DEDICATION

This project is dedicated to all the members of this group for their sacrifice and cooperation
researching this paper. We dedicate this project to God Almighty my creator, my strong
pillar, my source of inspiration, wisdom, knowledge and understanding. He has been the
source of my strength throughout this program and on His wings only have I soared.

My deep gratitude, respect and thanks are dedicated to our supervisor Mr. Abass

I
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We are very grateful to God Almighty for been there for we throughout our studies.
Without God, this work would have not been a success as he gave, we the strength and
courage required in every step during our study and also for long life and good health. To
him we give honor, praise and glory.

We sincerely express special thanks to our energetic supervisor Mr. Kanga for his guidance,
understanding, and patience and most importantly, he has provided positive
encouragement and warm spirit to finish this study. It has been a great pleasure and honor
to have him as my supervisor.

We must express our sincere gratitude to all the lecturers in the faculty of information
communication technology, Limkokwing University of Creative Technology for their
guidance and knowledge they inculcate in we.

Special thanks to all my friends for their moral support, especially Joshua Yarjah we would
like to thank everybody who was important to the successful realization of this Project, as
well as expressing my apology that we could not mention personally one by one. God
shower his blessing on you all. Finally, in term of any error or lapses found in this work I
whole heartedly take full responsibility.

II
 DECLARATION

We hereby declare that except the work of other researchers which are duly referenced,
this submission is the result of my own work under the supervision of MR KANGA and that
this has neither been presented in whole nor part elsewhere for the award of any other
degree or diploma of a university or other institution of higher learning.

Name: Osman A Kamara , 905002414

Signature…………………………………………. Date………………………………

Abu Bakarr S Turay, 905002413

Signature…………………………………………. Date……………………………………….

Alim Kargbo, 905002415

Signature…………………………………………. Date……………………………………….

Department: Faculty of Information and Communication Technology

This project has been submitted for examination with my approval as the university
supervisor.

Signature……………………….
Date………………………………
Supervisor:

III
 Table of content

Contents
DEDICATION...................................................................................................................i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.....................................................................................................ii

DECLARATION...............................................................................................................iii

Table of content............................................................................................................iv

List of figures................................................................................................................ix

List of tables..................................................................................................................x

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................xii

CHAPTER ONE...............................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1

1.1 BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................1

1.2 Problem statement................................................................................................3

1.3 THE AIM AND OBJCTIVES OF THE STUDY...............................................................5

1.3.2 Objectives of the study....................................................................................5

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY...............................................................................5

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY................................................................................6

CHAPTER TWO...............................................................................................................8

LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................................................8

2.0 INTRONDUCTION..................................................................................................8

1.1 INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY OR ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES NEEDED

FOR EDUCATIONAL DELIVERY.....................................................................................8

2.2 FUNCTIONALITY/EFFECTIVENESS OF TECHNOLOGICAL TOOLS IN EDUCATIONAL

DELIVERY.................................................................................................................11

2.3 THE EFFECT OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION.....................................................13

2.4 SETBACKS IN ACHIEVING TECHNOLOGY FRIENDLY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM...........15

IV
 2.4 SUMMARY OF EXPECTED RESULTS.......................................................................19

CHAPTER THREE..........................................................................................................20

3.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................20

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN..............................................................................................20

3.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA.....................................................................20

3.2.1 LOCATION.....................................................................................................20

3.2.2 CLIMATE.......................................................................................................22

3.2.3 POPULATION.................................................................................................23

3.2.4 ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES..................................................................................23

3.3 STUDY POPULATION............................................................................................23

3.4 SAMPLE FRAME...................................................................................................23

3.5 SAMPLE SIZE.......................................................................................................24

3.6 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE........................................................................................24

3.7 SOURCES OF DATA..............................................................................................24

3.8 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS...................................................................................24

3.9 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES........................................................................25

3.10 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA........................................................25

3.10.1 Coding and Summary of Data.......................................................................26

3.10.2 Statistics......................................................................................................26

3.10.3 Interpretation of Data..................................................................................26

CHAPTER FOUR............................................................................................................27

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS........................................................................................27

4.1.0 SOCIO - DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS.................................................27

4.1.1 SEX OF RESPONDENTS..................................................................................27

4.1.2 EDUCATIONAL STATUS OF RESPONDENTS.....................................................28

4.1.3 OCCUPAATION OF RESPONDENTS................................................................28

V
 4.1.4 HOUSEHOLD SIZE OF RESPONDENTS...........................................................30

4.1.5 RELIGION OF RESONDENTS.........................................................................31

4.1.6 AGE BRACKET OF RESPONDENTS.................................................................32

4.2.0 INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES IN

EDUCATION DELIVERY...........................................................................................33

4.2.1 TECHNOLOGY DEVICE USAGE......................................................................33

4.2.2 AVAILABILITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES...............................................34

4.2.3 THE AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES..................................................35

4.2.4 COMPUTER LAB AVAILABILITY.......................................................................36

4.2.5 NUMBER OF COMPUTER AVAILABLE...............................................................37

4.2.5 INTERNET FACILITY AVAILABLE IN INSTITUTION.........................................39

4.2.6 WHETHER TEACHERS/TUTORS ARE SKILLED IN USING TECHNOLOGICAL

DEVICES................................................................................................................41

4.3 FUNCTIONALITIES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF TECHNOLOGY TOOL IN EDUCATION

SERVICE DELIVERY...................................................................................................42

4.3.1 WHETHER INSTITUTION CURRICULUM ACCOMMODATE ICT AS A

MOUDLE/SUBJECT..................................................................................................42

4.3.2 TECHNOLOGY USAGE TO APPLY FOR ADMISSION.........................................43

4.3.3 ACCESSIBILITY OF GRADES AND OTHER DOCUMENT THROUGH THE USE OF

TECHNOLOGY........................................................................................................44

4.3.4 HOW OFTEN DO YOU HAVE ACCESS TO COMPUTER.....................................45

4.3.5 WHICH TEACHING OR LECTURE METHOD BEST APPLY TO YOUR INSTITUTION

............................................................................................................................ 46

