Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 19 no. 2 (2024)

ICT Integration and Students’ Academic Performance in Biology

John Mark Naldoza

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The rapid advancement of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has revolutionized traditional education, offering opportunities for enhanced student engagement and personalized learning experiences. This study investigates the impact of ICT integration, specifically employing the Aralinks Learning Management System (LMS), on the academic performance of Grade 9 biology students. Using a quasi-experimental design, two classes were selected, one as the experimental group with ICT integration and the other as the control group with traditional instruction. Results indicated that the ICT integration had no significant impact on overall academic performance, suggesting that traditional methods were as effective as technological intervention. Building on these findings, recommendations are proposed for further research and practice. Firstly, future studies should investigate factors influencing higher proficiency levels, as ICT integration primarily prevented students from falling into lower proficiency levels but showed limited effectiveness in promoting higher achievement. Longitudinal research is also recommended to assess the sustained impact of ICT integration over time. Additionally, exploring factors contributing to the improvement observed in the control group can provide insights into alternative strategies for enhancing academic performance. Teacher training and competence in utilizing technology are crucial factors that may influence the effectiveness of ICT integration. Therefore, evaluating the role of teacher training programs is essential in understanding the impact on student outcomes. Furthermore, incorporating additional variables such as student engagement, access to technology resources, and socio-economic factors can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between ICT integration and academic performance. Overall, this study contributes to the ongoing discourse on leveraging ICT for educational advancement and highlights avenues for further exploration to optimize its benefits in teaching and learning contexts.



References:

  1. Abdullahi, H. (2014). International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences Online: 2013-12-22 ISSN: 2300-2697, Vol. 19, pp 217-223 doi:10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.19.217 CC BY 4.0. Published by SciPress Ltd, Switzerland, 2014
  2. Abrams, S. S. (2013). Peer Review and Nuanced Power Structures: writing and learning within the age of connectivism. E–Learning and Digital Media, 395-496.
  3. Agina-Obu I., Anyanwu, N. C., & Nworgu, I. (2018).The impact of ICT integration on Biology instruction: A study of 80 students from two schools in Nigeria. Journal of Educational Technology Research & Development 66(3), 321-336.
  4. Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alias, N., Saged, A. A., Othman, M. S., & Rashid, A. (2019). Impact of Mobile Learning Applications on Biology Test Scores and Attitudes: A Case Study of Secondary Students in Yemen. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 22(4), 143- 156.
  5. Arreola, R.A. (2020). Effect of ICT integration on the performance of Grade 12 students in Biology. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 8(2), 35-42.
  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  7. Baquiano, M.F.T., & Roxas, R.E.S. (2016). Integration of ICT in Teaching Biology: Its Impact on Students’ Performance and Motivation. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology, 5(2), 1-15.
  8. Ebrada, J.M.R., & Cabrera, J.V. (2018). ICT Integration in Biology instruction and academic performance of high school students in the Philippines. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1082(1), 012056.
  9. Emike, C. J., & Ezeudu, C. J. (2014). The impact of ICT integration on students’ academic achievement and attitudes towards Biology. Journal of Eduational Technology and Society, 17 (1), 17-28. Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 –
  10. Gilbert, J.K. & Moore, D.W. (2014). Student learning in science education.Routledge.
  11. Hilkemeijer, M. (2021). How you can plan tech integration with ease in your Science classroom today? https://www.ictesolutions.com.au/blog/how-you-can-plan-tech-integration-with-ease-in-your-science-classrootoday/#:~:text=There%20are%20many%20advantages%20of,facilitate%20collaborative%20and%20active%20learning.
  12. Hsu, T.-C., Wu, H.-K., Hwang, F.-K., & Yang, F.-Y. (2018). Effects of the inquiry-based mobile learning model on the cognitive load and learning achievement of 8th-grade students. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(8), 997–1011. K to 12 Science Curriculum Guide August 2016. Learning Materials and equipment technical specifications may be accessed at http://rmds.Deped.gov.ph/.
  13. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational researcher,38(5), 365-379.
  14. Manzo, E., & Bautista, R. (2015). The Effect of Interactive Multimedia Technology on the Academic Performance of Grade 9 Biology Students in the Philippines. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(3), 214-218.
  15. Mbodila, M. et al. (2013). Integration of ICT in Education: Key Challenges.Scholarly Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science Vol. 2(5), pp.54-60, November 2013 Available online at http://www.scholarly-journals.com/SJMCS
  16. McFarlane, A. & Sakellariou, S. (2010) The Role of ICT in Science Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 32:2, 219-232, DOI:10.1080/03057640220147568
  17. Mijares-Morales, I., & Mijares, A. (2015). Developing Environmental Literacy through the K to 12 Science Curriculum in the Philippines. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16(2), 1-17.
  18. Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C., Okamoto, S., & Gatewood, J. (2019). Public under-standing of science: Still an unsolved challenge. Public Understanding of Science, 28(1_suppl), 3–7.
  19. Onyema, E. M.,& Ogbu, C. I.(2020). The impact of computer-based instruction on secondary school students’ Biology performance: A quasi-experimental study in Nigeria. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 23(3), 78-91.
  20. Palces, A.L., & Hernandez, G.J. (2019). Utilizing K to 12 Curriculum in Enhancing Environmental Awareness and Biodiversity Conversation. Asian Journal of Biological Sciences, 12(3), 517-523.Philippine Constitution of 1987 – https://www.Officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/198-constitution/PhoenixEducation.
  21. Picciano, A. G. (2017). Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. Online Learning, 21(3), 166–190.
  22. Rasdi, M. N. M., Nasir, M. F. M., & Aziz, A. A. (2021). Learning biology using The VR Tutor: Exploring students’ collaboration, engagement, and performance. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(2), 244– 269.
  23. Saad, M. M. (2020). The impact of interactive learning methods on teaching and learning biology among secondary school students in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 7(3), 255–263.
  24. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.
  25. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.
  26. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view.MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic