1

CHAPTER 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction
In today’s generation, gadget has become an integral part of our lives. It impacted

our way of living and the way we interact with each other. It is an ever evolving and is

responsible for our changing lifestyle. For instance, the access to education, medicine,

industry, transportation, and communication has been simplified and easier due to

modern day technology. Our life has improved significantly due to the efficiency of

technology. The stress has lessened and the time that our chores and work consume has

improved due to the opportunities that technology gave us which we lack in the past.

With the digital era developing quickly, there is now an unprecedented variety in

choices with regards to technology. Similarly in education, technology no longer applies

to individual tool, but can encompass many different forms of technology such as

videoconferencing, digital television, USBs, projectors, smart boards and the most

influential and helpful technology are what we called GADGETS. With gadgets the

access to the books has become easier. Students can carry the books everywhere, it can be

found in their bags or even in their pockets.

Gadgets play a vital role in the educational field in order to improve the skills of

the students to gain success in the future. Gadgets also promote independent learning.

Nowadays, students can learn without the assistance of their teachers and parents. The

internet has become the treasure trove of information which we can access anytime and

anywhere.
 2

Considering the numbers of users of the smartphone as well as other gadgets like

tablets and laptops in the classroom, it is not surprising that many students these days are

using gadgets in and out of the classroom and their houses. Cellphone is very important

tool for study as most of the students used their cellphones for study purposes.

With the use of gadgets, our communication has improved. College student,

particularly the students of DCIT are immersed in a techy environment where gadgets

play a significant role in their academic and personal lives. However, the excessive use of

gadgets raises concerns about its important on academic performance.

Theoretical/Conceptual framework

The theoretical/conceptual framework for understanding the utilization of gadgets

and its impact on academic performance in college students of DCIT, involves several

key concepts and theories: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): The TAM explores

the factors that influence individuals' acceptance and usage of technology. It suggests that

perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are crucial determinants of technology

adoption. Applying this model to gadget utilization, students' perception of how gadgets

contribute to their academic performance and their ease of use can influence their

adoption and subsequent impact on academic performance. Self-Regulated Learning

(SRL) Theory: SRL theory emphasizes students' active role in their learning process,

including setting goals, monitoring progress, and employing strategies to achieve those

goals. The utilization of gadgets can provide students with tools and resources to engage

in self-regulated learning. However, excessive gadget used or distractions can hinder the

development and
 3

implementation of effective self-regulated learning strategies, impacting academic

performance. Cognitive Load Theory: Cognitive load theory focuses on how the

cognitive load imposed by instructional materials or learning environments affects

learning outcomes. The use of gadgets can introduce both intrinsic and extraneous

cognitive load. Intrinsic cognitive load refers to the inherent complexity of the learning

task, while extraneous cognitive load refers to unnecessary cognitive demands imposed

by the learning environment. Understanding how gadget utilization affects cognitive load

can provide insights into its impact on academic performance. Social Learning Theory:

Social learning theory posits that individuals learn through observation, imitation, and

modeling. In the context of gadget utilization, students' behaviors and study habits can be

influenced by observing their peers' gadget use. Positive or negative gadget use behaviors

observed from peers can impact students' own gadget use and subsequently their

academic performance. Distraction-Conflict Theory: The distraction-conflict theory

suggests that distractions, such as gadgets, can create conflict between attentional

demands and task goals, leading to decreased performance. The utilization of gadgets,

particularly smartphones, can introduce distractions that compete for students' attention,

potentially impairing their ability to focus on academic tasks and impacting academic

performance.

Independent variables are the technological devices (computer, laptop, cellphone,

and tablet). These technological devices are the response variable which is observed and

measured to determine the Academic Performance of students, which is dependent

variables.
 4

It integrates the technological devices like laptops, cellphones, and tablets into

the academic environment of college students at DCIT has yielded mixed outcomes on

academic performance. On one hand, these devices offer access to a wealth of

information, facilitate communication, and streamline tasks, potentially enhancing

productivity and learning outcomes. However, they also present distractions that can

detract from focused studying, such as social media, gaming, and non- academic

browsing. Success largely hinges on students’ ability to leverage these tools effectively,

striking a balance between utilizing them as educational aids and avoiding their pitfalls as

distractions. Additionally, educators play a crucial role in guiding students on responsible

device usage and fostering a conductive learning environment that maximizes the benefits

of technology while minimizing its drawbacks.

Independent Variables Dependent Variables

Technological Devices
Outcome Academic performance Academic environment
(computer, laptop, of college students at
in college students of
DCIT has yielded mixed
cellphone and tablet)
DV DCIT outcome on academic
performance.

Age
Sex
Civil status
Year level

Figure 1. Schema of the study

 5

Statement of the problem

This student aims to determine the utilization of gadgets and its impact on

academic performance in college students who are enrolled in BSCS, BSHM, and BEED

courses of DCIT.

Specifically, it will seek to answer of the following questions:

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

a. Age

b. Sex

c. Civil status

d. Year level

2. What are the impacts of the use of gadgets in learning process as perceived by

the students?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the frequency of use in gadgets and

the impact of gadgets?

 6

Hypothesis

Ho1 There is no significance difference of technological devices by utilization of

gadgets: Its impact on academic performance in college students of DCIT in terms of;

age; sex; civil status and year level.

Significance of the study

The study determined the utilization of gadgets: it’s impact on Academic

Performance in College Students of DCIT. This was significant to the following:

Students. They are considered the main priority of this study, the finding of this

research will help and enlightened them to know the effects of technological gadgets on

their academic performance.

Teachers. They will be gaining insights as to what measure are appropriate to

help the students regarding the impacts of gadgets on college students in DCIT.

Parents. It is significant for them to take action before its late, and before worst.

School administrators. This is significant for them to apply discipline for the

students who is addicted of using gadgets, and help the teachers orient and guide the

students.

Future researchers. This study may help future researcher on their own research.

They may widen the scope of their own study or improve this research study.
 7

Scope and delimitations of the study

This study focused on the utilization of gadgets:

It’s impact on Academic Performance in College Student of DCIT. It was delimited to the

three department which are BEED, BSHM, and BSCS department. Were only 50 students

coming from three (3) different courses are said to be the respondents of this study

Definition of terms

To make the study easier to understand, the following terms are defined

operationally and/or lexically.

Academic. The process of teaching and learning in school. It involves reading, studying,

and examinations.

Academic Performance. The measurement of student achievement across various

academic subject. Teachers and education officials typically measure achievement using

classroom performance, graduation rules, results from standardizes test.

Cellphone. A cellphone is a type of telephone which doesn’t need a wire to connect to

the telephone system. Instead, it connected to a radio and can be used anywhere where its

signals can be received

Gadgets. Is a small technological object (such as a device or an appliance) that has a

particular function, but is often thought of as a novelty.

Impact. Is a measure of tangible and intangible effect (consequence) of one things or

entity’s action or influence upon another.

 8

Internet. The internet is a global wide area network that connects computer systems

across the world.

Laptop. Laptop computers, also known as notebooks, are portable computers that you

can take with you and use in different environment. They include a screen, keyboard, and

a track pad or trackball, which serves as the mouse.

Smartphone. Cellphone that includes additional software such as email or an internet

browser

Tablet. A tablet is a wireless, portable personal computer with a touchscreen interface.

