Impact of Technology on Learning

Chapter 1 Introduction

Statement of the Problem

With the rapid advancement of information technology, there are numerous opportunities for utilization of technology in this increasingly globalized world where borders, boundaries, and communication obstacles are becoming almost non-existent. As the world embraces the various resultant innovations of information technology, questions have been raised regarding the challenges that these innovations may present. Today’s highly portable and user-friendly mobile devices are among the most provocative innovations and have evoked both accolades and criticism, particularly in respect to young users such as university undergraduates. Greenhow and Askari (2017)) reported that the current generation has developed the ability to switch between different tasks and various media. The authors also found that those individuals who multitasked performed poorly on particular tasks in comparison to those who performed the tasks sequentially. Several researchers support this view,and they have proposed that human beings are truly not adept atmultitasking but do have the capacity to change efficiently from one action to the other (Kirschner & De Bruyckere, 2017; Zhang, 2015)). Students’ increased access to wireless technology and the Internet suggests the need for schools to pay attention to the influence of mobile technology on multitasking, learning, and student engagement. This increased access becomes a critical factor in classroom dynamics where students with cell phones can be talking, chatting, browsing, uploading or downloading information, or even recording a lecture while in class. With this in mind, there is a need for further understanding of student use of technology in the classroom and the influence on engagement and performance. The purpose of this study was to explore and assess how mobile devices affect students’ learning and engagement in the classroom.

Research Problem

Cell phones are valuable tools for sharing information globally andthey have become an essential part of daily life for students living in developing countries. Oyeyinka-Oyelaran and Asongu & Nwachukwu (2016)) found that educational institutions have observed an enormous increase in students’ mobile phone use. In fact, this was the trend across many universities in Nigeria (Shonola et al. 2016)). In addition to the noise and distraction caused by cell phone use in the classroom, Shonola et al. (2016) identified other closely associated implications;inattentiveness, disruption, and distraction become obstacles to effective learning. This study further investigatedstudents’ use of mobile devices in the classroom and their influence on learning and engagement.

Justification for the Research Problem

Whether the effects are positive or negative, technology is affecting teaching and learning. Some researchers have expounded on the learning and educational opportunities that cell phones bring, while others have discussed the perils of excessive and unregulated use (Ang, 2015; Mango, 2015). For instance, Mango (2015) examined the ways that college students in two foreign language classrooms in the southwest region of the United States perceived the influence of the use of iPads on their learning and engagement with classroom activities. Participantsresponded to a 5-point Likert-type questionnaire. The analysis of the data showed that students believed that iPads played a significant role in their learning and engagement, thus promoting active learning in the classroom and paving the way for student success. Another study on teen use of mobile phones pointedto a trend of increasing ownership and dependence on smartphones for online access (Madden, Lenhart, Duggan, Cortesi, & Gasser, 2013). Jumoke, Oloruntoba & Blessing (2015)) also studied students’ attitudes towards the use of mobile phones, including perceived social pressure and likely consequences. The study substantiated the high use of mobile phones among students. While some students saw mobile phone use as pleasant, helpful, and easy, others suggested that they spent too much time on the phone at the expense of school activities. These students sometimes felt distracted and anxious. It thus appearedthat some significant challenges and implications should be addressed. For the reasons indicated in the above studies, further study was conducted to understand the influence of mobile devices on student engagement and learning.

Deficiencies in the Evidence

The United States and other advanced countries have made attempts to address the use of mobile devices in the classroom by studying the works of researchers such as Mango (2015), Purcell, Heaps, Buchanan, and Friedrich (2013), Chen and deNoyelles (2013), Nagel (2014), and Chen, Bauer, Bennett, and Seilhamer (2015). Developing countries, however, have not addressed the issue on the same level. Aside from the work of Nielsen and Webb (2011), Kolb (2011), and Haydn (2013), the implications of incorporating cell phone technology into the classroom as a tool for supporting and improving teaching and learning has not been considerably researched (Warnich & Gordon, 2015). Although some efforts have been made, there remains an knowledge gap regarding the influence of classroom use of mobile devices on university undergraduates. In Nigeria, past attempts to fill such gaps have focused more on the status of mobile learning in Nigerian higher educational institutions or the perceived challenges rather than the opportunities presented for effective student engagement. Unfortunately, such analysis fails to present a holistic understanding of the influence of such devices. Ojewola and Akinduyo (2016) presented a typical example. The authors investigated the distractive impact of mobile phone use among Adekunle Ajasin University undergraduate students in Nigeria. The resultant data showed that there were no significant variations in the mobile phone use among undergraduate students by gender, age, and department. Although Ojewola and Akinduyo (2016) helped to establish the important differences in mobile device use, their study lacked in-depth information regarding learning and engagement. In their assessment of the level of mobile learning in higher education institutions in Nigeria, Chaka and Govender (2014) found that despite the advances that were recorded in the implementation of mobile learning throughout the world, the situation is different in Nigeria. The authors reported that there had been little success in the use of mobile devices in the classroom and no evidence of the application or adoption of mobile learning in colleges of education in Nigeria. Focusing on the status of mobile learning, Chaka and Govender (2014) did not provide in-depth information on learning and engagement.

Mobile technologies are playing a progressively important role in college students’ academic lives. Thus, information is required based on this phenomenon to better understand how students in developing countries such as Nigeria utilize mobile technology in the classroom as well as to ensure the possible adoption of mobile technologies across universities. Further, detailed information is to be gathered about how students use mobile technology and how it influences their learning and engagement. The researcher explored this issue by investigating the influence of mobile devices on students’ learning and engagement at the University of Lagos in Nigeria. In addition, as most of the students in developing countries are found to spend increased amount of time on their mobile devices during class, it is critical to determine how mobile technology impacts their learning and engagement (Onasanya, Ayelaagbe, & Laleye, 2012).

Relating the Discussion to Audiences

Mobile devices such as tablets, smartphones, laptops, and e-book readers instantly connect users to the world, increase their access to information, and enable global interactivity with other students. Mobile devices allow users to not only consume content but also to discover and produce it. These devices continue to change how students learn, as well as shape their learning choices both within and outside of the classroom. Access to technology in school is one way to support students’ efforts to reach their educational goals. Using technology in the classroom appeals to students because it evokes their sense of how technology enhances learning and has a positive impact on other areas of their social lives.

The findings in this study are importantfor several reasons:

The findings highlight how technology can play a significant role in making teaching and learning conducive and accommodating to the needs of the students.

The findings further highlight the importance of ensuring that the classroom environment is less distracting and more favorable to student learning.

The study provides policymakers with a clear understanding of the potential positive or negative impact of allowing cell phone use in class.

The study helps instructors include clear parameters for cell phone use in their syllabi.

The findings from this study enable teachers to understand students’ perceptions ofthe use of mobile devices in the classroom and the influence of mobile devices on learning and engagement.

The Nigerian higher education system has been consistently criticized for being highly inefficient in both the quality of service delivery and effective student engagement. Thus, this study is an important component for equipping the Nigerian Federation as it explores solutions for addressing the influence of mobile devices on university classrooms.

Significance of Research Problem

In Nigeria, mobile phones have become an integral part of daily life among the general population and university students. In fact, a study on smartphone users and smartphone penetration ranked the nation 17th(eMarketer, 2016). This ranking was based on the 23.1 million smartphones users counted in 2015 and the projected increase to 34 million by 2018 (eMarketer, 2016). Several studies have found that the use of mobile phones among university students has generated a broad and diverse pool of knowledge (Baker, Lusk, & Neuhauser, 2012; Junco, 2012). However, mobile phone use also has adverse effects. The concomitant positive and harmful effects of mobile device use among students in tertiary institutions in Nigeria are important. Most of the problems indicated are speculative and point to the need for more studies to confirm all of the claims concerning the use of mobile devices in the classroom. For more than two decades, Nigeria has experienced a continuing crisis in education, including limited access to educational resources and support and a lack of highly-qualified teachers, as well as a low level of literacy and basic education skills (Oyelere et al. 2016)). The rapid growth of mobile phone access in recent years potentially opens new avenues for addressing the systemic educational challenges in education in Nigeria. A study such as this one can reveal the best way to incorporate mobile devices in a learning environment. Researchers have shown that when technology is used properly, students are more engaged and motivated to learn and academic performance can improve (Oyelere et al. 2016). It is essentialfor educators to take note of this and explore safe, productive ways to integrate mobile learning devices into our curriculum. This study reveals how mobile devices influence students’ learning and engagement in the classroom and help in developing a policy that canenhance student performance. Finally, policymakers and the curriculum planners of education programs in Nigeria is going tounderstand how and why mobile devices need to be incorporated into adult education curricula.

Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to investigate and assess how mobile devices influence students’ engagement and learning in the classroom. Such an investigation and assessment is conducted in the context of understanding both the issues of multitasking and the views of several researchers who have postulated that human beings are not truly adept at multitasking but instead have the capacity to change efficiently from one action to the other (Xu, Wang & David, 2016; Hassoun, 2015)). Students’ increased access to wireless technology and the Internet suggests the need for schools to pay attention to the influence of mobile technology on multitasking, learning, and student engagement. As developing nations such as Nigeria seek to enact effective educational reform, there is a need to explore the non-traditional opportunities that information technology advancements present. Mobile devices, along with other technological innovations, present various challenges but can still be used to enable students to be more engaged and inspired to learn. For this reason, the focus of research in education needs to shift to include mobile technology in the engagement, learning, and performance of students.

The primary research question is: How does the use of mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) by college students in a classroom in Nigeria affect their engagement and learning?The research sub-question is: What do students primarily use their mobile technology for during class?

Based on preliminary readings (Ang, 2015; Mango, 2015) that suggest a relationship between student engagement characteristics and learning. The researcher believes the study offers additional evidence to support this relationship.

