PRACTICAL RESEARCH 1

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region VII, Central Visayas
Division of Carcar City
VANS PRIVATE TECHNICAL SCHOOL, INC.
JMV Bldg., J.P. Rizal St., Poblacion II, Carcar City,
Cebu 6019 Philippines
S.Y. 2020-2021

Mobile Phones

Research Adviser:
Kevan Jaymes Katipunan
Cindy Caballero

Researcher:
Christian Salud
Lord James Alia
Danrio R. Salve

1
 TITLE PAGE:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Rationale

2. Statement of the Problem

3. Objective of the Study

4. Research Hypothesis

5. Significance of the Study

6. Definition of Terms

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Meaning and Concept of Mobile Phone

2. Student Performance

3. Impact of Mobile Phones on Students’ Performance

4. Review of Related Literature

III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1. Research Design

2
2. Area of the Study

3. Research Instrument for Data Collection

4. Validation of Research Instrument

5. Reliability of Research Instrument

6. Administration of Instrument and Method of Data Collection

IV. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

1. Interpretation of Results

2. Discussions of the Findings

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

1. Summary of the Principal Findings

2. Suggestions for Further Research

3. Conclusion

4. Recommendations

VI. REFERENCES

3
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

I. Rationale

A mobile phone is a device that can basically make and receive

calls over a radio link while moving around a wide geographic area.

(Pew Research center, 2010). It does so by connecting to a cellular

network provided by a mobile phone operator, allowing access to the

public telephone network. The ancient types of Mobile phones

support limited services and examples were shown in Fig. 1.1. Such

as, calling, sending messages and very few for taking pictures.

However, the modern phones support very wide range variety of

other services apart from making and receive calls and examples

were shown in Fig. 1.2. These include text messaging, MMS, e-mail,

internet access, short range wireless communications [(Infrared,

Bluetooth, File Transfer Protocol, (FTP)], business applications,

gaming, and photography.

4
Fig. 1.1. The Ancient Types of Mobile Phones

5
 Mobile phone is one of the most rapidly growing new

technologies in the world (Rebello, 2010). In 2001, cell phone users

were less than a billion worldwide with most of the users from the

developed countries. By the end of 2010, however, mobile phone

users had reached five billion worldwide with subscriptions from

developing countries outnumbering that of the developed countries

(Kelly, 2009; Rebello, 2010). Obviously, this increase includes a

sharp increase in the number of cell phones used by the

younger generations. This area of interest was chosen because of

the unregulated usage and over dependent attitude on these devices

especially among our secondary school students. Interestingly, this is

obviously imperative as Geser & Junco (2006); and Merson & Salter

(2010) had observed that the youth have consistently displayed

higher level of attachment to their mobile phones which could serve

as distractions to them because of the time channeled to the phones.

6
Fig. 1.2. Other Ancient Types of Mobile Phones

7
 However, in recent years, different types of mobile phones have

been produced by different phone manufacturers. Each comes with

different features for different/ specific function(s). We have different

variety of mobile phones as named by their manufacturers, they

include, Nokia, Samsung, Motorola, Sagem, Sendo, Siemens, T-

mobile, Vodafone, Sony Ericsson, Bluebird, Alcatel, Blackberry, and

so on. We now have those that can make video calling, ping, take

clearer pictures/photographs, surf the internet and lots more. They

are also built/ installed in/ with different capacities, mode of operation

and features/applications. For example, 17mega Pixel phones

normally will produce clearer pictures/photographs, Skype is an

application for video calling, Blackberry and other android enabled

devices can ping. Some are android enabled; examples are, HTC,

Tecno, and so on which are basically the latest of all kinds of mobile

phones widely used by both young and old, especially among

students.

This study, therefore, attempts to find out the impact of mobile

phones use among students in both private and public schools on

their academic performance. Also, to check whether there will be

8
significant difference in the performance of students using mobile

phones in Public and Private Schools.

II. Statement of the Problem

In the past one-decade, Mobile phone was not as rampant

among users compared to how it is now being used, especially

among Secondary Schools’ students. Recently, mobile phone which

comes in different types/models each for specific tasks/functions is

one of the basic essential gadgets possessed by an average school

student which relatively might certainly influence such students’

academic performance. This study, therefore, seeks to address the

impact of mobile phones on student performance in Secondary

Schools.