4.3.6 TASKS PERFORMED BY LECTURERS TOWARDS ADOPTING TECHNOLOGY IN

EDUCATION...........................................................................................................47

4.3.7 METHODS ADOPTED BY TEACHERS/LECTURERS TO DESIGN LEARNING

MATERIALS............................................................................................................48

VI
 4.4 EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION............................50

4.4.1 HAS THE ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION IMPROVES YOUR

LEARNING COMPETENCIES.....................................................................................50

4.4.2 HOW TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION IN INSTITUTION IMPACT LEARNING

COMPETENCY........................................................................................................51

4.4.3 LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE ON TECHNOLOGY DEVICE USAGE............................53

4.5 CHALLENGES OF TECHNOLOGY FRIEDLY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM........................54

4.5.1 INTERNAL OBSTICLES YOU FACE IN ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY................54

4.5.2 WHAT ARE THE INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS EXPERIENCE IN ADOPTION OF

TECHNOLOGY........................................................................................................55

4.5.3 WHETEHER THERE IS SUPPORTS FROM GOVERNMENT AND ORGANIZATION OR

AGENCIES FOR INTEGRATION OF TECHNOLOGY IN YOUR INSTITUTION..................56

4.5.4 SUPPORTS RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENT AND ORGANIZATION....................57

CHAPTER FIVE.............................................................................................................58

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION........................................................58

5.1 Summary............................................................................................................58

5.2 Conclusion...........................................................................................................59

5.3 Recommendations............................................................................................60

5.1.1 Recommendation for policy implication............................................................60

5.1.2 Recommendation for further research.............................................................61

REFERENCES................................................................................................................62

APPENDICES................................................................................................................67

QUESTIONAIRE SAMPLE...............................................................................................67

SEMI-STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY ON EDUCATION

SERVICE DELIVERY......................................................................................................67

RESEARCH CONTROL...................................................................................................67

SECTION A: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS.................................................67

VII
SECTION B: INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES IN
EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY...................................................................................68

SECTION C: FUNCTIONALITIES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF TECHNOLOGY TOOL IN

EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY...................................................................................68

SECTION D: EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION...................69

SECTION E: CHALLENGES OF TECHNOLOGY FRIENDLY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM..............69

VIII
 List of figures

Figure 1 Map of Sierra Leone showing Bo District...............................................21

Figure 2 Map of Bo District showing Kakua chiefdom.........................................22

Figure 3 Illustration of respondents by use of technological device...................33

Figure 4 Illustration of respondents of those that have provisions for

technological devices available in their secondary school and tertiary institution.
................................................................................................................................... 35

Figure 5 illustration of respondents by the type of technology devices present. 35

Figure 6 illustration of respondents on whether they have computer lab...........36

Figure 7 illustration of respondents and the number of computers that are

present in their institution..................................................................................38

Figure 8 illustration of respondents who have internet facility in their institution

................................................................................................................................... 39

Figure 9 illustration of respondents based on whether teachers/tutors are

skilled in using technological devices..................................................................41

Figure 10 illustration of respondents on whether institution curriculum

accommodate ICT as a module............................................................................43

IX
 List of tables

Table 1 Distribution of respondents by sex..........................................................27

Table 2 The Distribution of respondents by educational status...........................28

Table 3 Distribution of respondents by occupation.............................................30

Table 4 The Distribution of respondents by household size...............................31

Table 5 The Distribution of respondents by religion............................................31

Table 6 Distribution of respondents by age bracket............................................32

Table 7 Distribution of respondents on technology use to apply for admission. .44

Table 8 Distribution of respondents on whether they access grade and other

documents through the use of internet...............................................................44

Table 9 Distribution of respondents on how often they access computer in their

institution............................................................................................................45

Table 10 Distribution of respondents on which teaching or lecture method best

applied to your institution...................................................................................46

Table 11 Distribution of tasks performed by teachers or lecturers towards

adopting technology in education.......................................................................47

Table 12 Distribution of respondents by the methods adopted by tutors to

design learning materials....................................................................................49

Table 13 Distribution of respondents on whether technology improves learning

competencies......................................................................................................50

Table 14 Distribution of respondents of how technology adoption in institution

impact their learning competency.......................................................................52

Table 15 Distribution of respondents on their level of performance on

technology device usage.....................................................................................53

Table 16Distribution of respondents on the internal obstacles they faced in

technology adoption............................................................................................54

X
Table 17 Distribution of respondents by analyzing the institutional barriers in
adoption of technology........................................................................................55

Table 18 Distribution of respondents on whether there are supports from

government and organization or agencies for integration of technology in
institution............................................................................................................56

Table 19 Distribution of respondents by the type of support received from

government and organization.............................................................................57

XI
 ABSTRACT

Educational technology focuses on technological tools and media that assist in the
communication of knowledge and its development and exchange. In recent years, countries
in Africa have tremendously experienced significant growth in the area of technology
adoption in their education systems. This study is designed to examine how technology
adoption has improved education service delivery at Njala University in Bo district. The aim
of this study is to assess the impact of educational technological advancement in improving
educational delivery. The specific objectives are: identify institutional capacity or access to
technological resources needed for educational delivery, examine the
functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational delivery and assess the
setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system. The study was designed
to be carried out in Bo city. The research was a case study design and adopts both
qualitative and quantitative research methods. The study population targets all students
and staff in the study area. The sample size consists of 55 students and 15 staff who were
selected randomly. The study utilizes both primary and secondary sources of data through
administration of questionnaire, use of internets, dissertations, articles and journals. Data
was analyzed using EXCEL. For the socio-demographic characteristics, much focus was on
information of the respondents’ sex, educational status, occupation, household size, religion
and age. With regards the access to technology, focus was on whether schools and tertiary
institutions’ access or own technology devices, the availability of ICT lab and internet
facilities, number of computers and other devices present and level of understanding of
tutors on technology device utilization. Focus was also on the functionalities or
effectiveness of technology devices in education service delivery, effects of technological
advancement on education and challenges to technology friendly education system.