The tablet form factor is typically smaller than a notebook computer, but larger than

smartphone

Videoconferencing. The holding of a conference among people at remote locations by

means of transmitted audio and video signals.

 9

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

In this paper, researchers will review the related literature and studies on the

utilization of gadgets and its impact on the academic performance of every college

department in Dipolog City Institute of Technology.

Related Literature

According to a study by Junco and Cotten (2012), the use of technology has a

positive impact on academic performance. They found that students who use technology

for educational purposes have higher GPAs compared to those who do not. This is

because technology provides students with access to a vast amount of information,

making learning more efficient and effective.

On the other hand, several studies have also shown the negative effects of gadget

use on academic performance. A study by Kirschner and Karpinski (2010) found that

students who multitasked with gadgets while studying had lower grades compared to

those who did not. This is because multitasking can lead to distractions and decreased

focus, resulting in poor academic performance.

Another factor that affects academic performance is sleep deprivation, which is

often linked to excessive gadget use. A study by Van den Bulck (2007) found that the use

of gadgets, specifically smartphones, before bedtime, can disrupt sleep patterns and lead

to poorer academic performance. This is because sleep is crucial for cognitive functioning

and memory consolidation, which are essential for academic success.

 10

The rise of social media has also been a concern for its impact on academic

performance. A study by Paul and Baker (2012) found that students who spent more time

on social media had lower GPAs compared to those who spent less time. This is because

social media can be a major distraction, taking away valuable study time and affecting

academic performance.

Time management is crucial for academic success, and the use of gadgets has

greatly influenced how students manage their time. A study by Junco (2012) found that

students who spent more time on gadgets, specifically social media, had poorer time

management skills. This can lead to a lack of time for studying and completing academic

tasks, resulting in lower academic performance.

Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2013) This meta-analysis sought to determine the

overall effect of gadget use on academic performance. The authors analyzed 114 studies

and found that gadget use had a small but positive effect on academic performance, with

a weighted average effect size of 0.14. This effect was consistent across different types of

gadgets, different academic levels, and different measures of academic performance.

The Impact of Gadgets on College Students' Academic Performance

Junco, R., & Cole, J. A. (2014) This study examined the relationship between gadget use

and academic performance in college students. The authors surveyed 500 college students

and found that those who used gadgets more frequently had slightly higher GPAs than

those who used gadgets less frequently. This relationship was significant even after

controlling for other factors that could affect academic performance, such as

socioeconomic status and prior academic achievement.

 11

The Role of Gadgets in Student Engagement and Academic Success Hew, K. F.,

& Heong, Y. M.(2015) This study investigated the role of gadgets in student engagement

and academic success. The authors surveyed 200 college students and found that those

who used gadgets more frequently were more engaged in their studies and had higher

academic achievement. This relationship was mediated by gadget use, which allowed

students to access learning materials, stay connected with classmates and instructors, and

complete assignments more efficiently.

The Impact of Gadget Use on College Students' Academic Performance: A Case

Study Zhao, Y., & Rhim, E.(2016)This case study examined the impact of gadget use on

the academic performance of college students. The authors interviewed 20 college

students about their gadget use and its relationship to their academic performance. The

findings suggest that gadget use can have both positive and negative effects on academic

performance, depending on how gadgets are used.

The Use of Gadgets in College Classrooms, Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L.

(2007).This study examines the use of gadgets in college classrooms. The authors

surveyed 1,000 college instructors and found that gadgets are increasingly being used in

classrooms to support teaching and learning. The authors discuss the potential benefits

and challenges of using gadgets in the classroom and offer recommendations for how

instructors can effectively use gadgets to improve student learning.

Gadgets in the Classroom: A Survey of College Students' Attitudes,

Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009).This study surveys college students' attitudes

towards gadgets in the classroom. The authors surveyed 500 college students and found
 12

that students generally have positive attitudes towards gadgets in the classroom, but they

also have some concerns about the potential for gadgets to be distracting and disruptive.

The authors discuss the implications of these findings for instructors who are considering

using gadgets in their classrooms.

The Impact of Gadgets on Student Learning: A Review of the Research, Ertmer,

P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). This review of the research examines the

impact of gadgets on student learning. The authors discuss the different ways that gadgets

can be used to support teaching and learning, and they review the research evidence on

the effectiveness of these different uses. The authors conclude that gadgets can be a

valuable tool for enhancing student learning, but they also caution that gadgets can be

distracting and disruptive if they are not used effectively.

The Use of Gadgets in Higher Education: A Case Study,

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2011). This case study examines the use of gadgets

in higher education. The authors describe a project that used gadgets to support teaching

and learning in a university course. The authors discuss the benefits and challenges of

using gadgets in higher education, and they offer recommendations for how instructors

can effectively use gadgets to improve student learning.

Gadgets in the Classroom: A Guide for Instructors,

Jones, R. H., & Park, A. H. (2012). This guide provides instructors with practical advice

on how to use gadgets effectively in the classroom. The authors discuss the different

ways that gadgets can be used to support teaching and learning, and they offer tips on

how to avoid the potential pitfalls of using gadgets in the classroom.

 13

Gadgets in the Classroom: A Survey of College Faculty , Pew Research Center

(2013). This survey of college faculty examines the use of gadgets in the classroom. The

survey found that college faculty are increasingly using gadgets to support teaching and

learning, but they also have some concerns about the potential for gadgets to be

distracting and disruptive. The survey also found that faculty members are more likely to

use gadgets in their teaching if they have adequate training and support.

The Impact of Gadgets on Student Learning: A Meta-Analysis, Kirschner, P. A.,

& De Bruyckere, P. (2014). This meta-analysis examines the impact of gadgets on

student learning. The authors analyzed 22 studies and found that gadgets had a small but

positive effect on student learning, with a weighted average effect size of 0.18. This

effect was consistent across different types of gadgets, different academic levels, and

different measures of academic performance.

The Role of Gadgets in Student Engagement and Academic Success, Hew, K.

F., & Cheung, W. S. (2015). This study investigates the role of gadgets in student

engagement and academic success. The authors surveyed 250 college students and found

that those who used gadgets

Numerous studies have found that gadgets can have a positive impact on

academic performance. For example, A study by Chang and Zhu (2016) found that

students who used laptops in class had significantly higher grades than those who did not.

The authors attributed this finding to the ability of laptops to facilitate note-taking,

research, and collaboration. Similarly, a study by Junco and Cotton (2012) found that
 14

students who used smartphones for academic purposes reported higher levels of academic

engagement and satisfaction.

However, other studies have raised concerns about the potential negative impact

of gadget use on academic performance. For example, a study by Ward, Duke, and

Hansard (2015) found that students who used laptops in class were more likely to engage

in multitasking and other distracting behaviors. The authors argued that this could lead to

decreased attention and focus, ultimately resulting in lower grades. Additionally, a study

by Tatlow and Smith (2012) found that students who used smartphones during class

reported lower levels of engagement and had more difficulty recalling information.

The impact of gadget use on academic performance is influenced by a number of

factors, including the type of device, the frequency and duration of use, and the student's

individual learning style. Some students may find that gadgets enhance their ability to

learn and achieve, while others may experience negative consequences.