III. Objectives of the Study

The general objective of this study is to assess the impact of

mobile phones on student performance in Secondary Schools.

The specific objectives are to:

1. ascertain the extent to which mobile phones are being utilized

in Secondary Schools among the students.

9
 2. find out the extent to which the use of mobile phones will affect

students’ performance in Secondary School.

3. comparison of student performance in Public and Private

Schools using mobile phones.

IV. Research Hypothesis

1. There are no significant differences in the number of Secondary

Schools’ students using mobile phones and those who do not.

2. There are no significant relationships in the extent to which the

use of mobile phone affects students’ performance in

Secondary School.

3. There are no significant differences in the academic

performance of students using mobile phones in Public and

Private Schools.

V. Significance of the Study

This study is meant to reveal the impact of mobile phones

on student performance in Secondary Schools. It would expose the

students to the implications of spending too much time on their

mobile phones. Also, can serve as precautionary measures towards

achieving good academic result for students.

10
 VI. Definition of Terms

 Impact: The effect of something on another thing.

 Mobile: Anything that can be carried from one place to another.

 Phone: Electronic equipment that converts sound into electrical

signals that can be transmitted over distances and then

converts received signals back into sounds.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This study reviewed related literature from books, journals, and

internet; organized under the following sub-headings:

I. Meaning and Concept of Mobile Phone

II. Student Performance

III. Impact of Mobile Phones on Students’ Performance

IV. Review of Related Literature.

I. Meaning and Concept of Mobile Phones

11
 A mobile phone is a phone that can make and receive

telephone calls over a radio link while moving around a wide

geographic area. It does so by connecting to a cellular network

provided by a mobile phone operator, allowing access to the public

telephone network. In addition, modern phones also support wide

range variety of other services such as text messaging, MMS, e-mail,

internet access, short range wireless communications (Infrared,

Bluetooth), business applications, gaming, and photography. (Pew

Research center, 2010)

Fig. 2.1. The Modern Types of Mobile Phones.

12
 The use of technology is a global imperative due to its

contributions to human existence and has enhanced the socio-

economic relations globally. Wireless communication has emerged as

one of the fastest diffusing media on the planet, fuelling an emergent

“mobile youth culture” (Castells, Fernandez-Ardevol, Qiu, and Sey,

2007). Thus, increased popularity of cell and smart phones in recent

years has attracted research attention. Cell phones are a mixed

blessing. Teens say phones make their lives safer and more

convenient. Yet they also cite new tensions connected to cell phone

use (Pew Research Center, 2010).

As cell phones have become more available, they are

increasingly owned and used by teens. Further, as handsets become

more loaded with capabilities ranging from video recording and

sharing, to music playing and internet access, teens and young adults

have an ever-increasing repertoire of use. Indeed, we are moving into

an era when mobile devices are not just for talking and texting but

13
can also access the internet and all it has to offer (Pew Research

Center, 2010).

II. Student Performance

Students academic gain and learning performance is affected

by numerous factors including gender, age, teaching faculty, students

schooling, father/guardian social economic status, residential area of

students, medium of instructions in schools, tuition trend, daily study

hour and accommodation as hostelries or day scholar. Many

researchers conducted detailed studies about the factors contributing

student performance at different study levels. Considine and Zappala

(2002) noticed the same that parent’s income or social status

positively affects the student test score in examination. According to

Minnesota (2007) “the higher education performance is depending

upon the academic performance of graduate students. Durden and

Ellis quoted Staffolani and Bratti, (2002) observed that “the

measurement of students previous educational outcomes are the

most important indicators of students future achievement, this refers

that as the higher previous appearance, better the student’s

academic performance in future endeavours.

14
Lot of studies have been conducted in students’ achievement and

these studies identify and analyze the number of factors that affect

the academic performance of the student at school, college and even

at university level. Their finding identifies students’ effort, previous

schooling, parent’s educational background, family income, self

motivation of students, age of student, learning preferences and entry

qualification of students as important factors that have effect on

student’s academic performance in different setting. The utility of

these studies lies in the need to undertake corrective measures that

improve the academic performance of graduate students.