XII
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

This chapter comprises of the detailed background of the study, statement of problem,
study aim and objectives, research questions and assumptions of the research justification
of the study, scope and limitations and definition of terms.

1.1 BACKGROUND

Educational Technology has been defined as solutions to instructional problems that involve
social as well as machine technologies with concern for improving the effectiveness and
efficiency of learning in educational contexts (Cassidy et al, 2010). Also, educational
technology focuses on technological tools and media that assist in the communication of
knowledge and its development and exchange. Technology is a valuable tool that can help
in the encouragement of collaborative learning as well as increase learner performance by
effectively improving teaching and learning abilities (Chigon, 2010).
Technology in Higher education is shifting the dynamics of delivery methods from
traditional face-to-face to online to blended (mixed) modes. More than 86% of traditional
residential colleges and universities now offer online course options. One third of all
degrees are now offered online (Cox et al, 2018). The changing of the guard is shifting
from traditional instruction to technology-driven interactive online education. The most
used tools in this new educational era are multimedia technology, online learning or e-
learning, mobile learning or m-learning, blogs, and social networks (Fojtik, 2014). Also,
multimedia technology allows the integration of text, numbers, graphics, still or moving
images, presentations, a high level of interactivity and, besides, the possibilities of
navigating through different documents, which gives students the convenience of
understanding words and teaching objects (Chen et al., 2012).
Digital education has become an important feature of education system world-wide over
the last decade. Globally, technology is viewed as a potent force in driving economic, social,
political and educational reforms as successful integration of any technology into class
rooms warrant advancement in service delivery to pupils and students (Kamara, 2020). The
world has experienced rapid changes in technology which contributed to adoption of new
approaches in education. These changes have brought about new way of doing old things

1
in

2
both education and economic life (Balicekapili, 2010). The integration of technology by
most nation in their educational landscape should not be considered as replacement for
face to face instruction but rather as a support to attain objectives that have not been
attained efficiently otherwise expanding access, promoting quality of education and
preparing old and new generation for a technology driven job market (Conteh, 2013).
In recent years, countries in Africa have tremendously experienced significant growth in the
area of technology adoption in their education systems. Now student uses devices such
tablet and phones which allow them access books and information that they may not have
otherwise been able to access. The use of mobile devices has seen particular success in
Uganda, Kenya and South Africa. In the Sub-Saharan regions of Africa, integration of
technology in education has been a contentious issue although at one extreme, there are
some who are not convinced that technology will bring the pedagogical benefits that have
been so much touted about (Chigon, 2010). Other advocates also affirm that technology
will change the educational landscape forever and in a way that will engender a dramatic
increase in the performance of learners (Karim, 2015). Unicaf University is one example of
how technology is improving educational delivery in Sub-Saharan Africa as it offers many
ways that students can afford admission fees through low-cost digital learning and
scholarships, the use of tablets by students, and the ability to access internet to download
their course materials. This helps to combat the concern of how internet access may impact
the idea of an online classroom (Amla, 2012). Moreover, online classrooms may help
students by bringing the classroom to them in a country where access to higher education
is limited. This is predominantly important for various educational institutions in the
developing countries, and also for those educational institutions in developed countries that
have restricted and out-dated material in their libraries (Sung et al, 2016).
In Sierra Leone, upon the invention and integration of technology such as the use of mobile
phones, tablets, computers, and Wi-Fi connections in universities, make possible
asynchronous learning, or learning characterized by a time lag between the delivery of
instruction and its reception by learners as online course materials may be accessed 24
hours a day (Kamara, 2017). Again, teachers and learners no longer have to rely solely on
printed books and other materials in physical media housed in libraries (and available in
limited quantities) for their educational needs (Conteh, 2013). With the Internet and the
World Wide Web, a wealth of learning materials in almost every subject and in a variety

3
of media can

4
now be accessed from anywhere at any time of the day and by an unlimited number of
people. This has helped in the encouragement of collaborative learning as well as increase
learner performance by effectively improving teaching and learning abilities (Kamara,
2017). However, while there are strong beliefs that educational technology has a positive
impact on the educational environment. Most students use some form of technology on
daily basis including texting, social; networking and web surfing (Bah, 2019). Today, there
is a common focus of raising students’ and pupils’ achievement while integrating
technology as a tool. Due to the large use of technology in our society, the use of
technology in teaching and learning is essential if we are to make a lasting impact on
education service delivery (Bangura, 2020). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to
ascertain the role of technological advancement in improving educational delivery in Bo
District.

1.2 Problem statement

In the previous years, comprehensive investigation into the use of technology in education
has been unable to determine whether technology influences student learning (Masterman,
2016). By adopting an empiricist stance, the majority of this research has only ever been
able to consider the past implementations of technology in descriptive terms. This has
made it unsuitable for making evaluative statements about the quality of past changes
(Masterman, 2016).

Many research have been conducted on educational issues but majority focuses to areas
such as Evaluation of Technical Vocational Education, Impact of School inspection,
Education for All (EFA) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), influences of
educational institution on the development of its residents, teaching and learning for
sustainable development that focused on technology education, sustainability in
management and business education, etc. and mostly these studies are not focused in the
study community. Few statistics are available from developing countries. Much research in
the area of technology integration in education has been conducted in technologically
advanced countries, but little in the so-called developing or third world countries of which
Sierra Leone is not an exception. On the one hand, this implies that the former countries
now possess a wealth of knowledge, skills, expertise, and the competitive edge that most
of the latter countries do not possess. However, none of them looked into the role of

5
education technological advancement in improving educational delivery.

