1

The Impact of Technology Utilization on Students Health and

Learning Performance

A Bachelor’s Research
Presented to

College of Sports Science and Physical Education

Western Mindanao State University
Zamboanga City

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Physical Education
____________________________________________________________________________

Shaterlan Tacbobo
Jean Eloisa Dan
Chennie Panang
Ariel Dumagal
Celdwin Pelayo
Hasbi Amil

Ms. Nur-Fatha S. Antao

 2

DEDICATION

We dedicate this research study to our parents. They are the number one supporters such as

providing us financial assistance and motivated us to view ourselves in a positive manner.

Believing in us that we can finish this study and despite of so much failures, revises, mistakes,

and to the point we doubt to ourselves that we will not make it through our research, they

embrace are problems and help us to find solution to it. Depression and anxiety is what we

sometimes gain in doing this study but because of our parents we surpass and challenge

ourselves to strive more.

They always care about us when we feel burn out and comfort us with hugs, kisses, and words of

advice. Our parents wanted to see us physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually healthy but

often we failed in making those things possible because of not just this study and also on other

subjects. As we develop our personal and professional growth they stand beside us, assisting,

comforting, and bestowing their love to us for we shall not experience low self-esteem and

unconfident to try new challenges in life.

To all our parents, thank you so much for being so responsible and providing us a lot of attention

even though you have hard time managing your work and being a parent. We promise you to do

our best not just in this subject but all throughout are life and we hope that we will have each

other’s back through good times and bad times. Thank you so much and God bless us all.
 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to state my gratitude to all the people who became part to the success of

this research. We sincerely appreciated the efforts and time providing by the people who made us

realized that life is much happier and better with people who knows us and cares for us through

ups and downs.

To our beloved research adviser, Ms. Nur-Fatha S. Antao, for sharing her ideas and

personal insights that enables us to search for more reliable sources for the completion of this

research.

To our research consultant and statistician Mr. Lemuel Francisco and Mrs. Princess

Gregorio thank you so much in assisting us from the very beginning since chapter 1 to chapter.

I hope this is not the end of knowing each other and sharing ideas and new information to

us was a great help in pursuing our study.

To our beloved parents for giving us the necessary funds and moral supports to finish our

studies and this research.

To our classmates and colleagues for sharing their years of happiness with the group. The

ups and downs.

And last but not the least, to the Almighty God who led me into this success. All praise

and glory to you.

 4

ABSTRACT

The Impact of Technology on the Students Health and

Learning Performance

This study was conducted to determine the impact met by the College students of

Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University in

using technology affecting their physical health, mental health, and learning performance.

The findings indicated that most of our respondents comes from Western Mindanao State

University and Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University, were majority are females

aged from 20-22 years old. The most common used devices of our respondents is smart phone in

their learning process and the never used technology of our respondents is tablet.

The students’ academic performance is fair wherein they do not excel too much in their

academic performance neither stand poor in their learning performance. It was also found that

the students’ physical health status in the results shows that the highest physical problem is poor

posture while using technology that leads them to body pain and for the mental health status,

found out that students are highly experiencing lack of sleep and sleeping disorder due to

excessive exposure to technology.

It was concluded that the result shows that majority of our respondents were females, are

20-22 years old, and came from Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga Peninsula

Polytechnic State University. The smart phone is commonly used devices of our respondents

because it is more accessible. The student has fair academic performance, it means that they are

not too focused on their studies and slightly excelling on their classes and also their performance

doesn’t list down on poor level. The physical health status problems of the students were often
 5

they experienced is the poor posture while using technology that leads them to body pain. For the

mental health problems of the students were sometimes they experiencing, is the lack of sleep

and sleeping disorder due to excessive exposure to technology. The students who were highly

exposed or excessing the utilization of technology experienced a negative impact on their

physical health and when they are not exposed or use technology properly, problem on the

students’ physical health is not occurred regardless of their age, sex, and school. The students

who were highly exposed or excessing the utilization of technology experienced a negative

impact on their mental health and when they are not exposed or use technology properly,

problem on the students’ mental health is not occurred regardless of their age, sex, and school.

The students who were less exposed or less excessive usage of technology, they are more

focused, and gets a higher mark on their learning performance and if they always use or more

exposed to technology they lose focus, and gets a low marking grade on their learning

performance.

It was recommended that Instructors/Educator must take into consideration to the

situation of students’ health and learning performance when providing them an activity using

technology or online. Also, using an approach or teaching strategies that limit students’

exposure on technology to help them build a classroom environment where their health and

learning performance will not be affected. Students should be aware about the negative and

positive impact of technology towards on their health and learning performance.

Parents/Guardian must limit their son or daughter utilization of technology and encourage them

to do physical activities that can help them stay healthy and have better performance in school.

From time to time evaluating and observing children utilization of technology should be the

norm to set healthy and active learning environment at home.

 6

Keyword:

Physical health, mental health, learning performance, technology utilization

 7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page……………………………………………………………………………
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 1 16-49
Dedication………………………………………………………………………..... 2
Acknowledgement………………………………………………………………… 3
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………. 4-6
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………. 7-8
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 9-15
Background of the Study…………………………………………………………… 9-11
Statement of the Problem…………………………………………...............……… 12-13
Null Hypothesis…………………………………………………………………… 13
Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………… 13-14
Scope and Delimitation of the Study………………………….……………………. 15

Literature Background ……………………………..…….…………………………. 16-43

Theoretical Framework …………………………………………………………….. 43-44
Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………………... 44-45
Operational Definition of Terms……………………………………………………. 46-47
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 48-54
Research Design……………………………………………………………………. 48-49
Research Locale…………………………………………………………………….. 50
Population and Sampling Method………………………………………………….. 51
Research Instrument………………………………………………………………… 51-52
Validity and Reliability…………………………………………………………….. 52
Data Gathering Procedure………………………………………………………….. 53
Ethical Consideration………………………………………………………………. 54
Statistical Tools……………………………………………………………………. 54
CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF 55-67
RESULTS
Problem 1…………………………………………………………………………… 56-57
Problem 2…………………………………………………………………………… 58
Problem 3…………………………………………………………………………… 59
Problem 4…………………………………………………………………………… 60-63
Problem 5…………………………………………………………………………… 64-65
Problem 6…………………………………………………………………………… 66
Problem 7…………………………………………………………………………… 66-67
Problem 8…………………………………………………………………………… 67
Table 2……………………………………………………………………………… 56
Table 3……………………………………………………………………………… 57
Table 4……………………………………………………………………………… 57
Table 5……………………………………………………………………………… 58
Table 6……………………………………………………………………………… 59
Table 7………………………………………………………………………………. 60
Table 8………………………………………………………………………………. 62
Table 9 ……………………………………………………………………………… 63
Table 10…………………………………………………………………………….. 64
 8

Table 11 ……………………………………………………………………………. 64
Table 12…………………………………………………………………………….. 65
Table 13…………………………………………………………………………….. 65
Table 14…………………………………………………………………………….. 66
Table 15…………………………………………………………………………….. 66

CHAPTER V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND 67-71

RECOMMENDATIONS
Findings…………………………………………………………………………..... 67-69
Conclusions………………………………………………………………………… 69-70
Recommendation…………………………………………………………………… 71

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE AND SURVEY QUESTIONNARE 72-76

REFERENCES 77-79

CHAPTER I
 9

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Technology is such a big part of the world of which we live. Many of the jobs that did not

require technology use in years past do require the use of technology today. Technology is a

factor improving learning is the fact that technology is becoming such an integral part of our

everyday world. Most jobs today require some types of technology use. Also, students and adults

are using technology on a daily basis to communicate, get information in multiple ways. The

prevalent daily use of technology in people’s lives overall makes use of technology very relevant

to the students and provides a connection that will greatly benefit student learning. (Cristen,

2009)

Technology addiction is also one of the issues that has an effect is the life style of an

individual. As in case of addiction to technological gadgets time and choices are the concerned

factors, the lifestyle is necessarily affected by the same. Life style is nothing but the way of life

of an individual or a group of individuals or the society as a whole. Somebody’s attitudes,

values, world views etc. are reflected by his/ her life style. So life style means making some

sense of the self and creating some cultural symbols which will reflect the identity of a person.

All the aspects of life style may not be voluntary in nature because one is associated with the

society and that surrounding plays an important role in shaping the choices of an individual’s life

style. Accordingly, the individual creates the symbols of life style by which he /she project the

self before the world and also before himself (Spaargaren & Van Vliet, 2000).

Negative effects come all from the excessive use or misuse of technology. The overuse of

devices students addicted to technology or gadgets like tablets, laptops, computers, smartphones,
 10

video games, etc. may reduce student’s self-motivation, ability, and interest in learning. It’s

unsafe for a student who uses technology more than limits. Technology that make students stay

in one place like; playing video games, overuse of surfing on their smartphones, and etc. Parents

also found an easy way by giving them gadgets to use and make stable in one place. Many

students may be thinking about how I can stop being addicted to technology. (Golden Peak High

School, 2020)

The students sample consisted of 221 students from different colleges in Caraga region of

Philippines. It was observed that students regarded positive consequences of use of technology to

be more than negative consequences. The most observed positive consequences were instant

messaging through chatting, lesson enquiry about assignments, sending and receiving e-mails,

research through surfing the net including data gathering by downloading and sharing cultural

experiences with others through internet. Among the negative consequences listed by students

were accessing social websites like face book, twitter etc. during class work, playing games,

playing music, answering and returning calls and downloading and using copyrighted material. It

was further observed that incidence of positive and negative consequences varied with the use of

technology (computer with internet, laptop with internet and mobile with internet). It is

concluded that most students in Philippines are likely to use technology in class room for the

purpose of positive consequences supporting the view that use of technology helps in enhancing

learning related activities in class room. (Carbonilla Gorra, V., Cababug, R. G. & Bhati, S.

(2012).

Most universities in Zamboanga City utilized technology as means of greater accessibility in so

many things. But, in the opposite manner what its impact on the student’s health and learning

performance? It could be positively beneficial learning of the students or it could be negatively

 11

harmful on the physical and mental health of the students. This study is focus on the technology

utilization and its influence on student’s health and learning performance. Specifically, students

from Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State

University.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the impact of the technology utilization on the Health and

Learning Performance of the students in selected higher education institutions in Zamboanga

City, School Year 2020-2021.

Specifically, it attempts to answer the following questions;

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of the following:

1.1 age

1.2 sex

1.3 school

2. What is the technology commonly used by the respondents in the learning process?

3. What is the student’s academic performance during the 1 st semester, School Year 2019-

2020?

4. What is the level of students’ health status in using technology in terms of:

4.1 Physical

4.2 Mental
 12

5. Is there a significant difference in the technology used by the respondents when data are

grouped according to profile?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the technology used and student’s physical

health when data are grouped according to profile?

7. Is there a significant relationship between the technology used and student’s mental

health when data are grouped according to profile?

8. Is there a significant relationship between the technology used and students learning

performance when data are grouped according to profile?

Null Hypothesis

1. There is no significant difference in the technology used by the respondents when data are

grouped according to profile.