Theoretical Framework

The theoritical framework which is to be investigated is execution of the study is the student involvement theory (Astin, 1984) and the conceptual framework that is to be investigated is the student engagement model (Kuh, 2009). Although believed to have originated from the philosophy of John Dewey (1897), student involvement theory was introduced to address learning effectiveness and work output . The theory focuses on the student’s behavior and motivation and emphasizes the significance of the faculty in ensuring that students are fully engaged in the classroom (Burch et al. 2015). As the principal developer of the theory, Astin (1984) argued that “students learn by becoming involved” through engagement in their environment. Such involvement relates to the amount of physical and psychological energy that students devote to their academic experience. Astin (1999) proposed the importance of viewing students’ time as a resource that needs to be nurtured. Student engagement underscoresthat the time and effort students devote to their educational activities is empirically linked to their desired college outcomes (Kuh, 2009). Astin (1984) stressed these outcomes and suggested that the measured level ofstudent engagement (both quality and quantity) has an impact on the level of their development and learning. Engagement results show that individuals participating in tasks related to their proficiency continually learn from the experiences and show persistence because of their commitment to their work. Engagement is thus never a momentous event but a process and an activity that is always ongoing (Quaye & Harper, 2014). Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, and Hayek (2007) defined student engagementas “participation in educationally effective practices, both inside and outside the classroom, which leads to a range of measurable outcomes” (). The study of engagementfocuses on academics, student-faculty interactions, student-peer interactions, and involvement with co-curricular activities (Henrie, Halverson, & Graham, 2015; Bergmann & Sams, 2014 ). Additionally, student engagement involves the effort that a college student applies to their academic and non-academic experiences (Kuh, 2009). Active engagement is important because all of these aspects of academic and non-academic life play significant roles in student success. The primary determining features of engagement are involvement and learning. There are various ways in which students can be engaged,and there are also significantly different concepts of student engagement that fit into the definitions above. Engagement requires those positive social contexts and conditions that help activate motivations. Student engagement and its impact on learning have been widely researched in higher education with a plethora of literature suggesting that engagement needs to be connected to meaningful student learning (Fitzgerald et al. 2016; Price & Tovar, 2014). Specifically, White et al. (2017) defined student engagement as “active involvement, commitment, and concentrated attention, in contrast to superficial participation, apathy, or lack of interest” (p.11). Today, engagement is theorized as the active involvement a student invests within their academic experience of college, including their interactions with faculty, peers, and participation in co-curricular activities (Veloso, Orellana & Reeves, 2018; Henrie, Halverson, & Graham, 2015; Bergmann & Sams, 2014). Bergmann & Sams, 2014) emphasized two main elements of engagement in educationally-relevant activities: in-class engagement and out-of-class engagement. Classroom activities create experiences that involve and engage students in their learning. Teachers can ensure that classroom experiences are not only motivating but also less distracting by establishing mobile technology usage policies in the classrooms. It follows that eliminating behaviors that interfere with students’ desire to learn is necessary for increasing engagement (Curwin, 2010; Lane & Harris, 2015).

Lam et al. (2014) asserted that engaging students is a vital step in the learning process. Although the authors suggested that there is the possibility of engaging students without the use of technology, they also pointed out that technology can augment engagement in “ways that are difficult to achieve otherwise” (p. 28). Their fundamental point was that technology facilitates the process of engaging students in a meaningful manner through interaction with other students and other significant tasks. ) It is further postulated that learning and engagement involve three principles: collaboration, using a project-based approach, and learning through the utilization of an external focus (Lam et al. 2014). By employing these principles, the authors proposed that the learning process could be a motivating experience for the learners that makes learning effective, improves retention, and makes knowledge transferable. Engagement may result in students getting involved in activities that enable them to work collaboratively. Classroom activities should facilitate teamwork, efficient planning, communication, and social skills. Whenever students can stand up and defend their ideas, motivation is bound to increase (Lam et al. (2014). In a project-based approach, Lam et al. (2014) suggested that the activities should be purposeful and creative. Such activities promote engagement because they provide students with the opportunity to innovate, organize, and devise projects, thereby helping to establish a sense of ownership within their learning process. Lam et al. (2014) suggested that the learning process should employ outside resources and that projects should have an external customer such as a community or government organization. By engaging in projects that are focused on real life, students would be better prepared for a real work environment because they have engaged in projects focused on real-life issues. ) It is also suggested that the employment of the techniques of this model would lead to improved engagement of learners (Lam et al. 2014). Boud, Lawson & Thompson, (2015) utilized a sliding scale of engagement that begins with passive observation and progresses to discussion, teaching, and practical use. This approach is vital in containing the problem of information overload and addingto the advancement of activity and engagement. According to Filsecker & Hickey (2014), this aspect of reward-based engagement is similar to those found in intrinsic motivation. The fundamental features of intrinsic motivation include meaningfulness, competence, having choices, and a clear show of progression. However, the idea of rewards remains the focal point in managing intrinsic motivation. There is a great desire for intrinsic motivation to believe this can be taught and made to happen. This assumption points to the idea that nothing can stimulate engagement into happening (Filsecker & Hickey (2014). As a result, engagement becomes successful only if the individual takes the first initiative. As Filsecker & Hickey (2014) proposed, engagement is a “bottom-up” grassroots phenomenon that the people above can never determine. Axelson and Flick (2011) argued that behavioral engagement may not necessarily mean that there is emotional and cognitive learning occurring. Some students may appear to be engaged but are detached, while others who show no outward signs of engagement wasdeeply curious or psychologically invested in their learning. Axelson and Flick (2011) aligned with Leamson (1999), who postulated that a student’s interest in a particular task does not necessarily imply that real new learning took place.

Willms,Friesen, and Milton (2009) developed a three-tiered framework in which the authors identified academic, social, and intellectual levels of student engagement. The authors defined the academic engagement level as the extent to which students are involved and interested in their academic activities. The social engagement level relates to the student’s sense of belonging while in school and the intellectual engagement level involves the student’s ability to deal with complex problems and the creation of new knowledge (Willms et al., 2009). Fitzgerald et al. (2016) developed another framework in which they identified effective and behavioral factors affecting engagement. The authors asserted that engagement is an important strategy that supports adjustment, retention in school, and achievement, particularly among vulnerable student populations, such as Latino students. Even in cases where high-quality learning exists, high levels of achievement is to be required for ample engagement on the part of the student (Chase, Warren, & Lerner, 2015). The authors also emphasized the importance of a combination of individual and interpersonal influences on engagement. Quaye & Harper (2014) suggested that engagement involves two key components: behavior and effect. Behavioral engagement relates to the student’s commitment to the activities that are less punished and results in a lower level of absenteeism. Effective engagement involves the attitudes that the students have towardsand their primary motivation for learning. The authors investigated qualitative and quantitative indicators of student perceptions of teacher support, their expectations for the future, and their behavioral and effective engagement in schools. Quaye & Harper (2014) found that the engagement of the students and their expectations are related in a specific manner. The authors concluded that the students’ perceptions of the relationships with their educators had a significant influence on their engagement, success, and overall expectations. Olson (2015) proposed that the foundation for adult learners’ knowledge lies in previously-acquired concepts and lessons. The author also proposed a cognitive idea of identifying a person’s existing concepts and utilizing them in new ways, rather than devising original concepts. This idea is referred to as concept attainment and serves as a conceptual framework that emphasizes making the learner the driver and owner of the knowledge they have acquired. Specifically, the approach makes the learners focus more on the meaning and comprehension of acquired concepts (Olson, 2015). Engagement framework is usefulto this study because it addresses factors that are essential to learning in the classroom. The researcher seeks to understand the existing process of student engagement in auniversity in West Africa while also exploring students’ perceptions ofthe use of mobile technology for such purposes. The researcher also seeks to learn the extent to which students’ use of mobile technology influences student engagement and learning. Twenty-first-century society makes demands on individuals, due to its fast-changing culture and developments. According to Arkorful & Abaidoo (2015), technology—including computers, mobile phones, and social networks—were perceived as recreational in the past but now have such a strong impact on the culture that the absence of them would make life miserable. Moreover, society expects its members to match the pace at which the culture is developing (Stromquist & Monkman, 2014). For this reason, the engagement model is appropriate as an approach to involving students in the kind of learning that considers these developments.

Educational institutions are expected to produce graduates with interpersonal, problem-solving, and teamwork skills. This necessitates the development of appropriate teaching approaches that wouldprepare the students for the demands of an ever-changing culture (McLaren, 2018 ). Some suggested strategies include self-directed learning, collaborative learning, experiential-based learning, and active learning. Teachers should never be limited by a specific teaching approach but should find a way to gain from all the models. Since no single theory can cover all aspects of teaching and learning, a combination of all existing theories is an appropriate approach. .

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Technology has transformed society and changed many aspects of daily life over the past twenty-five years. In most universities around the world, technology has become an essential tool for the twenty-first-century student. The digital age has caused an increase in the access to information, as well as facilitating the interaction between people. In a study on the state of global information technology, Bilbao-Osorio, Dutta, and Lanvin (2014) reported that the number of mobile subscribers reached 6.9 billion worldwide in the year of 2014. The authors indicated that the use of mobile technology in the form of tablets, phones and laptops has been currently widespread in most of the universities and colleges. According to Henderson, Selwyn & Aston (2017), digital natives have spent much of their lives surrounded by and engrossed in technology. As a result of this, technology has shaped the way that students think and learn. Digital culture influences much of the reasoning for and understanding of concepts. According to McKnight et al. (2016), students insist on using technology in all aspects of their learning experience and therefore prefer to multitask and have non-linear access to information quickly. They rely on technology to acquire information and perform social or business interactions. This chapter presents a review of the scholarly literature on the issue of student engagement and students’ use of mobile technology in classrooms in various institutions of learning. Additionally, this chapter examinesthe literature on the role of technology in learning, the influence of mobile technology on academic performance, and the pedagogical benefits of mobile devices.

Role of Technology in Learning

To shed light on the role of technology, this section reviews the works of various researchers who explore how technology aids the learning process. As being demonstrated, technology plays a critical role in learning, and the trend of mobile device use has redefined the learning process and presented numerous opportunities for effective student engagement. According to Bannon, Martin, and Nunes-Bufford (2012), technology is able to be used as a tool to improve the student engagement in educational environments. Researchers have indicated that student engagement is the aspect of learning that focuses on the activities in which students are involved during their studies and which promote learning and result in their academic achievement (Astin, 1984; Covington, 2017; Sidelinger, Frisby & Heisler, 2016 ; Kuh, 2009). Many researchers of student engagement have suggested that the main objective of education is for students to construct their own knowledge(Covington, 2017; Sidelinger, Frisby & Heisler, 2016; Quaye & Harper, 2014). In line with this viewpoint about learning and engagement, research is needed that explores the influence of mobile devices on learning, engagement, and performance. Balta & Duran (2015) found that Chinese classrooms have suffered from lack of interactivity, both online and in face-to-face environments. The authors discussed online classes in which the tutors presented recorded information to the students as an example of this lacking. Wang et al. (2009) reported that the researchers at Shanghai Jiao Tong University sought to find technological means to improve interactivity in large classroom settings. In response, the authors developed a mobile device learning system that could deliver vital information to the students in real time. In the study, it was mentioned that the model enabled the students to customize the ways through which they wanted to receive information,and they were allowed to communicate through text messages as well as carry out instant polls. Further, the mobile device learning system enabled the students to ask questions and make suggestions concerning the learning process in real time and it also the intructors to immediately adress the students concerns.. Balta & Duran (2015) found that embracing mobile technology in the classroom can improve interactivity and student engagement. The students in these classes improved their engagement and changed the classroom from a passive to an active environment (Balta & Duran, 2015). In a related engagement study, Riendeau (2015) found that the inclusion of social media in the classroom helped to create a sense of community. Thiswas important because it enhancedstudent engagement and contributedto their overall success. The authors identified common activities regarding how students were engaged, including visiting social media sites to update what other students were doing, thereby creating closer ties with the instructor and other students, interacting in a setting outside of the classroom, helping them to feel more connected to their classmates. Several students stated that when they had difficulties with course assignments, they would use social media to turn to their peers for support (Riendeau, 2015). In particular, one student said that she found that her peers would respond quickly and constructively with feedback on questions regarding assignments. Riendeau (2015) concluded that social media use in the classroom strengthened the students’ connectedness to each other, thereby creating a classroom community that increased engagement and facilitated learning. Another study by Higgins, Xiao, and Katsipataki (2012) found that digital technology used in higher learning institutions hadan impact on learning and academic achievement. The authors pointed out that it is notable that technology has positive benefits for learning. According to Greenhow & Lewin (2016) study on the impact of technology in U.K institutions, there is a positive association between higher information and communication technology (ICT) levels and students’ school achievement at all key stages in all disciplines, but especially in science, math, English, design technology, and modern foreign languages. Higgins et al.al. (2012) argued that the connection that they found between learning and technology was consistent with previous studies of technology and learning. Most ofthose studies indicated a strong association between technology and learning. The association showed that, on a general basis, students with a higher use of ICT have a slightly higher performance compared to their colleagues who do not embrace technology in their study methods (Higgins et al., 2012). Neier & Zayer (2015) suggested that the adoption of technology and its use in learning helped in the removal of some questionable practices such as issues of autonomy and control, the psychological barriers, and institutional complexities associated with teaching. Technology enhances student engagement and proves to be highly effective as a short but focused intervention for improving learning (Higgins et al., 2012). However, the researchers stress that in any case, technology should not replace normal learning but rather should act as a supplement, which implies, that students should be cautious in the way that they use technology for learning.