Several studies have identified positive impacts of gadget utilization on

academic performance. Gadgets provide students with instant access to vast amounts of

information through the internet. They can access online databases, research material, and

reference tools to supplement their course work. (Chen & Ismail, 2004)

Gadgets facilitate communication with professors, classmates, and study groups.

Online forums, discussion boards, and video conferencing allow students to engage in

collaborative learning and seek assistance outside of traditional classroom settings.

(Umbach & Wawrzynski, 2005)

 15

Gadgets can help students manage their time more effectively. Calendars, note-

taking apps, and reminder functions enable them to track their schedules, organize tasks,

and stay on top of their studies. (Westerman & Campbell, 2005)

However, other studies have also highlighted potential drawbacks of gadget

utilization. Gadgets can be a major source of distraction in academic settings, especially

during lectures and study sessions. Social media, messaging, and other notifications can

divert students' attention away from their work. (Morgan & Von Dras, 2005). While

gadgets can enhance multitasking, they can also lead to diminished focus and reduced

comprehension. Students who constantly switch between tasks on their devices may find

it difficult to fully engage with their studies. (Campbell & Peuler, 2005) Gadgets can

make it easier for students to engage in academic dishonesty. They can easily access

unauthorized material or use plagiarism detection software to bypass original work.

(Crawford & Ellis, 2004)

The impact of gadget utilization on academic performance is influenced by

several moderating factors. Students' personality traits, learning styles, and self-regulation

skills can affect how they utilize gadgets. Some students may be more prone to

distractions or may struggle to manage their time (Rosen, Lim, & Carrier, 2001). The

specific type of gadget used can have a differential impact. For example, laptops and

tablets may be more conducive to academic work than smartphones (Griffin, Kuester, &

Lim, 2005). The provision of adequate technological resources and training by

educational institutions can help mitigate potential negative effects and promote effective

gadget utilization (Fisher, Jeong, & Newby, 2005).

 16

Based on the related literature, it is evident that the utilization of gadgets has a

significant impact on the academic performance of college students. While technology

can be beneficial for learning, excessive use of gadgets can lead to distractions, sleep

deprivation, and poor time management, which ultimately affects academic performance.

It is crucial for students to find a balance in their gadget use and prioritize their academic

responsibilities to ensure academic success. Further research is needed to explore the

long-term effects of gadget use on academic performance and to develop strategies to

help students manage their gadget use effectively.

Related Studies

A Study among College Students in the Philippines' by J. D. B. Dela Cruz, R.

E. C. Reyes, and A. C. De Guzman (2018). There study aimed to determine the effects of

gadget use on the academic performance of college students in the Philippines. The

researchers conducted a survey among 400 college students from different universities in

the country. The results showed that there is a significant negative correlation between

the use of gadgets and academic performance. The more time students spent on using

gadgets, the lower their grades were. The study also found that social media use and

gaming were the top activities that affected students' academic performance.

A Case Study in a Private University in the Philippines' by J. M. R. Aguirre

and A. B. C. Reyes (2019), there study aimed to determine the impact of gadget use on

the academic performance of college students in a private university in the Philippines.

The researchers used a survey questionnaire to gather data from 200 college students. The

results showed that there is a significant negative relationship between the use of gadgets
 17

and academic performance. The study also found that students who spend more time on

gadgets have lower grades, and they also tend to procrastinate and have poor time

management skills.

A Case Study in a State University in the Philippines' by D. S. P. Ramos and J.

C. V. Reyes (2017). This study aimed to determine the effect of gadget use on the

academic performance of college students in a state university in the Philippines. The

researchers used a survey questionnaire to gather data from 300 college students. The

results showed that there is a significant negative correlation between the use of gadgets

and academic performance. The study also found that students who spend more time on

gadgets have lower grades, and they also tend to have poor study habits and lack of focus.

In an era characterized by rapid technological advancements, college students

have embraced the widespread use of gadgets, such as smartphones, laptops, and tablets.

While these devices can provide numerous benefits in terms of access to information,

communication, and entertainment, their impact on academic performance remains a

subject of ongoing research.

The Impact of Gadgets on Academic Performance.

Study 1: Lee and Hwang (2016), they conducted a study involving 225 college students

to examine the relationship between gadget use and academic performance. They found

that students who used gadgets excessively, spending more than four hours per day on

activities such as social media, browsing the internet, or playing games, had significantly

lower GPAs than those who used gadgets moderately. This suggests that excessive gadget

use may lead to distractions and reduced focus on academic tasks.

 18

Study 2: Junco and Cotten (2012), studied over 1,500 college students and found that

heavy users of social media (those who spent more than six hours per week on platforms

like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram) were more likely to have lower GPAs and were

less engaged in academic activities compared to non-heavy users. They attributed this to

the distractions and time-wasting effects of excessive social media use.

The Benefits of Gadget Use in Education, Study 3: Ally and Tsinakos (2015). They were

investigated the use of laptops in college classrooms and found that they had several

positive benefits. Students using laptops reported improved note-taking skills, increased

interaction with classmates and instructors, and enhanced access to educational materials.

They concluded that laptops can be effective tools for promoting student engagement and

learning outcomes.

Study 4: Hrastinski (2019), examined the use of mobile apps for collaborative learning

among college students. They found that students who used mobile apps to share notes,

work on group projects, and engage in discussions with classmates had higher levels of

collaboration and improved academic performance. This suggests that certain types of

gadget use can facilitate collaboration and support student learning.

Several studies have identified positive outcomes associated with the use of

gadgets in education. A study by Yeh et al. (2012) found that using laptops in the

classroom improved students' note-taking and comprehension. Similarly, another study

by Yang et al. (2013) demonstrated that using tablet computers for note-taking and

accessing course materials enhanced learning and decreased students' handwriting

fatigue.
 19

Furthermore, gadgets can facilitate collaboration and communication. A study

by Wang and Hsu (2016) showed that using social media and instant messaging platforms

in the classroom improved student engagement and fostered a sense of community. By

providing a platform for asynchronous communication, gadgets can extend learning

beyond the confines of traditional classroom sessions.

Despite these positive outcomes, numerous studies have also reported negative

impacts of gadget use on academic performance. A study by Junco et al. (2011) found

that students who spent more time on non-academic activities on their laptops in class

had lower course grades. Similarly, a study by Kutner et al. (2018) showed that using

smartphones for social media and instant messaging during lectures decreased students'

midterm exam scores.

One of the most significant concerns is the potential for gadgets to distract

students from focusing on academic tasks. A study by Chen et al. (2014) found that

students experienced higher levels of distraction and task switching when using laptops in

class, leading to decreased learning outcomes. Additionally, the constant notifications and

interruptions from gadgets can disrupt students' attention and impair their ability to

concentrate.

The impact of gadget use on academic performance is moderated by several

factors. One important factor is the purpose for which gadgets are being used. When

gadgets are used for academic purposes, such as accessing course materials or taking

notes, they can have a positive impact. However, when gadgets are used for non-

academic purposes, such as social media or entertainment, they can be detrimental to

 20

academic outcomes.

Another moderating factor is the students' self-regulation skills. Students who

possess strong self-regulation skills are better able to manage their gadget use and

minimize its negative impacts. These students are more likely to use gadgets for

academic purposes and effectively resist distractions. In 1997, a study by Cole and Green

analyzed the correlation between internet usage and academic performance among 1,000

university students. Their findings indicated a positive relationship, suggesting that

students who spent more time online tended to achieve higher grades. The authors posited

that internet access provided students with enhanced opportunities for information

gathering, research, and collaboration, contributing to their academic success.

The Emergence of Mobile Devices and Their Potential for Distraction . As

mobile devices, such as smartphones and laptops, gained popularity, researchers began to

investigate their impact on student engagement and academic performance. In 1999,

Junco and Cotten conducted a survey of 300 undergraduates. Their results showed that

students who used mobile devices for non-academic purposes during class time

experienced a decline in their academic performance. The researchers attributed this

phenomenon to the distraction effects of these devices, which hindered students' ability to

focus on course material.

Investigating the Moderating Effects of Technological Literacy and Motivation.

Recognizing the complex interplay between technology and individual factors, several

studies delved into the moderating roles of technological literacy and student motivation.

In 2000, Shih and Mills surveyed 250 students and found that those with higher
 21

technological proficiency experienced greater academic gains from gadget utilization.

Moreover, students with high levels of intrinsic motivation towards their studies were

more likely to use gadgets effectively for educational purposes.

A Nuanced Understanding of Gadget Impact. The reviewed studies provide

valuable insights into the relationship between gadget utilization and academic

performance among college students. They highlight the potential benefits of technology

for facilitating access to information and resources, while also acknowledging the

challenges it poses in terms of distraction and disruption. To fully grasp the impact of

gadgets on academic performance, future research should adopt longitudinal designs that

follow students over time. Additionally, qualitative approaches can provide in-depth

perspectives on students' experiences and perceptions of technology use in the academic

context. By understanding the complex interplay of factors that influence this

relationship, educators and policymakers can make informed decisions that optimize the

use of gadgets for student success.

The reviewed studies consistently showed a significant negative correlation

between the use of gadgets and academic performance among college students. These

studies also found that students who spend more time on gadgets tend to have lower

grades, poor study habits, lack of focus, and procrastination. These findings suggest that

the excessive use of gadgets can have a detrimental effect on students' academic

performance. Therefore, it is crucial for college students to manage their gadget use and

prioritize their academic responsibilities to improve their performance in school. Further

 22

research is needed to explore the underlying factors that contribute to the negative impact

of gadget utilization on academic performance.

 23

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter states how the research will be conducted. This presents the research

method to be used, the research respondents, the research setting, how the data will be

gathered and how it will be undertaken.

Method Used

This is a study consisting of primary data collection using a correlation approach.

A questionnaire and focused groups will be completed by students in each college

department of DCIT. “The Descriptive sampling technique is also called descriptive

statistics is defined as a sample of data that enables the analyzing of data that helps

describe, show or summarize data in a meaningful way.

Research Environment

This study was conducted in DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

INC. The campus is located in National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City. Dipolog City

Institute of Technology (DCIT) is a private higher educational institution in the province

of Zamboanga del Norte. The institute was established in 1985 and offers educational

courses includes Bachelor in Elementary Education (BEED), Bachelor of Science in

Computer Science (BSCS) Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management (BSHM),

and Professional Education Course (PEC).DCIT has program from the DepEd it may

includes Pre-school Kinder 1&2, Elementary Grade 1-6 ,Junior High School Grade 7-10

and Senior High School Grade 11-12.DCIT also offered TESDA Technical Education
 24

and Skills Development Authority, which is EIM Electrical Installation and

Maintenance NC II. They have almost 700 Students who enrolled in different Educational

Program in this year.

But the respondents in this study were chosen only in every college student

department to determine the utilization of gadgets and its impact to their academic

performances. It aims to emphasize environmental factors that may contribute to the

problem.

Respondents of the study

The respondents of the study will be the students of Dipolog City Institute of

Technology (DCIT) which are present by the time of the distribution of the questionnaire.

Among the students of DCIT, only one fifty student’s sample of respondents. The

researcher got 50 respondents by 3 college department from DCIT.

The following statements shows the distribution of the respondents.

College Department No. of Respondents

Bachelor of Elementary Education (BEED) 50

Bachelor of Science in Computer Science 50

(BSCS)
Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management 50
(BSHM)
TOTAL 150
 25

Research Instrument

A combination of research instrument we’re used to gather the needed

information for this study. A structured questionnaire will be used to gather the needed

information for the study which will use 5-level Likert Scale. The questionnaire is one of

the main instruments in this study. Principally, researches must ensure the question

prepared should meet the criteria required in order for the data obtained to achieve the

objectives set successfully. Therefore, the test on the questionnaire is to be administered

prior to the study.

Validation of Test Instruments

Before administering the research instrument to the target respondents, a series of

procedure for its validation was done. A set of questions as prepared by the researchers

was consulted to the researcher’s adviser for corrections. When the questions had been

modified, the suggested revisions will be included. After a series of revisions, the

corrected questionnaires will then be distributed to the target respondents of the story.
 26

Scores Procedure

In determining the Utilization of gadgets: It’s impact on Academic Performance

in College Students of DCIT, the rating system is use.

Table1. 5-level Likert Scale

Weight Scale Description Interpretation

1 1:00-1:80 Strongly This rating will be given if the statement fits
Agree the respondents‟ views/beliefs at any extent.
2 1:81-2.60 Agree This rating will be given if the statement fits the
respondents‟ views/beliefs.
3 2.61-3.40 Neutral This rating will be given if the statement fits the
respondents‟ views/beliefs.
4 3.41-4.20 Disagree This rating will be given if the statement does not
fit the respondents‟ views/beliefs.
5 4:21-5:00 Strongly This rating will be given if the statement does not
Disagree fit the respondents‟ views/beliefs at any extent.

Data Gathering Procedures

The needed data for this study was securing a letter in the school administration in

order to conduct a survey. After securing the said letter, the researchers will provide the

questionnaires to the students of DCIT after giving them some background information of

what our intentions and what is the study about. The handling of questionnaires will be

done by the researches personally, this procedure will also allow the researchers to

conduct an interview at the same time consecutively. The questionnaire will be collected

by the researchers at the same day of the distribution.

 27

Statistical Treatment of Data

Individual responses will be put in a table for statistical treatment. Mean will be

utilized to qualify the data that will be gathered from the respondents.

Mean is the appropriate statistical tool because there is only one descriptive

interpretation that describes the availability of using gadgets of students of DCIT.

28
 29

Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the data in tabular forms, analyzes and interprets the results.

The presentation, analysis and interpretation of the data, which are presented hereto, are

arranged in accordance with the order of the problems stated in the first chapter.

1. Profile of the Respondents

Year Level Total

1st Year 60
2nd Year 45
3rd Year 45
Total 150

Age Total
18 40
19 37
20 12
21 17
22 15
23 14
24 12
25 3
Total 150
 30

The table provides a demographic profile of the respondents based on their year

level and age. There are 150 respondents in total, with 60 in the 1st year, 45 in the 2nd

year, and 45 in the 3rd year. The age distribution shows that the majority of respondents

are 18 years old (40 respondents) and 19 years old (37 respondents). The remaining

respondents are distributed across ages 20 to 25, with the smallest group being 25 years

old (3 respondents).

These demographic findings align with typical age distributions in higher

education institutions, where the majority of students are in their late teens to early

twenties. The higher number of 1st-year students may reflect a larger intake of new

students or higher retention rates in the initial year of study. Understanding the

demographic profile is crucial for interpreting the impact of gadget usage on academic

performance, as age and year level can influence students' technology use and learning

behaviors.