2. There is no significant relationship between the technology used and student’s physical health

when data are grouped according to profile.

3. There is no significant relationship between the technology used and student’s mental health

when data are grouped according to profile.

4. There no significant relationship between the technology used and students learning

performance when data are grouped according to profile.

Significance of the Study

 13

This study aims to determine the various impact of using different technology in the Health and

Learning performances of the students of WMSU and ZPPSU that can be used by the different

sectors or individuals such as:

Administrators/Dean: The study can be helpful to this sector to determine the effectivity of

using advance technologies and its advantage and disadvantage in the health and learning

performance of the students which can be a large factor on how they can improve or enhance the

teaching modalities imposed in the “New Normal Education”.

Instructors/Educator: The outcome of this study can benefit every teachers or educators with

the same situation for the reason that it may serve as a guide for them to understand the approach

or strategy for the betterment of every learner. The data given will provide the instructors with

the information on how the technologies affect the health and learning performance of the

students.

Students: The result of the study will provide the students awareness and understanding about

the impact of the technologies to their health and their learning performances. This study can

help learners to determine how they will deal the different difficulty or struggles they might

encounter. Learners can classify various factors of technologies affecting their health and

learning performance.

Parents/Guardian: The result will help the parents evaluate the healthy total hours must render

by their sons/daughters. It will provide the parents/guardian information about the advantage and

disadvantage of the technologies to their son's/daughter's since they will be the one who will be

the facilitator in every household.

 14

Researchers: The result of this study can be used by the different researchers all over the world

with regards to the impact of technology in the health and learning performance of the students

in "New Normal Education”, the collected data or information of this study can be a basis on

reference in understanding various factors

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The center of interest of this study will be the Male/Female Tertiary School Students

coming from the (2) two Schools or Universities of Zamboanga City were study is conducted.

In prior to these, this study focusing on the impact of technology utilization on the

students’ health and Learning performance. The most used “Technology” by the students, and

the impact of using different technologies in student’s learning process and health.

This study will be conducted in (2) Tertiary Schools here in Zamboanga City namely,

Western Mindanao State University (WMSU), and Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State

University (ZPPSU) 2021- 2022.

The estimated forty (40) respondents will be chosen through the help of the students who

are studying in that specific University. Each respondent will be tasked to answer the survey

questionnaire.
 15

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The purpose of this section is mainly to critically discuss related literature that is relevant

to concept exercise being viewed in this present study in relation to How Technologies Impact

the Health and Learning performance of the students. This concept will then be associated with

relevant theoretical framework in the literature along with the research findings about How

Technologies impact the Health and Learning performance of the students. Operational

definition is also included in this segment. This section concludes with an attempt to construct a

conceptual framework of this present study.

Introduction Technology is a recent marvel in our everyday life that has taken off.

Technology allows the most difficult tasks to become seamlessly easy and more efficient. In

education, technology has allowed the dissemination of knowledge to be dispersed instantly and

it allows for quicker and more effective communication. Also, technology has allowed students

to be engaged and learn in ways that they never have in a classroom setting before. According to

Spears (2012) she cites Donovan, Hartley & Strudler (2007) and describes the first 1:1

technology program that was used in a school setting. Spears (2012) states, “The first provider of

1:1 computer access for teachers and students was Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT). The

goal of ACOT was to promote change in the context of education”(p. 1). Spears continues in her

study and describes Microsoft’s 1:1 initiative through the Anytime Anywhere Learning (AAL)

program. Spears (p. 1) cites the work of Donovan et al. (2007), “An increase in enthusiasm for

teaching and learning with technology, an improvement in student writing skills, an increase of

authentic and purposeful use of technology…are some of the benefits of 1:1 technology

integration program like the AAL program.” These programs in the 1980’s and Hi1990’s paved
 16

the way for presidents, legislators, administrators, and educators to become aware of how

positively technology could impact the student and teacher in the classroom, alike.

The Role of Educational Reform in Technology Development. The role of technology in

the world of education has been ever changing. Most recently, technology has been a new

phenomenon to help motivate, differentiate, and allow students to achieve and excel in ways that

they have never been able to before. According to Johnson (2003), the computer and technology,

if used correctly, has the ability to “invoke dream in the minds of visionary educators who saw

endless potential for altering traditional notions of teaching and learning” (p. 2). Two past

presidents saw the need for fundamental change in education to keep American students in

competition with technology with other students from around the world. In 1994, President Bill

Clinton signed The Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Goals 2000: Educate America Act,

1994). There were many parts of this bill that involved technology and education. Part C of The

Goals 2000: Educate America Act, Leadership in Technology, (a) calls upon the Department of

Education to create a national strategy to involve technology into all educational programs and

the state and local school systems, (b) foster understanding of how technology can be used to

improve teaching and learning, (c) show how technology can be used to create an equal

opportunity for all students to be successful while meeting state education requirements, and (g)

create high-quality professional education opportunities for educators with the ability to integrate

technology into their instruction (Goals 2000: Educate America Act, 1994).

After President Bill Clinton signed this bill into action, President George W. Bush pushed

one step further with education and technology while he passed the No Child Left Behind

(NCLB) Act in 2001. This bill sought to close the achievement gap in education, while also

creating accountability amongst schools and states, alike, and choice and flexibility so no child is
 17

left behind in education. (No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 2002). The goal of Part D of the No

Child Left Behind Act was to improve student academic achievement through the use of

technology. The main points of Part D, Enhancing Education through Technology Act of 2001

include, (a) assistance to states for the implementation of technology into schools, elementary

and secondary, to promote and encourage student academic achievement, (b) establish and

develop technology initiatives in regards to access to technology, (c) assistance for acquisition of

technology, which increases the amount of students who have accessibility to technology, (e)

professional development initiatives for teachers and administrators, (h) supports for efforts to

involve families in education and to help in communication (No Child Left Behind Act of 2001,

2002). The No Child Left Behind Act also sought to decrease the digital divide between students

and to also use best practices while integrating technology with teacher training to establish

research-based instructional methods.

Again in 2009, President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment

Act, which provided $4.35 billion for the Race to the Top Fund for education innovation and

reform (Race to the Top Program Executive Summary, 2009). Spears (2012) cites Duncan

(2009), the United States Secretary of Education, refers to Race to the Top as “education

reform’s moon shot” in a commentary describing the largest unrestricted fund for education in

the history of the country. Spears (2012, p. 3) states in her work that the emphasis of Priority 2 of

Race to the Top (Race to the Top Executive Summary, 2009, p. 1) is the rigorous preparation of

students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). In 2010 the President’s

Council of Advisors on Science and Technology issued a report to the president. This report

indicated that there is the need for urgency of preparing American students with a strong

foundation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in order for students to transfer
 18

this knowledge in their personal and professional lives, which will then also impact the

American society. Spears (2012, p. 4) states that the Council acknowledges that ICT can be a

driving force for education innovation through the improvement of instructional material quality,

the development of high-quality assessments that indicate student learning, and the increased use

of data to provide rich feedback to students, teachers, and schools (President’s Council of

Advisors on Science and Technology, 2010, p. 73).

Educational Technology Challenges Although these past presidents were able to have

legislation passed, there are still many difficulties with technology being introduced and

immersed in schools (Brinkerhoff, 2006). Legislation being passed is not enough. There are so

many students without accessibility, and the digital divide still exists in schools to this day. The

financial constraints that the school districts and states are under make immersing technology

even more difficult. The cost, infrastructure, and technology development in schools across the

country is not the same. Most technology used in schools are computer labs that classes can

schedule times for students use, or some schools have three to four desktop computers for

classroom and teacher use in the classrooms. There are some school districts, however, that are

able to provide 1:1 Technology experiences for students, but not all students have this

accessibility. In some school districts, it will take many years for 1:1 Technology to be present in

all classrooms.

As 1:1 Technology is a rather new phenomenon in the educational world, it needs to be

introduced. not replacements of best practices for teaching in the classroom. Another important

component of 1:1 Technology is student motivation. The teacher in the classroom must

understand how and why students are motivated to learn. In her study, Spears (2012) cites the

work of Keller. Spears (2012, p. 8) cites the work of Keller (1987) and explains, “Attention,
 19

relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (ARCS) are the four characteristics one needs to establish

in order for people to be motivated to learn.” When looking to implement 1:1 Technology into a

classroom, educators must look closely at their student population to understand who they are

working with, how their students will learn best, and how to build their confidence with

technology so they will, in return, be satisfied with their learning experience, and thus become

motivated to learn. Educators cannot simply use technology as a replacement. Sansone et al.

(2011) addresses motivation and note that students who already have a greater interest in

computers may display greater knowledge and interest because the tasks they may do on a

computer are already relevant to their interests and they are able to make connections on their

own. This finding from Sansone et al. (2011) shows the importance of using the four

characteristics from Keller (1987). Attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction all come

into play with educators and students for technology to be introduced and used effectively in the

classroom. In another study of 1:1 technology implementation in Texas, Shapley et al. (2011, p.

299) noted, “technology immersion had a positive effect on students’ technology proficiency and

frequency of their technology-based class activities and small-group interactions.” With more

and more emphasis being placed on student learning and achievement, schools are looking at

making changes and immersing students and teachers with technology. With that, though, comes

the ability and responsibility to train and uphold high standards of learning with both teachers

and students.

Mark Edwards, a superintendent in Mooresville, North Carolina, has successfully launched

1:1 laptop initiatives in two school districts as acting superintendent. In this article, Edwards

(2012) explains the excitement and energy factor that students have when learning due to 1:1

Technology being implemented. Edwards continues and explains in Mooresville the school
 20

district has created a very hands-on approach and exploratory way of learning with their

technology. Edwards describes how teachers feel that even though the technology is in place and

they are seeing academic gains in the classroom, most of these teachers would say that teaching

is not easier. If anything, implementing 1:1 technology has made teaching more difficult and

complex. Teaching with 1:1 technology “requires significant changes for individuals and teams

with an exception for everyone to be committed to growth and improvement. Success in the

classroom depends more than ever on the talent, initiative, and skills of the teacher” (Edwards,

2012, p. 6). Teaching is much more of a hands-on approach with 1:1 technology. Edwards calls

this kind of teacher a “roaming conductor.” This kind of teacher will move about the classroom

engaging the students by posing questions and engaging students as needed.

One of the key elements in the instructional designs for this 1:1 laptop initiative in North

Carolina is professional development. Edwards (2012, p. 8) states, “professional development is

vital to successful teaching.” He continues to explain that student success is connected to

professional growth in teachers. 1:1 technology initiatives are not an isolated event with just one

teacher; these kinds of technology initiatives take a building and culture of wanting to grow and

change for the betterment of the students that are taught. As expectations are raised, teachers

have been thoughtful and have used praxis to reflect upon the decisions they are making in the

classroom when it comes to learning and achievement. According to Cavanaugh, Dawson and

Ritzhaupt (2011) they state when a learning environment is comprised and changed with 1:1

technology that also, in turn will change the teaching practices that are used in those classrooms.

Cavanaugh et al. (2011, p. 360) cite the work of Barrios (2004) and note “the primary motivation

for laptop classroom technology and accompanying teacher professional development is the

belief that the new learning environment will support engaged students an increases in academic
 21

achievement.” Without professional development for teachers, these academic gains and

increases would be nearly impossible. The Florida Department of Education funded program,

Leveraging Laptops: Effective Models for Enhancing Student Academic Achievement,

professional development was a main component of this program for educators. Each teacher

involved with this technology initiative was required to a four-day institute that focused on

“student-centered, tool-based technology integration” (Cavanaugh et al., 2011, p. 360). In some

districts that participated in this study, there were continual professional development

opportunities online, and even some with small learning communities, coaching and modeling,

technology trainers, and customary consulting. In order for technology immersion programs to

be successful and obtain the outcomes that are desired, increased learning opportunities and

higher academic achievement, these steps that the Florida Department of Education put in place

to assist teachers with learning opportunities and growth is essential.

In order for any 1:1 technology initiative to become successful, funding must first be

present. If there is no money to fund these initiatives and then fund the increased costs of

manpower,infrastructure, and professional development, these initiatives will be ineffective and

it will bedifficult to obtain the desired results. As Race to the Top and the Common Core State

Standardstake effect, school districts across the state of Illinois and other states are looking for

ways toincrease student academic achievement and also prepare students for the demands of

college andcareers they may hold in the future. Technology is a tool that students and adults may

use frequently outside of the classroom, but bringing technology into the classroom can allow

students and teachers to learn in ways they never have before, thus changing the role of the

teacher, the learner, and the environment in which learning takes place. Students should be well

aware of how technology affects our health. An extensive amount of time spent in front of
 22

screens tends to lead to mental health problems. These issues include a much higher rate of the

student developing depression and anxiety. These screens tend to become a substitute for real-

life interaction, which is so important. Over-reliance on technology leads to the development of

certain obsessive-compulsive disorders as well. You’ll find that most modern-day students are

constantly checking their phones for new messages and notifications. This is one of the worst

ways that technology affects students. They spend so much of their time substituting real-life

experiences for virtual ones. Additionally, increased over-reliance on technology leads to the

development of several chronic diseases as well. As you spend more time on screens, it increases

the level of inactivity of your experience. Once you become more and more inactive, you’re

prone to developing metabolic syndrome. The syndrome is a precursor to several future health

problems, such as blood pressure and diabetes. While it’s true that technology adversely affects

students, there’s a lot that can be done to avoid the harmful impact. Setting regular times, where

you completely avoid using technology and focusing on real-world interactions, will help

decrease the negative effects of technology.

Furthermore, research tends to find that while giving students free access to eBooks and

tablets may have an adverse effect, the same is not the case for the teachers. If teachers are given

free access to these technologies, they can actually significantly improve academic performance.

The same teachers can then figure out ways to implement the technology in ways that are less

harmful to a student’s health. Another key to avoiding harmful health effects of technology is

improving the diet. Students tend to have a poor diet, and healthy eating can go a long way in

helping prevent metabolic syndrome. The healthier food you put inside you, the healthier you

are. While there’s still a long way to go before technology can shed the “good for education bad

for health” reputation, the future definitely does seem bright! As research continues in the
 23

subject, we’ll continue to learn more about how technology affects students and come up with

better solutions to improve technology and student learning. Some postsecondary educators view

technology as a distraction in the classroom. Even if they don’t ban the use of mobile phones or

social media during class, they may begrudgingly view technology as a little more than a

necessary evil. But rather than simply ‘tolerate’ it, instructors can harness the power of digital

devices, apps and tools to increase engagement, encourage collaboration, spark innovation and

enhance student learning.

In and of itself, educational technology doesn’t result in effective teaching and learning. It

still requires a guide (the educator) and a purpose (related to the curriculum). And it does require

some effort and strategies to integrate it effectively into your course material. But, if used with

intention, technology can be transformed from a distraction to an effective teaching tool. With an

Internet connection, we have access to information at our fingertips 24 hours a day. We can find

almost anything online, in its most up-to-date version. For students, this means access to

everything from research materials and educational apps to interactive edutainment and open

resources from prestigious universities around the world. They may, however, need instruction

on how to find credible resources and direction on providing proper attribution when they use

them. Students can also supplement their learning by connecting with online groups and virtual

communities in real time, or by collaborating on group projects with tools such as wikis and

cloud-based apps. And instructors can provide access to course material (and additional

resources) by setting up portals through learning management systems or providing access to

course-specific software for each learner. Blended learning — a mixture of classroom

technology and face-to-face learning—is a popular way of organizing this.

 24

Education technology can make learning more interactive and collaborative—and this can

help students better engage with course material. Rather than memorizing facts, they learn by

doing. This could be as simple as taking an interactive quiz in class or participating in tech-

enabled group discussions or as involved as playing educational games, practicing science

experiments in a virtual lab or taking a virtual field trip. But to make it truly engaging, it must be

truly interactive. Doing math on a computer isn’t any different than doing math with a pencil and

pad of paper. But using augmented reality to animate math challenges is a whole different

ballgame. For some students, interactivity provides a better learning experience. For teachers, the

possibilities are endless: from using simulation tools to demonstrate how a hurricane develops, to

using virtual reality to practice medical procedures. “As a growing number of medical schools

bring virtual reality into the classroom, students are finding it an effective way to learn complex

subject matter, such as anatomy, that’s often easier to understand with hands-on practice,”

writes1 Chris Hayhurst for EdTech Magazine.Thanks to technology, the classroom no longer has

walls. The learning environment no longer has boundaries. And instruction can be provided by

any number of subject matter experts—in addition to the person teaching the course.“Students in

a classroom in the rural U.S., for example, can learn about the Arctic by following the expedition

of a team of scientists in the region, read scientists’ blog posting, view photos, e-mail questions

to the scientists, and even talk live with the scientists via a videoconference. Students can share

what they are learning with students in other classrooms in other states who are tracking the

same expedition,” according to an article2 on technology in education by Purdue University.In a

traditional classroom, students who were struggling to learn new concepts would quickly fall

behind their peers. With online assignments, however, students can advance at their own pace.
 25

Those who need more time or extra help can practice outside of class with guided

exercises or additional coursework. So, too, can learners who want more of a challenge.Thanks

to the always-on nature of technology, students can access resources online whenever they need

to, and instructors can see which students might need extra help. The exercise of self-paced

learning also helps students learn digital literacy and 21st century skills, which will be useful

when they enter the workforce. Technology changes the way we access information, but also

how we’re taught that information. The instructor becomes less of a ‘sage on stage’ and more of

a ‘guide on the side.’ From accessing course materials online to watching video-recorded

lectures, technology opens up the possibility for teaching innovation: from collaborative group

work to flipped and hybrid classrooms. Instructors can also use classroom response systems to

assess students’ understanding of course material and adjust the pace or content as needed in real

time.

While technology is sometimes seen as a threat—and it does have its limits—integrating it

into your teaching practice offers a new way for students to interact and engage with course

material. Thanks to technology, education is no longer confined to the walls of your classroom.

YouTube videos and social media don’t have to be a distraction; they can be part of your course

material. The math is easy: it adds up to better learning outcomes. Students today live in a very

technological world. Most students use some form of technology on a daily basis including;

texting, social networking, and web surfing. Students see these types of technologies as useful

and extremely enjoyable. These very same students that are accustomed to these types of

technologies will relate to using technology at school. If their learning environment mirrors the

ways in which they engage with the world, they will excel in their education (Christen, 2009).

Technology can transform the classroom into an interactive learning environment.

 26

Technology is a powerful contributor to learning if it is used to deepen students’

engagement in meaningful and intellectually authentic curriculum. Technology is a tool. It

should be selected when it is the best tool for students to learn. Technology can be a particularly

effective tool for English language learners and can enhance the participation of children with

disabilities. Children in elementary schools should begin to use familiar technology tools as a

part of their academic program. Teachers should model the use of technology in support of the

curriculum so that children can see the appropriate use of technology and benefit from exposure

to more advanced applications that they will use independently when they are older (DePasquale,

McNamara, & Murphy, 2003).

Many studies have shown the advantages of using technology in classroom instruction.

Technology can be used as a tool for establishing meaningful projects to engage students in

critical thinking and problem solving. Technology can be used to restructure and redesign the

classroom to produce an environment that promotes the development of higher-order thinking

skills (Kurt, 2010). Technology also increases student collaboration. Collaboration is a highly

effective tool for learning. Students cooperatively works together to either create projects or they

can learn from each other by reading the work of their peers (Keser, Huseyin, & Ozdamli, 2011).

One study that was conducted to determine whether Wiki technology would improve

students’ writing skills in a college English as a foreign language writing class showed benefits

to using Wiki technology. Students were invited to join a Wiki page where they would write and

post passages and then read and respond to the passages of their fellow classmates. Students

participating in the study reported that their receiving immediate feedback from the instructor

was a benefit of using this form of technology. Students in the study also reported learning
 27

vocabulary, spelling, and sentence structure by reading the work of their classmates (Lin &Yang,

2011).

Another study was conducted to examine the experiences of pre-service teachers

implementing technology in math lessons. The study shows a positive effect on student learning

in mathematics. The pre-service teachers noted that the internet provided math activities at

different levels, which gave students an opportunity to choose the level they are comfortable

working. Findings showed that students were engaged during the math lessons using technology

and students were able to discuss what they learned the following day. The teachers were

surprised by the students’ recall of the lesson. Some students who participated in the lessons

believed that the computer helped them understand what the teacher was saying about the lesson.

Technology can be used as a way to create a hands-on and meaningful math lesson (Herron,

2010).

Another study found that integrating technology and peer-led discussions of literature can

produce increased student engagement and motivation. Technology used in these small group

discussions of literature includes wikis, online literature circles, and online book clubs. With

these technologies, students were able to connect with readers from other schools, states, and

even other countries. This type of technology is an assessable and motivational way to expose

students to other ideas and cultures. These online literature discussions have the ability to create

a sense of community and foster positive social interaction (Coffey, 2012) Continuing

advancements in technology change the ways all people live and work. The internet is becoming

a common learning tool in many classrooms (Açıkalın, 2009). This means provides a meaningful

learning experience for all students. Teachers today have many opportunities to use technology

increasing the ways students learn.

 28

Using computers and the internet has become an integral part of our daily lives. Therefore,

one of the greatest vehicles for the 21st century is using technology for effective and permanent

learning. The internet affects peoples’ lives by increasing communication, expanding educational

services, and increasing quality along with personal interaction. More emphasis has been placed

on seeking, evaluating, organizing using and sharing information with others. The internet is the

greatest source for information and the best way to quickly share and exchange information with

others, the internet sharpens one’s ability to search and analyze information (Tutkun, 2011).

The internet is being used as a source for teaching material. Providing information and

communication technologies for teaching and learning will have some advantages. First, the

students will play a more active role, which will help them retain more information. Next,

follow-up discussions will contain more detail where students will become more independent.