It is generally assumed that the students who showed better or

higher performance in the starting classes of their studies also

performed better in future academic years at degree level. Everyone

can be surprised with this assumption if it could be proved

scientifically. From the last two decades it has been noticed

significantly that there is great addition in research literature and

review material relating to indicators of academic achievement with

much emphasis on this dialogue, whether traditional achievement

measures of academic performance are best determinants of future

academic gain at university or higher level or innovative measures.

15
However, it is also observed that many of the researchers are not

agree with this viewpoint or statement. Reddy and Talcott (2006)

looks disagree with these assumptions that future academic gains are

resolute by preceding performance. In their research on the

relationship between previous academic performance and

subsequent achievement at university level, they found that students

learning or studying at graduate level and the score secured did not

predict any academic achievement at university level. They also cited

Pearson and Johnson (1978) who observed that on the whole grade

association of only 0.28 between graduate level marks and university

degree achievement.

It is also confirmed in the study of Oregon State University (2003) on

graduate admissions that normal measures of educational potential

and academic performance such as high school GPA (Grade Point

Average) scores showed only 30% of the deviation in initial or starting

(first) year at college. It is important to note that even these studies

do not agree with the former studies who explored that previous

achievement affect the future performance of the students in studies,

they confirmed that the admission scores are related to academic

performance at university level but to a very minimal extent.

16
McDonald et.al (2001) also suggested that the scores of graduate

level studies still outperform any other single measure of cognitive

aptitude in predicting success at university level.

Parent’s socio-economic condition, which includes parents’

academic and professional qualification, revenue, and occupational

affiliation, is also associated with academic gain of students. The

results of many studies confirmed that academic achievement of

students is contingent upon parent’s socio-economic condition. So,

the students belonging from higher social economical backgrounds

will perform better than other students associated with low social

economic backgrounds. “Social and economical status of student is

generally determined by combining parents’ qualification, occupation

and income standard” (Jeynes, 2002). Among many research studies

conducted on academic achievement, it is not very surprising to

observe that Socio-economic status is one of the main elements

studied while predicting academic performance.

On other hand Pedrosa et.al (2006) in their study on social and

educational background pointed out those students who mostly come

from deprived socio-economic and educational background

17
performed relatively better than others coming from higher socio-

economic and educational area. They named these phenomena

educational elasticity. It is obvious and true that the criteria for

categorizing socio-economic standard in different countries are

different depending on their norms and values. The criteria for low

socio-economic status for developed country will be different from the

criteria of developing nations and same will be in the case of

developing and under developing countries. “The total income of

families, monthly or annually and their expenditures also put a great

effect on the learning and academic opportunities accessible to

youngsters and their chances of educational success. Furthermore,

he also pointed that due to residential stratification and segregation,

the students belonging to low-income backgrounds usually attend

schools with lower funding levels, and this situation reduced

achievement motivation of the students and high risk of educational

malfunction in future life endeavours’” (Escarce, 2003).

Considine & Zappala (2002) observed that children come from those

families having low income make known more subsequent models in

terms of learning outcomes; low literacy level, low retention rate,

problems in school behaviour and more difficulty in their studies and

18
mostly display negative attitude towards studies and school. The

viewpoint of Considine and Zappala is more strengthen by this

statement of Eamon, according to Eamon (2005) “Those students

usually come out from low socio-economic status or area show low

performance in studies and obtained low scores as compared to the

other students or their counter parts”.

It is also assumed that children learning outcome and educational

performance are strongly affected by the standard and type of

educational institution in which students get their education. The

educational environment of the school one attends sets the

parameters of students’ learning outcomes. Considine and Zappala

(2002) quoted Sparkles (1999) showed that school’s environment and

teachers expectations from their students also have strong influence

on student performance. Most of the teachers working in poor

schools or schools having run short of basic facilities often have low

performance expectations from their students and when students

know that their teachers have low performance expectations from

them, hence it leads to poor performance by the students. Kwesiga

(2002) approved that performance of the students is also influenced

by the school in which they studied but he also said that number of

19
facilities a school offers usually determine the quality of the school,

which in turn affect the performance and accomplishment of its

students. Sentamu (2003) argue that schools influence educational

process in content organization, teacher and teaching learning and in

the end evaluation of all. All these educationists and researchers

agreed with this principle that schools put strong effect on academic

performance and educational attainment of students.