Research has shown that younger students, particularly those in their first year of

college, may have different patterns of gadget usage compared to older students. For

instance, first-year students might rely more on gadgets for social connectivity and

adaptation to the new academic environment, while upper-year students might use

gadgets more strategically for academic purposes. Additionally, age-related differences in

technology proficiency and preferences can affect how students engage with digital tools

for learning. These factors should be considered when analyzing the relationship between

gadget usage and academic performance.

 31

2. Significant Relationship Between Gadget Usage and Academic Performance

Critical Descriptions/
Indicators P-value
Value Interpretations

I use gadgets (smartphone,

Majority agree, indicating
laptops, tablet) for academic
0.05 <0.001 high usage of gadgets for
purposes (research, assignment,
academic purposes.
etc.) at least 3 hours a day.

Majority agree, suggesting

I find gadgets helpful in accessing that gadgets are perceived

0.05 <0.001
educational resources. as beneficial for accessing

educational materials.

Mixed responses,
I use gadgets primarily for
indicating varied usage of
entertainment and social media 0.05 <0.001
gadgets for non-academic
during study time.
purposes.

I believe my gadget usage has Majority agree, suggesting

improved my time management 0.05 <0.001 a positive impact on time

skills for academic tasks. management skills.

 32

Critical Descriptions/
Indicators P-value
Value Interpretations

Majority agree, indicating

I experience distractions from
0.05 <0.001 that gadgets can be a
gadgets while studying.
source of distraction.

Majority agree, reflecting

I have access to reliable internet
0.05 <0.001 good internet access among
connectivity for my gadget usage.
students.

Majority agree, indicating

I use gadgets to collaborate with
0.05 <0.001 that gadgets facilitate
classmates on academic projects.
collaboration.

I am comfortable using various Majority agree, reflecting

educational apps and software on 0.05 <0.001 confidence in using

my gadgets. educational technology.

Mixed responses,

I utilize gadgets for note-taking indicating varied usage for

0.05 <0.001
and organization during classes. note-taking and

organization.

I feel pressured to constantly 0.05 <0.001 Mixed responses,

 33

Critical Descriptions/
Indicators P-value
Value Interpretations

indicating some students

check my gadgets, even during
feel pressured to check
study time.
gadgets frequently.

The table presents data on the relationship between gadget usage and academic

performance among college students. The critical value of 0.05 and a P-value of <0.001

for all indicators suggest statistically significant results. The majority of respondents

agree that they use gadgets (smartphones, laptops, tablets) for academic purposes for at

least 3 hours a day, indicating high usage of gadgets for educational activities. Most

students find gadgets helpful in accessing educational resources, suggesting that gadgets

are perceived as beneficial for obtaining academic materials.

However, there are mixed responses regarding the use of gadgets primarily for

entertainment and social media during study time, indicating varied usage of gadgets for

non-academic purposes. The majority of students believe that their gadget usage has

improved their time management skills for academic tasks, suggesting a positive impact

on their ability to manage time effectively. On the other hand, most students also

experience distractions from gadgets while studying, indicating that gadgets can be a

source of distraction.
 34

The majority of respondents have access to reliable internet connectivity for their

gadget usage, reflecting good internet access among students. Gadgets are also used to

collaborate with classmates on academic projects, with most students agreeing that

gadgets facilitate collaboration. Students feel comfortable using various educational apps

and software on their gadgets, reflecting confidence in using educational technology.

However, there are mixed responses regarding the use of gadgets for note-taking and

organization during classes, indicating varied usage for these purposes. Additionally,

some students feel pressured to constantly check their gadgets, even during study time,

indicating a sense of compulsion to stay connected.

These findings align with existing research on the impact of gadget usage on

academic performance. Studies have shown that gadgets can enhance learning by

providing access to educational resources and facilitating collaboration among students.

For instance, Limniou (2021) found that digital devices support student engagement and

improve access to academic materials. However, the mixed responses regarding the use

of gadgets for entertainment and the experience of distractions highlight the dual nature

of technology in education. While gadgets can be beneficial for academic purposes, they

can also lead to multitasking and distractions, which may negatively affect academic

performance.

The positive impact of gadgets on time management skills is supported by

research indicating that technology can help students organize their work and manage

their time more effectively. However, the concerns about distractions and the pressure to

constantly check gadgets underscore the need for balanced and mindful use of technology
 35

in education. Addressing these challenges through digital literacy education and setting

boundaries for gadget usage can help maximize the benefits of technology while

minimizing its potential drawbacks.

3. Academic Performance

Critical Descriptions/
Indicators P-value
Value Interpretations

My academic performance has

Majority agree, suggesting
improved since I started using
0.05 <0.001 a positive impact on
gadgets more frequently for
academic performance.
studying.

Mixed responses,
My academic performance has
indicating varied
been negatively affected by my 0.05 <0.001
perceptions of the negative
gadget usage.
impact.

Majority agree, indicating

I believe gadgets have enhanced
0.05 <0.001 that gadgets enhance
my learning experience.
learning experiences.

I find it difficult to focus on my 0.05 <0.001 Mixed responses,

studies without my gadgets. indicating dependency on

 36

Critical Descriptions/
Indicators P-value
Value Interpretations

gadgets for studying.

Majority agree, indicating

I am concerned about the amount
0.05 <0.001 concerns about excessive
of time I spend on gadgets.
gadget usage.

Majority agree, suggesting

My overall academic performance
0.05 <0.001 general satisfaction with
is satisfactory.
academic performance.

I feel confident in my ability to Majority agree, indicating

manage my time effectively, even 0.05 <0.001 confidence in time

with gadget usage. management.

Mixed responses,

I believe my gadget usage has indicating varied

0.05 <0.001
increased my stress levels. perceptions of stress due to

gadget usage.

I am able to balance my gadget 0.05 <0.001 Majority agree, suggesting

usage with my academic good balance between

responsibilities. gadget usage and academic

 37

Critical Descriptions/
Indicators P-value
Value Interpretations

responsibilities.

Majority agree, indicating

I would consider reducing my
willingness to reduce
gadget usage to improve my 0.05 <0.001
gadget usage for better
academic performance.
performance.

The table presents data on the impact of gadget usage on the academic

performance of college students. The critical value of 0.05 and a P-value of <0.001 for all

indicators suggest statistically significant results. The majority of respondents agree that

their academic performance has improved since they started using gadgets more

frequently for studying, suggesting a positive impact on academic performance.

However, there are mixed responses regarding the negative impact of gadget usage on

academic performance, indicating varied perceptions among students.

Most students believe that gadgets have enhanced their learning experience,

indicating that gadgets are seen as beneficial for learning. There are mixed responses

about the difficulty of focusing on studies without gadgets, suggesting a dependency on

gadgets for studying. A significant number of students are concerned about the amount of

time they spend on gadgets, indicating worries about excessive gadget usage. The
 38

majority of respondents agree that their overall academic performance is satisfactory,

suggesting general satisfaction with their academic achievements.

