THE INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT ON STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN TANZANIA: A REFLECTION FROM DEVELOPING ECONOMIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61538/jipe.v8i2.304Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate the influence of technological development on students’ academic performance in public secondary schools in Musoma Municipality in Tanzania. Four objectives guided the researcher to examine students’ perceptions about technological development in relation to their schooling; to determine the usefulness of technology in teaching and learning; to identify the challenges associated with technological development in teaching and learning of students; and to assess how stakeholders participate in improving students’ academic performance by using technological development opportunities. 113 participants volunteered participation in the study. The study used both quantitative and qualitative approaches adopting correlation and descriptive research design. Data collection involved self-administered questionnaires, documentary reviews, and structured interviews. Data especially quantitative were analyzed using computer software and the qualitative data were analyzed using thematic approach. Results showed that technological development such as computers, television and mobile phones placed more limitations than advantages on students’ academic achievements. In addition, students’ use of technologies was not directed to learning resulting in students’ misuse of technological resources. Many students used technological development for romantic and none academic purposes that seemed to adversely affect their academic performance. The study recommended that teachers should introduce various directives, rules and regulations on how to use different forms of technologies in their teaching and learning processes. The government should develop a policy to guide students and teachers on proper use of technological development in teaching and learning to improve students’ academic performance.ÂReferences
Amin, M. E. (2005). Social Science Research Conception, Methodology and Analysis. Kampala, Makerere University Printery.
Antonell, B. D. (2003). Information Communication Technology for Development. No 5, pp 1-31.
Attewell, P. (2001). Comment: The First and Second Digital Divides.
Sociology of Education. 74
Attewell, P., Belkis, S.& Juan, B. (2003). Computers and Young Children: Social Benefit or Social Problem. Social Forces. 82 (1): 277-296.
Becker, M& Jay, H. (2000). Who’s wired and who’s not: Children’s Access to and Use of Computer Technology. Children and Computer Technology.
(2): 44-75.
Becker, M& Jonathan, D. (2006). Digital Equity in Education: A Multilevel Examination of Differences in and Relationships between Computer Access, Computer Use and State-level Technology Policies. Education Policy Analysis Archives. 15 (3) 2-36.
Boss, Suzie & Krauss, J. (.2007). Real Projects in a Digital World. Principal Leadership. 8 (4): 22-26.
Burns, S., &Lohenry, K. (2010). Cellular phone use in class: Implications for teaching and Learning pilot study. College Student Journal, 44, 805_810.
Brayman, A. & Bell, E. (2007). Business research method. (6th edition). Oxford university press.
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. 2001. Education Technology Must Be Included in Comprehensive Education Legislation. 3-11. www.ceoforum.org
CEO Forum on School Technology Readiness.2001. Key Building Blocks for Student Achievement in the 21st century. 1-32/ www.ceoforum.org
Cooper. D. R., Schilnder, P. (2003). Business research method. McGraw-Hill
Cohen, K. (2003). Principals and student achievement what the research says.Alexandria, VA:ASCD
Dawson, C. (2002). Practical research methods. Cromwell press: A user friendly guide to mastering research. Harvard University Press. United Kingdom.
DSEO Office Musoma (2013). List of secondary school teachers.Musoma.
DSEO District Education Office (2007). Education annual report.Musoma, DSEO.
Hubbard, L. (2000). Technology-based math curriculums, custom build for today’s classroom. Technology Horizons in Education Journal. 28(3).
Hair, J. F., Celsi, M., Money, A., Samouel, P., Page, M. (2003) Essential of business research method. 2nd edition. London.
Jones. M, J. D., Staats, W.D., Bowling, N., Bickel, R.D., Cunningham, M.L.,&Cadle, C. (2004). An evaluation of the merit reading software program in the Calhoun county (WV) iddle/high school Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37, 177-95
Maninger , R. M. (2006). Successful Technology Integration: Student Test Scores Improve an English Literature Course through the Use of Supportive Devices. TechTrends. 50(5) 37-45.
Means, B., Roschelle, Jeremy, Penuel, William, Sabelli, Nora &Haetel, G. (2003). Technology’s Contribution to Teaching and Policy: Efficiency, Standardization, or Transformation. Review of Research in Education. 27: 159- 181.
