EFFECTS OF USAGE HABITS OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES TO SCHOOL SUCCESS

Abstract

Objective: Although relationship between learning, studying and school performance are known, it is not clarified why there are significant diffences in terms of school performence between students who heve same skills on the learning and studying. The increase in use of technological devices such as cell phone and computer may be the answer of the question. The purpose of the present study is to examine the relationship between usage habits of technological devices and school success. Material-Method: This research contains a survey which was applied on 39 medical students who attend to Mugla Sıtkı Kocman University, Faculty of Medicine. It is identified that which technologial devices equipped by students, the hours that students spend on their devices, their usage reasons and it is statisticly evaluated wheter there is a relation between all these factors and school succes. Results: The use of smart phones, owning a laptop or a desktop, duration of TV watching, duration and method of listening to music and quantity of short messages (SMS) are sent, don't have an effect on school success. Increased duration of connection time to internet has a negative effect on school success whatever way and reason that use for connection. It is observed that playing video games have directly propotional effects on school success. However, the increase in duration of phoning has a possitive effect on school success. Discussion: It was demostrated that usage of technology in educational aim has a possitive effect on school success. According to our findings, also, usage of technology in different areas has an afeect on school succes.. And this result can explain us that why there is a significant differences in terms of school performence between students who heve same skills on the learning and studying. To improve the school performance, it is important to decrease duration that spend on internet and video games. Other habits that we evelatuated should not be needed limited.

Keywords

• Technology, School Performance, Mobile Phones, Computers

TEKNOLOJİK CİHAZ KULLANIM ALIŞKANLIKLARININ OKUL BAŞARISI ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ

Abstract

Giriş: Öğrenme, çalışma ve okul başarısı arasındaki ilişki biliniyor olmasına rağmen, benzer öğrenme ve çalışma becerisine sahip kişilerin okul başarıları arasında neden anlamlı farklıklar olduğu halen anlaşılamamıştır. Teknolojinin ilerlemesi ile cep telefonu ve bilgisayar gibi teknolojik cihaz kullanımının giderek artması bu sorunun cevabı olabilir. Çalışmamızın amacı; teknolojik cihazların ve bu cihazların kullanım alışkanlıklarının okul başarısı üzerine muhtemel etkilerini incelemektir. Materyal-Metod: Araştırma Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesinde öğrenim gören 39 öğrenci üzerinde bir anket çalışması olarak yapılmıştır. Öğrencilerin sahip olduğu teknolojik cihazlar, bu cihazları kullanma süreleri ve bu cihazları kullanım amaçları saptanmış olup okul başarıları ile ilişkisi istatistiksel olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: Akıllı telefon kullanımının, diz üstü veya masaüstü bilgisayar sahipliğinin, televizyon izleme süresinin, müzik dinleme süresi ve yönteminin ve günlük atılan kısa mesaj (SMS) sayısının okul başarısı ile ilişkisi olmadığı saptandı. Ayrıca, bağlanma yöntemi ve bulunma nedeni ne olursa olsun internette bulunma süresinin okul başarısını olumsuz etkilediği gözlendi. Uzun süreli ve özellikle bilgisayar ile oyun oynamanın okul başarısını olumsuz yönde etkilediği saptandı. Bununla birlikte, cep telefonu ile konuşma süresinin okul başarısını olumlu yönde etkilediği gözlendi. Sonuç: Teknolojinin eğitim amaçlı kullanımının okul başarısını olumlu şekilde etkileyebileceği daha önceki çalışmalarda gösterilmişti. Elde ettiğimiz bulgulara göre teknolojinin eğitim amacı dışında kullanılması da okul başarısını etkilemektedir. Bu sonuç, benzer öğrenme ve çalışma becerisine sahip kişilerin okul başarıları arasında neden anlamlı farklılıklar olduğunu bize açıklayabilir. Okul başarısını artırmak için internette bulunma ve bilgisayar oyunu oynama süreleri kısıtlanmalıdır. Ölçülen diğer alışkanlıklar için bir sınırlamaya gitmeye gerek yoktur.

Keywords

• Teknoloji, Okul Başarısı, Cep Telefonu, Bilgisayar

References

1. Atkinson RC, Shiffrin RM. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. Advances in Research and Theory, Vol. 2. Academic Press, NY, 1968 89–195.
2. Atkinson RC, Shiffrin R. Storage and retrieval processes in long-term memory. Psychological Review 1969; 76:179-193. 3. Ferguson E, James D, Madeley L. Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature. BMJ. 2002; 324(7343): 952-957.
3. Hayes K J. The backward curve: a method for the study of learning. Psychological Review 1953; 60(4): 269-275.
4. Fordham S, Ogbu JU. Black students’ school success: Coping with the “burden of ‘acting white’”. The Urban Re- view 1986; 18(3): 176-206
5. DiMaggio P. Cultural capital and school success: The im- pact of status culture participation on the grades of US high school students. American Sociological Review 1982; 47(2): 189-201
6. Zins JE, Bloodworth MR, Weissberg R P. The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation 2007; 17(2): 1-10
7. Pajares F, Schunk DH. Self-beliefs and school success: Self-efficacy, self-concept, and school achievement. Percep- tion 2001: 239-266.
8. Valencia RR. Chicano school failure and success: Research and policy agendas for the 1990s. The Stanford Series on Ed- ucation and Public Policy, London, Falmer Press, 1993: 3-26 10. Erickson F. Transformation and School Success: The Pol- itics and Culture of Educational Achievement. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 1987; 18(4): 335–356