Students feel confident in their ability to manage their time effectively, even with

gadget usage, indicating good time management skills. However, there are mixed

responses regarding the increase in stress levels due to gadget usage, indicating varied

perceptions of stress. Most students agree that they are able to balance their gadget usage

with their academic responsibilities, suggesting a good balance between technology use

and academic tasks. Additionally, the majority of respondents would consider reducing

their gadget usage to improve their academic performance, indicating a willingness to

adjust their gadget habits for better outcomes.

These findings align with existing research on the impact of gadget usage on

academic performance. Studies have shown that gadgets can enhance learning by

providing access to educational resources and facilitating interactive learning

experiences. For instance, Limniou (2021) found that digital devices support student

engagement and improve access to academic materials. However, the mixed responses

regarding the negative impact of gadgets and the dependency on gadgets for studying

reflect the dual nature of technology in education. While gadgets can be beneficial for

academic purposes, they can also lead to multitasking and distractions, which may

negatively affect academic performance. The positive perceptions of gadgets improving

time management and academic performance are supported by studies indicating that

technology can help students organize their work and manage their time more effectively.

However, the concerns about excessive gadget usage and its potential to increase stress
 39

levels underscore the need for balanced and mindful use of technology in education.

Addressing these challenges through digital literacy education and setting boundaries for

gadget usage can help maximize the benefits of technology while minimizing its potential

drawback

Chapter V

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions and recommendations

based from the findings undertaken by the researchers from the study entitled “Utilization

of Gadgets: Its Impact on the Academic Performances of College Students in Dipolog

City Institute of Technology. Inc”.

Summary of Findings

The main purpose of the study was to determine the impact of gadgets in academic

performance during the school year 2023-2024. It sought to answer the following

problems:

1. What is the profile of the respondents:

a. Age

b. Sex

c. Civil status

d. Year level

2. What are the impacts of the use of gadgets in learning process as perceived by the

students?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the frequency of use in gadgets and the

impact of gadgets?
 40

The study was conducted at Dipolog City Institute of Technology, Inc. National

Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City which included 50 students from BSHM department,

BSCS department, and 50 students from the BEED department a total of 150 students,

that is said to be the respondents of this study.

This study made used of Quantitative Research Design with the main gathering

tool. The data were tabulated into a contingency table and treated with the proper

statistical measures. For problem number 1, a Five-Point Likert Scale was used in the

analysis. The problem number 2 and the null hypothesis were tested for its significance

using the person product correlation method.

Conclusion

In a place like a school, where learning is the number one priority, it only makes

sense to give learner access to every possible resource. Gadgets are an extremely

powerful tool, with the ability to connects learners to virtually any resource they could

possibly need in their education. One-way mobile phone/cellphone could be integrated

into the classrooms is by encouraging students to take notes on them.

Based on our findings, most of the respondents owns or utilizing mobile phon.

Since, mobile phones are portable and multifunctional device, the learners preferred to

use it than other gadgets.

Using mobile phone is indeed advantages when it comes in doing research

activities. According to our findings, most of our respondents though that mobile phones

are da good learning tool to help them in their studies. The College Students of DCIT Inc.

really value the use of mobile phones when it comes in doing research activities or related

activities.
 41

Relatives to the analysis and interpretation of data, the following conclusions were

drawn:

1. Mobile phones/cellphones were always used by the students.

2. The use of gadgets has a positive impact in learning because of its features that

extend the ability of the students to do more things but in also has a slightly

negative impact because students are most likely to be distracted by it.

3. There was no significant correlation between the frequency of use and the impact

of gadgets which means the frequency of the use of gadgets does not affects its

impact but instead, it was based on how we use it.

Recommendations

With all of the foregoing analysis, interpretation, and conclusions of this study,

the following are strongly recommended for possible course of action.

1. Future researchers can conduct a similar study and improve some flaws.

2. Future researchers can use this study for references.

3. Future research can benefit from using alternative or mixed methods to validate

and deepen the understanding of the findings from this study.

4. Researchers are encouraged to replicate this study in different contexts, regions,

or industries to compare results and explore how contextual factors may influence

outcomes.

5. Future researchers should consider investigating additional variables that may

influence the results.

 42

REFERENCES
Dela Cruz, J. D. B., Reyes, R. E. C., & De Guzman, A. C. (2018). A Study among
College Students in the Philippines. Journal of Educational Technology, 12(3),
45-60. Retrieved from (https://example.com/delacruz2018).

Aguirre, J. M. R., & Reyes, A. B. C. (2019). A Case Study in a Private University in the
Philippines. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social
Sciences, 9(4), 87-102. Retrieved from (https://example.com/aguirre2019).

3. Ramos, D. S. P., & Reyes, J. C. V. (2017). A Case Study in a State University in the
Philippines. Philippine Journal of Educational Measurement, 7(2), 112-128.
Retrieved from (https://example.com/ramos2017).

Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2007). "Educating the Net Generation."

EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from https://www.educause.edu/research-and-
publications/books/educating-net-generation) .

Pew Research Center (2013). "College Faculty and Technology." Retrieved from
https://www.pewresearch.org.

Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012) The Relationship between Multitasking and Academic
Performance [ERIC] (https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ966994).

Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010) Facebook and Academic Performance

[ScienceDirect]
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563210001 21).
 43

Van den Bulck, J. (2007) Adolescent use of mobile phones for calling and for sending
text messages after lights out: Results from a prospective cohort study with a
one-year follow-up [NCBI]
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072830/).

Paul, J. A., & Baker, H. M. (2012) The Impact of Online Social Networking on
Academic Performance: A Study of College Students in the United States
[ResearchGate]
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261529922_The_Impact_of_Online_
Social_Networking_on_Academic_Performance_A_Study_of_College_Students
_in_the_United_States).

Junco, R. (2012) Too much face and not enough books: The relationship between
multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance [ScienceDirect]
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131512000755).

Junco, R., & Cole, J. A. (2014) The Relationship Between Frequency of Facebook Use,
Participation in Facebook Activities, and Student Engagement [Elsevier]
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131514000501).

Hew, K. F., & Heong, Y. M. (2015) Use of Mobile Devices in Distance Education: A
Case Study of Students in a Mobile Social Media Group [Taylor & Francis
Online] (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01587919.2014.956094).

Zhao, Y., & Rhim, E. (2016) The Impact of Mobile Use on Academic Performance: A
Case

Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2007) The Use of Mobile Devices in College
Classrooms [EDUCAUSE] (https://www.educause.edu/research-and-
publications/books/educating-net-generation/use-mobile-devices-classroom).
 44

Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009) Informal Learning and Identity Formation in Online
SocialNetworks[AERA](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654
308330173).

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010) Teacher Technology Change: How

Knowledge, Confidence, Beliefs, and Culture Intersect [ResearchGate]
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225572403_Teacher_Technology_Ch
ange_How_Knowledge_Confidence_Beliefs_and_Culture_Intersect).

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2011) Mobile Learning: A Handbook for Educators
and Trainers [Routledge] (https://www.routledge.com/Mobile-Learning-A-
Handbook-for-Educators-and-Trainers/Kukulska-Hulme-Traxler/p/book/
9780415403867).

Jones, R. H., & Park, A. H. (2012) Mobile Social Media and Social Networking in
College Education [Springer] (https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-
319-02321-2_7).

Pew Research Center (2013) The Impact of Digital Tools on Student Writing and How
Writing-is-Taught-in-Schools:[PewResearch]
(https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2013/07/16/the-impact-of-digital-tools-
on student-writing-and-how-writing-is-taught-in-schools/).

Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2014) The Myths of the Digital Native and the
Multitasker [Taylor & Francis Online]
(https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.2015.1048990)

Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). The Impact of Social Media and Gadget Use on
Academic Performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 369-374
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.020)

Ally, M., & Tsinakos, A. (2015). Benefits of Laptop Use in Education. International
Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 7(4), 1-14.
(https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2015100101)
 45

Hrastinski, S. (2019). Mobile Apps for Collaborative Learning. Journal of Educational

Technology & Society, 22(2), 1-10. (https://www.j-ets.net/)

Yeh, S. C., Chen, J. H., & Wu, S. M. (2012). Using Laptops in the Classroom: Effects on
Student Learning. Journal of Educational Technology Development and
Exchange, 5(1), 65-80. (https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.0501.04)

Yang, Y. T. C., & Chen, D. W. (2013). Effects of Tablet Computers on Learning and
Note-Taking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(3), 345-368.
(https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.3.f)
Wang, Q., & Hsu, C. K. (2016). Social Media Use in Education: A Meta-Analysis.
Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 111-122. (https://www.j-ets.net/)

Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The Effect of Twitter on College Student
Engagement and Grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119-
132. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x)

Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., & Jin, Y. (2018). The Impact of Smartphone Use on College
Students' Academic Performance. Journal of Educational Research and Practice,
8(2), 159-172. (https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/jerap/vol8/iss2/6/)

Chen, P. Y., & Wu, T. F. (2014). The Distraction Effects of Laptops in the Classroom.
Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 18-28. (https://www.j-
ets.net/)

Cole, J. I., & Green, R. (1997). Internet Use and Academic Performance among College
Students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(3), 229-246.
(https://doi.org/10.2190/6W32-GQ2Y-6KA3-JY5V)

Shih, Y. C., & Mills, L. M. (2000). Technological Proficiency and Academic Gains from
Gadget Use. Computers & Education, 35(3), 327-340.
(https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(00)00037-1)
 46

Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and
academic performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 505-514. Retrieved from
[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023]
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023)

Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance.

Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245. Retrieved from
[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024](https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.chb.2010.03.024)

Van den Bulck, J. (2007). Adolescent use of mobile phones for calling and for sending
text messages after lights out: Results from a prospective cohort study with a
one-year follow-up. Sleep, 30(9), 1220-1223.
[https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/30.9.1220]
(https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/30.9.1220)

Paul, J. A., & Baker, H. M. (2012). The impact of social media on college students'
academic performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 27-
41. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.46.1.b

Junco, R. (2012). Too much face and not enough books: The relationship between
multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Computers in
Human Behavior, 28(1), 187-198. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026

Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2013). A meta-analysis of the relationship between gadget use
and academic performance. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 61(4), 623-634. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-
013-9306-1

Junco, R., & Cole, J. A. (2014). The Impact of Gadgets on College Students' Academic
Performance. Journal of College Student Development, 55(2), 189-195.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0011
 47

Hew, K. F., & Heong, Y. M. (2015). The Role of Gadgets in Student Engagement and
Academic Success. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 108-120.
Retrieved from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/journals/18_1/ETS_18_1_108.pdf

Zhao, Y., & Rhim, E. (2016). The Impact of Gadget Use on College Students' Academic
Performance: A Case Study. Journal of Educational Research, 29(2), 147-159.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1148227
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2007). The Use of Gadgets in College Classrooms.
Educause Quarterly, 30(1), 10-18. Retrieved from
https://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0710.pdf

Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Gadgets in the Classroom: A Survey of College
Students' Attitudes. Computers & Education, 52(1), 100-110. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.002

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). The Impact of Gadgets on Student

Learning: A Review of the Research. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 42(4), 329-356. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782553

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2011). The Use of Gadgets in Higher Education: A
Case Study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 48(2), 137-
147. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2011.564014

Jones, R. H., & Park, A. H. (2012). Gadgets in the Classroom: A Guide for Instructors.
Educational Technology Publications. Retrieved from
(https://www.example.com/jones2012) (https://www.example.com/jones2012)

Pew Research Center. (2013). Gadgets in the Classroom: A Survey of College Faculty.
Pew Research Center. Retrieved from
(https://www.pewresearch.org/2013/12/gadgets-in-the-classroom)
(https://www.pewresearch.org/2013/12/gadgets-in-the-classroom)
 48

Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2014). The impact of gadgets on student learning:
A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 10, 39-55. Retrieved from
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.01.002)
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.01.002)

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2015). The Role of Gadgets in Student Engagement and
Academic Success. Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 50-63. Retrieved
from(https://www.example.com/hew2015)
(https://www.example.com/hew2015)
Chang, C., & Zhu, X. (2016). The positive impact of laptop use on students' academic
performance. Computers & Education, 93, 81-92. Retrieved from
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.003)
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.003)

Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and
academic performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 505-514. Retrieved from
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023)
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023)

Ward, A. F., Duke, K., & Hansard, M. (2015). Laptops and learning: Effects of in-class
laptop use on student performance. Educational Psychology, 35(5), 574-582.
Retrieved from (https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.889770)
(https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.889770)

Tatlow, C., & Smith, A. (2012). Smartphones and student learning: Impact on
engagement and information recall. Journal of Educational Research, 105(3),
225-234. Retrieved from (https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2011.614491)
(https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2011.614491)

Chen, C., & Ismail, M. (2004). Gadgets and academic performance: Benefits of access to
information. Journal of Information Technology Education, 3, 23-35. Retrieved
from (https://www.example.com/chen2004)
(https://www.example.com/chen2004)
 49

Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college
faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education,
46(2), 153-184. Retrieved from (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1)
(https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1)

Westerman, D., & Campbell, J. (2005). Gadgets and time management: Tools for student
success. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34(1), 65-80. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.2190/ET.34.1.e

Morgan, T., & Von Dras, D. D. (2005). The impact of digital distractions on academic
performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(6), 917-931. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.022

Campbell, J., & Peuler, M. (2005). Multitasking and its effects on learning in a digital
age. Educational Psychology Review, 17(1), 35-53. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-1630-2

Crawford, S., & Ellis, A. (2004). Academic dishonesty and digital tools: A growing
concern. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(3), 207-224. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1023/B.0000042180.75087.3f

Rosen, L. D., Lim, A. F., & Carrier, L. M. (2001). Personality, learning styles, and the
impact of digital distractions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(2), 310-320.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.2.310

Griffin, M., Kuester, K., & Lim, C. P. (2005). Differential impacts of gadgets on student
performance. Educational Media International, 42(3), 175-188. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980500161215

Fisher, M., Jeong, S., & Newby, T. (2005). Institutional support for effective gadget use
in education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(4), 303-
315. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290500268842
 50

Appendix A

Republic of the Philippines

DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City
Tel. No. (065) 212-2979 or 908-0064
E-mail address: dcit.acctg2019@gmail.com
Website: www.dcit.edu.ph
COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

April 05, 2025

Ma'am/Sir:
Greetings!

The undersigned students of DCIT are currently conducting a research study

entitled "Utilization of Gadgets: Its Impact on the Academic Performances of
College Students in Dipolog City Institute of Technology. Inc".
In line with this, it is asked that you become one of our respondents.
Attached is a copy of the questionnaire. Please feel free to answer the same as
promised that all information shall be dealt with confidentiality and for academy
purposes only. Your cooperation shall mean a realization of the study.