Last, the students will easily process new student-based educational material and their skills will

increase (Tutkun, 2011).

In 2009, Van Meter Community School in Iowa adopted a one-to-one laptop initiative in

grades 6-12. They also enacted a strong technology focus throughout the district. Since the

launch of this program, the school has reported that there was an evolving atmosphere of respect,

creativity, collaboration, and connection. They also say that independent thinking and learning

has prevailed at their school. Through this educational transformation, Van Meter has become a

place where students can find their passion (Miller, 2011).

The students at Van Meter use their laptops for virtual reality programs and creating Prezi

software slideshows, YouTube videos, and reading and writing blogs. At one school, one fifth

grade girl talked about how she loved to present and show what she could do by using
 29

technology. The students at Van Meter are very excited about the learning activities that the

laptops allow which is evident showing students’ in learning. Students are being allowed to

develop their abilities and strengths by doing activities in which they are passionate. The

learning is immediate, motivational, and relevant. They are using technology to interact and

exchange ideas, research independently, adapt to new situations, and take ownership over their

own learning (Miller, 2011). Because technology is a big part of people’s daily lives, it is

pertinent and vital that children learn how to use it at an early age. When children use technology

tools in elementary schools, a sense of confidence and competence in their computer skills will

grow as they get older. Many children today have access to a great deal of technology in their

home; this access will result in students being comfortable by using technology at school as well.

When elementary school teachers use and model different forms of technologies, they actively

engage their students and create a stimulating work environment (Kenney, 2011).

A study to examine the effects of information and communication technologies on

students’ math and science achievement was conducted with 4,996 students in Turkey. The data

was obtained from the results of The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a

standardized test given to 9th grade students. The study results indicated that students’ exposure

to Information and communication technology at home and school had a positive impact on their

math and science achievement scores. Students’ who spent a lot of time using technology were

shown to have increased science knowledge. They also performed better on math skills.

Information and communication technology has a positive effect on student learning and should

be included in classroom instruction (Bulut & Delen, 2011).

A study conducted by Baytak, Tarman, & Ayas found that most students believe that their

learning is improved by integrating technology into classroom curriculum. Students participating

 30

in the study reported that using technology in school makes learning fun and helps them learn

more. They believed that technology makes learning interesting, enjoyable, and interactive.

Children today love to learn by doing, interacting, and discovering (Baytak, Tarman, & Ayas,

2011). Using technology in classrooms has the potential to create increased student motivation,

increased social interactions, positive outcomes, enhanced student learning, and enhanced

student engagement. Technology is capable of unlocking keys of learning with all students. This

includes students with special learning needs. The Etiwanda School District in California has

implemented a technology integration program district wide. Teachers received technology

training and then began integrating technology into general education lessons on a daily basis.

This program also included a practical technology support plan for teachers working with

students with special needs. This plan enabled teachers to help these students by weaving

technology resources into instruction in meaningful ways. The plan proved to be successful in

the Etiwanda School District. The students with special learning needs are now meeting their IEP

goals more quickly due to this technology integration. They are also improving their

performance on district benchmarks (Courduff, 2011). The evidence in this paper shows that

technology has a positive effect on student learning expectations and outcomes. Evidence also

shows that technology integration is becoming more common in public and private schools.

Technology integration is shown to be effective in all age groups and is also shown to be helpful

for students with special learning needs. To reiterate, technology integration has the following

benefits: 1) increased student motivation; 2) increased student engagement; 3) increased student

collaboration; 4, increased hands-on learning opportunities; 5) allows for learning at all levels; 6)

increased confidence in students, and 6) increased technology skills. Today’s college students are

proficient with technology, using it daily in and out of the classroom. However, heavy reliance
 31

on technology can lead to negative impacts on the health of many students, and especially those

in higher education from college to PhD programs. Mental health disorders and increased risk of

developing chronic diseases are just some of the potential effects of overuse or improper use of

today’s technology. Mental Health Too much screen time leads to mental health problems

including an increased incidence of depression among teenagers and young adults, and screens

are often used as a substitute for real-life interaction. Obsessive-compulsive behaviors such as

repeatedly checking for new messages are another effect of rampant technology use among

students. Getting together in person with friends and doing something physically active or even

just socially active, like chatting over a cup of coffee, reduces mental stress. Friendship and

humor are known to reduce blood pressure and mental fatigue. Chronic Diseases Spending many

hours a day sitting in class, sitting in front of the computer, and sitting with smartphones and

other handheld devices sending texts, playing games, and reading e-mail can lead to metabolic

problems in young adults. Increased screen time has been associated with an increase in the

development of metabolic syndrome, a precursor of chronic health problems including diabetes.

Higher blood pressure, higher glucose levels, and obesity are also related to spending long

periods of time sitting in front of a screen. To combat these negative effects, setting a daily

schedule with consistent waking and sleeping times resets the body’s internal clock and helps

prevent the fatigue and headaches resulting from staying up too late using the computer and

other devices. Eating a diet with a variety of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean meats

combined with daily exercise provides fuel and stimulation to the brain and nourishes the rest of

the body. In addition, exercising outdoors reduces stress and relaxes those tense eye muscles.

When used within the proper context and with some common sense, technology enhances the

academic and social lives of college and graduate students. Developing and maintaining lifelong
 32

healthy habits helps override some of the negative health consequences of heavy reliance on

technology in school and everywhere in modern life. When used appropriately and, like

everything else, in moderation, technology can integrate into a healthy lifestyle to help students

achieve their academic and personal goals. Technology is quickly invading every classroom in

the country, making schools who cannot afford such luxuries disadvantaged to a certain extent.

For college students, laptops are essential to classroom success. Most professors will use the

university portal to email students, post notes and quizzes, and relay grades. Students almost

always have their laptops in classrooms, but they are not always using them academically. This

notion has brought up the question of academic integrity and how students are using the internet

to do their homework quicker, write papers, or email answers to their friends. Technology in the

Classroom.

At the University of South Carolina, every classroom is equipped with a computer hookup

and a projection screen. Slides with class content are almost always posted before class for

students to review or print. Grades are posted before tests are handed back in class. Students

receive emails that class is cancelled. Students use online study groups to share information and

email to access professors and turn in assignments. With these things becoming commonplace, it

is hard to imagine universities without technology, but the technology has introduced a whole

new dimension into the academic world. In one study, 79% of college students feel positively

about the impact of the Internet on their academics. Students also feel that the Internet has

positively affected relationships with their professors, even though email contact was not very

frequent or even seldom (Jones 3). There is, however, a slight generation gap between professors

and college students when it comes to the Internet, and newer programs (such as Blackboard and

Web have been created to ease communication for both students and professors. When it comes
 33

to research, students primarily rely on the Internet rather than the library to find primary sources.

During observations, students in the library were mostly there to study or use the Internet, not to

truly use the resources available to them there (Jones 9). With these advances, cheating and

plagiarism have become big problems on college campuses and one major way students cheat is

with Google.Search Engines and Cheating. In this day and age, most people, especially students,

cannot get through the day without using the phrase “Google it” at least once. In fact, Google is

worried about losing its trademark rights if the term becomes too generic (Poppick). Google, and

other search engines, have revolutionized the academic world by allowing unlimited information

to be available after just a few keystrokes. Instead of learning the Dewey-Decimal system,

students will start to learn how to optimize their search results. While this access to mass

information has helped in so many ways, it has strongly affected the way college students

conduct research, complete homework, and their overall integrity Students are told not to cheat

from the first day they step into school. This continues very thoroughly throughout high school.

In college, at the end of every syllabus, there is a reference to the University’s academic honesty

policy. But how many of those students have even read that policy or think that it applies to

them? The real issue is how many students think that what they are doing is not cheating.

Without specifying the word “cheat,” students were asked about the appropriateness of activities

while taking an online test, quiz, or homework. It turned out that about three-fourths of students

think it is much easier to cheat on an online assignment than in a traditional classroom (Ravasco

72).

While this may seem like an obvious finding, when search engines like Google were still

in their early years, there was not as much information available and students would have to go

to much greater lengths to cheat than they do now. With the widespread use of online portals for
 34

classes that do meet on a regular basis, and the constant addition of online classes, academic

integrity is slowly beginning to blur in student’s minds and in practice. According to the Boston

Globe, 75% of students admit to cheating – a statistic that has held steady over the years and

with the introduction of technology (Lang). However, while cheating may not have increased in

numbers, it is changing in form. With so many online classes being available, and regular classes

posting material online, the opportunity for cheating has grown exponentially. According to a

study done at liberal arts colleges, 40% of students reported cheating on an online quiz, another

13% reported cheating on a paper, and another 13% admitted to bending the rules in online

discussion boards (Haynie 1). From personal experience, this number is much higher. Students at

universities justify cheating on online quizzes by telling themselves that if professors did not

want them to cheat, they would give the quiz in a classroom, which brings the topic back to

search engines. Students are able to copy and paste a quiz question into Google and the answer

will come up most of the time, mostly through websites from students who have posted the quiz

questions in flashcard form. The other major use of search engines to cheat is when writing

papers. A director from the New England College of Business and Finance said, “Most students

caught by the technology aren’t intentionally cheating, but rather don’t understand how to

correctly cite their sources,” referring to software known as Turnitin that scans large amounts of

web material to see if the student’s work matches anything already out there (Haynie 1).

The fact that this technology exists goes to show how much of an issue it has been. While

students do accidentally plagiarize, a majority of that accident is due to laziness and not learning

what needs to be cited and what does not and just hope that they do not get caught. Since

students can even find primary sources on the internet now with access to online databases from

the university or through Google Scholar, the urge to simply copy and paste is always there.
 35

While the internet provides many ways to cheat, many of them are outside of the classroom, but

ever since cellphones have boomed, they have become the easiest way to cheat in a classroom.

Cellphones in the Classroom. In a recent poll by Common Sense Media, 35% of students

admitted to cheating with the use of a cellphone. Ways to cheat with a cellphone include storing

notes in the phone, sending text messages with test answers, questions or warnings of pop

quizzes, looking up answers on the internet, and even taking a picture of the test (“35% of

Teens”).

Teachers and professors have had to go to extremes to prevent cheating through cellphone

usage, including creating multiple test forms, having students put all bags in a separate room,

checking students’ pockets prior to exams, and bringing in multiple people to monitor the room.

Unfortunately, it is not just cheating with cellphones that has become an issue. Cellphone use

during regular class time is at an all-time high and it takes away from the learning experience. In

one study, 92% of students reported sending a text message during class. In another study,

students reported using their cellphones 11 times a day just in class. If students have, on average,

two classes per day then that is more than five times per class that students are reaching for their

cellphones. However, students are completely aware that this is a distraction, with 80% saying

that it decreases their ability to pay attention (Brenner). The author was in a college class that did

not allow any technology, neither cellphones nor laptops. In order to alleviate this, the professor

allowed for about two minutes in the middle of class for students to look at their phones because

she did not believe they could go an hour and fifteen minutes without doing so. However,

students were sneaking peaks at their phones throughout the whole class. The fact the professor

even felt the need to give this break goes to show how attached students are to their cellphones.
 36

Not only are cellphones highly distracting, they are actually reducing students’ cognitive

abilities. Attention spans have reduced drastically, and critical thinking has decreased with the

ability to look everything up on an app on their cellphones. Also, four of five college students

report feeling anxiety, stress, or isolation when asked to unplug from their cellphones for just one

day (Morgan). On the other end of things, cellphones are the number one way that students stay

in touch with their families while they are in college.

