CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

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.

1
Fig. 1.1. The Ancient Types of Mobile Phones

Source: Olanrewaju (2014) Field Work

2
 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 the majority 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.

3
Fig. 1.2. Other Ancient Types of Mobile Phones

Source: Olanrewaju (2014) Field Work

4
 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, Thuraya, 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 (Olanrewaju, 2015).

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 or not there

will be significant difference in the performance of students using mobile phones in Public and

Private Schools.

1.2 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.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The general objective of this study is to assess the impact of mobile phones on student

performance in secondary Schools.

5
 The specific objectives are to:

1. ascertain the extent to which mobile phones are being utilized in secondary Schools among

the students.
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.

1.4 Research Hypotheses

1. There is no significant difference in the number of secondary Schools students using mobile

phones and those who do not.

2. There is no significant relationship in the extent to which the use of mobile phone affects

students performance in secondary School.

3. There is no significant difference in the academic performance of students using mobile

phones in Public and Private Schools.

1.5 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.

1.6 Operational 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

6
 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.

2.1 Meaning and Concept of Mobile Phones

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)

7
Fig. 2.1. The Modern Types of Mobile Phones.

Source: Olanrewaju (2014) Field Work

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

8
recent years has attracted research attention. Cell phones are seen as 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 can also access the internet and all it has to offer (Pew Research Center, 2010).

2.2 Student Performance

Students academic gain and learning performance is affected by numerous factor 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. Graetz (1995) suggested A

student educational success contingent heavily on social status of students parents/ guardians in the

society. Considine and Zappala (2002) noticed the same that parents 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 students academic performance in future

endeavours.

Lot of studies have been conducted in the area of 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 identify students effort, previous schooling,

parents educational background, family income, self motivation of students, age of student,

9
learning preferences and entry qualification of students as important factors that have effect on

students 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. However, it is also

observed that many of the researchers are not agree with this view point 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. McDonald et.al (2001) also suggested that the scores of graduate level studies

still out perform any other single measure of cognitive aptitude in predicting success at university

level.
10
 Parents 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 parents 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.

Graetz (1995) conducted a study on socio-economic status of the parents of students and concluded

that the socio economic background has a great impact on students academic performance, main

source of educational imbalance among students and students academic success contingent very

strongly on parents socio economic standard. Considine and Zappala (2002) also having the same

views as Graetz (1995), in their study on the influence of social and economic disadvantage in the

academic performance of school students noticed, where the parents or guardians have social,

educational and economical advantage definitely strengthen the higher level success in future. But it

is also noted that these parents make available sufficient psychological and emotional shore up to

their children by providing good educational and learning environment that produce confidence and

the improvement of skills needed for success.

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

performed relatively better than others coming from higher socio-economic and educational area.

They named this phenomena educational elasticity. It is obvious and true that the criteria for

categorizing socio-economic standard in different countries are different depending of 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
11
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 endeavors (Escarce, 2003).

Considine & Zappala (2002) observed that children comes 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 mostly display

negative attitude towards studies and school. The view point 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 schools 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 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 the all. All these educationists and researchers agreed
12
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 very 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 students from Govt schools

colleges and universities in Punjab Pakistan are providing the laptops by the Punjab Government, so

that the students could interact with the whole world and know about the latest developments and

innovations.

2.2 Impact of Mobile Phones on Students Performance

Apart from the negative effect through the usage of these phones by the students, it also

have 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 student

13
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. Chliz, (2010) pointed out that excessive use of and dependency on the cell phone may

be considered an addictive disorder. In order 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 highly 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 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 as long as to

upgrade their phone, by buying the current ones and selling of the old ones at a giveaway price or

trunking as the word is widely used, just to meet up with the current trend. (Elkind, 1967).

These ostentatious mode of using and disposing of mobile phones especially, the internet

enabled phones at will, in order 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

14
their future roles and the roles that will be vested upon them by their predecessors as the new

generations.

In an attempt to discuss about the issue of this topic on mobile phones and its impact on

students performance, personal observations has been seen among student using the phones for

visiting social platform, such as the Facebook, Twitter, 2go, Myspace and instant messengers

(yahoo messengers, msn messengers and blackberry pinging 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 are 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, Sdaba and Brigu, (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 has to 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 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.

2.3 Review of Related Literature

Some of the common mobile phone related research topics include cell phone 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

15
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, 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 of secondary schools as case study at both private and public
secondary schools.

The study was carried out in order to understand and bring to fore if the students academic
performance is affected due to the time channelled 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 opinions of the students simultaneously with the data gathered during the course
of 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.

16
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter described the research design, area of the study, population and Samples,

instrument for data collection, validation and reliability of research instrument, administration of

instrument, data collection method and data analysis technique.

3.1 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.

3.2 Area of the Study

This study was carried out in Ife-East Local Government Area, State of Osun. It has an area

of 172km2 and a population of 188,087 (National Populations Commission Census NPC, 2006).

3.3 Population and Samples

The population of the study were made up of Two (2) Schools, one Private secondary

School in Ile-Ife and the other Public School in Modakeke, State of Osun. However, Two Hundred

(200) students in the two Schools as samples.

3.4 Research Instrument for Data Collection

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 contain questions based on the set objectives and the research hypothesis

and section C contain records of student performance accordingly. The questionnaire is a close

17
ended one, whereby respondents were only allowed to choose their answers from the boxes

provided.