BrckaLorenz, Haeger, Nailos, and Rabourn (2013) carried out a study in which they established that technology often increases in collaboration, engagement, and learning in higher educationNeier & Zayer (2015) stated that today’s generation of students has grown up with and adopted technology from a very early age. Newman & Scurry (2015 ) argued that technology has essentially altered the current generation’s way of reading, learning, information processing, and problem-solving; therefore allowing them to use what they are accustomed to as the best way to enhance their engagement on campus while collaborating with their peers, acquiring new information, and enhancing their learning. Like other researchers, BrckaLorenz et al. (2013) suggested that to make technology work effectively and appropriately in higher educationfor the improvement and enhancement of learning, the manner in which students are currently using technology should be investigated as well as the impacts it has on students’ educational outcomes. According to a survey by Jones, Johnson‐Yale, Millermaier, and Perez(2009), based on the responses given by 7,421 respondents from 40 universities and colleges used for the study on the familiarity and use of the Internet, 85% of the students reported that their college experience and learning were great because of the Internet. The research also identified some of the ways in which technology is being integrated into these institutions to enhance learning. One of these ways is the course management software that increases the efficiency of course material distribution and offers an opportunity for more online interaction between students and lecturers (BrckaLorenz et al., 2013). The increase of student interaction with technology beyond just web pages and email has increased the opportunities for university students to engage with their course material, faculty, and college administrators (Howe and Nadler, 2010). In a recent study by Morrone, Gosney, and Engel (2012) that focused on how technology can enhance the effectiveness of learning, they found that devices such as iPads increased students’ engagement through the provision of creative and innovative learning environments. Guided by the evidence presented above, the researcher argues that the current trend of utilizing mobile devices for the facilitation and dissemination of information access in higher education not only redefined the manner in which learning takes place but also presented exciting opportunities for effective student engagement. By creating a sense of community, instructors are no longer the primary source of information for students who are also allowed to explore vast formal and informal sources of information. However, the opportunities presented by mobile devices are not without risks. There is a need for such risks to be recognized and overcome to avoid the challenge of students’ ability to properly engage with technology,the challenge that Hung and Yuen (2010) classify as “lack of interactivity”(p. 707).

Influence of Mobile Technology on Academic Performance

This section describes the varying perspectives of researchers regarding the influence of mobile technology on student academic performance. It is argued that mobile devices do have a significant influence on academic performances by causing distractioions (Radesky, Schumacher & Zuckerman, 2015). However, it is also mentioned in some studies that mobile technology do not have any influence on the student’s academic performance (Heflin, Shewmaker & Nguyen, 2017). Student performance is significantly correlated with cell phone use during class time (Duncan, Hoekstra, & Wilcox,2012). Duncan et al. (2012) found an average negative grade difference of 0.36 ± 0.08 (on a four-point scale) for students who reported regular cell phone use in class. Data from the same studyderived from observations, interviews, and the survey revealed that students accessed their phones at a rate of seven times per class period, although the students themselves under-reported the number as three times (Duncan et al., 2012). An interesting finding from another study highlightedthe impact of this behavior. Tindell and Bohlander (2012) found that other students were distracted by students’ texting in class. Students may claim they are only hurting themselves when texting, but studies show that others are also affected (). McCoy (2013) conducted a study to describe students’ behavior and perceptions regarding the classroom use of digital devices for non-class purposes. The respondents included 777 students at six U.S. universities. The average respondent used a digital device for non-class purposes 10.93 times during a typical school day for activities including texting, social networking, and emailing. Most respondents did so to fight boredom, entertain themselves, and stay connected to the outside world. More than 80% of the respondents indicated that such behavior caused them to pay less attention in the classroom and miss instruction. Most respondents indicated that they favored policies governing digital device distractions in the classroom. Ezemenaka (2013) conducted a case study on the use and perceived effects of Internet-enabled phones on the educational performance of undergraduate students at the University of Ibadan in Nigeria. The authors collected the personal opinions of 200 students via structured questionnaires to obtainthe data. Ezemenaka (2013) conducted 15 in-depth interviews to obtain grounded knowledge opinions of the students with the data gathered during the study. The author found that Internet-enabled phone use didnot affect the academic performance of the students but that distractions caused byphone use were admitted (Ezemenaka, 2013). Lau (2003) also confirmed thatmobile technology is a potential source of distraction in the classroom because using social media networks and other mobile applications during lectures distracted students from learning. Ojewola and Akinduyo (2016) investigated the distractive effects of mobile phone use among Adekunle Ajasin University undergraduate students. The authors employed a descriptive survey design and made use of questionnaires to elicit a response from the respondents. The sample population consisted of 500 students selected from all five of the university’s departments. The data collected were analyzed through a t-test and analysis of variance. All hypotheses were tested at a 0.05 level of significance. The results showed that there were no significant variances in mobile phone use among undergraduate students by gender, age, or department.

While Ojewola and Akinduyo (2016) focused on the distractive impact of mobile phone use, Amali, Onche, Bello, and Hassan (2012) focused on how students use mobile phones during lectures at the University of Ilorin. The goals of the study were to determine how the use of mobile phones affects collaboration in the classroom, as well as its subsequent consequences for the teaching and learning processes. A total of 378 students were randomly selected from two departments using a researcher-drawn questionnaire. The data were analyzed using the arithmetic mean rating and chi-square. The authors found that students at the university use mobile phones for various purposes in class and that there is no significant difference inmobile phone usebetween males and females. Wargo et al.(2012) found that their study participants checked their phones 34 times a day. The authors proposed that though people might check their phones out of impulse or compulsion, it can also be a way to avoid relating with people. Wargo et al. (2012) also found that some people experienced withdrawal symptoms when they were without their smartphones. These withdrawal symptoms are normally connected with substance abuse and include anxiety, insomnia, and depression. All of these symptoms could cause academic hurdles. Some students find it hard to believe that they are addicted to their phones and are unaware of the toll that these addictions take on them. This fact gives more credence to the amount of time spent on mobile phones than on academics. In a study conducted in India,Sundari (2015) found that a relationship exists between mobile device use and students’ learning skills; studentswho used technology performed better than those students who did not use technology. Mobile technology has been the most popular communication channel for individuals in tertiary institutions (Sundari, 2015). However, Sundari (2015) stated that studies have shown that extensive use of technology such as social networking, chatting, and texting on students’ mobile phones during class time contributes to lower grades and overall poor performance. Further, Sundari (2015) addedthat various researchers have shown that quite a significant number of students hadthe habit of using their phones during classes and while studying. According to the researcher, this habit extended even to the library whereby it led to numerous distractions to the users and others. On the other hand, Sundari (2015) acknowledgesthat students’ use oftechnologyenhanced their learning because it helpedthem to exchange crucial information with their classmates regarding their studies. Thus, while some researchers argue that technology can negatively impact students’ performance when used in class, other studies have shown that technology can have a positive impact on student performance. Sundari’s (2015) study found that fewerthan half of the respondents attributed their improved performance to the use of technology, despite 47% of the students who participated in the survey confirming that technology has improved their contact with classmates. More than 35% of the students agreed that they keep their mobile phones on while in class and that the ringtones cause numerous disturbances (Sundari, 2015). The study also revealed that a significant number of the students agree that writing and sending SMS messages during class time was a waste of their time.

A study conducted in Nigeria to analyze the impact of mobile phones on student academic performance in tertiary institutions concluded that students were negatively influenced by the use of mobile phones in class, as their attention shiftedto music and chatting, among other activities, while neglecting the main purpose of attending classes (Jumoke, Oloruntoba, & Blessing, 2015). Further, the study found that students’ use of mobile phones cannot be controlled. Hence, the challenge remains a major cause of poor student performance. Jumoke et al. (2015) stressed that various researchers have demonstrated that the use of technology, such as mobile phones, in classrooms is problematic. As Jumoke et al. (2015) argued, mobile phones make room for the conflictingpositionof students’need to keep in touch with relatives and friends and the distractions and disruptions to students’ academic work. However, mobile devices are key to the promotion of collaborative learning,andthey enable various learning types through a wireless Internet connection (Jumoke et al., 2015). In 2016, Rabiu, Muhammed, Umaru, and Ahmed researched the impact of mobile phone use on academic performance. Based on the results they obtained, the researchers demonstrated that the use of mobile phones had a significant effect on students’ academic performance by acting as a source of distractions. On the contrary, a significant number of survey respondents stated that mobile phone use does not have a notable effect on their performance (Rabiu et al., 2016). Further, Rabiu et al. (2016) stated that a large number of studies have shown that the use of mobile technology in class negatively affects students’ academic performance. A study by Jackson et al. (2008) supported the idea that the use of mobile technology in class causes distractions and could result in a lower GPA. The study further revealed that students who use their mobile technology in most of their classes had a higher chance of having a low GPA. Conclusively, this researcher postulates that even though there is no direct correlation between mobile technology and the academic performance of students, its influence on student engagement suggests a linkage. Mobile technology provides a platform for interaction between and collaboration among students. However, it can also be a source of numerous distractions for students in the classroom, which ultimately affect their academic performance by impeding the level of engagement achieved during learning.

