Effect of Digital Learning Equipment on the Academic Performance of Student
CHAPTER ONE
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The main objective of the study is to ascertain the impact of digital learning equipment on the academic performance of student. To aid the completion of the study, the researcher intends to achieve the following specific objectives;
- To investigate the effect of digital learning equipment on the academic performance of student
- To ascertain the impact of digital equipment on the learning culture of student
- To examine the role of government in enhancing the availability of digital learning equipment in higher institution
- To ascertain if there is any relationship between digital learning equipment and student academic performance
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Introduction
Bartsch and Cobern (2003), Leonard et al. (2007), Ricer et al. (2005), Apperson et al. (2004), Sugahara and Boland (2006), Burke and James (2005), Parette et al. (2008), Clark (2008), Yu et al. (2010), and Wijekumar et al. (2009) were all researchers who have sought sound empirical data to determine the effects of technological instruction on student academic performance. One of the most used methods of instruction was the use of PowerPoint. Several researchers studied the impact of the use of PowerPoint on student academic performance. Researchers Slykhuis, Wiebe, and Len (2005) employed eye tracking technology to determine the most effective use of PowerPoint instruction. Web-based learning was another area educational researchers Wiley et al. (2009) and Pucel and Stertz (2005) have deemed important to study. Most of the research deals with the static Web 1.0 technologies. As Ward et al. (2009) recognized, the research has not kept pace with the swiftly changing technological innovations of the interactive Web 2.0 tools. Cramer, Collins, Snider, and Fawcett’s (2007) researched the virtual lecture hall environment. These educational researchers have compared the use of traditional methods of instruction to the technological methods of instruction. Student educational computer use in social and leisure environments has been studied. Bartsch and Cobern (2003), Hansen and Williams (2008), D’Angelo and Wooley (2007), and Cramer et al. (2007) sought to identify students’ preferences and perceptions of educational methods of instruction.
DIGITAL LEARNING AND RAISING ATTAINMENT
There is a substantial body of research that has examined the impact of digital tools and resources on children’s attainment in a range of areas. Higgins et al (2012) provide a summary of research findings from studies with experimental and quasi-experimental designs, which have been combined in meta-analyses to assess the impact of digital learning in schools. Their search identified 48 studies which synthesised empirical research of the impact of digital tools and resources on the attainment of school age learners (5-18 year olds). They found consistent but small positive associations between digital learning and educational outcomes. For example, Harrison et al (2004) identified statistically significant findings, positively associating higher levels of ICT use with school achievement at each Key Stage in England, and in English, maths, science, modern foreign languages and design technology. Somekh et al (2007) identified a link between high levels of ICT use and improved school performance.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This chapter deals with the method used in collecting data required in carrying out this research work it explains the procedures that were followed and the instrument used in collecting data.
SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION
Data were collected from two main sources namely
-Primary source and
-Secondary source
primary source: These are materials of statistical investigation, which were collected by the research for a particular purpose. They can be obtained through a survey, observation questionnaire or as experiment, the researcher has adopted the questionnaire method for this study.
Secondary data: These are data from textbook Journal handset etc. they arise as byproducts of the same other purposes. Example administration, various other unpublished works and write ups were also used.
POPULATION OF THE STUDY
Population of a study is a group of persons or aggregate items, things the researcher is interested in getting information for the study effect of digital learning equipment on the academic performance of student. 200 staff of Nigerian open university was selected randomly as the population of the study.
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Introduction
Efforts will be made at this stage to present, analyze and interpret the data collected during the field survey. This presentation will be based on the responses from the completed questionnaires. The result of this exercise will be summarized in tabular forms for easy references and analysis. It will also show answers to questions relating to the research questions for this research study. The researcher employed simple percentage in the analysis.
DATA ANALYSIS
The data collected from the respondents were analyzed in tabular form with simple percentage for easy understanding.
A total of 133(one hundred and thirty three) questionnaires were distributed and 133 questionnaires were returned.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to investigate the effect of digital learning equipment on the academic performance of student.
In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given.
In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing the challenges of digital learning equipment on the academic performance of student.