6
Again, in terms of research design, Daudi, (2016) used longitudinal research design on ICT
perceptions and practices among secondary school students in Tanzania, and Sarkar,
(2012) conducted a research on the Role of Information and Communication Technology
(ICT) in Higher Education for the 21st Century in Tanzania used exploratory research
design. For this study, a case study research design was used by the researcher to know
in-depth on the impact of information communication technology on improving
educational delivery in universities in Sierra Leone.

In Sierra Leone, there is a need for a paradigm shift from the existing teacher–centred
learning environment to a learner-centred instructional environment where learning is
enhanced and students acquire the necessary 21st century knowledge and skills. The quest
for development now in the nation makes it imperative for education atmosphere to shift
from the existing method of teaching in schools to accommodate use of information
communication technologies. Other African countries like Tanzania, Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda
and South Africa seems to have gone ahead of Sierra Leone in this regard. Also, it is
disheartening to note that Sierra Leone, with her abundance of resources - human and
non- human cannot boast of being among the countries utilizing technology in teachings,
school administration and management (Kamara, 2020).

Moreover, the methods of data collections have been varied by some of these researchers.
For instance, Daudi, (2016) uses focus group discussion, whereas Sakar, (2012) uses both
interviews and focus group. For this study, the researcher used semi structured
questionnaire and personal observations to collect data from the field to assess the impact
of technological advancement in improving educational delivery. In view of that, this study
will provide information to fill the existing gaps, by assessing the impact of information
communication technology in university educational delivery.
Therefore, the research aimed to answer the following questions:
 What is the institutional capacity or access to technological resources needed for
educational delivery?
 What are the functionalities or effectiveness of technological tools in educational
delivery?
 What are the effects of technology advancement in education?
 What are the setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system?

7
1.3 THE AIM AND OBJCTIVES OF THE STUDY

The aim of this study is to assess the impact of educational technological advancement in
improving educational delivery.

1.3.2 Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study are;

 To identify institutional capacity or access to technological resources needed for
educational delivery.
 To examine the functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational
delivery.
 to investigate the effects of technology advancement on education
 To assess the setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system.

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This research deems relevant as it adds to already existing or pool of knowledge on the
topic under investigation and similar field of study.

This study is significant to social change because the results of this study reflect how the
advancement of education technology impact educational delivery and add to existing body
of knowledge on how tertiary institutions become more effective in education service
delivery. The value of digital education is critical to both individuals and society, as
integration of technology in education increases the skill level of the individual as well as
society (Alstadsæter, 2011).

Researchers in the past had made use of comparative and longitudinal designs to collect
data on education technology; and most even adopted the focus group as method of
collecting data. Therefore, this study is relevant as it adopts case study research design
which provides overall strategy that you choose to integrate the different components of a
study in a coherent and logical way to ensure that you effectively address the research
problem.
There are very limited empirical studies on education and technology. So, there is the need
of systematic study on it, which this will fulfil to some extent some research gaps. Findings
of this research will help both government and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in
8
terms of policy formulation and designing of programs and projects that help foster
technology integration in education systems.
This study should be useful to legislators, school administrators, and educators as most of
our schools are turning to technology to aid and assist in learning in the classrooms. Also,
the results of this study will be useful as reference material for students who may want to
do further study in such field.

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

In any research work there must be a limitation. There is hardly any research that can be
conducted under ideal situation and this research is exception. The main limitations of this
study are;

Research of this nature requires long time and duration and would have loved to cover all
the universities in Sierra Leone, but limited time imposed limitations, due to time limit, the
study failed to sample all education institutions in the nation considering the fact that work
has to be done alongside other academic work.

Moreover, research of this nature also requires a longitudinal survey method in order to
achieved in-depth data collection and analysis, but due to limited resources such approach
has not been practicable. The researcher had to overcome this problem by making frequent
visits, for making appointments through mobile phones and arranging a convenient time for
interviews including afternoon hours after classes.

Study of this nature requires a comparative study on impact of information communication

technology in educational delivery which needs to be done in other parts of the country.
Comparing result can give a clear picture of what is happening in other community and
made better conclusion which a single community cannot give. However due to limited
financial resources and accessibility to some regions of the country-imposed limitations, this
study was limited to Freetown city. Therefore, a case study research design was adopted
for the research.

9
10
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 INTRONDUCTION

This chapter reviews related literature on key concepts of the study objectives. It focuses
on the impacts of information communication technology in tertiary institutions and the
institutional capacity or access to technological resources needed for educational delivery,
the functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational delivery and the
setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system.

1.1 INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY OR ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES

NEEDED FOR EDUCATIONAL DELIVERY

According to Ritzhaupt et al, (2012), institutional capacity or access to technological

resources needed for educational delivery is defined as any resources and processes put in
place to maintain school technology. Sendurur (2012) also defined institutional capacity or
access to technological resources needed for educational delivery as personnel available to
provide technical support to institutions.

The access to technology resources has positive ramifications in developing both staff and
students’ capacity to be continuously engage in collaborative teaching and learning,
particularly when the right type of learning technology is used (Rana 2012). Choice as to
which technology mediated learning tool is used to support the integration of technology in
HEIs provision should be left with individual institutions; for example, whether MOOC (a
more video style learning tool) or MOODLE (a collaborative learning platform), and in some
cases both, is actually based on an institution's vision and capacity to take learning beyond
the remit of the classroom environment, and much more so, in giving learners the choice to
access variety of teaching and learning materials that suit their learning needs (Kusano et
al, 2013).