Pedagogical Benefits of Mobile Devices

This section is going to review literature on how mobile devices can benefit the education sector. It is going toshow some of the benefits ofusing mobile technology in the classroom for augmenting class projects, studying for tests, getting tutoring assistance from instructors, increasing learner-content interaction, and promoting classroom accountability. Al-Emran, Elsherif & Shaalan (2016suggested it was time to think of cell phones as computers. The description of the word cell phones seemed vague. Some researchers used the term cell phones while others used mobile phones or smartphones. Ally & Prieto-Blázquez (2014) identified cell phones as only one of four types of mobile devices: cell phones, smartphones, portable media players, and tablet computers. For this study, the term mobile devices was used to refer not only to cell phones, but also mobile phones, smartphones, tablets, laptop computers, and iPods. Cell phones can be great learning tools in similar ways as other computing and communication devices (Vázquez-Cano, 20147). There are many valid uses for cell phones such as augmenting class projects, studying for tests and getting tutoring assistance from instructors (Docksai, 2009). In a study of college classrooms with more than 100 students, Scornavacca, Huff, and Marshall (2009) found that using cell phones to augment teaching helped increase the quality and quantity of student feedback. This trend was very encouraging for the instructor. Other researchers who used Short Message Service (SMS) and Multi-Media Service (MMS) on polling and feedback for students showed increased interactivity both in and outside the classroom (Lindquist et al., 2007; Markett, Sánchez, Weber, & Tangney, 2006). Researchers have found that SMS and MMS encourage uncomfortable students to participate, increase learner-content interaction, promote classroom accountability, and encourage student interaction (Markett et al., 2006; Patry, 2009). Students use their mobile devices to access other media such as the Internet, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other information communication technology. Bannon et al. (2012) reported the findings of a national survey (N=1,998) and suggested that the use of social media by college students ages 18 to 34 was increasing. Similarly, Duggan and Brenner (2013) reported that 67% of Internet users between the ages of 18 and 29 frequently used social networking sites. The most popular social networking sites include Facebook (N=1,802) followed by Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, and Tumblr. Participants mentioned Facebook and Twitter, in particular, as effective platforms that the teaching staff should embrace (Duggan & Brenner, 2013). Besides the pedagogical benefits of the use of mobile devices in the classroom, student performance has also been affected (Duncan et al., 2012; Ezemenaka, 2013). Gikas and Grant (2013) investigated the process of incorporating mobile technologies, such as tablets and smartphones, into teaching and learning. The authors sampled students from three universities in the United States. In these institutions, the faculty often incorporated mobile technologies into their courses. The data werecollected through group interviews and indicated that the use of mobile technologies in learning enabled students to interact, collaborate, and engage in activities such as content creation. Gikas and Grant (2013) found that the use of such technologies in institutions of learning was accompanied by positive outcomes that would make learning a meaningful and fruitful experience for the students. Blankenship (2011) illustrated the benefits of using social media sites in enhancing the learning in the classroom. Firstly, students were more engaged, which ensuredthat they were persistent in pursuing their college careers. Secondly, social media allowedstudents to assume direct control of their education and take responsibility for their actions. Thirdly, incorporating social media in the classroom inspired students and their instructors to become more creative. Blankenship (2011) argued that social media is also an asset in the classroom because it allows those students who feel uneasy talking in class to communicate with the instructor and their peers. Another study by George and Dellasega (2011) on the use of social media networking in learning provided results that agreed with Blankenship’s (2011) study. In George and Dellasega’sstudy, the researchers used Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, various blogs, and Skype to encourage students to engage in learning. At the end of the study, all of the students were required to provide an assessment of the course proceedings. The students reported that they preferred theapproach because it “augmented learning and collaboration” (George & Dellasega, 2011, p. 433). However, other students reported challenges such as lack of facility with technology, demands on time, and concerns regarding the privacy of the process. George and Dellasega (2011) concluded that the inclusion of social media in educational activities was important because it provided several advantages over traditional methods of instruction. The advantages included communication in real time even outside the classroom, better connection between teachers and students, and room for more creativity.

According to the findings of a study by Batista and Barcelos (2014), mobile devices are capable of contributing to increased access to digital educational content. Due to the portability of these devices, they can support learning both inside educational institutions’ physical space and beyond. Buck, McInnis, & Randolph (2013) mentioned that through the help of mobile devices in the teaching process various learning styles can be implemented such as video learning style, audio learning style and others which assists in creating attractive learning. Based on their research findings, Buck et al. al. (2013) concluded that mobile devices canbe used to make learning more collaborative, accessible, and relevant. Ndafenongo (2011) also investigated the pedagogical benefits of mobile devices and focused on the use of these devices in the teaching of mathematics. In the study, the researcher used video clips on the Pythagorean Theorem. The videos were used in class and sent to students’ phones to support their understanding of the topic. The results of the study showed that the video clips sent to students’ mobile phones played a vital role in improving their concentration and participation (Ndafenongo, 2011). The researcher also found that the video clips accelerated content development, stimulated peer interaction and collaboration,and promoted student autonomy. Rikala and Kankaanranta (2012) noted that mobile device use is increasing across every educational sector in both the developed and developing worlds. The use of mobile devices in education has grown regardingits importanceand its visibility. However, Koole (2009)arguedthat mobile devices do not guarantee learning and teaching effectiveness by themselves. Teaching methods and the teachers’ views on learning play a significant role in educational technology use (Koole, 2009). Augmented reality is the use of technology to enhance one’s current perception of reality. Itis considered to be one of the major characteristics of mobile learning as the applications involved use the mobile devices’ built-in camera, GPS, and compass features for information gathering in relation to the students’ surroundings before projecting additional information to the student. Therefore, in an educational context, augmented realities can be used to facilitate knowledge and skills transfer while increasing student engagement in real-life situations (Fritschi & Wolf, 2012). The benefits of mobile devices to education vary greatlywith respect to the situation, devices, and context. Keane, Lang, and Pilgrim (2012) categorized the pedagogical benefits of these mobile devices into seven types. One of the benefits is that mobile devices serve as a multimedia access tool, thus helping in obtaining access to multimedia resources. Secondly, mobile technology plays the role of a communication tool. Thirdly, this technology helps to capture media and data and can also be used in content co-creation in situ. Further, mobile devices serve as a representational tool whereby they demonstrate students’ ideas, thinking, knowledge, and experiences. Students can also benefit from mobile devices by using the devices as analytical tools, hence manipulating variables and data. Mobile devices can also be used as an assessment tool in the completionof examinations, questions, and quizzes. The last category of the pedagogical benefits of mobile devices’ benefits, according to Keane et al. (2012), is their use as a managing tool. As such, students can manage their personal information such as address book, calendar attendance rates, and task lists. Other benefits were highlighted by Suhr et al. (2010) who found that mobile devices can help students in the class to conduct research, write with a word processor, create presentations, and complete quizzes or tests. However, based on their research findings, Keane et al. (2012) concluded that the presence of mobile devices is not as important as having a dedicated curriculum program. Nonetheless, the researchers acknowledged that it is evident that mobile devices act as a source of motivation and engagement (Keane et al., 2012). Despite the benefits of the use of mobile devices in the classroom that many researchers describe, some studies also identified other influences on academic performance. Researchers have highlighted the need to also recognizethe role that academic performance influencers play such as nutrition, study habits, parental involvement, teachers’ adopted classroom practices, time spent on educational tasks (Cargill, 2014; Kritsonis & Nickerson, 2006; Wenlinksy, 2001).

Using mobile technologies for learning enables students to study, interact, collaborate, and engage in various educational activities (Keane et al.,2012; Suhr et al., 2010). Scholars have also advised the need to recognize other factors, which may also affect student performance. While this may present a challenge in the review of the pedagogical benefits of mobile devices, the proper consideration of such factors in every research process can also facilitate the holistic analysis of the role that mobile technology plays (Koole, 2009; Kritsonis & Nickerson, 2006; Wenlinksy, 2001).

Summary

From the information provided in the literature review, it is evident that the use of mobile devices in the classroom environment remains a topic of debate. Some instructors and students have expressed the belief that it could increase student engagement and academic performance (Bannon et al., 2012;Wang et al., 2009). Nevertheless, a large number of participants in the studies reviewed reported the perception that the use of mobile phones in the classroom results in students being less engaged and that their academic performance might not be affected (Ezemenaka, 2013). As a result, further research on the topic is needed to address the ways that mobile devices can be effectively utilized in the classroom. Such research can help to provide relevant information regarding the creative ways in which teachers and students would use mobile devices to enhance the learning environment and student engagement.

Conclusion

Guided by various scholars’ opinions on the impact of mobile technology use on the process of academic instruction, as well as students’ learning, engagement, and academic performance, this researcher argues that mobile devices can be highly beneficial to learning. The researcher recognizes that the current trend of utilizing mobile devices for the facilitation of information access and dissemination in higher education has not only redefined the manner in which learning takes place but has also presented exciting opportunities for effective student engagement. Mobile phone devices are now an essential part of daily life and a valuable means of information dissemination around the world, especially in most developing countries. The effects of the use of mobile devices in the classroom by students cannot be denied. Research suggests (Ang, 2015) the need for colleges to pay attention to the influence of mobile technology and student engagement. Such influence includes both the educational opportunities as well as the distractions which can be detrimental to students’ acaemic performance. Nonetheless, the challenges that the various forms of technological innovations may present to students’academic performance remains a topic viewed as highly worrisome because of the significant knowledge gap on the subject. With this in mind, further exploration intounderstanding students’ uses of mobile devices in the classroom and the influence on engagement and learning is needed. Thus, this researcher sought to investigate and assess how the use of mobile devices may affect the academic performance of students by focusing on its impact on student learning and engagement in the classroom.

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

The methodology selected for this study was descriptive survey research; it involved surveying students in the education department at a university in West Africa. The goal was to obtain completed surveys from the students to understand in a better way how the use of mobile devices in the classroom influences their engagement and learning in the classroom. Descriptive studies aregenerally used to collect data that wouldreveal relationships and describe the characteristics of the population being studied. It often relies on instruments such as surveys and interviews or the use of observations to collect data. Best & Kahn, (2016) suggested that descriptive studies can answer questions such as “what is” or “what was.” Information is collected without changing or manipulating the environment, which also means that statistical analysis is not possible. Sometimes these studies are referred to as “correlational” or “observational” studies and the data gathered can be quantitative or qualitative. The Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP, 2016) defines a descriptive study as “Any study that is not truly experimental.”As a result, descriptive research often cannot be replicated,and findings can be open to interpretation. Student engagement informed this investigation. According to this model, students learn by becoming involved through engagement with their environment. The model emphasizes that the time and effort that students devote to their educational activities is empirically linked to their desired college outcomes (Kuh & Gonyea, 2015). Moreover, the primary determining features of engagementare involvement and learning. Thus, the modelwas appropriate for this study as it addressedfactors that are essential for classroom learning. This chapter outlines the research design, methods of data collection, data analysis, and the ethical considerations in detail.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was toexplore and assess how mobile devices influence students’ engagement and learning in the classroom. The main research question was: How does the use of mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) by college students in a classroom at a university in West Africa affect their engagement and learning?To adequately address this research problem, the following research sub-question was formulated:What do students primarily use their mobile technology for during class?

Research Design

The researcher utilized the descriptive method of research, which aims to cast light on current problems or issues through a data collection process that enables the researcher to describe the situation more completely than before applying the method (Lambert & Lambert, 2012). Descriptive research describes a certain present condition of a situation. The method is appropriate for this study because it is going to enable the researcher to describe how mobile devices currently influence students’ engagement and learning in the classroom. Surveys are used to collect biographical data from individuals about themselves, their households, or about larger social issues. Sample surveys are a valuable tool for collecting and analyzing information from selected individuals. Surveys are widely accepted as a key tool for conducting and applying basic social science research methodology (Nardi, 2018). In the proposed study, the researcher administered a survey to a selected sample of students from various departments in the Faculty of Education at a WestAfrican university. The questionnaire was relevant to this study for many reasons. There are advantages to using a questionnaire rather than an interview methodology. unlike personal interviews, which are resource intensive, questionnaires are less expensive and easier to administer. Questionnaires also lend themselves to group administration and ensure confidentiality (Sitnikova et al. 2017). Surveys are quite efficient at providing information in a short time frame at a minimal cost (Huang, Liu & Bowling, 2015). For these reasons, the researcher chosea descriptive research methodology utilizing a survey questionnaire instrument to investigate the research question posed in this study. Among the different approaches of data collection for research purposes, many researchers favor the survey method due to its various strengths and benefits (Sincero, 2012). The researcher carefully considered various pros and cons when choosing the descriptive research methodology and while designing the survey instrument for this study. The advantages and disadvantages are listed below.

