2.5 months of additional progress.

The studies by Lee et al (2009) and Biagi and Loi (2013) found similar results for mathematics as they did for
reading and literacy in relation to the use of digital equipment. Learners who used a computer at least one
hour a day for both school work and other activities had significantly better mathematics test scores and
more positive teacher evaluations for their classroom behaviour in mathematics classes than those who did
not use the computer. Biagi and Loi (2013) found a significant positive relationship between intensity of
gaming activity and maths test scores in 15 countries out of the 23 studied. As with language, the authors
found that learners' total use of digital technologies was positively and significantly associated with PISA test
scores for maths in 18 of the 23 countries studied.

Anderson and Barnett's (2013) study, in the US, examined how a digital game used by learners aged 12-13
increased their understanding of electromagnetic concepts, compared to learners who conducted a more
traditional inquiry-based investigation of the same concepts. There was a significant difference between the
control and experimental groups in gains in knowledge and understanding of physics concepts. Additionally,
learners in the experimental group were able to give more nuanced responses about the descriptions of
electric fields and the influence of distance on the forces that change experience because of what they learnt
during the game.

Güven and Sülün (2012) considered the effects of computer-enhanced teaching in science and technology
courses on the structure and properties of matter, such as the periodical table, chemical bonding, and
chemical reactions, for 13-14 year olds in Turkey. Their proposition was that computer-enhanced teaching
can instil a greater sense of interest in scientific and technological developments, make abstract concepts
concrete through simulation and modelling, and help to carry out some dangerous experiments in the
classroom setting. They found a significant difference in achievement tests between the mean scores of the
group of learners who were taught with the computer-enhanced teaching method and the control group who
were taught with traditional teaching methods.

Belland (2009) investigated the extent to which a digital tool improved US middle school children's
ability to form scientific arguments. Taking the premise that being able to construct and test an evidence-based
argument is critical to learning science, he studied the impact of using a digital problem based learning tool on
12-14 year olds. Learners worked in small groups and were asked to develop and present proposals for
spending a grant to investigate an issue relating to the human genome project. Those in the experimental group
used an online system which structured the project into stages of scientific enquiry. The system prompted the
learners to structure and organise their thinking in particular ways: by prompting the learners individually,
sharing group members' ideas, tasking the group to form a consensus view, and prompting the group to assign
specific tasks among themselves.
Higgins et al report that in general analyses of the impact of digital technology on learning, the typical overall
effect size is between 0.3 and 0.4 - just slightly below the overall average for researched interventions in
education (Sipe & Curlette, 1997; Hattie, 2008) and no greater than other researched changes to teaching to
raise attainment, such as peer tutoring or more focused feedback to learners. The range of effect sizes is also
very wide (-0.03 to 1.05),which suggests that it is essential to take into account the differences between
technologies and how they are used.

This study aims to produce better outputs in terms of students who will turn out to be responsible and
productive citizens of tomorrow. Maintain good and active performance of students inside the classroom.
Students that excessively use their gadgets to the point they are addicted to it. It can guide to them on how to
control of their gadgets
Statement of the Problem

General Objectives

This study aims to know the effects of gadgets to the Academic Performance of the Junior High
School Students of Holy Rosary.

It specifically sought to answer the following questions.

1. What are the factors that lead the student to use gadgets?

2. What are the effects of gadgets to the academic performance of the HRHS students?

3. What are the significance difference on the technological devices used in terms of:

a. Gender

b. Family Income
Significance of the Study

This study determined the effects of gadgets in junior students’ learning in Holy Rosary High School.
This was significant to the following.

Students. They will know the effects of using gadgets in learning and hindrance their study
effectively.

Teachers. This will give awareness to teachers to not allow students to use gadgets inside the
classroom.

School Administrator. This study may be included in school policy. Re: Do not use gadgets inside
the classroom.

Future Researchers. This study may help future researchers on their own research. They may widen
the scope of their study or improve research study.
Definition of Terms

To make the study easier to understand, the following terms are defined operationally and / or lexically.

Gadget. This refers to an often-small mechanical or electronic device with a practical use but often
thought of as novelty. In this study, gadgets refers to cellphones, tablets and laptops, which are used by the
respondents learning.

Effects. This refers to the effects of gadgets on the respondents in their learning.

Frequency of use. This refers to the number of times or how often the gadgets are used by the
respondents learning.