According to Newbill and Baum (2013), the way the world works in the past two decades is
being revolutionized by technology. Moreover, quite recently technology integration
envelops the future for which schools are charged towards preparing their students
(Ritzhaupt et al,
11
2012). With the advancements of technology into mainstream life, technology integration
has rapidly become a driving force in education (Dougherty, 2012). Currently, students are
growing up in an academic arena where technology is an inescapable key component of
daily life (Ritzhaupt et al, 2012). According to Franciosi (2012) in his research affirmed that
education coexists on a sociocultural level, with an expectation and necessity for education
to adjust to the emergent needs of the progressively digital public. Current research
reported implementing computer technology at the classroom level remained top priority of
educational administrators (Kurt, 2013); meanwhile, additional research reports numerous
schools are actively engaged in the integration of technology into the curriculum (Cakir,
2012). Educational administrators recognize the evolution of technological integration as a
logical step toward educational reform (Berrett, Murphy et al, 2012).

Notwithstanding, researchers have reported low levels of technology integration and

irregular intervals with integration as a result of its poor accessibility in institutions (Gumbo
et al., 2013). Ritzhaupt et al., (2012), emphasized that although researchers have advised
that there is need for schools and learning institutions to purchase technological devices
and equipment to be place in classrooms, libraries, and labs; nonetheless, teachers are
reporting a shortfall in training and lack of competency in using current educational
technology. A school may possess adequate technology installations, but merely having
technological tools accessible does not necessarily result in effective technological
integration (Kusano et al, 2013).

On the other hand, Researchers stressed that through institutional and inter-institutional
support, education institutions now have better access to quality and professional learning
opportunities, and digital resources. Support at the institutional level is pivotal to ensure
that conditions are conducive for teachers to develop themselves professionally and able to
integrate technology in their educational setting (Summak, 2012). In 2010, the
Commonwealth of Learning (COL) implemented the Innovation in Vocational Education and
Skills Training (INVEST) Africa capacity-building model to support flexible skills
development using technology. The implementation of the model had an impact on the
policies and implementation strategies of institutions, their organizational structures, their
technology infrastructure, and their learning and teaching practices (Shih et al, 2013). In
Ghana, the government supports the integration of technology in institutions by applying

12
the Devotra

13
Smart Classroom concept. In addition to enhancing teaching and learning, the project aims
to improve access, quality and relevance. To this end, the project introduces state-of-the
art technologies, software, simulations and hands-on practical education in classrooms
(COTVET, 2018).

At national level prior to 2006, there was a non-existence of ICT Policy in Sierra Leone,
which is seen as the backbone of a country's driver of heading towards the digital
economy. The national ICT policy document which started in 2006 and completed in 2007
is a starting point in the way forward in recognizing the importance of technology,
particularly in the educational development of Sierra Leone, but its remit is rather
restrictive and too general to enable due cognizance and importance to education
institutions provision in the country (Jackson 2016). The Sierra Leone government has been
instrumental in working with countless stakeholders within the country, more so higher
education institutions, and backed by the support of its link with regional institutions like
the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), a 15-Member States institution
that assembled in Ouagadougou on the 19th January 2007 to formulate technology policy
under the Supplementary Act A/SA1/01/07 entitled the ‘Harmonization of Policies and of
the Regulatory Framework for Technologies (Thomson 2016).

Again, Jackson (2016) mentioned that integration of learning technology in Sierra Leone’s
higher education system, The University of Sierra Leone being the oldest higher educational
institution (HEI) in the country has three major institutions, namely Fourah Bay College
(FBC), Institute of Public Administration and Management (IPAM) and the College of
Medicine and Allied Health Sciences (COHMAS). Currently, the university hosts a single
website and from which the three institutions are linked with essential resources. The
website lacked integrated facilities to allow integrated learning resources for the
enhancement of flexible learning in the 21st century. IPAM as a dedicated ICT-based
delivery institution has some capacity to support students learning through flexible
provision, but this is also restricted as financial resources required to forge such progress is
restricted (Thomson, 2016). There is still a long way to go, particularly for constituent
institutions to keep pace with the integration of technology in their curriculum provision,
which in a similar not as already mentioned, is due to lack of adequate financial resources
to create relevant investments to support the delivery of technology mediated facilities

14
(Conteh, 2020).

15
However, Njala University which became autonomous from the University of Sierra Leone in
2005 is also making a head way in terms of its thoughts about enrolling a dedicated
learning platform (MOODLE) to improve flexible learning for students (Kamara, 2019). The
establishment of Directorate of ICT is making it possible for relevant course materials to be
embedded on the university's website, but limited in terms of its capability to be used
flexibly for students to be able to interact collaboratively with tutors / lecturers in producing
and submitting online learning materials (Conteh, 2020).

For the purpose of this study, institutional capacity or access to technological resources
needed for educational delivery is defined as the availability of any resources and processes
which include the tools, materials, devices, settings, and people that learners interact with
in educational institutions to facilitate learning.

2.2 FUNCTIONALITY/EFFECTIVENESS OF TECHNOLOGICAL TOOLS IN

EDUCATIONAL DELIVERY

According to Kendall (2018), functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational

delivery is defined as the fact or quality of producing the intended or desired result in
education. Also, Delello et al., (2015) defined functionality/effectiveness of technological
tools in educational delivery as the productiveness or power of using technological tools in
education in order to achieve better outcome. In measuring functionality/effectiveness of
technological tools in educational delivery, Kendall (2018), measured by assessing the
degree at which the use of technological tools in education is utilized by students and
teachers to facilitate learning in the virtual, hybrid, or traditional classroom environment are
successful in producing desired result. Additionally, Delello et al., (2015) measured the
functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational delivery by comparing the
success rate in educational delivery using technical tools. For the purpose of this study,
functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational delivery is measured by
asking respondents how best they think technology has improved educational delivery.

All around the world digital technology is making its way in education, and more so in the
new emerging economies in the Far East of Asia (China and India), where demand for
higher education provision is on the increase as a result of adult learners seeking to engage
in full time work and studies to increase their economic prospects (European Commission,

16
2014).