High Representativeness

Surveys provide a general capability in representing a large population. Due to the usual large number of participants, the data being gathered enables a description of the relevant characteristics of the general population involved in the study.

Low Cost

Cost can be a barrier to researchers. When conducting surveys, the cost of the production and distribution of survey questionnaires is negligible when compared to the cost of other data gathering methods, such as focus groups and personal interviews that require researchers to spend more time and resources.

Convenient Data Gathering

Surveys can be administered to the participants in a variety of ways. They can be distributed by postal mail, e-mail, and fax, or administered through the Internet. Recently, online survey methods have been the most popular way of gathering data from participants. Aside from the convenience, researchers can collect data from people around the globe.

Good Statistical Significance

Because of the high representation, it is often easier to find statistically-significant results, compared to other data gathering methods. Multiple variables can also be analyzed efficiently using surveys.

Little or No Observer Subjectivity

Surveys are ideal for scientific research studies because they provide all the participants with the same questionaries. which ensures high reliability is obtained and baises by the resercher is minimzed in the study.

Precise Results

Generally, the questions in the survey undergo scrutiny and standardization; they provide uniform definitions for all of the survey participants. This permits greater precision in measuring the data gathered. However, despite all of the advantages above, there are challenges that must be considered when using the survey method (Sincero, 2012). The challenges are listed below.

Inflexible Design

The survey instrument used by the researcher and the method of administering it cannot be changed during the data gathering process. Although this rigidity can be viewed as a weakness of the survey method, this can also be seen as a strength because of the precision and fairness exercised in the study.

Not Ideal for Controversial Issues

The participants may not precisely answer questions that bear controversies because of the probable difficulty in relating to the topic. Controversies may not be accurately reported when compared to different data collecting methods such as face-to-face interviews and focus groups.

Possible Inappropriateness of Questions

Questions in surveys are always homogeneous before they are administered to the participants. This means that the researcher needs to generate questions that are general enough to accommodate the general population, even though the questions may not be suitable for all the participants. As indicated above, the advantages of using the survey method outweigh the disadvantages associated with it. As such, the method is more reliable and can produce more accurate results compared with other methods.

Population and Sampling

The population for this study consisted of all students enrolled in a federal government university located in West Africa. The university has approximately 45,000 students and has one of the largest student populations of any university in the country (UniLag, 2010). The university is among the first generation of universities in Nigeria and is accredited by the National Universities Commission. The researcher usedconvenience sampling technique to select participants for the study. One hundred respondents from each of the five departments yielded a total of 500 participants. Convenience sampling is a method involving data collection from members of the population who can be recruited for the study (Robinson, 2014). The method relies on the convenience of the respondents to participate in the study. This is a type of sampling in which the first available primary data source is used for the study without any additional requirements. Researchers prefer convenience sampling not only because of its ease of use but also because of its additional advantages. For instance, when used in a pilot study, convenience sampling enables the researcher to gain information about basic trends and data without the complications related to random sampling (Farrokhi & Mahmoudi-Hamidabad, 2012). Convenience sampling can also be used to document that a certain quality of a phenomenon or substance occurs within a particular sample. Some of the advantages of using convenience sampling as a data collection technique are:

Sampling simplicity and the ease of carrying out research;

Helpful for generation of hypothesis and pilot studies;

Data collection can be done in a short duration; and

This sampling helps to collect useful data in a convinient manner without much effort as the data to be collected from the partcipants are within easy reach of the researcher (Brewis, 2014).

Despite the numerous benefits that convenience sampling has, it is also associated with some disadvantages:

The method is highly vulnerable to selection biases and influences, which in most cases is beyond the researcher’s control; and

The sampling error level of this method is relatively high(Johnstonet al., 2009).

Instrument

By drawing on various theorists,the survey instrument was developed and tested on 20 students, after which it was found that changes needed to be made to some questions for clarity and ease of coding (see Appendix A). During the development of the instrument, the following process was followed:

Literature search was conducted on previously-used validated questionnaires that could be administered in a similar setting and that captured variables of interest.

Familiar words, uncomplicated sentence structures, and the use of the minimum number of words were possible. The reading level of the instrument was checked to ensure that it was appropriate for the study’s audience. Using Microsoft Word, the instrument’s grammar, spelling, and readability statistics were checked.

One concept was asked at a time, while avoiding double barreled questions..

Response options were checked to make sense with the item stem. For instance, when asking about the respondent’s comfort level, the response options were made to include the word “comfortable,” not words like “sometimes.”

Response categories were reviewed to ensure that they wre exhaustive and mutually exclusive.

The research instrument was entitled, “Mobile Phone Usage in the Classroom.” It is a printed self-report form designed to draw information from the written responses of the subjects. Although evidence gathered through a questionnaire is similar to the evidence collected through interviews, they tend to have less depth (Su, Willis & Salomon, 2017). The questionnaire consistsed of twenty items with two sections. Section A dealt with the collection of the respondents’ demographic information. Section B consisted of items related to mobile phone use in the classroom during lectures. The researcher adopted a five-point Likert-type response format for the questions. Questionnaires were the chosen instrument based on the following:

They ensure a high response rate because the questionnaires were distributed to respondents to complete and were personally collected by the researcher.

They offered the possibility of anonymity because subjects’ names are not required on the questionnaires.

There was less opportunity for bias as they were presentedconsistently(Burns & Grove, 1993; Creswell, 2009).

It is important to note that despite the advantages listed above, questionnaires have limitations. For example, there is the issue of validity and accuracy (Burns & Grove, 1993). The subjects might answer the question with what they think the researcher wants to hear and not reflect their true opinions. Additionally, valuable information may be lost as answers are usually brief.

Validity and Reliability

To ensure the validity and reliability of the instrument, various methods were usedwhich include translational validity (content validity and face validity). These were:

Content validity. Content validity wasexamined to ascertain whether the content of the questionnaire was appropriate for and relevant to the study’s purpose. To examine the content validity, the researcher defined the theoretical framework for this study by undertaking a thorough literature review. Once the frameworks were established, three purposely-chosen experts identified in the university in the areas of technology, measurement, and evaluation were asked to review the draft of 20 items to ensure consistency with the purpose of the study. Each reviewer independently rated the relevance of each item on the questionnaire for the purpose of this study using a 4-point Likert scale (1=not relevant, 2=somewhat relevant, 3=relevant, 4=very relevant).

Face validity. Face validity was defined as the extent to which a procedure appears effective in relation to the concept it measures (Barnett et al. 2015). Face validity is done to ensure that the instrument is appropriate to the study purpose and content area. Although this is the easiest validation process to undertake, it is the weakest form of validity. It does, however, evaluate the appearance of the questionnaire regarding feasibility, readability, consistency of style, formatting, and the lucidity of the language used (Wakefield et al. 2017). Thus, it is a form of usability rather than reliability. To determine the face validity of the questionnaire, a pilot study was conducted. The researcher focused on participants’ responses based on:

the clarity of the wording of the items,

the likelihood the target audience would be able to answer the questions, and

the layout and style of the questionnaire.

In general, the validation procedure for the instrument used in this study to ensure that it accurately measured what it aimed to do was as follows:

Clearly identified the object of measurement.

Defined the object’s relevant elements. At this stage, the literature was reviewedand experts were consulted.

Developed measures such as survey questions for the relevant elements defined in step two.

Reviewed and pilot tested the survey.

Pilot Study

The pilot study refers to mini versions of a full-scale study as well as the specific pre-testing of the research instrument for this study. The researcher piloted the questionnaire with a small group of volunteers who were as similar to the target population as possible. The researcher distributed the questionnaire to 20 randomly selected students and analyzed the collected data. This study was administeredto a group of students taking the Introduction to Education Technology course at the Faculty of Education at the University of Lagos. There were fifty students in this class. Dr. Blessing Adebayo taught the class. Two researchers (Oluwadamilola Salami and Kehinde Adeoye) went to the class after obtaininglecturer approval and administered the questionnaires to 20 randomly selected students. The names of the participants were not recorded to maintain confidentiality. The pilot study helped to uncover any problems that may affect the research process.

Data Collection

In this study, the researcher collected data through self-administered questionnaires that were distributed personally to the subjects. The researcher visited six classrooms in which lectures were in progress. Before distributing the questionnaires, the students were informed of the purpose of the study and asked to participate voluntarily. Thisensured that the students did not feel pressured to complete the survey. The questionnaires were thendistributed to every student who was willing to take the survey. The reason for convience sampling was that it allows collection of useful data in a convinient manner. Moreover, it offers advantage of speed in collecting data by giving everyone the questionnaire and collecting it at the end of the class. Thus, sampling saves time while being more representative of the larger population. The participants were given clear instructions on how to complete the questionnaire. The time required for the completion of the survey wasapproximately 15 minutes.

Data Analysis

Data analysis is the process of breakingup the whole study into its constituent parts of the groups according to the research questions under the statement of the problem, to bring into focus the essential features of the study. The data analysis consists of investigating the surveys for correctness and completeness, coding and keying data into a database in SPSS, and performing an analysis of descriptive responses to all of Section One (items 1-8) and Section Two (items 9-20) using frequency distributions and descriptive statistics. The coding consists of an analytical process in which data, in quantitative form (such as questionnaire results), are categorized to facilitate analysis. It wasexpected that the number of incomplete surveys would be minimal because a clear and proper explanation was provided to the respondents before engaging in the exercise. Statistical treatment usually involve using the Likert scale to interpret items in the questionnaire. A Likert scale is a psychometric scale frequently involved in research employing questionnaires (Joshi et al. 2015). Self-reporting is the most widely used approach to scaling responses in survey research. The range and interpretation of the five-point scale are shown in Table 1 below. The weighted mean is used to measure the general response of the survey samples, whether they agree with a given statement or not (Liu et al. 2015). The survey results are analyzed with the use of a statistical approach and Microsoft Excel spreadsheets or Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Frequency tables and descriptive statistics are constructed to display the results of each of the research questions.

Validity of the Study

The validity of the research is a critical concept that many researchers overlook. “Any research can be affected by different kinds of factors which, while extraneous to the concerns of the study, can invalidate the findings” (Leung, 2015). Many scientific studies are unreliable, and, as such, it is important to be able to determine which studies are in fact conclusive and dependable (Leung, 2015). Whenever possible, reliable studies use random samples, avoid biases, use appropriate sample sizes, and should be conducted by researchers who are not swayed by funding or the desire to seek certain results (Leung, 2015).For any inference or conclusion, there are always possible threats to validity and reasons why the conclusion or inference might be wrong. Despite efforts to avoid biases, there are always opportunities for threats to validity to happen (Woodman, 2014). Ideally, the researcher intends to reduce the most likely threats to validity, thereby leaving the most plausible conclusion reached in the study. This study’s setting wascompletely natural, with all variables present, and cannot identify causation; therefore, the focus was on the description.