Students from elite schools are expected to perform good because

they attend these elite schools and the main reason behind is that

these schools are usually rich in resources and facilities. Some

researchers have the view that school ownership and the funds

available in schools do indeed influenced the performance of the

student. Crosne and Elder (2004) noticed that school ownership,

provision of facilities and availability of resources in school is an

important structural component of the school. Private schools due to

the better funding, small sizes, serious ownership, motivated faculty,

and access to resources such as computers perform better than

public schools. These additional funding resources and facilities

found in private schools enhance academic performance and

educational attainment of their students. It is also very pleasing that

20
students from Government schools’ colleges and universities in some

area of the Philippines are providing the laptops and Tabs by the

Government, so that the students could interact with the whole world

and know about the latest developments and innovations.

III. Impact of Mobile Phones on Students’ Performance

Apart from the negative effect through the usage of these

phones by the students, it also has some other effects, which maybe

psychological. The addictive nature of cell phones has concerned

psychologists for years.

Recently, psychologists have warned that phone users are

especially at risk of becoming addicted to their devices. In a recent

study by Wargo, (2012), the subjects checked their phones 34 times

a day. People may check their phones out of habit or compulsion,

but habitually checking can be a way to avoid interacting with people.

Some people can experience withdrawal symptoms typically

associated with substance abuse, such as anxiety, insomnia, and

depression, when they are without their phones and all these are

embedded to the course of academic relapse of students who fall into

this category. Surprisingly, these addictions take strong toll on the

21
student without them noticing it and some of them find it hard to

believe that they are addicted to their phones. Thus, giving more

credence to the amount of time meted out to these phones than

academics. Chóliz, (2010) pointed out that excessive use of and

dependency on the cell phone may be considered an addictive

disorder. To address some of the issues attached to cell phones

researchers chose different area of interest and teasing them out.

Theory on adolescent egocentrism, pointed out heightened self-

consciousness during adolescence. The theory adolescent

egocentrism stated that it is a stage of self-absorption where the

world is seen only from one's own perspective. Thus, adolescents are

extremely critical of authority figures, unwilling to accept criticism, and

quick to find fault with others. Adolescent egocentrism helps explain

why teens often think they are the focus of everyone attention. Also,

adolescence is a time of considerable physical and psychological

growth and change, which falls in line with the study of the student in

the secondary Schools being examined, on cell phone usage and

acquisition among other. Most students like to keep track ahead of

their peers or to have an ontological balance in their peer group

which they find themselves. At the expense of their notions, they try

22
to live the life which is expected of them in the social settings which

they find themselves instead of the ideal life; thereby pushing them to

the limit.

It was observed that most of the students using the Internet

enabled phones get to pay some bills at the end of the month, which

is however paid with the little monthly allowance money given to them

by their sponsors or parent for upkeep in school and their studies.

Some go if to upgrade their phone, by buying the current ones and

selling of the old ones at a giveaway price or “swapping” as the word

is widely used, just to meet up with the current trend.

These ostentatious mode of using and disposing of mobile

phones especially, the internet enabled phones at will, to be abreast

of current trends may inhibits the student from focusing on their

academics and allowing them to do better in their studies which is

their primary target as students in the secondary schools. Their

academic performance is a fulcrum for their future roles and the roles

that will be vested upon them by their predecessors as the new

generations.

23
 To discuss about the issue of this topic on mobile phones and

its impact on students’ performance, personal observations have

been seen among student using the phones for visiting social

platform, such as the Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and

instant messengers especially the internet enabled ones, during

academic periods and off academic periods indicating that the

internet phones have a strong effect on the students. Calling to mind

the judicious gap which has been mended by technology, it should be

noted that the usage of phones is not intended for negative purpose

and influence; however, the attitude and time channeled towards

these devices has enslaved the student, thereby making them

addicts, Also, they affirmed that young people between 15 and 19

admitted being addicted to their cell phones (Naval, Sádaba and

Brigué, (2004). Also, British scientists noted that more and more

people are getting addicted to their cell phones, causing stress and

irritability (BBC, 2006). While specialists indicate that the abuse of the

use of cell phones could be typified as ‘a disorder of addiction that

must be stopped as soon as possible’ (Paniagua, 2005).