17
In addendum, online technology is making it possible for learning (which used to confine to
a specified location) to be accessed anywhere, and at any point in time with accessibility of
technology devices like Laptops, Tablets and even mobile phones (Jackson, 2016). As
emphasized in the European Commission (2014) report, technology integration into
educational institutions have created an opportunity for increased global diversity, and also
enhanced collaboration between tutors and learners, and also improved tutor-tutor
relationship through resource sharing (Jackson, 2015).

Even though higher education institutions are making relevant strides in implementing
technology strategy for student access, the system is still based on the old didactic
approach, whereby lecturers are recycling notes (legacy) created years back, without
experiencing the impact of dynamism in the global education system; this in many parts of
the world, and more so in most of the West African English speaking states is based on the
concept of ‘blended learning’ approach (James, 2020). The emergence of technology, and
more recently flexible learning resources and platforms (e.g., MOODLE) has made it very
much possible for a mix of learning style to be made possible; this is based on the concept
of blended learning (Jackson, 2015), an approach incorporating variety of learning
approaches, for example, face-to-face/didactic learning and the use of ICT to enhance
learning opportunities for learners.

Also, majority of the students had no access to computers during their learning while most
of those accessing the computers for learning purposes spend less than two hours per
week. This clearly indicates that schools and higher institutions in Africa are yet to fully tap
on the vast opportunities for learning using technology (Sesay, 2018). On regards to
intensity or frequency in which teachers made use of technology in performing basic
teaching and learning roles, it emerged that the majority of teachers had never used
technology in performance of tasks such as: preparing records of work, using digitalized
notes and lessons presentation in class using projectors for the students, most had never
used technology for finding information via internet, communication or networking with
them or using specific subject software for learning purposes (Jackson, 2015). Empirically,
evidence from a study in Nyeri South District of Kenya revealed that 60% of teachers in
Nyeri South District do not use the internet or computers to prepare learning
materials .Further, 88.1% of the teachers who use computers or the internet spend less

18
than 5 hours per week in using the internet or

19
computer for teaching and learning purpose. This indicates that most teachers spend most
of their time using tradition methods like text books, chalkboards, and handwritten notes as
opposed to technology enhanced methods (Delello et al., 2015).

The education system in Sierra Leone, particularly the three established universities
(University of Sierra Leone, Njala University and University of Makeni (UNIMAK) in the
current 21st century is still predominated by the old-style didactic method of teaching and
learning. This means that students' chances of being able to access higher education
services, for example, remote and flexible teaching and learning materials is very limited as
a result of the limited provision by individual institutions (John, 2017). While universities
within the British West African colonies (Ghana and Nigeria) are making advances in forging
teaching and learning through the provision of modern / remote learning technologies
(Sarfo et al, 2016), the situation in Sierra Leone is still no way near in terms of enabling
learners to expand their learning opportunities through flexibility in their learning
opportunities.

In a study conducted by Attwell, et al, (2010) on Pedagogic approaches to using

technology for learning, when students were asked to rate themselves in terms of utilizing
technology in their learning visa-vis traditional methods of text books and handwritten
notes, cumulatively 84.9% rated themselves at a percentage of below 50% implying that
most students felt they were more traditional users of learning methods than technology
users. Therefore, it is expected that majority of teachers and students utilizes more of
traditional methods of education rather than effective use of technological tools.

For the purpose of this study, functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in

educational delivery is defined as successfulness or potency of using technological tools in
education by students and teachers in order to achieve desired outcome

2.3 THE EFFECT OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

Integration of ICT in education has been a contentious issue. At one extreme, there are
some who are not convinced that ICT will bring the pedagogical benefits that have been so
much touted about (Peat and Franklin, 2013). At the other extreme, advocates like Edison
(cited in Alpha, 2018), claim that technology will change the educational landscape forever
and in ways that will engender a dramatic increase in the performance of learners. In

20
between the two extremes, there are others who adopt a balanced approach. They are

21
convinced that ICT, if properly integrated, has the potential to enhance the teaching and
learning process (Thompson, 2013). If properly integrated, ICT-enabled education has the
potential to promote the development of students' decision-making and problem-solving
skills, data processing skills, and communication capabilities (Bockarie, 2020).

Much has been said and reported about the impact of technology, especially computers, in
education. Much research has been conducted throughout the world to evaluate the
positive effects of technology on learning, and to investigate the kind of enhanced learning
environment that technology provides in the classroom. In short, considerable resources
have been invested to justify the place of technology in education, and many research
studies have revealed the benefits and gains that can be achieved by students, teachers
and administrators (Pratt, 2017). In addendum, technology creates an enhanced learning
environment for learners. Technology provides a motivating learning environment whereby
learners are given the opportunity to be constructively engaged with instruction
(Thompson, 2013). Research has revealed that, if properly implemented, learners can reap
the pedagogical benefits of technology in the classroom. Experts today increasingly
advocate the implementation of the constructivist model of learning rather than of the
traditional instructive model (Alpha, 2018).

Technology integration in education for decade now has been a powerful tool to
supplement teachers’ instruction in classroom. If properly used by teachers, technology can
foster more interest in learning on the part of students, and teachers can use it in the
instruction of their respective subjects (Sama, 2022). Technology has the potential to make
instruction easier, more challenging and motivating for teachers (Bah, 2012). More so,
Kamara (2017) in his research affirmed that technology integration in education serves as
an administrative tool for teachers and administrators because apart from classroom
instruction, teachers are also involved in class administrative duties such as student record
keeping, lesson planning, preparing handouts, tutorials and slides, preparing exams papers,
marking papers and recording of results, performing some type of statistical analyses on
marks, and so on. According to Alpha (2018), it was observed that administrators are also
involved in a variety of work that requires technology, such as the computation of school
performance for a certain year, keeping of records of employees, and preparation of
school budget. Technology can

22
therefore become an extremely useful tool in handling of a number of the administrative
tasks for both teachers and administrators.