Means, B., Blando, J., Olson, T., Middleton, T, Morocco, C., Remz, A.
&Zorfass, J. (1993). Using Technology to Support Education Reform
U.S. Department of Education, Washington D.C.
www.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/TechReforms
Morgan, D.W., Krejcie, R.V. (1970) Determining sample size for research activities. Science and education publishing
Natriello, G. (2001). Comment: Bridging the Second Digital Divide: What Can Sociologists of Education Contribute? Sociology of Education. 74 (3): 260-265.
Ringstaff, C., Kelley, L. (2002). the Learning Return on Our Educational Technology Investment: A Review of Findings from Research. 1-30. WestEd RTEC.
Robert, J. Hancox, MD. (2005). Association of Television viewing during childhood with poor educational achievements
Roberts, J. & Linda, G. (2000). Appendiz A: Federal Programs to Increase
Children’s Access to Educational Technology. The Future of Children. 10 (2): 181-185.
Roschelle, J. P, Roy, D., Hoadley C. M., Gordin, Douglas, N.& Means, B. (2000). Changing How and What Children Learn in School with Computer-Based Technologies. The Future of Children. 10 (2): 76-101.
Sahin, I. (2006). Journal of Research on Technology In Education, V 39 Savenye, W.C & Robinson, R.S (2004). Qualitative research issues and methods: an introduction for research technologist, New jersey.
Shamoo, A.E., Resnik, B.R . (2003). Responsible Conduct of Research. Oxford University Press.
Shepard, R .J. (2002). Ethics in exercise science research. Sports Med, 32 (3): 169-183.
Shields, Margie, K. & Behrman, R . A. (2000). Children and Computer Technology: Analysis and Recommendations. The Future of Children
(2): 4-30.
Swain, C& Pearson. (2003). Educators and Technology Standards: Influencing the Digital Divide. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 34 (3):326-335.United States. Department of Commerce
(1999). The Emerging Digital EconomyII.
http://www.ecomerce.gov/ede/ede2.pdf
Tanzania teaching training policy (1995). Government press. Dar es salaam.
Ungerleider, M., Charles, S. & Tracey C. B. (2002) Information and Communication
Technologies in Elementary and Secodary Education: A State of the Art Review. Information Technology and Learning 2-28.
Kalyanpur, M., Kirmani, M. H. (2005). Diversity and Technology: Classroom Implications of the Digital Divide. Journal of Special Education Technology. 20(4) 9-18.
Kothari, C.R. (Eds). (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Age International Publishers Limited, New Delhi. 401pp
Krejcie, R . V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities, Educational and psychological measurement
Leuven, E., Lindahl, M., Oosterbeek, H. &Webbink, D. (2004). The Effects of Extra Funding for Disadvantaged Pupils on Achievements. IZA Discussion Paper. No 1122. Born, German: Institute for the Study of Labor.
Morghan, D. W. &Krejcie, R .N. (1970) Educational and Psychology MeasurementWest Virginia Department of Education. (2008, June). A chronicle of West Virginia's 21st Century learning initiative. Retrieved
July 6, 2009, from http://wvde.state.wv.us/ dci/documents/ChronologyReportJune2008.pdf
McCrery, W.R . (2004). A Framework for Understanding Teaching with the Internet. American Educational Research Journal. 41 (2): 447-448.
Mubina, G. (2005). System and Dynamic for Electronic Learning Based on Continuing Students Assessments and Responses. USA.
Ogunsola, L. A. (2005). Information Communication Technologies and the Effects of Globalization: 21st century. “Digital slavery†for Developing Countries myth or reality?. Journal for academic and special librarianship, vol 6,pp 1-10.
Web-based Education Commission. (2000). The Power of the Internet for Learning: Moving from Promise to Practice. 1-84.
Youssef, M.O.(2008). Information and communication technology and education: analyzing the Nigerian national policy for information technology. international education journal, 2005, vol., 6(3). pp.316321.
Valadez, J &Richard , D. (2007). Redefining the Digital Divide: Beyond Access to Computers and the Internet. The High School Journal. 90 (3): 31-44.