Limitations

The primary concern in conducting this study was the sampling. The researcher requested that only a small portion of the students participate in the survey. The sample size may not exactly represent all of the students at the university, which may affect the generalization of the results. There may be underrepresentation or overrepresentation of certain groups within the sample. In the case of this study, the motives of some students taking part in the study were unclear, while others wereclearThere is always the possibility of encountering outliers, which are isolated extreme low or high values in the dataset. Outliers can have a significant effect on the mean and standard deviation and skew the results. These represent types of biases that are attached to this sampling technique, which further explain the study’s limitations. Further, due to the high self-selection possibility involved in non-probability sampling, the consequence of outliers can be problematic (Battaglia, 2008).

Protection of Human Subjects

The fundamental principle of human subjects’ protection is that of informed consent. Subjects should not incur an increased risk of harm from their research involvement beyond the usual risks inherent in everyday life (NSF, 1976). Informed consent is handled differently in different countries. In most universities in Nigeria, the procedure is to write a letter of permission to the administrator of the institution and obtain their permission before students can be invited to participate in any study. For this reason, a letter was written to the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the university asking for permission to collect data from students for this study (see Appendix B).

Summary

This chapter described the research methodology used,the research design, such as the population, sampling, instrument, methods of data collection, the type of data analysis, and the ethical considerations. The researcher collectedface-to-face data from students in the classroom using a surveyandmadesense of the data by using a descriptive method to analyze data and ensure that the data weretrustworthy. By observing the principles of fairness and human dignity, the researcher ensuredthat the participants were morally and ethically protected. Recognizing the views already expressed by various scholars on the subject, the opinions of randomly selected respondents contribute towards this research analysis of how the use of mobile technology in classrooms impact student learning and engagement in the Faculty of Education at a university in West Africa. The research is going to add to the body of knowledge on student perceptions of their use of mobile technology in the classroom.

CHAPTER 4 REPORT OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

Reporting the Findings and Analysis

This chapter presents the findings and analysis of the study data. The chapter is organized into three sections. Section one provides the demographic information of the participants. Section two describes the emerging themes of the investigation based on the analysis of information provided by the participants. The chapter concludes with a summary of the findings. This research focused on how mobile devices influence students’ engagement and learning in the classroom, and the data werereviewed to answer the primary research question developed at the beginning of this study: How does the use of mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) by college students in a classroom in Nigeria affect their engagement and learning? The research sub-question is:What do students primarily use their mobile technology for during class? Participants in this study consisted of 700 college students from 21 different majors studying at a university located in Lagos, Nigeria. The group of students included both males and females, ages 16 to 38, and in levels 100 through 500 (first year through 5th-year students). Not all participants responded to every question; therefore, the reported percentages correspond to the total number of participants who answered the questions.

Study Context

This quantative study was conducted to investigate students’ perception of their use of mobile technology in the classroom and how it affects their engagement and learning. The data werefurther reviewed to determine their relationship to the framework of Student Involvement Theory and the Student Engagement Model. The study site is a public research university located in an urban area in southwestern Nigeria with over 40,000 students and 12 departments (or faculties, as it is referred to in Nigeria). All of the participants volunteered to participate in the study. Of the 1000 survey instruments printed, 700 completedsurveys were collected from participants.

Demographics

Although it was not part of the purpose of the study, the data presented here are intended to describe the demographics of the sample population, including gender, age, institution, department, major, and academic status. Table 2 presents the demographic information of the participants.

The participants were asked to specify their gender by checking off the appropriate option (male or female). All 700 participants (100%) responded. Among the 700 students who participated in the study, 52.6% were female,and 47.4% were male. Most of the participants were between 16 to 38 years old. They were as follows: 16-21 years old (26.4%), 22-27 years old (37.7%), 28-33 years old (25.7%), and 34-38 years old (2.1%), which is consistent with the general age of college students in Nigeria. The demographic data indicated that the participants were from various departments and represented 50 major areas of study. The responses to the question about the departments from which the participants cameare summarized in Table 3. In Table 3, the total number of students is shown as 649 because some of the participants either omitted this question or entered the wrong information. This table reveals that participants who used mobile devices the most were from Biology, Computer Science, Christian Religious Studies, Early Childhood, English, Physics, and Science and Technology.

Table 4 presents the educational level or academic year of the participants. Table 4 shows that only 9.3% of first-year students (level 100) and 2.2% of final-year students (level 500) did not use mobile devices in the classroom, compared to students in levels 200, 300, and 400.

Emerging Themes

This section describes the emerging themes of the study. Table 5 presents the three themes identified as significant factors in students’ perception of their use of mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) in the classroom and how it affects their engagement and learning, achieved through data analysis. In section two,I present the three central themes from the study.

Most of the students indicated that they owned smartphones, tablets, or personal computers that they could use to access the Internet.

Table 6 presents the types of mobile devices that the participants in this study owned. According to the data, 96.1% of the participants indicated that they owned smartphones, tablets, or personal computersand used them often.

Table 7 presents participants’comfort level with mobile technology. According to the data, 79.6% of the participants were fairly comfortable or very comfortable using mobile technology, which could be attributed to the ease of access thatownership and dependence on smartphones for online access support (Madden et al., 2013).

This section presents the results based on students’ responses to questions based on the participants’ level of agreement and disagreement with the statements provided regarding the primary research question developed at the beginning of this study: How does the use of mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) by college students in a classroom in Nigeria affect their engagement and learning?

Students Use of Mobile Technology in the Classroom Affects Engagement and Learning

Table 8 provides a summary of the participants’ perceptions of the impact of their use of mobile devices in the classroom on their level of engagement and learning. As presented in Table 8, the majority of participants(63.3%) indicated that it helped them to concentrate, while 64.9% of the participants indicated that using mobile technology facilitated their engagement in the classroom and 64.1% indicated that it was distracting when other students use mobile technology in class.

The following is the report of the data analysis.

64.1% of the participants indicated that other students’ use of mobile devices distracts them from paying attention in class, while 26.7% disagree with this notion and 8% of the participants were uncertain. This finding indicated that the participants were distracted when others were using mobile devices in class because they were creating distraction by asking others to look into what information they found on their phones. This hindered their ability to learn effectively as they could not properly concentrate in their studies. Moreover, the students using mobile phones were discussing among others which made noise resulting others to face hindrance to concentrate in the classroom.

44.9% of the participants indicated that they played games every day on their mobile devices during class, while 42.4% disagreed with this notion and 11.7% of the participants were uncertain. This finding indicated that almost half of the participants were not consistently focusing on learning in class, which they indicated hindered their ability to engage in in-class activities and learn effectively.

47.9% of the participants indicated that mobile devices of their classmates distracted them from doing their classwork, while 31.4% disagreed with this notion and 20% of the participants were uncertain. This finding indicated that almost half of the participants were distracted by their mobile devices in class, which they indicated consequently hindered their ability to learn and engage effectively.

64.9% of the participants indicated that the use of mobile devices in the classroom facilitated their ability to collaborate with other students, while 12.6% disagreed with this notion and 21.9% of the participants were uncertain. This finding indicated that many of the participants were able to collaborate with others,usingmobile devices in class.

63.3% of the participants indicated that they concentrated better on their studies when using mobile devices, while 15% disagreed and 20.9% were uncertain. The participants who indicated that mobile devices helped them to concentrate more on their studies informed so because they could cross-check the information received while learning to ensure they are authentic in nature, easily connect with their peer groups, take notes in the class and get informed videos for better understanding on the learned information. Thus, this finding indicated that many of the participants concentrated better on their studies when using mobile devices in class.

41% of the participants indicated that mobile devices did not allow them to engage in in-class activities, while 40.6% disagreed and 17.6% of the participants were uncertain. This finding indicated that many of the participants could not engage in in-class activities because of their mobile devices, which they indicated hindered their ability to learn effectively. The participants who faced hindrance with effectively engaging in the class activities did so because the noise of the mobile phones and distractions made by others did not allowed them to involve in studies.

Students Like Using Mobile Technology for In-Class Activities

Table 9 presents more information on the participants’ uses of mobile devices to answer the research sub-question: What do students primarily use their mobile technology for during class?

When asked if they use mobile devices for studying, 54.1% indicated that they use mobile devices for studying and 43% indicated they do not. As shown in Table 9, there are several activities for which they use mobile devices; notably, 49.9% used mobile devices to access the learning management system in the classroom. Further, cross-tab analysis was used to show the relationship between gender and participants’ use of mobile devices in the classroom. As indicated in Table 10, 53.2% of females used mobile technology in the classroom, compared to 46.8%of males.

Summary of Findings

The benefits of the use of mobile technology in the classroom, the student’s desire to use the technology, and the potential for future academic preparation all have a susubstantiate influence on student learning and engagement. The purpose of this study was to explore how the use of mobile devices influences students’ engagement and learning in the classroom. Thiswas achieved by using a descriptive survey. Through data analysis of the opinions of the participants in this study, the results of how the use of mobile technology in classrooms impacts student learning and engagement at a university in southwestern Nigeria was conducted and presented. The findings from this study were found to be consistent with the results of several related studies on the impact of mobile devices on learning and engagement.

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

Revisiting the Problem of Practice

This quantitative study, which used a descriptive staistical analysis nonexperimental investigated how students’ use of mobile devices in the classroom influences their engagement and learning. The pace with which information technology is evolving demands that attention be paid to the potential challenges and opportunities these innovations may present in a university classroom environment. The current highly-mobile and user-friendly technology and the increase in access to the Internetmake it pertinent for higher institutions to pay attention to andunderstand issues associated with the influence of mobile technology on engagement and learning, and the need for mobile technology integration into the classroom experience.

Review of Methodology

The methodology for this study was descriptive survey research and involved surveying students at a university in southwestern Nigeria; the goal was to understand, through the lens of students’ use of mobile technology in the classroom,the impact on their engagement and learning. The research question driving the study focusedon how the use of mobile technology by students in the classroom affectedtheir engagement and learning. The descriptive method of researchwas used with a survey as the instrument fordata collection. The descriptive method was appropriate for this study because it enabled the researcher to describe how mobile devices influence students’ engagement and learning in the classroom (Kothari, 2004). Data werecollected through self-administered questionnaires that were distributed to the students. With the assistance of two graduate students, the researcher visited six classrooms in which lectures were in progress. Before distributing the questionnaires, the students were informed of the purpose of the study and asked to participate voluntarily. The questionnaires were distributed to every student who was willing to take the survey. The convinience sampling was used because it helped to collect quality and useful data within small amount of time and helped in executing pilot study. As stated earlier, student engagement informed this investigation. According to this model, students learn by becoming involved through engagement in their environment. The model emphasizes that the time and effort students devote to their educational activities is empirically linked to their desired college outcomes. Moreover, the primary determining features of engagement are involvement and learning. Thus, the model was appropriate for this study as it addressedfactors that are essential for classroom learning. To ensure the validity and reliability of the instrument, various methods were usedwhich include translational validity (content validity and face validity).