Again, technology in education serves as a passport to employment and to gaining

competitive edge in the global economy. Increasingly, in developed and developing
countries, job markets are demanding a computer literate workforce (Bangura, 2012). In
the not too distant future, knowledge and skills of computer use will become a basic
requirement for securing a job and for a nation to compete for a share of the global
market. Technology in education can prepare students now to integrate the world of work
and competition tomorrow. Moriba (2017), mentioned that technology in education systems
have led to career development in the competing digitalized job market as technology has
been integrated and relevant in all field of study.

Technology has been perceived as a communication platform in education systems

(Johnson, 2020). For past centuries, geographical distance was a major hurdle when it
came to communicating with people around the world. Technology has changed that.
Through networks and the Internet, it is now possible to communicate with anyone in the
world (Lawundeh, 2021). Technology has also presented schools with an excellent medium
to share ideas and experiences. Students, teachers, and administrators can communicate,
exchange knowledge and concerns, meet experts and peers, and share work in
collaborative projects through the use of technology (Moriba, 2017).

2.4 SETBACKS IN ACHIEVING TECHNOLOGY FRIENDLY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM.

According to Ertmer, et al., (2012) setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational

system is defined as events that delay the progress or reverse some of the progress made
in trying to integrate technology in to educational system. Also, Meester (2013) defined
setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system as a check or interruption
in the process of making educational system to be more technological. Moreover, (Kim et
al., 2013) defined setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system as the
factors limiting efficient and effective technology integration in to educational system.
Kendall (2018), measured setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system
by assessing the availability and accessibility of technological tools in education that
students and teachers utilize to facilitate learning. Also, Ertmer, et al., (2012) measured
setbacks in
23
achieving technologically friendly educational system by checking the interruptions in using
technology. However, this study measured setbacks in achieving technologically friendly
educational system by asking respondents to state challenges they encountered in using
technology in educational system.

Setbacks or challenges are an obvious concern when thinking about implementing

technology mediated system in an institutional setting. In developing countries, the
challenges are enormous (Kandeh, 2019). The current common systems’ network support
and cost, particularly for publicly funded educational institutions pose serious challenges, as
most of the schools and higher institutions in Africa are really not in the right state to set
them in a competitive state of (flexible) educational provision when compared to developed
nations (Kamara, 2013). Again, lack of adequate funding provision from government is an
obvious problem facing learning institutions and schools in Sub-Saharan region of Africa, in
comparison to developed nations where funding is normal based of accessible use per
students (Jackson, 2015). The current lack of technology funding is making it quite
impossible for education institutions to see the reality of meeting their dreams of
implementing effective technology to support flexible teaching and learning (DFID, 2014).
Ultimately, the factors limiting efficient and effective technology integration were directly
related to personal self- perceived teacher barriers and institutional barriers. From the
anxiety of unknown technology and fears of appearing unintelligent to lack of knowledge
and the need for mentoring, these common barriers were not limited to a small population
of schools. Research indicated these teacher-reported barriers as common and reoccurring
issues around the world (Kim et al., 2013).

Additionally, a study was conducted in Tanzania on the impact of technology in education

service delivery and result proved that accessibility to and know-how on how to utilize
these technologies has been a challenge to most institutions in Africa (Sife et al., 2013). As
typical of many developing nations, and in particular many Sub-Saharan African nations,
there are obviously other challenges which include "lack of administrative support, more so
in financing the continuity of ICT implementation, inadequate technical support to meet the
demand of installing systems, and difficulty associated with the accessibility and also
transformational process of higher education institutions (Thomas, 2012). Based on the
findings of Ehrmann (2011) in his study on technology integration in educational system,

24
there seemed to have

25
been a driving focus on just the installation of ICT into education institutions as opposed to
the focus on integrating ICT pedagogical rationale and particularly that which is geared
towards the enhancement of learning through supported enhanced learning technologies.

Though technology integration in education system is considered a best practice, the reality
is educators are not integrating technology both effectively and efficiently as expected or
needed (Gumbo et al, 2012). The reason for the setback of or low levels of integration was
barriers of different proportions. These barriers to technology integration or technologically
friendly education system were divided into two distinct categories: personal barriers
(internal obstacles and directly connected to the educator), and institutional barriers (those
created by educational institutions: districts, individual schools, or administrators)
(Reigeluth, 2011). In addendum, the most common barrier level was the educators’ self-
perceived lack of competency, knowledge, and self-confidence in technology utilization
(Kim et al., 2013). According to Aldunate et al, (2013), teachers commonly reported not
being computer smart, tech savvy, or a technology capable person. They further express a
lack of uncertainty on how to use a program or being able to resolve issues if they arise
while using a program (Kurt, 2013). Moreover, anxiety or inner fear of technology makes
teachers or tutors look naïve over the use of technology as they forcefully express concerns
about looking uneducated in the ICT field in front of their students or becoming frustrated
when students were better able to use the technology in the classroom (Teo, 2011).
Frequently non- technology user friendly teachers expressed a frustration with a lack of
time to create additional lessons for technology integration or explained that in order for
them to integrate technology into the lesson; they had to recreate the whole lesson
(Keengwe et al, 2011). Commonly teachers added that have no time for more or new
activities to be added into their existing curriculum because they are overwhelmed with
meeting standardize tests requirements (Biancarosa et al, 2012).

Furthermore, there is limited emphasis by administration on technology integration due to

the lack of support and limited recognition of the importance of technology integration by
administration and supervisors (Plair, 2008). Also, limited training opportunities provided
through districts and school such as: access to training, paid professional leave for
attending technology-focused training or conferences, and lack of funding for course or
workshop registration fees served as barrier to technology integration in education

26
systems (Kurt,

27
2013). Other studies have emphasized on the nonexistence of technology specialists or
coaches on campus as a key barrier to adoption of technology in education (Smith, 2012).
Outside of basic infrastructure IT support, most schools do not employee technology
specialists to work one-to-one or in small groups with teachers on technology integration.
In districts and schools that do employ technology specialists for teacher support, it is
common those coaches are assigned to an unrealistic number of teachers to support (Plair,
2012). Lastly, the limited channels for IT support beyond an email or phone number of a
helpdesk was observed as an institutional challenge (Teo, 2011).