A study from Cornell found that students, on average, talk to their families about 13 times

per week. It definitely is a convenient and efficient way to keep families up-to-date on students’

day-to-day lives (Morgan).It is apparent how much technology has evaded the academic world

when someone goes to take a standardized test. The author recently took a section of the

Certified Public Accounting exam and had to put all of her belongings in a locker, was not

allowed to have pockets, had to use a fingerprint when entering and exiting the testing room, and

was scanned with a metal detector. These measures sound extreme, but students these days go to

extremes to cheat – and technology has made cheating that much easier. SOCIAL MEDIA It is

impossible to talk about current technology without bringing up social media. Social media is

constantly growing and evolving and infiltrating peoples’ lives. Social media apps have allowed

constant real time updates on just about everything, from news to discounts to friends’ locations.

However, social media is so prevalent that people are seemingly spending more time on their

phones and computers than with real people. It is also prompting a competitive environment in

which everyone wants the most “likes.” How is social media affecting students, their self-esteem,

and their college experience? Facebook. By far, the biggest social media presence is Facebook.

Started in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook has 1.59 billion users as of December 31, 2015.

Of these 1.59 billion users, 1.44 billion users are active monthly on their account. Because of
 37

Facebook’s massive global reach, the previous six-degrees of separation has been reduced to 3.5

degrees. This means that every person in the world is connected by just three and a half people

(Mastroianni). Facebook has connected people in a way that previously was unheard of, and it

turns out that it is affecting many aspects of students’ lives.Facebook and School. In the world,

an average of 20 minutes is spent on Facebook per day. However, in the United States, the

average is doubled to 40 minutes per day according to the company’s earnings report (D’Onfro).

Even more astounding is that the average college student spends 106 minutes on Facebook per

day (Daly). From personal experience, some of this time is definitely during class. Professors

who allow laptops are inevitably inviting students to get distracted with Facebook or other forms

of social media. With so much time being spent on the website, there are bound to be side

effects. Dr. Rey Junco, a researcher from Lock Haven University in Pennsylvania, has done

much research on the effects of social media on higher education. While the study showed

excessive use of Facebook did correlate to a drop in GPA, it was a slight decrease. The study

found that it was not just using Facebook that produced a worse GPA, but how a student used it.

92% of students reported using Facebook. The most common Facebook activities included status

updates, checking up on friends, posting photos, viewing photos, commenting, Facebook chat,

and sharing links. There was a positive relationship with grades for students who shared links

and checked up on friends and a negative relationship for students who often utilized status

updates. The study did not find any significant link between the use of Facebook and time spent

studying (Daly). This is one of the forefront studies on the topic, with research undoubtedly

likely to come out in coming years. One of Facebook’s largest effects is the amount of time it

consumes. One researcher suggests that “users in low self-control presented with leisure options
 38

will tend to eschew task that provide delayed benefit in favor of immediate gratification and will

experience guilt for doing so” (Eglendi 38).

Many students will use the website to procrastinate. A survey showed that students are

widely aware of their overuse of media. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, less time

spent using media between the ages of 8-18 did better in school than those with more media.

However, this awareness does not seem to be stopping the students from logging on anyways

(Eglendi 38). Facebook and Health. There has been quite a lot of research on some of the

negative side effects that Facebook can have on mental and physical health. According to Leon

Festinger, a psychologist, Facebook increases the natural inclination for social comparison. Often

times, this happens when students see pictures of other people traveling to cool places or doing

cool things and can result in the user feeling unsatisfied with life, thinking other people are

happier than them, or thinking life is unfair (Kenrick).

A new study from the Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology has linked Facebook and

depressive symptoms to this phenomenon of social comparison. The first part of the study, done

at the University of Houston, found that the more people used Facebook the more they tended to

have depressive symptoms. While the study admits it does not mean that Facebook causes

depression, it acknowledges that a lot of times spent on the website and comparing oneself to

others seem to go hand-in-hand. The second part of the study delved into the types of

comparison. Upward social comparison is when one looks at someone more attractive or popular

while downward social comparison is when one looks at someone with lower grades or someone

that is less attractive. However, the study found that the more time logged onto Facebook, the

more depressive symptoms resulted from social comparison in any direction. The researcher

suggests assessing feelings after using Facebook. If the feelings are negative, Facebook use
 39

should be decreased (Walton). As a college student, the author feels that this is the most

discussed and obvious effect of social media. Students are constantly showing their friends

pictures of someone else either doing something cool, or looking really good, and wondering

why they do not look like that or are not doing that.Hashtags such as “thinspiration” and

“fitspiration” propel the media’s image of what a woman should look like and highly affect

female users from personal experience.

A study conducted of over 1,000 girls indicated that Facebook exposure is, in fact,

associated with the thin body ideal that is so popular for adolescents today. Users scored much

higher in body image concerns than non-users (Elgendi 38). There is definitely a strong sense of

inferiority and comparison that result from Facebook and other forms of social media. Linked to

this is the other end of the spectrum with narcissism. Facebook impacts ego and self-concept and

narcissism can be developed by over-using Facebook. People who end up being narcissistic seem

to be linked to the more friends a user has on the website. In one study, an attitude toward being

open about sharing information about oneself is highly related to the frequency of Facebook

usage and is positively correlated with narcissism (Elgendi 38). Another mental health issue

developed from Facebook is addiction. Studies have shown that excessive time spent online can

lead to addiction, similar to that of sex, gambling, and drug addiction (Elgendi 37). Students can

experience withdrawal, denial or hiding of their usage, and tolerance in the sense of increasing

usage when they are addicted to Facebook (Elgendi 38). The addiction has even been added to

the DSM-V with a scale called the Facebook addiction scale (Kenrick). Facebook can also affect

physical health. Studies have shown Facebook use can increase the risk of Upper Respiratory

Infections due to the increased stress levels that the website causes. More than half of the

students in the study who used Facebook reported symptoms of an Upper Respiratory Infection.
 40

While this study has some confounding variables, there is no question that Facebook can

increase stress levels of students. 31.7% of students reported that unplugging from Facebook

would result in less stress and 43.9% of students feel that it has made it harder to feel close to

people (Elgendi 37).

Facebook and Relationships. Facebook is not just affecting health; it also has shown large

effects on relationships. One of the major issues is has caused is Facebook jealousy. Messaging

old flings, analyzing posts on a partner’s wall, or looking at a suspicious picture without asking

about it have all been known to cause issues for couples. A 2009 study suggested that there are

unique contributions from Facebook to the experience of jealousy in relationships. Divorce

attorneys often cite Facebook flirtation in their cases. There has even been a book written on the

matter called Facebook and Your Marriage by Jason and Kelly Krafsky (Bindley). Going

“Facebook official” can also cause conflict and confusion. Taking this next step can be a

stressful conversation or mean different things to the different partners and may lead to some sort

of conflict. A study also found that excessive time spent on Facebook was associated with

negative relationship outcomes, like cheating or breaking-up. This could be a result of ex-partner

contact on Facebook or constant partner monitoring. While these problems can occur without

Facebook, they can still add fuel to the fire. Facebook can even cause indirect issues for couples

in relationships. A study found that people posting often about details of their relationship are

less liked by others (Siedman). While Facebook is not to blame for relationship problems, it can

create an avenue to allow threats to develop if they are not communicated about. Fortunately,

Facebook also has some positive effects on relationships. One of the positive aspects that

Facebook brings to relationships is making new relationships more easily accessible. Even

though Facebook is not often used to meet people, it is definitely the first thing people do after
 41

they meet someone they are interested – they add each other on Facebook. This makes it easier to

see things about the person and get a feel for them before giving them a second date. Facebook

also allows social network integration for partners. Researchers discovered that by analyzing the

extent of friend integration on Facebook they could actually predict the people who were

couples. It allows the partners to stay in touch with people outside of their immediate social

circle and each other’s families and childhood friends. Finally, Facebook can help with

relationship maintenance techniques. One study showed that couples who maintained positive

and assuring relationship maintenance behaviors on Facebook had higher relationship

satisfaction. Displaying statuses as “in a relationship,” posting pictures with the partner, and

posting statuses about the partner also reported higher relationship satisfaction (Siedman). Other

Forms of Social Media. Facebook is definitely the most researched form of social media, but

there have been many others that are also affecting college students. Among these are Twitter

and Instagram. In a news article from USA Today, one student admits that he would not want his

family or future employers to see what he posts on Twitter and because of that, has a more

selective following (Burns).

Students are using Twitter primarily to share about their lives or say funny things, but it

can definitely affect their futures. 45% of employers use social media to screen potential

employees and 35% of what they find is negative (Burns). This threat is true of other forms of

social media. From personal observation, students often change their names on Facebook to

make it harder for employers to find them. They think this is easier than just keeping clean social

media in the first place. Instagram poses a whole different threat for students, highly related to

self-esteem. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Utah Valley University, and

Humboldt University Berlin believe mindless scrolling through Instagram can be more damaging
 42

to the psyche than one would think. The studies done on Facebook that are linked to loneliness,

depression, low self-esteem, and resentment were linked most negatively to photo sharing.

Specifically, stalking other people’s accounts and their seemingly better lives and posting one’s

own photos to emulate an equally enviable life. While the study was done on Facebook, the

effects must be even more so on Instagram because it does not have news and games and other

updates to dilute it. While people know that Instagram is showing a perfectly cropped and

filtered version of someone else’s life, it is still hard not to compare. Instagram has tons of

halftruths and optimizations of life (Mariella). The author of an article about Instagram in Elite

Daily says, “A friend recently invited me to a polo match in Newport, Rhode Island and included

a reminder to how wonderful the day would look on Instagram in the invitation. It has become a

tool for self-invention as much as it is a tool for sharing, which is probably why people live in

their phones” (Mariella). Unfortunately, this is very true of students as well, with the phrase “Do

it for the Insta” becoming all too common. The element of social comparison previously

discussed in terms of Facebook is even more active on Instagram. From personal experience,

Instagram is definitely a tool to either envy someone or tear them down. Students are constantly

showing each other “Instas” of someone who they wish they could be like or look like, which

definitely takes a toll on self-esteem. Instagram also affects self-esteem with respect to “likes.”