Reawakening, to the recalcitrant mode of the student academic

prowess in the academic ‘world’ there is a need to address the

24
students’ prerogative in the society which serves as issues in

empowering them towards helping to the development of the society

which also address the issue of gender equality, if we are looking

towards positive changes in the society and development.

IV. Review of Related Literature

Some of the common mobile phone related research topics

include cellphone use while driving (Caird, Willness, Steel, and
Scialfa, 2008; Horrey and Wickens, 2006; McCartt, Hellinga, and
Braitman, 2006), cell phone etiquette (Lipscomb, Totten, Cook, and
Lesch, 2007), cell phone cultures and behaviors (Campbell and
Park, 2008; Bakke, 2010; Ling, 2004), text messaging (Pettigrew,
2009), health risks from cell phone radiation. Some other studies
reported that the presence of cell phones provide a higher sense of
security in potentially harmful situations. This has contributed to an
increase in cell phone value, leading cell phone users to perceive
cell phones as a must-have tool (Nasar, Hecht, and Wener, 2007;
Walsh et al., 2008). The use of Mobile Phones has also been
addressed with other focuses, such as enhancing Academic
performance in Distance Education. Jean-Marie, Viljoen and Carl,
(2009). On Semen Analysis in men attending infertility Clinic: an
observational study. During the study, their objective was to
investigate the effect of cell phone use on various markers of semen
quality, and in their conclusion stated that "Use of cell phones
decrease the semen quality in men by decreasing the sperm count,

25
motility, viability, and normal morphology. The decrease in sperm
parameters was dependent on the duration of daily exposure to cell
phones and independent of the initial semen quality" Costly Cell
Phones: The Impact of Cell Phone Rings on Academic
Performance. During the study, "Findings indicated that cell phone
rings during a video presentation impaired academic performance"
(Ashok, End, Worthman, Mathews, and Katharina, 2008).

However, this study therefore seeks, to find out the impact of the
use of mobile phones on students’ performance. Taking students at
secondary schools as case study at both private and public
secondary schools.

The study was carried out to understand and bring to fore if the
students’ academic performance is affected due to the time
channeled to the phone during class hours which has a general
perception as a medium of distractions to students. The retrieval of
the information gotten from this study was done with structured
questionnaires administered to 200 students to obtain their personal
opinions, while 15 in-depth interviews were conducted to have a
grounded knowledge opinion of the students simultaneously with the
data gathered during this study. The analysis of the students’
perception showed that the internet enabled phone usage does not
affect the academic performance of the students but distractions by
the usage of phone were notably admitted.

CHAPTER THREE
26
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter described the research design, area of the study,

instrument for data collection, validation and reliability of research

instrument, administration of instrument, data collection method and

data analysis technique.

I. Research Design

This research work adopted the descriptive survey research

design to find out the impact of mobile phones on student

performance in Secondary Schools.

II. Area of the Study

This study was carried out in Cebu City and some Provinces of

Cebu, particularly in San Fernando and Carcar City, Cebu

Philippines. It has an area of 186km 2 and a population of 185,944

(POPCEN, 2015). The population of the study were made up of Two

(2) Schools, one Private Secondary School and the other Public

Secondary School in Cebu.

III. Research Instrument for Data Collection

27
 Structured questionnaire was used to gather information from

the respondents. The questionnaires were designed in 3 sections.

Section A consist of the respondents’ socio-demography, section B

contains questions based on the set objectives and the research

hypothesis and section C contain records of student performance

accordingly. The questionnaire is a close ended one, whereby

respondents were only allowed to choose their answers from the

boxes provided.

IV. Validation of Research Instrument

The questionnaires were constructed by the researcher and

validated by the project instructor who made face validation and

ascertained the stability of the instruments.

V. Reliability of Research Instrument

To ascertain the reliability of the instrument, test re-test method was

adopted.