Summary
It is important to note that the research literature has some shortcomings for a study of this kind. Much of it describes uses of digital tools and resources without any assessment of the outcomes or how and why they were achieved or not achieved. Most studies that attempt to measure any outcomes focus on short and medium term outcomes, small numbers of learners or teachers or schools, and commonly measure these qualitatively. The studies that do measure change, and measure change quantitatively against a comparative group or other ways to attribute the change to the digital tools or resources being applied, tend to do this over short periods (four weeks to six months). As a consequence, this led Higgins et al (2012) to conclude that ‘taking the body of research as a whole, there is not a conclusive case for the impact of digital technology on longer term educational attainment outcomes’, but there is compelling evidence that digital technology provides teachers with tools and resources that can aid learning and teaching and enhance the ability of some children to learn effectively. The meta-analyses discussed provide some strong evidence of impact, while the qualitative studies provide evidence about how the these impacts are achieved.
Conclusion
The increasing variety of digital technologies and the diversity of contexts and settings in which the research has been conducted, combined with the challenges in synthesising evidence from different methodologies make it difficult to identify clear and specific implications for educational practice in schools. Studies linking provision and use of technology with attainment tend to find consistent but small positive associations with educational outcomes. However, a causal link cannot be inferred from this kind of research. It seems probable that more effective schools and teachers are more likely to use ICT and digital technologies more effectively than other schools. We need to know more about where and how it is used to greatest effect, then investigate if this information can be used help to improve learning in other contexts. Research findings from experimental and quasi-experimental designs which have been combined in meta-analyses indicate that overall technology-based interventions tend to produce just slightly lower levels of improvement when compared with other researched interventions. The range of impact identified in these studies suggests that it is not whether technology is used (or not) which makes the difference, but how well the technology is used to support teaching and learning. This alignment of technology and learning is important. There is no doubt that technology engages and motivates young people. However this benefit is only an advantage for learning if the activity is effectively aligned with what is to be learned. It is therefore the pedagogy of use of technology which is important: the how rather than the what. With computer and digital technologies there is a recurrent and specific challenge in understanding and applying the research evidence as it takes time for robust evidence to emerge in education and the rapid pace of change of technology makes this difficult to achieve
Recommendations
Haven completed the study, the researcher recommends that;
The rationale for the impact of digital technologies on teaching and learning needs to be clear: Will learners work more efficiently, more effectively, more intensively
The role of technology in learning should be identified:
Will it help learners gain access to learning content, to teachers or to peers Technology should support collaboration and effective interaction for learning:
The use of computer and digital technologies is usually more productive when it supports collaboration and interaction, particularly collaborative use by learners or when teachers use it to support discussion, interaction and feedback.
Teachers and/or learners should be supported in developing their use of digital and computer technologies to ensure it improves learning.
Skills training is not usually sufficient to support teachers and pupils in getting the best from technology. On-going professional development and support to evaluate the impact on learning is likely to be required.
Identify what learners and teachers will stop doing: The use of computer and digital technologies is usually more successful as a supplement rather than as a replacement for usual teaching. It is therefore important to identify carefully what it will replace or how the technology activities will be additional to what learners would normally experience.
Reference
- Andrews R., Burn A., Leach J., Locke T., Low G.D. & Torgerson C. (2002) A Systematic Review of the Impact of Networked ICT on 5-16 year olds’ literacy in English. In: Research Evidence in Education Library. Issue 1. London: EPPICentre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.
- Becta (2003), Primary Schools – ICT Standards. An Analysis of National Data from Ofsted and QCA by Becta, Becta, Coventry. http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&catcode=_re_rp_02_a&rid=13619 (accessed 31/10/08).
- Chan, T., Roschelle, J., Hsi, S., Kinshuk, Sharples, M., Brown, T., Patton, C., Cherniavsky, J., Pea, R., Norris, C., Soloway, E., Balacheff, N., Scardamalia, M., Dillenbourg, P., Looi, C., Milrad, M., & Hoppe, U. (2006). One-to-one technology-enhanced learning: An opportunity for global research collaboration. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1.1: 3-29.
- Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2009). A review of research methodologies used in studies on mobile handheld devices in K-12 and higher education settings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25.2: 153-183.
- Cole, J.M. & Hilliard, V. R. (2006) The Effects Of Web-Based Reading Curriculum On Children’s Reading Performance And Motivation Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34.4: 353-380.