Many students will go as far as to take down a picture that did not receive a certain number of

“likes.” While Instagram is a fun and easy way to see what people are doing, in order for it to be

healthy, students need to consciously remember that it is a perfectly filtered version of someone

else’s life.
 43

Theoretical Framework

Figure 1. Dynamic model of online interaction learning theory. From The online

interaction learning model: An integrated theoretical framework for learning networks

Source: R. Benbunan-Fich, S. R. Hiltz, and L. Harasim, In S. R. Hiltz and R. G. Goldman (Eds.),

Learning together online, 2005, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Digital learning resources are becoming increasingly common in classrooms. They bring huge

potential for increasing learning in part because they can be constantly updated to meet students’

needs. Digital resources allow for faster updates than textbooks and offer a wider variety of

sources to all students, including those with disabilities. The benefits of the increased access to
 44

more resources is not only good for students, but is also supported by formal theories and

philosophies of learning.

One theory that supports increased access to quality digital learning resources is the

Behaviorist philosophy of learning B.F. Skinner (as cited by Wardlow, 2016). According to his

philosophy, teaching should emphasize ways to increase desired behaviors, which can occur

through connectionism or operant conditioning. Connectionism stresses that learners form

associations between sensory experiences and neural impulses often through trial and error

practices. One key component of this theory is that learning should involve practice and rewards

that increase desired behaviors, which is what many educational technology applications are

built around. Many apps serve to increase drill practice such as learning a foreign language,

doing math drills or spelling practice, which all help a student’s overall learning. Operant

conditioning, the other component of behaviorism, refers to training voluntary responses by the

consequences they induce. Apps and other ed tech that provide incentives for desired behaviors,

like earning coins or tokens for correct answers, are a couple of examples of operant

conditioning.

Another theory that supports increased access to digital learning resources is Social

Cognitive theory by Albert Bandura (as cited by Wardlow, 2016) which is a formal theory of

learning that, asserts people learn from observing others in their social environments. This theory

has three key themes: modeling, self–efficacy, and tutoring and mentoring. Modeling, which

refers to learners observing others perform actions in context, is central to learning, so teachers

often incorporate it into their own teaching practice. Before technology, students’ access to

models were limited, but now it can increase educators’ abilities to provide models and increase

students’ access to models by providing opportunities for all students to observe teachers explain
 45

and demonstrate concepts and skills. Students are no longer bound to just classroom walls,

either. They can easily reach out through computers, tablets, and apps to see instructors around

the globe model different skills and problems.

Self–efficacy, or the belief in one’s own ability to complete tasks and reach goals, is

increased when students are able to watch a model of a skill and then practice it themselves. One

example of how technology is increasing access to this type of learning opportunity is software

programs with already downloaded avatars or recorded teachers that model a desired skill or

behavior, after which the student is provided an opportunity to practice and perform. Many other

types of educational technology can increase students’ access to opportunities to increase their

self-efficacy.

The last component that the Social Cognitive theory stresses is the importance of tutoring

and mentoring for learning. Technology provides access to tutors or mentors that many students

may not have otherwise. Students are no longer bound to receiving help solely through their

school community, and can communicate with tutors and mentors from all over the world whom

they would not otherwise be able to reach with technology, increasing their learning potential.

Another influential formal learning theory is Information Processing theory by George

Miller (as cited by Wardlow, 2016), which focuses on students’ abilities in the areas of attention,

perception, encoding of skills and information, storage of knowledge in short and long-term

memory, and retrieval of knowledge. This theory stresses that individual students have different

information processing capacities, meaning students differ in how much information they can

attend to, encode, retrieve, and retain in their short and long-term memory. According to

Information Processing theory, students must be able automate some function, like a simple math

function, in order to free up cognitive resources to learn effectively. Apps that provide students
 46

with drills and practice follow this theory and can provide students with increasingly changing

and innovative ways to automate essential skills.

Although there is great interest, and considerable investment, in adopting technology within

Higher Education, it is less clear what this change means to the people who implement or

experience it. Presently, there is no consistent framework used to study and explain this

phenomenon. In this paper, we propose a framework that can structure and guide work in the

area. Work carried out as part of a Kaleidoscope-funded project (see Price et al, 2005) to explore

the impact of technology, providing an overview of current research in this area is described,

outlining a framework of approaches to researching this topic, and providing an example of

empirical work that fits within this methodological framework. Findings from the case study

reported here focus on the role that models of teaching and learning play in the process of

technology adoption and will be used to elaborate on the themes emerging from the review of

existing research. The paper will conclude by considering the framework’s role as a foundation

for further work in this area.

Conceptual Framework

The diagram below is the Figure 2. Outline the sequence taken by the researcher to achieve the

objectives of the study. The first box on the left side encompasses the student’s health and

learning performance. The second box on the right side indicates the technology utilization and

the third box is the demographic profile of the students in terms of age, sex and school, which

will be considered to find or meet the significant of the impacts of technology to the students.
 47

DV IV

Student’s Health and

Learning Performance Technology Utilization

PROFILE
1. Age

2. Sex

3. School

Figure 2. Schematic Diagram of the Framework of the Study

Operational Definition of Terms

Age-it refers to the year of life of our respondents on their collegiate level categorized as 17-19,

20-22, 23-25, and 26 and above.

Mental health- it refers to the situation of the students’ mental health when using technology, it

could be depression, anxiety, mental disorders, or lack of sleeps.

Physical Health-it refers to the situations of the students’ physical health when using

technology, it could be body pain, vision problems, or abnormal changes of the body.
 48

Learning Performance- refers to the general average obtained by the respondents for second

semester, school year 2019-2020 categorized as 1.00-1.25, 1.26-1.50, 1.51-1.75, 1.76-2.0, 2.01-

2.25, 2.26-2.50, 2.51-2.75, and 2.76-3.0.

Sex-refers to a set of biological attributes whether they are male or female.

School- this refers to Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga Peninsula Poly-

technic State University.

Technology Utilization- refers to the use of devices such as smartphone, tablet, laptop, desktop,

PC, television, speaker, headphone or earphone, USB or flash drive, and projector in the learning

process.
 49

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presented the research design, research setting, research instrument, data gathering

procedure, data analysis procedure, and the statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

The researcher used both quantitative methodologies to study the health condition and

academic status of the students in different University towards the impact of utilization of the

students on technology.

The research study will use descriptive quantitative correlation in order to determine the

impact of technology in the health and learning performance of the respondents (students from

different university) in technological repercussion in health and learning.

And to support the result of this research, the qualitative method will also be utilized. This

will also determine the correlation between two variables; the dependent variables which

includes Student’s Health and Learning Performance and the independent variables that will

cover the Technology Utilization while the demographic profile of the respondents such as Age,

Sex and School will serve as intervening variables.

 50

Work plan flow chart of the study

START END

CONCEPTUALIZATION
FINAL RESEARCH
OF THE RESEARCH

WRITING THE INTERPRETATION AND

RESEARCH PAPER ANALYSIS OF DATA

DATA GATHERING
ETHICS CLEARANCE

Research Locale

The researcher will conduct the study in the two (2) State University and Colleges in Zamboanga

City, Region IX. The Division is part of the basic tertiary private and public school office of the

Commission on Higher Education (CHED). In particular, Western Mindanao State University

with a total population of 32,000, and Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University with a

population of 18,000 students.

TABLE 1.

TOTAL NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS

Tertiary Schools\ No. of Respondents (University College

Students)
Western Mindanao State University
(WMSU) 20
Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University 20
(ZPPSU)
Population and Sampling Method
 51

The researcher used Simple Random Sampling since this sampling has the equal

opportunity of the respondents in getting designated to be the part sample. It is used when we

don’t have any kind of prior information or data about the target population.

Research Instrument

This study used a Researcher-made checklist with the 5 point- Likert Scale where respondents

specified their levels of always used or never used and on a symmetric always experienced or

never experienced scale for a series of statements. The researcher used a survey questionnaire

that is consisted of four parts. The following are;

Part 1. Personal Characteristics. It asks the respondent campus location, age, gender,

and name (optional).

Part 2. Technology Used It is also a ten – item questionnaire that collects current

respondent status of having or acquiring technology such as gadgets/devices and etc.

Part 3. Health Status (Physical & Mental). The 20 – item questionnaire that solicits

current respondent health status on daily usage of technology.

Part 4. General Average. This will serve as a basis if their answer in the part 4

questionnaire are true and will be compared on their general average of 2 nd Semester

school year 2019-2020 for justification.

The respondents rated each statement with 5 – always used and experienced, 4 – often

used and experienced, 3 – sometimes used and experienced, 2 – rarely used and

experienced, and 1-never used and experienced.

 52

Validity and Reliability

The research instrument was a researcher-made checklist. It was submitted to the adviser

for the necessary corrections of the content. The same questionnaire was submitted to the group

of evaluators for the consistency, relevance and appropriateness of the instrument to the research

problems. The suggestions of the adviser and panel of evaluators were considered as deemed

necessary.

To check the reliability of the instrument, the researcher used a coefficient of reliability to test

the dimensionality of the research instrument. Thirty questionnaires were administered to non-

respondents with the same characteristics of the respondents of the study.

The instrument was subjected to Cronbach’s Alpha wherein the results showed that the

instrument (.864) was highly reliable.

Data Gathering Procedure

 53

The preliminaries that will contribute before the real conduct of the study will be to

request first permission and approval from the two Higher Education Institutions President of –

Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga City State Polytechnic College.

Such authority to conduct the study will also be coordinated with the school faculty

members and department of administration office of the said school.

The researcher will administer the test to the respondents on dated that both the researcher

and respondents are available. This is to ensure that the details of the instrument are carefully

explained and attendance for this purpose will be highlighted.

The estimated respondents will be chosen through the help of each school staff and

students who are enrolled in the two universities. Each respondent will be tasked to answer the

survey questionnaire through online survey.

Ethical Consideration

In compliance to Research Ethics Protocol, the researcher will obtain Informed Consent

from the survey participants specifying their awareness to the purposes of the study. A

permission will be sought from the head of the school.

In the course of the answering the survey questionnaire, it will be made known to the

participants that an indicative statement and closed questions is asked from them; there will be

no pictures will request from them showing their identity nor the features of their personal

attributes and location will be included in the study.

 54

The participants will be assured that all answers from the survey questionnaire will be kept

with utmost confidentiality.

The researcher will provide informed consent in two copies stating the rights, the risk, and

benefits of the study. One copy will be provided to the participant and one will be kept by the

researcher.

Statistical Tools

To facilitate the analysis of data, the following statistical measures were used:

Frequency and Percentage. This measure was used to determine the proportion of the

respondents in relation to the samples when categorized according to profile and their general

average.

Weighted Mean. This measure was used to determine the commonly used technology of the

respondents, and their health status when using technology.

2 – tailed t – test for independent samples. This measure was used to determine the significant

differences on technology utilization when data are grouped according to sex and school.

One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). This measure was used to determine the significant

difference on technology utilization when data are grouped according to age.

Pearson’s r Correlation. This measures were used to determine the correlation between the

technology utilization, student’s physical health, and learning performance.

 55

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals on the presentation and interpretation of data that answers the specific

problems cited. This is done in accordance to the sequence of research questions presented.

PROBLEM 1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents?

TABLE 2
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS IN TERMS OF AGE

AGE Frequency Percent

17-19 years old 1 2.5
20-22 years old 37 92.5
23-25 years old 2 5.0
Total 40 100.0

Table 2 shows that thirty-seven or 92.5% of the respondents were aged 20-22 years old.