VI. Administration of Instrument and Method of Data

Collection

28
 Two Hundred (200) copies of the questionnaires were produced

and administered by the researcher to the randomly selected

students in the public and private Schools in Cebu, Philippines. To

minimize errors in the completion of the questionnaire, difficult items

on the questionnaires were explained by the researcher to the

respondents. The filled copies were collected immediately and kept

saved to avoid loss in transit.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

 Interpretation of Results

 Discussions of the Findings:

Table 1: Test responses based on socio demography of

respondents and set objectives.

SEX Frequency Percentage

(%)
Male 94 47.0
Female 106 53.0
Total 200 100.0
AGE
13-15years 98 49.0
16-18years 97 48.5
Above 19years 5 2.5

29
 Total 200 100.0
Do you have access to
mobile phones?
Yes 194 97.0
No 6 3.0
Total 200 100.0
If yes, how do you get access
to it? Through;
Parents 100 50.0

Friends 4 2.0

Personal 90 45.0

Total 194 97.0

Do you use mobile phones
frequently?
Yes 189 94.5
No 11 5.5
Total 200 100.0
What do you use it for?
Night calling
Often 38 19.0
Rarely 67 33.5
Not often 95 47.5
Total 200 100.0
Browsing
Often 111 55.5
Rarely 51 25.5
Not often 38 19.0
Total 200 100.0
Charting (2GO, WhatsApp,
Intagram etc.)
30
 Often 103 51.5
Rarely 54 27.0
Not often 43 21.5
Total 200 100.0
Face booking
Often 83 41.5
Rarely 68 34.0
Not often 49 24.5
Total 200 100.0
Gaming
Often 91 45.5
Rarely 64 32.0
Not often 45 22.5
Total 200 100.0
Do you spend too much time
in any of the above
mentioned?
Yes 59 29.5
No 141 70.5
Total 200 100.0
Apart from the above
mentioned, do you use
mobile phones to get your
assignment get?
Yes 174 87.0
No 26 13.0
Total 200 100.0

31
Do you bring mobile phones
to school?
Yes 23 11.5
No 177 88.5
Total 200 100.0
Is the use of mobile phones
in school premises
prohibited?
Yes 147 73.5
No 53 26.5
Total 200 100.0
How long have you been
using mobile phone?
1-3 Months 31 15.5
4-6 Months 43 21.5
Above 1year 126 63.0
Total 200 100.0

32
Fig 1: The respondents’ gender frequency chart.

Fig 2: The respondents’ age frequency chart.

33
Fig 3: The respondents’ frequency charts showing their access to
mobile phones.

Fig 4: The respondents’ frequency charts showing how they got

access to mobile phones.

34
Fig 5: The respondents’ frequency charts showing how frequent they

use mobile phones.

Fig. 6: The respondents’ frequency charts of those making night calls

with their mobile phones.

35
Fig. 7: The respondents’ frequency charts of those that browse with

their mobile phones.

Fig. 8: The respondents’ frequency charts of those that chart with

their mobile phones.

36
Fig. 9: The respondents’ frequency charts of those that are

Facebooking with their mobile phones.

Fig.10: The respondents’ frequency charts of those that play games

with their mobile phones.

37
Fig.11: The respondents’ frequency charts of mobile phones

prohibited in school use.

Fig. 12: The respondents’ frequency charts of those who bring their

mobile phones to school.

38
Fig. 13: The respondents’ frequency charts showing how long they

have been using mobile phones.

Fig.14: Cross tabulation showing Age of respondents and their Sex

39
Fig.15: Cross tabulation of respondents’ Age and their access to

mobile phones.

Table 2: The correlations showing the relationships between the

average performances of the respondents and usage of mobile

phones.

Do you use AVERAGE

mobile phones?
Do you use Correlation 1.000 .067
mobile phones? Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) . .346
N 200 200
Correlation .067 1.000
Coefficient
AVERAGE
Sig. (2-tailed) .346 .
N 200 200

40
Table 3: The statistics of Private and Public School
PRIVATE PUBLIC
F P
MEAN±SEM MEAN±SEM

FIRST TERM 57.79±1.37 54.51±1.35 1.13 0.737

SECOND TERM 58.87±1.38 42.50±1.16 13.63 0.000

AVERAGE 58.50±1.22 48.91±1.06 5.56 0.190

II. Discussion of the Findings

Based on the above Table 1, it showed that, 94 (47%)

respondents were male while 106 (53%) were female. 98

respondents were between 13 -15 years, 97 between 16 – 18 years

while just 5 were above 19 years. Consequently, based on the

respondents’ 194 students have access to mobile phones while those

who did not were just 6. Also, 100 students got access to mobile

phones through their parents, 4, through friends and 90, personal.