3.5 Validation of Research Instrument

The questionnaires were constructed by the researcher and validated by the project instructor

who made face validation and also ascertained the stability of the instrument.

3.6 Reliability of Research Instrument

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

3.7 Administration of Instrument and Method of Data Collection

Two Hundred (200) copies of the questionnaires were produced and administered by the

researcher to the randomly selected students in the selected public and private Schools in Ife East

Local Government of State of Osun. 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.

3.8 Data analysis Technique

The researcher used Descriptive, Correlation, Cross Tabs and ANOVA (Analysis of

Variance).

18
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Interpretation of Results

4.2 Discussions of the Findings:

Table 4.1: 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
Total 200 100.0
RELIGION
Islam 36 18.0
Christianity 164 82.0
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

19
 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, etc)

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

20
 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

Fig 4.1: The respondents gender frequency chart.

21
Fig 4.2: The respondents age frequency chart.

Fig 4.3: The respondents Religion frequency chart.

22
Fig 4.4: The respondents frequency charts showing their access to mobile phones.

Fig 4.5: The respondents frequency charts showing how they got access to mobile phones.

23
Fig 4.6: The respondents frequency charts showing how frequent they use mobile phones.

Fig. 4.7: The respondents frequency charts of those making night calls with their mobile

phones.

24
Fig. 4.8: The respondents frequency charts of those that browse with their mobile phones.

Fig. 4.9: The respondents frequency charts of those that chart with their mobile phones.

25
Fig. 4.10: The respondents frequency charts of those that are facebooking with their mobile

phones.

Fig. 4.11: The respondents frequency charts of those that play games with their mobile

phones.

26
Fig. 4.12: The respondents frequency charts of those that play games with their mobile

phones.

Fig. 4.13: The respondents frequency charts of those who bring their mobile phones to school.
27
Fig. 4.14: The respondents frequency charts showing how long they have been using mobile

phones.

Fig.4.15: Cross tabulation of respondents Religion and their Sex.

28
Fig.4.16: Cross tabulation showing Age of respondents and their Sex

Fig.4.17: Cross tabulation of respondents Age and their access to mobile phones.

29
Table 4.2: The correlations showing the relationships between the average performances of the

respondents and usage of mobile phones.

Do you use mobile AVERAGE

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

Table 4.3: The ANOVA statistics of Private and Public School

PRIVATE PUBLIC
F P
MEANSEM MEANSEM
FIRST TERM 57.791.37 54.511.35 1.13 0.737
SECOND TERM 58.871.38 42.501.16 13.63 0.000
AVERAGE 58.501.22 48.911.06 5.56 0.190

30
4.2 Discussion of the Findings

Based on the above Table 4.1, it showed that, 94 (47%) respondents were male while 106

(53%) were female. 98 respondents were between 13-15years, 97 between 16-18years while just 5

were above 19years. Consequently, based on the respondents religion, 36 were Muslims while 164

were Christians. 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.

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 was 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 4.2 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 4.3 above showed that, the mean performance of private school students

(57.791.37) was higher than the mean performance of public school students (56.911.02) 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

meansem performance of private school (58.871.38) was higher than the meansem of public

school (48.361.34). At (f= 13.63, P=0.000, p<0.05) as shown in Table 4.3. Therefore, the

significant difference between mean of performance of private school students could be because
31
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 (58.501.22) and Public, mean performance (52.941.11) at (f= 5.56, P=0.190,

p>0.05). However, there was no significant difference as shown in Table 4.3. 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

5.1 Summary of the Principal Findings

32
 This study focused on the impact of mobile phones on the performance of secondary schools

students in Ife East Local Government Area, State of Osun, Nigeria. 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.

5.2 Suggestions for Further Research

This study covered Ife East Local Government Area, State of Osun. Therefore, replication of

the study could still be carried out on a broader scope.

5.3 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 has strongly showed there was no vast influence on students academic performance in the

secondary schools.

5.4 Recommendations

Based on the findings of this work, the following recommendations were formulated:

33
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 students use of mobile

phone device during class session.

REFERENCES

34
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 adiccin al telfonomvil.

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.

Chliz, 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.

Jarrat, J. and Coates, J.F. (1990). Future Use of Cellular Technology. Some Social Implications,
Telecommunications Policy. pp 7884.

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.

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

Naval C, Ch. Sdaba Y J Brigu. (2004). Impacto de las TIC (Tecnologas de la Informacin
Comunicacin) en lasrelacionessociales de los jvenesnavarros. Universidad de Navarra.
The usage and impact of Internet enabled phones on academic concentration. P.,173.

Paniagua A. (2005). El 38% de los niossientenansiedadsi no llevansumvil. El Norte de Castilla

Colpisa

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.

35
Wargo, J, Wargo, L. (2012) Cell Phones: Technology, Exposures, Health Effects. Environment

and Human Health Monograph 7: 65.

Elkind, D. (1967). Egocentrism in adolescence. Child Development, 38, 1025-

1034. Elkind, D. (1978). Understanding the young adoles-cent. Adolescence, 13, 127-134

Horrey, 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

36
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.

Sex: Male ( ), Female ( ).

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

Class: S.S 2

Religion: Islam ( ), Christianity ( ), Others, Specify................................

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 ( ).

SECTION C- Student over-all Students Performance

37
S/N 1ST TERM 2ND TERM AVERAGE
1. 58 60 59

2. 61 62 62

3. 52 42 47

4. 40 32 36

5. 70 61 66

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 60
38

29. 49 62 56

30. 71 51 61