On the other hand, two or 5.0% of the respondents were aged 23-25 years old, and the remaining

one or 2.5% of the respondents were aged 17-19 years old. This means that 20-22 years’ old are

mostly the aged of a 3rd year level college students where the respondents are friends or

acquaintance of the researcher.

 56

TABLE 3
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS IN TERMS OF SEX

SEX Frequency Percent

male 11 27.5
female 29 72.5
Total 40 100.0

Table 3 shows that out of forty respondents there were twenty-nine or 72.5% are female

whereas eleven or 27.5% are males. According to the article “Education of Women and Men”

reference Number: 2011-03, means that there are 41.1 % of women enrolled in the higher

education whereas the male only with 36.4 % where enrolled in the higher education. This

implies that there are more female enrolled in the university or higher education.

TABEL 4
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS IN TERMS OF SCHOOL

SCHOOL Frequency Percent

WMSU 20 50.0
ZPPSU 20 50.0
Total 40 100.0

Table 4 shows that out of forty respondents each university have the same amount of

respondents where 20 or 50% comes from WMSU and 20 or 50% comes from ZPPSU. This

implies that the researcher has equal amount of respondents that gathered between the two

universities.

PROBLEM 2 What is the student’s academic performance during the 1st semester, School
Year 2019-2020?
 57

TABLE 5
STUDENTS ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

General Average Frequency Percent

1.76-2.00 1 2.5
2.01-2.25 15 37.5
2.26-2.50 18 45.0
2.51-2.75 5 12.5
2.76-3.0 1 2.5
Total 40 100.0

Table 5 shows that 18 or 45% of our respondents have the general average of 2.26-2.50

described as fair. This implies that their performance when it comes to academic is not less than

or greater than outstanding and poor performance.

PROBLEM 3. What is the technology commonly used by the respondents in the learning
process?
 58

TABLE 6
TECHNOLOGY COMMONLY USED BY THE RESPONDENTS

Devices Weighted Mean Description

Smart Phone 4.95 Always Used
Tablet 1.62 Never Used
Laptop 3.42 Sometimes Used
Desktop 2.20 Rarely Used
Television 3.40 Sometimes Used
Speaker 3.57 Sometimes Used
Earphone 4.35 Always Used
USB Drive 3.37 Sometimes Used
Projector 2.00 Rarely Used
Valid N (listwise)
4.00-5.00-Always Used /3.25-3.99- Often Used / 2.50-3.24-Sometimes Used/ 1.75-2.49- Rarely
Used/ 1.00-1.74- Never Used

Table 6 shows that smart phone is always used by the respondents with a weighted mean

of (4.95) described as always used. This implies that smart phone is more accessible, in trend and

easy to use device, that’s why it always used by our respondents. While, tablet is never used by

the respondents with weighted mean of (1.62) described as never used. This implies that tablets

are not convenient to use and nearly a phase out device.

PROBLEM 4. What is the students’ health status in using technology?

 59

TABLE 7
PHYSICAL HEALTH STATUS OF STUDENTS IN USING TECHNOLOGY

INDICATIVE STATEMENT Weighted Mean Description

1. The student experience eye strain due excessive 3.78 Often Experienced
usage of technology.
2. Devilish exposure on technology cause student 3.48 Sometimes
blurry vision. Experienced
3. Student gain weight because of spending more 2.73 Sometimes
time in technology. Experienced
4. Using technology with a poor posture leads 3.95 Often Experienced
student to body pain.
5. Radiation on the screens causes student headache. 3.88 Often Experienced

6. Hearing in a high volume earphones causing 3.28 Sometimes

hearing or ear problems to student.
Experienced
7. Skipping meals because of long time usage of 3.53 Sometimes
technology cause students hunger. Experienced

8. The students encounter less engagement of 3.53 Sometimes

physical activities because of technology. Experienced

9. Excessive amount of time in technology resulting 3.30 Sometimes

to insensibility to students. Experienced

10. Student Experience abnormal heartbeat issues 2.68 Sometimes

due to technology.
Experienced
Average Weighted Mean 3.41 Sometimes
Experienced
4.00-5.00-Always Experienced /3.25-3.99- Often Experienced / 2.50-3.24-Sometimes
Experienced/ 1.75-2.49- Rarely Experienced / 1.00-1.74- Never Experienced

Table 7 shows that indicative statement 4 “Using technology with a poor posture leads

students to body pain” obtained the highest weighted mean of (3.95) described as often

experienced. This means that students often experienced poor posture that cause them body pain
 60

when using technology. This implies that students find comfort zone when using technology but

they didn’t realize that it’s a poor posture and after a long spending in technology body pain

occurs. While indicative statement 10 “Student experience abnormal heartbeat issues due to

technology” obtained the lowest weighted mean of (2.68) described as sometimes experienced.

This implies that students less experienced abnormal heartbeat issues in using technology. This

implies that technology can sometimes cause students heart to beat or pump abnormally because

of the radiations and some other harmful chemicals that installed in technology. The Average

weighted mean of students’ physical health status is (3.41) described as sometimes experienced.

This means that students’ physical health status is sometimes affected when utilizing technology.

This implies that technology is a great contributor of abnormal changes on the physical health of

the students.

TABLE 8
STUDENTS’ MENTAL HEALTH STATUS IN USING TECHNOLOGY

INDICATIVE STATEMENT Mean Description

 61

1. Too much exposure on technology leads student laziness 3.55 Sometimes

in doing school works and chores. Experienced
2. Being forgetful of student due to focusing excessively on 3.25 Sometimes
technology. Experienced
3. They experience anxiety such as fear of missing out in 3.33 Sometimes
the absence of technology. Experienced
4. They experience cyber bullying that resulted to 2.50 Sometimes
depression because of obscure graphics information and Experienced
videos.
5. Over-used of technology may cause students mental and 2.93 Sometimes
physical exhaustion. Experienced
6. Student encounter sleeping disorder due to the excessive 3.73 Sometimes
exposure to technology. Experienced
7. They are confident to connect and communicate via 2.78 Sometimes
digital flat forms but disconnecting in the isolation of real Experienced
life conversation.
8. Students are prone to technology addiction; decreasing 2.85 Sometimes
interest in actual life activities, engaging more on Experienced
mobile/video games, and watching censored videos.

9. Getting irritated when someone bothers/disturbed you 3.23 Sometimes

from focusing on technology. Experienced
10. A sudden worry, fear, curiosity, sadness and other 3.40 Sometimes
mood swings develop and can change students mood Experienced
rapidly because of technology utilization.
Average Weighted Mean 3.16 Sometimes
Experienced

4.00-5.00-Always Experienced /3.25-3.99- Often Experienced / 2.50-3.24-Sometimes

Experienced/ 1.75-2.49- Rarely Experienced / 1.00-1.74- Never Experienced

Table 8 shows that indicative statement 6 “Student encounter sleeping disorder due to the

excessive exposure to technology” obtained the highest weighted mean of (3.73) described as

sometimes experienced. This means that students is more likely to experience sleeping disorder

or lack of sleep due to excessive exposure to technology. This implies that students stay up all

night searching, watching, and using technology as a leisure but students didn’t know that it has
 62

a negative effect on their mental health that causes them to sleeping disorder. While indicative

statement 4 “They experience cyber bullying that resulted to depression because of obscure

graphics information and videos” obtained the lowest weighted mean of (2.50) described as

sometimes experienced. This means that less experienced cyber bullying resulted to depression

because of obscure graphic information or videos by students. This implies that students

sometimes use technology as means of bullying others or experience bullying online and being

depressed when unwanted information or graphics are presents on their individual devices. The

Average weighted mean of the students’ mental health status is (3.16) described as sometimes

experienced. This means that student’s mental health is sometimes affected by the technology

depends on the duration of utilization. This implies that sometimes students experienced a mental

health breakdown while using the technology that causes them to have several issues such as

depression, anxiety, and abnormal behavior.

TABLE 9
SUMMARY ON STUDENTS’ HEALTH STATUS IN USING TECHNOLOGY

Health Status Average Weighted Mean Description

Physical Health 3.41 Sometimes Experienced
Mental Health 3.16 Sometimes Experienced
Overall Weighted Mean 3.29 Sometimes Experienced

Table 9 shows the students’ health status in using technology which has an overall

weighted mean describes as sometimes experienced. This means that whether in physical or

mental health status of the students, if expose too much or using technology excessively

sometimes have negative effect.

PROBLEM 5 Is there a significant difference in the technology used by the respondents

when data are grouped according to profile?
 63

TABLE 10
ANOVA Results on Technology used of Respondents According to Age

Sum of df Mean Square F p-value Interpretation

Squares

Between Groups .463 2 .232

Within Groups 10.717 37 .800 .457 Not Significant

.290
Total 11.180 39

Table 10 shows that when data are grouped according to age the computed value of p-value of

F-Obs was (.457) was greater than .05 which means that there was no significant difference on

the technology used by the respondents. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that there is no

significant difference on the technology used by the respondents when data were grouped

according to age was accepted. This means that regardless of their ages, they are utilizing the

same devices or technology.

TABLE 11
T-test Results on Technology used of Respondents According to Sex

Sex Mean SD t-Obs df p-value Interpretation

Male 3.3535 .65323 1.037 38 .135 Not Significant

Female 3.1571 .48570

Table 11 shows that when data are grouped according to sex the computed value of
 64

p-value of t-Obs was (.135) was greater than .05 which means that there was no significant

difference on the technology used by the respondents. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that

there is no significant difference on the technology used by the respondents when data were

grouped according to sex was accepted. This means that female and male uses similar

technology or devices.

Table 12
T-test Results on Technology used of Respondents According to School

School Mean SD t-Obs df p-value Interpretation

WMSU 3.1778 .53397 -.389 38 .803

ZPPSU 3.2444 .54861 Not Significant

Table 12 shows that when data are grouped according to school the computed value of

p-value of t-Obs was (.803) was greater than .05 which means that there was no significant

difference on the technology used by the respondents. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that

there is no significant difference on the technology used by the respondents when data were

grouped according to school was accepted. This means that WMSU and ZPPSU both using

similar technology.

PROBLEM 6 Is there a significant relationship between the technology used and student’s
physical health?

TABLE 13
Pearson Correlation Between the Technology and Student’s Physical Health
 65

Correlation Coefficient Interpretation

-.079 Negative Correlation

Table 13 shows that the correlation coefficient between the technology and student’s physical

health described as negative correlation with a value of (-0.79). This means that there is no

significant relationship between the technology used and student’s physical health. Thus, the null

hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference on the technology used by the

respondents was accepted. This means that whenever the students are highly exposed or

excessive usage of technology, they experienced a negative impact or effect on their physical

health and when they are not exposed or use technology in the right way physical health

problems will not occur.

PROBLEM 7 Is there a significant relationship between the technology used and student’s
mental health?

TABLE 14
Pearson Correlations Between the Technology and Student’s Mental Health

Correlation Coefficient Interpretation

-.142 Negative Correlation

Table 14 shows that the correlation coefficient between the technology and student’s mental

health described as negative correlation with a value of (-.142). This means that there is no

significant relationship between the technology used and student’s mental health. Thus, the null

hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference on the technology used by the

respondents was accepted. This means that whenever the students are highly exposed or

excessive usage of technology, they experienced a negative impact or effect on their mental

health and when they are not exposed or use technology in the right way mental health problems

will not occur.

 66

PROBLEM 8 Is there a significant relationship between the technology used and students
learning performance?
TABLE 15
Pearson Correlation between the Technology and Students Learning Performance

Correlation Coefficient Interpretation

-.079 Negative Correlation

Table 15 shows that the correlation coefficient between the technology and student’s learning

performance described as negative correlation with a value of (-0.79). This means that there is no

significant relationship between the technology used and student’s learning performance. Thus,

the null hypothesis which states that there is no significant difference on the technology used by

the respondents was accepted. This means that whenever the students are less exposed or less

excessive usage of technology, they are more focused, and gets a higher mark on their learning

performance and if they always use or more exposed to technology they lose focus, and gets a

low marking grade on their learning performance.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions and recommendations.

 67

Findings

1.Our respondents comes from Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga Peninsula

Poly-technic State University, were majority are females aged from 20-22 years old.

2. The commonly used devices of our respondents is smart phone in their learning process and

never used technology of our respondents is tablet.

3. The students’ academic performance is fair wherein they do not excel too much in their

academic performance neither stand poor in their learning performance.

4. The students’ physical health status in the results shows that the highest physical problem is

poor posture while using technology that leads them to body pain and for the mental health

status, found out that students are highly experiencing lack of sleep and sleeping disorder due to

excessive exposure to technology.

5. ANOVA results showed that there was no significant difference on the technology used by the

respondents and the age. The t-test results showed that when data are grouped according to sex,

there was no significant difference on the technology used by the respondents. The t-test results

showed that there was no significant difference on the technology used by the respondents and

their school.

6. The Pearson correlation coefficient results showed that technology and student’s physical

health has negative correlation it means that, there is no significant relationship between the

technology used and student’s physical health.

 68

7. The Pearson correlation coefficient results showed that technology and student’s mental health

has negative correlation it means that, there is no significant relationship between the technology

used and student’s mental health.

8. The Pearson correlation between the technology and students learning performance results

showed that it has negative correlation, it means there is no significant relationship between the

technology used and student’s learning performance.

Conclusions

In the light of the findings, this study arrived at the following conclusions:

1. The result shows that Most of our respondents were females, are 20-22 years old, and came

from Western Mindanao State University and Zamboanga Peninsula Poly-technic State

university.

2. The smart phone is commonly used devices of our respondents because it is more accessible,

in trend and easy to use device when studying or in leisure time.

3. The students has fair academic performance, it means that they are not too focused on their

studies and slightly excelling on their classes and also their performance doesn’t list down on

poor level. Balanced and exact academic performance that our respondents had.

4. The physical health status problem of the students were often they experienced it, is the poor

posture while using technology that leads them to body pain. Meaning they practice more often

improper or poor posture when using technology and it causes the students body pain or

abnormal changes on their body. For the mental health problems of the students were sometimes

they experienced it, is the lack of sleep and sleeping disorder due to excessive exposure to
 69

technology. Meaning they sometimes spend so much time in using technology and find it hard to

sleep and causes them sleeping disorder.

5. The respondents used same devices or technology when data are grouped according to age. If

data are grouped according to sex it means that both male and female used similar technology or

devices. The respondents used same technology or devices when data are grouped according to

school.

6. The students who were highly exposed or excessing the utilization of technology experienced

a negative impact on their physical health and when they are not exposed or use technology

properly, problem on the students’ physical health is not occurred regardless of their age, sex,

and school.

7. The students who were highly exposed or excessing the utilization of technology experienced

a negative impact on their mental health and when they are not exposed or use technology

properly, problem on the students’ mental health is not occurred regardless of their age, sex, and

school.

8. The students who were less exposed or less excessive usage of technology, they are more

focused, and gets a higher mark on their learning performance and if they always use or more

exposed to technology they lose focus, and gets a low marking grade on their learning

performance.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions, the following are the recommendations:
 70

Instructors/Educator must take into consideration the situation of students’ health and learning

performance when providing them an activity using technology or online. Also, teach them the

proper way on utilizing technology so that they would be aware and understand that technology

has a negative impact on the health and on their learning performance. Use an approach or

teaching strategies that limit students exposure on technology to help them build a classroom

environment where their health and learning performance will not be affected.

Students should be aware about the negative and positive impact of technology towards on their

health and learning performance. Information and data about proper usage and negative factors

of technology can be search online or they will base here on the research and then after that,

students can practice following the right way of using technology to the point it wouldn’t harm

their health and affect their learning performance.

Parents/Guardian most of the students consider home is the most comfortable zone to spend

leisure time to use technology. Parents should teach their children about the harmful and

dangerous effect of technology that might lead them to physical or mental illnesses and negative

results on their learning performance. Limit their utilization of technology and encourage them to

do physical activities that can help them stay healthy and have better performance in school.

From time to time evaluating and observing children utilization of technology should be the

norm to set healthy and active learning environment at home.

Demographic Profile and Survey Questionnaire

 71

“The Impact of Technology Utilization on Students Health and

Learning Performance”

QUESTIONNAIRE
Direction: The following statement below will determine the technology that you are always

utilized and will contribute as a data for the impact of the technology to the health and learning

performances of the students. Please indicate your answer by checking (/) appropriately in the

column provided in this form. Please respond according to your own personal view and

experience.

PART I: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

A. Name: ________________________________________(Optional)
B. Age :

Age (/)
17-19
20-22
23-25
26 and
above

C. Sex:

Sex (/)
Male
Female

D. School:
 72

School (/)
WMSU
ZPPSU

PART II: Technology Use

Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Device Used Used Used Used Used

Smartphone

Tablet

Laptop

Desktop PC

Television

Speaker

Headphone/Earphone

USB/Flash Drive

Projector
Other:___________________

PART III. HEALTH STATUS (PHYSICAL AND MENTAL) IN TECHNOLOGY.

 73

A. PHYSICAL HEALTH

INDICATIVE ALWAYS OFTEN SOMETIMES RARELY NEVER

STATEMENT
Experienced Experienced Experienced Experienced Experienced
The student
experience eye
strain due
excessive
usage of
technology.
Devilish
exposure on
technology
cause student
blurry vision.
Student gain
weight because
of spending
more time in
technology.
Using
technology
with a poor
posture leads
student to body
pain.
Radiation on
the screens
causes student
headache.
Hearing in a
high volume
earphones
causing
hearing or ear
problems to
student.
Skipping meals
because of
long time
usage of
technology
cause students
hunger.
 74

The students
encounter less
engagement of
physical
activities
because of
technology.
Excessive
amount of time
in technology
resulting to
insensibility to
students.
Student
Experience
abnormal
heartbeat
issues due to
technology.

B. MENTAL HEALTH

INDICATIVE ALWAYS OFTEN SOMETIME RARELY NEVER

STATEMENT Experienced Experienced S Experienced Experienced
Experienced
Too much
exposure on
technology leads
student laziness in
doing school
works and chores.
Being forgetful of
student due to
focusing
excessively on
technology.
They experience
anxiety such as
fear of missing
out in the absence
of technology.
They experience
cyber bullying
that resulted to
depression
because of
 75

obscure graphics
information and
videos.
Over-used of
technology may
cause students
mental and
physical
exhaustion.
Student encounter
sleeping disorder
due to the
excessive
exposure to
technology.
They are
confident to
connect and
communicate via
digital flat forms
but disconnecting
in the isolation of
real life
conversation.
Students are
prone to
technology
addiction;
decreasing
interest in actual
life activities,
engaging more on
mobile/video
games, and
watching
censored videos.
Getting irritated
when someone
bothers/disturbed
you from focusing
on technology.
A sudden worry,
fear, curiosity,
sadness and other
mood swings
develop and can
 76

change students
mood rapidly
because of
technology
utilization.

PART IV. GENEAL AVERAGE

(S.Y. 2019-2020)

2nd semester

General Average Grade (/)

1.00-1.25

1.26-1.50

1.51-1.75
 77

1.76-2.00

2.01- 2.25

2.26-2.50

2.51-2.75

2.76-3.0

REFERENCES

[1] Amelink, C., Scales, G., & Tront, J. (2012). Student use of the Tablet PC: Impact on student

learning behaviors. Advances in Engineering Education, 3(1), 1-17.

[2] Barrios, T. (2004). Laptops for learning: final report and recommendations of the laptops for

learning task force. Retrieved on 18 October 2007 from http://etc.usf.edu/L4L/

[3] Brinkerhoff, J. (2006). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on

technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and practices.

International Society for Technology in Education, 39(1), 22-43.

 78

[4] Cavanaugh, C., Dawson, K., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2011). An evaluation of the conditions,

processes, and consequences of laptop computing in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Educational

Computing Research, 45(3), 359-378.

[5] Donovan, L., Hartley, K., & Strudler, N. (2007). Teacher concerns during initial

implementation of a one-to-one laptop initiative at the middle school level. Journal of Research

on Technology in Education, 39(3), 263-286.

[6] Duncan, A. (2009, July 24). Education reform’s moon shot. The Washington Post. Retrieved

on 22 February 2016 from http://www.washingtonpost.com

[7] Edwards, M. (2012). Our digital conversion. Education Digest, 78(1), 4-9.

[8] Goals 2000: Educate America Act, H.R. 1804. (1994). Retrieved on 22 February 2016 from

http://www2ed.gov.legislation/GOALS2000/TheAct/index.html

[9] Illinois Interactive Report Card. (2013). Retrieved on 22 February 2016 from

http://iirc.niu.edu/ School.aspx?schoolid=170640870252011

[10] Johnson, D. & Maddux, C. (2003). Technology in education: A twenty-year retrospective.

Computers in the Schools, 20(1/2), 1-186.

[11] Keller, J. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance &

Instruction, 26(8), 1-7.

[12] No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110. (2002). Retrieved on 22 February 2016

from http://www2ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html

[13] President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Report to the

president. Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering, and math
 79

(STEM) for America’s future. Retrieved on 22 February 2016 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/

sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf

[14] Race to the Top Program Executive Summary. (2009). Retrieved on 22 February 2016 from

http://www2ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf

[15] Sansone, C., Fraughton, T., Zachary, J.L., Butner, J., & Heiner C. (2011). Self-regulation of

motivation when learning online: The importance of who, why, and how. Educational

Technology Research & Development, 59(2), 199-212.

[16] Shapley, K., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2011). Effects of

technology immersion of middle school students’ learning opportunities and achievement.

Journal of Educational Research, 104(5), 299-315.

[17] Spears, S. A. (2012). Technology-enhanced learning: The effects of 1:1 technology on

student performance and motivation (Doctoral thesis). University of West Florida.

[18] United States Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved on 22

February 2016 from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html