Then, 189 respondents make use of their phones frequently while 11

did not. However, 38 often use theirs for night calls while 95 do not.

41
 It was recorded that; 141 respondents do not spend too much

time in using their mobile phones for specific functions. And 174 said,

their mobile phones were being used mainly to get their assignments

done. 177 responded that, the use of mobile phones in the school

premises is prohibited but, we still have some stubborn 23 students

who bring theirs to school. However, 126 respondents have been

using their phones for more than 1 year.

The Table 2 above showed a positive relationship between the

average performance of students and their extent of use of mobile

phones because, as average performance increases, their phone

level usage increases.

The Table 3 above showed that, the mean performance of

private school students (57.79±1.37) was higher than the mean

performance of public-school students (56.91±1.02) in first term of the

academic session but there is no significant difference (f= 1.13,

P=0.737, at p>0.05). Therefore, the higher mean of performance of

private school students recorded could be because there were

restrictions in the use of mobile phones among the students.

Also, there was a significant difference in the second term

academic session where mean±sem performance of private school

42
(58.87±1.38) was higher than the mean±sem of public school

(48.36±1.34). At (f= 13.63, P=0.000, p<0.05) as shown in Table 3.

Therefore, the significant difference between mean of performance of

private school students could be because students make use of their

mobile phones while teaching is on-going, thereby making them lose

concentration or get distracted.

Meanwhile, the average mean performance of the private

school students in their first and second term (58.50±1.22) and

Public, mean performance (52.94±1.11) at (f= 5.56, P=0.190,

p>0.05). However, there was no significant difference as shown in

Table 3. Therefore, the higher mean of performance of private school

students recorded could also be because there were restrictions in

the use of mobile phones among the students.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

I. Summary of the Principal Findings

43
 This study focused on the impact of mobile phones on the

performance of secondary schools’ students’ in Cebu, Philippines.

However, the following findings were made from the study:

1. Ninety-Seven 97 (%) of the secondary school students have access

to mobile phones either through their parents, friends or personal.

2. The performance of the secondary schools’ students is not

significantly affected by their access to mobile phones.

3. There was no significant difference in the performance of both private

and public secondary schools’ students.

II. Suggestions for Further Research

This study covered in San Fernando, Carcar and some area of

Cebu City, Philippines. Therefore, replication of the study could still

be carried out on a broader scope.

III. Conclusion

In conclusion, mobile phones which are in different

types/models each for specific tasks/functions are essential gadgets

possessed by an average school student. This concluded research

44
has strongly showed there was no vast influence on students’

academic performance in the secondary schools.

IV. Recommendations

Based on the findings of this work, the following

recommendations were formulated:

1. Secondary school students need to be re-orientated on the

need to set their priorities right. This drive towards reorientation

must be championed by the school management in conjunction

with the parents/guardians of the students. While the usage of

mobile phones by students cannot be outlawed drastically, they

need to be continuously informed on the positive and negative

effects of their usage and of the problems deriving from the

over-dependency and unregulated use of their mobile phones.

2. Similarly, the school management must be more alive to their

responsibilities by ensuring conformity to the school laid down

rules and regulations on student’s use of mobile phone device

during class session.

REFERENCES

45
Ashok A., (2008). "The use of Mobile Phones in enhancing Academic
performance in Distance Education: An African Perspective"
American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Elsevier Inc. pp. 47-51.

BBC World Service. (2006). “La adicción al teléfonomóvil.”

Best, S.G. (2006). "Conflict Analysis" in S.G(ed). Introduction to

peace and conflict studies in West Africa, Ibadan: Spectrum Books.
Ltd. Pp. 62-66.

Caird, J.K., Willness, C, R., Steel, P., and Scialfa, C. (2008). “A meta-
analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance”.
Accident analysis and prevention, 40, 1282-1293.