Discussion of Major Findings

The findings from the study indicated that access to mobile technology has increased the comfort level of students who are using mobile technology. Moreover, it has indicated that use of mobile technology has helped the students with enhanced engagement in learning. However, the technology negatively affects some student to effectively engage in the class activities as they face distraction due to use of mobiles by their peers in the class. The further discussion regarding the information received from the findings are explained below in details.

Access to Mobile Technology Increases the Comfort Level of Students’ Use of Mobile Technology

When participants were asked about their frequency of use of mobile devices, 66.4% indicated that they used them multiple times daily and 24.2% indicated multiple times weekly. When asked how comfortable they were with the use of mobile devices, 79.6% indicated that they were fairly or very comfortable. Thisconfirms theBannon et al. (2012) findings, which illustrated that mobile technology use has increased in the 18-29 age bracket and their comfort level has also increased.

Use of Mobile Technology Enhances Engagement and Learning

Relevant research in the use of mobile technology in the classroom as a learning tool (Hwang, Lai & Wang, 2015; Davison & Lazaros, 2015) reported increased student interactivity and learning both in and outside the classroom. In this study, of the 689 students whoresponded to the question,“What do students use their mobile devices for in the classroom,” 70.2% indicated they used to access the learning management system or other e-learning tools. The rest were either browsing the Internet or listening to music. When asked about their perceptions of the impact of the use of mobile technology in the classroom, 64.9% of the participants indicated that the use of mobile devices in the classroom facilitated their ability to collaborate with other students. 63.3% of the subjects indicated that they concentrated better on their studies when using mobile devices, and 66.7% of the participants indicated that they enjoy using mobile devices for in-class activities. The findings of this study established that the connection between the use of mobile devices in the classroom and learning and classroom engagement is consistent with previous studies (Bannon et al., 2012; Hung & Yuen, 2010).

Use of Mobile Technology in Class Affects Student Engagement

Studies on student engagement and its impact on learning suggest that engagement needs to be connected to meaningful student learning (Heflin, Shewmaker & Nguyen, 2017). Mobile technology is a potential source of distraction in the classroom and affects student learning and engagement (Ezemenaka,2013; Lau, 2003). Some participants in this study reported the negative effect of the use of mobile technology in the classroom. 64.1% of participants reported that other students’ use of mobile devices distracted them from paying attention in class, 47.9%reported that their use of mobile devices in class distracted them from doing class work, and 41% reported that their use of mobile devices did not allow them to actively engage in in-class activities.

Discussion in Relation to the Theoretical Framework

This study was informed through the perspective of student involvement theory and the student engagement model. These theoretical and conceptual frameworks served as the lens to investigate students’ perception of their use of mobile devices in the classroom during lectures.

Student Involvement Theory

The fundamental aspects of student involvement theory are that students learn by being engaged in their environment. The theory focuses on the behavior and motivation of students and emphasizes the importanceof faculty in ensuring that students are fully engaged in the classroom. Such learning can be achieved without teacher interaction; however, research has shown that non-teacher involvement in the use of mobile technology in the classrooms by students can become a distraction or can become a tool for increased learning (Henrie, Halverson & Graham, 2015). 65% of the participants agreed that their use of mobile technology in the classroom facilitated their collaboration with other students, while others stated that it was a source of distraction from doing their class work.

Student Engagement Model

The time and effort students devote to their educational activities is empirically linked to their desired college outcomes (Henrie, Halverson & Graham, 2015). Henrie, Halverson & Graham (2015) defined student engagement as “participation in educationally effective practices, both inside and outside the classroom, which leads to a range of measurable outcomes” (p. 10). The study of engagement focuses on academics, student-faculty interactions, student-peer interactions, and involvement with co-curricular activities (Henrie et al. 2015; Henrie, Halverson & Graham, 2015). Additionally, student engagement involves the effort that a particular college student applies to their academic and non-academic experiences. Active engagement is important because all of these aspects of academic and non-academic life play a role in student success. Student performance is significantly correlated with cell phone use during class time (Duncan et al.,2012). Duncan et al. found an average negative grade difference of 0.36 ± 0.08 (on a four-point scale) for students who reported regular cell phone use in class. Theframework in this study aligns with both the student engagement model and student involvement theory. The findings of this study are aligned with the theoretical framework. Theysupport the results which indicate that students’ use of mobile technology in the classroom was related togreater classroom engagement and learning. Most of the participants’ responded that their use of mobile devices helpedthem to concentrate better andfacilitatedtheir collaboration with other students. They enjoyed using mobile technology for in-class activities. Other participants reported that other students’ use of mobile technology in the classroom distractedthem from paying attention in class,and their use of mobile technology in the classroom distracted them from doing their classwork and did not allow them to engage in in-class activities. Willms et al. (2009) presented a three-level framework, in which they identified academic, social, and intellectual levels of student engagement. They defined the academic engagement level as the extent to which students are involved and interested in their academic activities. The social engagement level relates to the student’s sense of belonging while in the school,and the intellectual engagement level involves the student’s ability to deal with complex problems and the creation of new knowledge. Student Involvement Theory and the Student Engagement Model were relevant to this study because theyexplainedfactors that contribute to engagement and learning, especially in non-teacher directed student use of mobile technology in the classroom.

Discussions of Findings in Relation to the Literature Review

The findings in this study powerfully connect with the literature presented in chapter two on the use of mobile technology forstudent engagement and student learning in universities. Many of the findings in this study were consistent with the literature that illustratedthe need for the effective use of technology to increase student performance and enhance student engagement. Finding ways to integrate mobile technology into the classroom that engage and enhance student learning isfound to be critical in the twenty-first century. Embracing mobile technology in the classroom can improve interactivity and student engagement (Wang et al., 2009). The students in those classes improved their engagement and changed the classroom from a passive to an active environment. In a related student engagement study, Hung and Yuen (2010) found that the inclusion of social media in the classroom helped to create a sense of community. This is important because it enhances student engagement and contributes to students’ overall success. The authors identified common activities regarding how students are engaged, including visiting social media sites to update what other students are doing, therebycreating closer ties with the instructor and other students, interacting in a setting outside the classroom, and helping them to feel more connected to theirclassmates. Several students stated that when they had difficulties with course assignments, they would use social media to turn to their peers for support. Corroborating the researchers’ findings, 64.9% of the participants in thisstudy indicated that the use of mobile technology in the classroom facilitated students’ability to collaborate with other students as well as help them to concentrate on their studies. An interesting finding from another study highlights the impact of this behavior. Tindell and Bohlander (2012) found that other students are distracted by students’ texting in class. Students may claim they are only hurting themselves when texting, but studies show that others are also affected. Ezemenaka (2013) found that Internet-enabled phone use does not affect the academic performance of the students, but that distractions caused by phone use were reported. Davison & Lazaros, (2015) reported that mobile technology use was a potential source of distraction in the classroom during lectures. Thisstudy foundthat 47.9% of the students indicated that they were distracted when using mobile technology in the classroom, and thata considerable percentageof students (94.1% of the participants) were distracted by other students’ use of mobile technology. Although thisstudy did not investigate student academic performance,Sundari (2015) stated that studies have shown that extensive use of technology such as social networking, chatting, and texting on students’ mobile phones during class time contributes to lower grades and overall poor performance. Further, Sundari (2015)addedthat various researchers have shown that a significant number of students have the habit of using their phones during classes and while studying, and this habit extends even tothe library, whereby it leads to numerous distractions to the users and others. The key benefits received by using mobile phone and technology in learning and teaching is that they can be used as a multimedia acess tool, communication tool, representation tool, analytical tool, personal asstant tool and helps in caturing data and media. In thisstudy, even without teacher engagement, when students were asked what they use their mobile devices for in the classroom, most of the participants indicated that they used themto access the learning management systems, other e-learning tools, access the course calendar, and research information. This suggests that student engagement does lead to increased performance.

Limitations of the Study

Most of the students who participated in this study reside in an urban section of Lagos. This may limit the generalizability of the results to other students who reside in other remote parts of the country. Also, the study was limited to student perception and did not look at student academic performance in relation to their engagement and learning. Further study is needed to look at student engagement and learning in relation to age, gender, and year in school in order to better understand how mobile technology influences student academic performance. Another area of study would be to explore the effect of or influence that mobile technology policies may have or donot have on student engagement, learning, and academic performance. Purposeful mobile technology integration into the classroom is necessary,and it is evident that the pace of technological innovation far outruns higher education technology integration. Either way, it is important that further research helpsto address these limitations. Based on findings in this study andin agreement with other researchers, it is essential to investigate the way students are currently using technology as well as the impacts it has on their educational outcomes.

Conclusion

This study was driven by the primary research question that was developed at the beginning of this study: How does the use of mobile technology (smartphones, tablets, and laptops) by college students in a classroom in Nigeria affect their engagement and learning?The researchsub-question is:What do students primarily use their mobile technology for during class? The responses generated from the participants indicate that most students have access to mobile technology, know how to use them, and enjoy using mobile technology in the classroom for in-class activities. On the one hand, the students’ use of mobile technology in the classroom facilitated collaboration with other students and helped them to concentrate better. On the other hand, the study also revealed that student use of mobile technology in the classroom was a source of distraction for other students as well as for themselves. The past decade has seen a steady growth in student use of mobile devices (smartphones, laptops, tablets). The devices allow students more extensive access to information and people. As more students use mobile devices in the classroom, research shows that their use is affecting learning and classroom engagement. This study investigated and assessed how mobile devices influence students’ engagement and learning in the classroom. Based on the findings derived from this study, the benefits of the use of mobile technology in the classroom, the student’s desire to use the technology, and the potential for future academic preparation have an important influence on student learning and engagement.

Positionality Statement

My experiences in higher education as a consultant, technology educator, and administrator, as well as my ethnicity, gender, and faith, have shaped me as a researcher in a number of ways. For instance, being a higher education consultant forces me to research widely in order to understand the complexities of the institutions thatI advise. Research also plays a key role in appreciating the politics around any proposed changes. Also, as a technology educator, I am forced to keep researching in the area of technology in an effort to seek new knowledge, since the world of technology is extremely dynamic in nature. Research enables an educator’s lessons to remain relevant even with the changing technological environment. Researching has also improved my proficiency as an administrator; through research, Iam able to gain new insights into contemporary administrative issues, which better enable me to manage people and resources. Moreover, my ethnicity, gender, and faith have always motivated me to research various subjects and the contradictions that surround them. For example, gender equality issues keep meconstantly engaged in research in an effort to identify the forces behind these issues and the possible ways through which such concerns can be addressed. Thus, I can describe myself as a researcher who is influenced by her experiences. Being technologically savvy can have its drawbacks. I am always exploring and reading while working on other projects simultaneously, and Iinevitably end up a few clicks away from the original website that I was viewing. My assumptions have always been that I was engaged in every aspect of the activities I was undertaking. This posture I took for myself was not applied to my students’ multitasking during lectures. The interpretation of my observations of my students was that they did not seem to be engaged in the class while being distracted by their cell phone use. Why is there such a contradiction? What made me feel that I was engaged when I multitasked but did not believe that my students were? These questions can only be truly answered through the lens of transparency through the reflexivity of acknowledging perspectives and biases, which would lead to a better research investigation. . Constructivists consider me a researcher whose role is vital in the collecting and interpreting of data using quantiative methods and agree that my experiences, or lack thereof, may affect the research approach. My assumptions on engagement and learning have made me consider my various roles as an educator, learner, and researcher, as well as how Imust be aware of these biases in the course of this study. It is vital to take note of biases, such as confirmation biases, that occur as a researcher uses information provided by respondents to confirm a hypothesis. Biases may also arise from leading questions in the questionnaires where the researcher elaborates on the answer given by the respondent, hence putting words in their mouth. Additionally, there is the bias that occurs as a result of the halo effect whereby the researcher and respondents tend to view something in a certain light due to a single positive or negative attribute. By understanding these biases, the quality of the research undertaken can be improved.