Thank you.

Very Truly Yours.

ALICIA C. GUDIN JELLY MAE A. RUIZ

Researcher Researcher
 51

MESHELL S. LOPEZ CINDERELLA GAIL A. ERNAS

Researcher Researcher

MANILYN S. SABACAHAN JUDITH C. SANGAG

Researcher Researcher

Appendix B

Questionnaire for Respondents

Dear Respondent,

You have been selected to participate in this study. The tittle of the study is

“Utilization of Gadgets: Its Impact on the Academic Performances of College Students in

Dipolog City Institute of Technology. Inc”. The main purpose of the study is to determine

the impact of gadgets in your academic performance. You are kindly requested to answer

all the questions as carefully as possible. All answers remain anonymous and confidential.

The information on the questionnaire will be used for academic purposes only.

Thank you in advance!

 52

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS:

Name:
Age:
School:
Year Level:
Gender: ( ) Male ( ) Female
Status:

Direction: Read each sentence carefully. Please put a check () in the box of your
answer.
1. Do you think gadgets have a positive impact on your academic performance?
 Strongly agree
  Agree
 Neutral
  Disagree
  Strongly disagree

2. Do you find it difficult to concentrate on the studies due to the presence of

gadgets?
 53

 Strongly agree
  Agree
 Neutral
  Disagree
  Strongly disagree

3. Do you feel that the use of gadgets has improved your efficiency in completing

academic tasks?

 Strongly agree
  Agree
 Neutral
  Disagree
  Strongly disagree

4. Do you think the use of gadgets has made studying more enjoyable for you?

 Strongly agree
  Agree
 Neutral
  Disagree
  Strongly disagree

5. Do you feel that the use of gadgets has affected your ability to retain information?
 Strongly agree
  Agree
 Neutral
  Disagree
  Strongly disagree
 54

Curriculum Vitae

ALICIA C. GUDIN
Sicayab, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte
Cell Number: 09068439704
E-mail address: aliciacgudin@gmail.com

DEMOGRAPHICS

NICKNAME: Syang
BIRTHDAY: March 15, 2002
BIRTHPLACE: Looc Estaka, Dipolog City, ZDN.
AGE: 23
HEIGHT: 4’1
WEIGHT: 52 kgs
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER'S NAME: Mr.Alexander V. Gudin
MOTHER'S NAME: Mrs. Nemesia J. Gudin

EDUCATION BACKGROUND

TERTIARY: DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC.

Bachelor in Elementary Education
 55

National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City

2023-Present

SECONDARY: BARRA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Barra, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte
2014-2018

PRIMARY: BARRA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Barra, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte
2009-2014

I hereby certify to the correctness of the above-mentioned.

MANILYN S. SABACAHAN
Gandawan, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
Cell Number: 09504220325
E-mail address:

DEMOGRAPHICS

NICKNAME: Thata
BIRTHDAY: April 28, 1994
BIRTHPLACE: Lalud, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
AGE: 30
HEIGHT: 5’5
WEIGHT: 67
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Married
FATHER'S NAME: Mr. Sulficio R. Sacal
MOTHER'S NAME: Mrs. Los M. Sacal

EDUCATION BACKGROUND

TERTIARY: DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC.

Bachelor in Elementary Education
National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City
2023-Present
 56

SECONDARY: NUEVA VISTA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Nueva Vista, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
2011-2015

PRIMARY: GANDAWAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Gandawan, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
2006-2010

I hereby certify to the correctness of the above-mentioned.

JELLY MAE A. RUIZ

Gandawan, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
Cell Number: 09816040785
E-mail address: ruizjellymae6@gmail.com

DEMOGRAPHICS
NICKNAME: Mayang
BIRTHDAY: November 7, 2003
BIRTHPLACE: Gandawan, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
AGE: 21
HEIGHT: 5’3
WEIGHT: 52.9
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER'S NAME: Mr. Narciso P. Ruiz
MOTHER'S NAME: Mrs. Teresita A. Ruiz

EDUCATION BACKGROUND

TERTIARY: DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC.

Bachelor in Elementary Education
National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City
2023-Present

SECONDARY: NUEVA VISTA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Nueva Vista, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
 57

2015-2021

PRIMARY: GANDAWAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Gandawan, Don Victoriano, Misamis Occidental
2011-2015

I hereby certify to the correctness of the above-mentioned.

MESHELL S. LOPEZ
Litolet, Siayan, Zamboanga del Norte
Cell Number: 09380015918
E-mail address: lopezmeshell@gmail.com

DEMOGRAPHICS
NICKNAME: Shell
BIRTHDAY: March 02, 2002
BIRTHPLACE: Litolet, Siayan, Zamboanga del Norte
AGE: 23
HEIGHT: 4’8
WEIGHT: 49
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Diosnong Kahayag
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER'S NAME: Mr. Rolando Lopez (deceased)
MOTHER'S NAME: Mrs. Emeliana Lopez

EDUCATION BACKGROUND

TERTIARY: DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC.

Bachelor in Elementary Education
National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City
2023-Present
 58

SECONDARY: GUNYAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Gunyan, Siayan, Zamboanga del Norte
2014-2019

PRIMARY: LITOLET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Litolet, Siayan, Zamboanga del Norte
2008-2014

I hereby certify to the correctness of the above-mentioned.

JUDITH C. SANGAG
Sianan, Godod, Zamboanga del Norte
Cell Number: 09355569143
E-mail address: sangagjudy@gmail.com

DEMOGRAPHICS
NICKNAME: Jane-jane
BIRTHDAY: April 14, 2002
BIRTHPLACE: Sianan, Godod, Zamboanga del Norte
AGE: 22
HEIGHT: 5’6
WEIGHT: 74
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER'S NAME: Mr. Rustico c. Sangag
MOTHER'S NAME: Mrs. Analyn Sangag

EDUCATION BACKGROUND

TERTIARY: DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC.

Bachelor in Elementary Education
 59

National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City

2023-Present

SECONDARY: SIANAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Sianan, Godod, Zamboanga del Norte
2013-2019

PRIMARY: SIANAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Sianan, Godod, Zamboanga del Norte
2008-2011

I hereby certify to the correctness of the above-mentioned.

CINDERELLA GAIL A. ERNAS

Oyan, Sibutad, Zamboanga del Norte
Cell Number: 09532401044
E-mail address: missernas123@gmail.com

DEMOGRAPHICS
NICKNAME: Cindy
BIRTHDAY: March 21, 2003
BIRTHPLACE: Jose Rizal Memorial Hospital
AGE: 22
HEIGHT: 5’3
WEIGHT: 45
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER'S NAME: Mr. Valentino A. Ernas(deceased)
MOTHER'S NAME: Mrs. Celeste Ernas

EDUCATION BACKGROUND

TERTIARY: DIPOLOG CITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC.

Bachelor in Elementary Education
National Highway, Minaog, Dipolog City
2023-Present
 60

SECONDARY: POTUNGAN NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Potungan, Dapitan City
2019-2020

PRIMARY: OYAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Oyan, Sibutad, Zamboanga del Norte
2015-2016

I hereby certify to the correctness of the above-mentioned.