Campbell, S.W., and Park, Y.J. (2008). “Social implications of mobile

telephony”: The rise of personal communication society. Sociology
Compass, 2, 371-387.

Castells, M., Fernandez-Ardevol, M, Qiu, J., and Sey, A. (2007).

“Mobile Communication and society: A global perspective.”
Cambridge, MA: MIT press. Retrieved, April 2015.

Chóliz, M. (2010). “Mobile phone addiction: Point of issue

Addiction”.105, 374. Christian M. End, ShayeWorthman, Mary
Bridget Mathews, and Katharina Wetterau 2010 "Costly Cell
Phones: The Impact of Cell Phone Rings on Academic
Performance", Xavier University.

Jean-Marie, Viljoen and Carl, Du Preez (2009)."The use of Mobile

Phones in enhancin Academic performance in Distance
Education.” An African" Perspective. Pp.33-38.

Kelly, M. (2009). Mobile Phones: pros and cons. Retrieved from

http://www.educatorsabout.com/ School violence/phones.htm.
Accessed on 8th November 2013.

Lipscomb, T. J., Totten, J. W., Cook, R. A., and Lesch, W. (2007).

“Cellular phone etiquette among college students.” International
Journal of Consumer Studies, 31,46-56.

46
Nasar, J., Hecht, P., and Wener, R. (2007). “Call if you have trouble':
Mobile phones and safety among college students”. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31, 863-873

Pettigrew, J. (2009). “Text messaging and connectedness within

close interpersonal relationships.” Marriage and Family Review,
45, 697-716.

Pew Research center, (2010). “Teens and Mobile Phones.” Text

messaging explodes as teens embrace it as the center piece of their
communication strategies with friends.

Wargo, J, Wargo, L. (2012) “Cell Phones: Technology, Exposures,

Health Effects.” Environment and Human Health Monograph 7:

65Horrey, W.J. and Wickens, ... Phone Conversations on Driving

Using Meta-Analytic Techniques," Human Factors, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp.

196-205, 2006.

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS

THE IMPACT OF MOBILE PHONES ON STUDENT

PERFORMANCE IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS

This questionnaire is designed to find out relevant information

about the above topic. Please, respond to questions objectively. The
information you supply will be for the purpose of this research only.

SECTION A: Personal Data

Instruction: Please fill and tick () as appropriate in the space

provided.

47
Sex: Male ( ), Female ( ).

Age: 10-12 years ( ), 13-15 years ( ), 16-18 years ( ), Above 19

years ( ).

Class: S. S 2

SECTION B- Availability of Mobile Phones.

1. Do you have access to mobile phones? Yes ( ) No ( )

2. If yes, how do you get access to it? Through Parent ( ), Friends ( ),
Personal ( )
3. Do you use mobile phones? Yes ( ), No ( )
4. If yes, what do you use it for?

Often Rarely Not

Often

a. Night Calling
b. Browsing
c. Charting (2go, Whatsapp, e.t.c)
d. Face booking
e. Gaming

5. Do you spend too much time in any of the above mentioned? Yes ( )
No ( )
6. Apart from the above mentioned, do you use mobile phone to get your
assignments done? Yes ( ) No ( )
7. Do you bring mobile phone to school? Yes ( )
No ( )
8. Is the use of mobile phones in the school premises prohibited? Yes ( )
No ( )
9. How long have you been using mobile phone? 1-3months ( ), 4-
6months ( ), 1year and above ( ).

48
S/N 1ST TERM 2ND TERM AVERAGE
1. 58 60 59

2. 61 62 62

3. 52 42 47
SECTION C-
4. 40 32 36 Student over-all
Students
5. 70 61 66
Performance
6. 52 51 52

7. 49 50 50

8. 53 62 58

9. 60 71 66

10. 58 62 60

11. 61 59 60

12. 80 79 80

13. 62 56 59

14. 55 62 58

15. 52 59 56

16. 60 62 61

17. 59 61 60

18. 50 62 56

19. 62 58 60

20. 46 51 49

21. 61 58 60

22. 62 52 57

23. 63 62 61

24. 58 62 60

25. 62 52 57

26. 46 51 49

27. 50 69 60

28. 59 60 49 60

29. 49 62 56

30. 71 51 61