Reference

Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 93-102.

Amali, I., Onche, O., Bello, M. . B., & Hassan, I. . (2012). . A survey of University of Ilorin students’ use of mobile phone in lecture rooms and its implications in education for Nigeria development. . Journal of Education and Practice, 3(10), 1-6. . Retrieved from

Appleton, J. . J., Christenson, S. . L., & Furlong, M. . J. . (2008). . Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. . Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386.

Arkorful, V., & Abaidoo, N. (2015). The role of e-learning, advantages and disadvantages of its adoption in higher education. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 12(1), 29-42.

Asongu, S. A., & Nwachukwu, J. C. (2016). The mobile phone in the diffusion of knowledge for institutional quality in sub-Saharan Africa. World Development, 86, 133-147.

Baker, W. . M., Lusk, E. . J., & Neuhauser, K. . L. . (2012). . On the use of cell phones and other electronic devices in the classroom: Evidence from a survey of faculty and students. . Journal of Education for Business, 87(5), 275-289.

Balta, N., & Duran, M. (2015). Attitudes of students and teachers towards the use of interactive whiteboards in elementary and secondary school classrooms. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(2), 15-21.

Bannon, S., Martin, G., &Nunes-Bufford, K. . (2012, March). . Integrating iPads into mathematics education.. In Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference (pp. . 3519-3522).. ). . Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Barnett, L. M., Ridgers, N. D., Zask, A., & Salmon, J. (2015). Face validity and reliability of a pictorial instrument for assessing fundamental movement skill perceived competence in young children. Journal of science and medicine in sport, 18(1), 98-102.

Battaglia, M. . (2008). . Convenience sampling. . In P. . J.. Lavrakas, (ed.), Encyclopedia of Survey of Research Methods,(pp. . 806–808). . Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications.

Boggs, C., & Kennedy, A. . (2010). . College students’ use of mobile technology for distance learning and academic purposes. . A look at iPod Touch. . Symposium conducted at the 2010 College of Education, University of Wyoming.

Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., Hammerness, K., & Beckett, K. . L. . (2005). . Theories of learning and their roles in teaching. . Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do, 40-87.

BrckaLorenz, A., Haeger, H., Nailos, J., &Rabourn, K. . (2013, May). . Student perspectives on the importance and use of technology in learning.. In a paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research,(Vol. . 31). .

Buck, J. . L., McInnis, E., & Randolph, C. . (2013). . The new frontier of education: The impact of smartphone technology in the classroom.. American Society for Engineering Education.. (2013 ASEE Southeast Section Conference).

Carroll, J., Howard, S., Vetere, F., Peck, J., & Murphy, J. . (2002, January). . Just what do the youth of today want? Technology appropriation by young people.. In System Sciences, 2002. . HICSS. . Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp.. 1777-1785). . IEEE.

Chase, P. A., Warren, D. J., & Lerner, R. M. (2015). School engagement, academic achievement, and positive youth development. In Promoting Positive Youth Development (pp. 57-70). Springer, Cham.

Creswell, J.. W. . (2009).. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Davison, C. B., & Lazaros, E. J. (2015). Adopting mobile technology in the higher education classroom. Journal of Technology Studies, 41(1), 30-39.

Duncan, D., Hoekstra, A., & Wilcox, B. . (2012). . Digital devices, distraction, and student performance: Does in-class cell phone use reduce learning. . Astronomy Education Review, 11(1), 1-4.

Ezemenaka, E. . (2013). . The usage and impact of Internet enabled phones on academic concentration among students of tertiary institutions: A study at the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. . International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology(IJEDICT), 9(3), 162-173.

Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D. T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external rewards on elementary students' motivation, engagement and learning in an educational game. Computers & Education, 75, 136-148.

Fitzgerald, H. E., Bruns, K., Sonka, S. T., Furco, A., & Swanson, L. (2016). The centrality of engagement in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 20(1), 223-244.

Fitzgerald, H. E., Bruns, K., Sonka, S. T., Furco, A., & Swanson, L. (2016). The centrality of engagement in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 20(1), 223-244.

George, D. . R., & Dellasega, C. . (2011). . Use of social media in graduate-level medical humanities education: Two pilot studies from Penn State College of Medicine. . Medical Teacher, 33(8), e429-e434.

Gikas, J.,& Grant, M. . M. . (2013). . Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cell phones, smartphones & social media. . The Internet and Higher Education,19(1), 18-26..

Harrison, C., Lunzer, E. . A., Tymms, P., Fitz‐Gibbon, C. . T., &Restorick, J. . (2004). . Use of ICT and its relationship with performance in examinations: A comparison of the ImpaCT2 project's research findings using pupil‐level, school‐level and multilevel modelling data. . Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(5), 319-337.

Heflin, H., Shewmaker, J., & Nguyen, J. (2017). Impact of mobile technology on student attitudes, engagement, and learning. Computers & Education, 107, 91-99.

Henrie, C. R., Bodily, R., Manwaring, K. C., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Exploring intensive longitudinal measures of student engagement in blended learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). 45-56.

Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36-53.

Higgins, S., Xiao, Z., &Katsipataki, M. . (2012). . The impact of digital technology on learning: A summary for the education endowment foundation.. Durham, UK: Education Endowment Foundation and Durham University.

Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: a mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 449-473.

Jackson, L. . A., Zhao, Y., Kolenic III, A., Fitzgerald, H. . E., Harold, R., & Von Eye, A. . (2008). . Race, gender, and information technology use: The new digital divide. . CyberPsychology&Behavior, 11(4), 437-442.

Johnston, L.G., Trummal, A., Lohmus, L. . and Ravalepik, A. . (2009). . Efficacy of convenience sampling through the internet versus respondent driven sampling among males who have sex with males in Tallinn and Harju County, Estonia: Challenges reaching a hidden population. . AIDS Care, 21(9), 1195-1202.

Jumoke, S., Oloruntoba, S. A., & Blessing, O. (2015). Analysis of mobile phone impact on student academic performance in tertiary institution. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 5(1), 361-367.

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.

Kirschner, P. . A., Sweller, J. . & Clark, R. . E (2006). . Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of the constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. . Educational Psychologist, 14(2), 75-86.

Kuh, G. . D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. . A., Bridges, B. . K. . &Hayek, J. . C. . (2007). . Piecing Together the Student Success Puzzle: Research, Propositions, and Recommendations. . ASHE Higher Education Report, 32(5). .

Lam, S. F., Jimerson, S., Wong, B. P., Kikas, E., Shin, H., Veiga, F. H., ... & Stanculescu, E. (2014). Understanding and measuring student engagement in school: The results of an international study from 12 countries. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(2), 213.

Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of family medicine and primary care, 4(3), 324.

Lindquist, D., Denning, T., Kelly, M., Malani, R., Grisworld, W. . G., & Simon, B. . (2007). . The potential of mobile phones for active learning in the classroom.. Association for Computing Machinery - SIGSE, 39(1), 384-388.

McCarthy, J. . (2010). . Blended learning environments: Using social networking sites to enhance the first-year experience. . Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 729-740.

McKnight, K., O'Malley, K., Ruzic, R., Horsley, M. K., Franey, J. J., & Bassett, K. (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of research on technology in education, 48(3), 194-211.

Ndafenongo, G. . (2011). . An investigation into how cell phones can be used in the teaching of Mathematics using Vitalmaths video clips: A case study of 2 schools in Grahamstown, South Africa (Thesis for the degree of Master of Education). . Grahamstown, South Africa, Rhodes University (Faculty of Education).

Nielsen, L., & Webb, W. . (2011). . Teaching generation text: Using cell phones to enhance learning. . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., Shonola, S. A., & Joy, M. S. (2016). Discovering students mobile learning experiences in higher education in Nigeria. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2016 IEEE (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

Patry, M. . (2009). . Clickers in large classes: From student perceptions towards an understanding of best practices. . International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 3(2), 17-30.

Price, D. V., & Tovar, E. (2014). Student engagement and institutional graduation rates: Identifying high-impact educational practices for community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 38(9), 766-782.

Rabiu, H., Muhammed, A. . I., Umaru, Y., & Ahmed, H. . T. . (2016). . Impact of Mobile Phone Usage on Academic Performance Among Secondary School Students in Taraba State, Nigeria.. European Scientific Journal, 12(1), 1857-7881.

Rubinstein, J. . S., Meyer, D. . E., & Evans, J. . E. . (2001). . Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. . Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27(4), 763.

Shonola, S. A., Joy, M. S., Oyelere, S. S., & Suhonen, J. (2016). The impact of mobile devices for learning in higher education institutions: Nigerian universities case study. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 8(8), 43.

Sidelinger, R. J., Frisby, B. N., & Heisler, J. (2016). Students' out of the classroom communication with instructors and campus services: Exploring social integration and academic involvement. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 167-171.

Su, Y., Willis, G., & Salomon, J. A. (2017). Improving vignette descriptions and question formats to measure distance vision: Evidence from cognitive interviews among students in China. Field Methods, 29(3), 175-193.

Suhr, K. . A., Hernandez, D. . A., Grimes, D., &Warschauer, M. . (2010). . Laptops and fourth grade literacy: Assisting the jump over the fourth-grade slump. . The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 9(5).

Tindell, D. . R., &Bohlander, R. . W. . (2012). . The use and abuse of cell phones and text messaging in the classroom: A survey of college students. . College Teaching, 60(1), 1-9.

Topor, D. . R., Keane, S. . P., Shelton, T. . L., & Calkins, S. . D. . (2010). . Parent involvement and student academic performance: A multiple mediational analysis. . Journal of Prevention &Intervention in the Community, 38(3), 183-197.

Vázquez-Cano, E. (2014). Mobile distance learning with smartphones and apps in higher education. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 1505-1520.

Wakefield, E., Jenerette, C., Santanelli, J., & Zempsky, W. (2017). (266) Face validity of the sickle cell disease health-related stigma scale in youth with sickle cell disease. The Journal of Pain, 18(4), 42.

Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. . (2009). . The impact of mobile learning on students' learningbehaviors and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. . BritishJournal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 673-695.

White, P. J., Naidu, S., Yuriev, E., Short, J. L., McLaughlin, J. E., & Larson, I. C. (2017). Student engagement with a flipped classroom teaching design affects pharmacology examination performance in a manner dependent on question type. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 81(9), 5931.

Young, K. . S. . (1998). . Caught in the net: How to recognize the signs of Internet addiction—and a winning strategy for recovery.. New York: John Wiley & Sons.