9. Guthrie JW. Organizational Scale and School Success. Ed- ucational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 1979; 1(1): 17-27
10. Özdener N, Çelen B. The effects of web based educational drills in competitive atmosphere on motivation and learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 2009; 1(1): 1485- 1490.
11. Burgstahler S. The role of technology in preparing youth with disabilities for postsecondary education and employ- ment. Journal of Special Education Technology 2003; 18(4): 7-20.
12. Paraskeva F, Bouta H, Papagianni A. Individual charac- teristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Com- puters & Education 2008; 50(3): 1084-1091.
13. Riel M, Schwarz J. School change with technology: Crossing the digital divide. Information Technology in Child- hood Education Annual 2002; 1: 147-179.
14. Robertson M, Grady N, Fluck A., Webb I. Conversations toward effective implementation of information communica- tion technologies in Australian schools. Journal of Education- al Administration 2006; 44(1): 71-85.
15. 17) Donahoo S, Whitney M. Knowing and getting what you pay for: Administration, technology, and accountability in K-12 schools. Advances in Educational Administration 2006; 8: 125-142.
16. 18) Collins A, Morrison D, Newman D. Putting technology to work for school reform. Systemic Change in Education 1994: 71-82.
17. 19) Sandholtz JH, Ringstaff C, Dwyer DC. The relationship between technological innovation and collegial interaction. ERIC Clearinghouse. 1991: 1-14.
18. 20) Martini M. Features of home environments associated with children’s school success. Early Child Development and Care 1995; 111(1): 49-68.
19. 21) Nielsen L, Webb W. Teaching generation text: Using cell phones to enhance learning. John Wiley & Sons. 2011: 1-10
20. 22) Cavus N, Ibrahim D. m-Learning: An experiment in using SMS to support learning new English language words. British Journal of Educational Technology 2009; 40(1): 78-91.
21. 23) Koivisto M, Krause CM, Revonsuo A, Laine M, Hämäläinen H. The effects of electromagnetic field emitted by GSM phones on working memory. Neuroreport 2000; 11(8): 1641-1643.
22. 24) Krause CM, Sillanmäki L, Koivisto M, Häggqvist A, Saarela C, Revonsuo A, Hämäläinen H. Effects of electromagnetic field emitted by cellular phones on the EEG during a memory task. Neuroreport 2000; 11(4): 761-764.
23. 25) Edelstyn N, Oldersha W, Lavin MJ, Barrows JR. Internet use and collegiate academic performance decrements: Early findings. Journal of Communication 2001; 51(2): 366-382.
24. 28) Kandell JJ. Internet addiction on campus: The vulnerability of college students. CyberPsychology & Behavior 1998; 1(1): 11-17.
25. 29) Caplan SE. A social skill account of problematic Internet use. Journal of communication 2005; 55(4): 721-736.
26. 30) Anderson KJ. Internet use among college students: An exploratory study. Journal of American College Health 2001; 50(1).21-26.
27. 31) Keith TZ, Reimers TM, Fehrmann PG, Pottebaum SM, Aubey LW. Parental involvement, homework, and TV time: Direct and indirect effects on high school achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology 1986; 78(5): 373.
28. 32) Hancox RJ, Milne BJ, Poulton R. Association of television viewing during childhood with poor educational achievement. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 2005; 159(7): 614.
29. 32) Hancox RJ, Milne BJ, Poulton R. Association of televi- sion viewing during childhood with poor educational achieve- ment. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 2005; 159(7): 614.
30. 33) Gortmaker SL, Salter CA, Walker DK, Dietz WH. The impact of television viewing on mental aptitude and achieve- ment: A longitudinal study. Public Opinion Quarterly 1990; 54(4): 594-604.
31. 34) Pingree S. Children’s activity and television comprehen- sibility. Communication Research 1986; 13(2): 239-256.
32. 35) Christakis DA, Zimmerman F J, DiGiuseppe DL, McCa- rty CA. Early television exposure and subsequent attentional problems in children. Pediatrics 2004; 113(4): 708-713.
33. 36) Rehbein F, Psych G, Kleimann M, Mediasci G, Mößle T. Prevalence and risk factors of video game dependency in ad- olescence: results of a German nationwide survey. Cyberpsy- chology, Behavior, and Social Networking 2010; 13(3): 269- 277.
34. 37) Chuang TY. Effect of computer-based video games on children: An experimental study. In Digital Game and Intel- ligent Toy Enhanced Learning. DIGITEL’07. The First IEEE International Workshop on IEEE, 2007: 114-118
35. 38) Schellenberg EG. Music and cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2005; 14(6): 317-320.
36. 39) Standley JM. A meta-analysis on the effects of music as reinforcement for education/therapy objectives. Journal of Research in Music Education 1996; 44(2): 105-133.
37. 40) Roe K. Different Destinies—Different Melodies: School Achievement, Anticipated Status and Adolescents’ Tastes in Music. European journal of communication 1992; 7(3): 335- 357.
38. 41) Southgate DE, Roscigno VJ. The Impact of Music on Childhood and Adolescent Achievement. Social science quar- terly 2009; 90(1). 4-21.