Evidence from a study conducted by Ayere et al, (2010) on technology integration in Nyeri
South District indicated that some secondary schools (34%) had very few computers and
that for most of the schools that had reasonable number of computers, the main use was in
teaching Computer Studies. Also, in establishing the challenges or barriers to
ICT/technology integration in Africa, teachers were asked to rate on a liker scale of major,
minor or not a challenge a number of potential challenges (Johnbull et al., 2010). Other
studies indicated that most teachers were of the opinion that lack of adequate computer
laboratory was not a challenge to ICT integration 45.7% while technophobia (fear of
working with computers) was a minor challenge to a small majority 53.3% (Kandeh, 2019).
Generally, the findings implied that despite the efforts expended towards technology
integration policy by the government as well as individual schools, obstacles to the
implementation were still to a large extent in existence. Therefore, it is expected that the
conservative nature of teachers, lack adequate technological tools and expertise would be
some of the setbacks in achieving technologically friendly education system in the study
area (Alpha, 2018).

At national and local level, lack of basic technological infrastructure and inadequate
manpower skills is also a challenge facing educational institutions in Sierra Leone (Johnson,
2020). Computer-based courses are delivered in most education systems in Sierra Leone,
but the present state of systems seemed quite slow and old to support current
requirements in building an effective and integrated technology facility for schools and
tertiary institutions in the country (Kandeh, 2019). The major problem is attributed to the
lack of adequate planning in terms of meeting current rise in students’ population, and also
assessing needs requirements to support effective teaching and learning (DFID, 2014).

28
Institutions lack the necessary manpower skills-base to support continuity in technology
service provision; this in

29
part may be attributed to the low investment capacity of the government in focusing
attention to technology investment for educational institutions in the country (Thomson,
2020).

For the purpose of this study, the definition of Ertmer, et al., (2012) of setbacks in
achieving technologically friendly educational system was adopted; as events that delay the
progress or reverse some of the progress made in trying to integrate technology in to
educational system.

2.4 SUMMARY OF EXPECTED RESULTS

 It is expected that institutions have access to technological resources needed to

improve educational delivery through government policies, self-provisions and
support from other organizations in the study area.
 It is expected that the conservative nature of teachers, lack adequate technological
tools and expertise would be some of the setbacks in achieving technologically
friendly education system in the study area.
 It is expected that majority of teachers and students utilizes more of traditional
methods of education rather than effective use of technological tools.
 It is expected that technology will have great effect on education in the area of
achievement and performance of student.

30
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.0 INTRODUCTION

This section describes the manner in which the study was conducted and processed.
Therefore, it comprises the research design, key information about the study area,
population and sample, sample frame, sample size, sample technique, sources of data,
research instruments, data collection procedures, data analysis, summary and coding of
data, statistics and interpretation of data.

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design refers to the overall strategy that you choose to integrate the different
components of a study in a coherent and logical way to ensure that you effectively address
the research problem. Also, Bryman and Bell (2003) defined research design as a
framework for the collection and analysis of data. The research design employed for the
study was the case study approach wherein both qualitative and quantitative research
strategies were used. A case study is a strategy of doing research which involves an
empirical investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context,
using multiple sources of evidence. Being a case study research design, it was done in
single community in Bo city.

3.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

The study area describes the location, climate, vegetation, soils and population of the study
area.

3.2.1 LOCATION

Bo City which is the case study is the capital and administrative centre of Bo District. Bo is
an urban centre and lies approximately 160miles (250km) south-east of Freetown and
about 44miles (71km) to Kenema. Bo city is located between 70 57’23” North of the Equator
and Longitude 110 44’24” West of the Greenwich Meridian in Bo District, Southern Sierra
Leone.
31
Bo District is in the southern province and borders with Kenema District to the East,
Tonkolili District to the north, Moyamba District to the west, Bonth District to the southwest
and Pujehun District to the South. The sixteen chiefdoms of the district are as follows:
Badjia, Babwe, Baoma, Bumpe, Ngao, Jaiama, Kakua, Komboya, Lugbu, Niawa, Bo,
Selenge, Tikonko, Valunia, Wonde and Gbo.

Source:

Figure 1 Map of Sierra Leone showing Bo District

32
Figure 2 Map of Bo District showing Kakua chiefdom

3.2.2 CLIMATE

Like the rest of Sierra Leone, Bo District has a tropical climate more specially a tropical
monsoon climate, with a rainy season from May to October and a dry season from
November to April. During the dry season, the temperatures are high, averaging about 30
degrees centigrade. The rainy season is characterized by high temperature, high relative
humidity and heavy down pour of rain. The prevailing winds are the South West Monsoon
wind during the wet season and the North-Eastern Harmattan which is a dust laden wind
from the Sahara Desert during the dry season. However, average annual precipitation
varies with up to 5,080mm (200inches) in the wettest parts. During the May to October
rainy season, the district receives an average of 292cm rainfall annually.

33
3.2.3 POPULATION

The study locality is ethnically, culturally, and religiously diverse as it the home to a
significant population of Sierra Leone’s ethnic groups with the Mende in majority whilst
Temnes, Fullahs, Limba and Mandingo are in minority.

Bo City which is the case study is the capital and administrative centre of Bo District with a
population 174369 of (STATS SL 2015).

3.2.4 ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES

Bo city is the leading financial, educational and economic centre of southern Sierra Leone.
Bo city which is the head quarter of Bo District, has several economic activities ranging
from administrative functions, education and banking, trading, insurance and small-scale
manufacturing like garri making, gara tie and dye, agricultural production of swamp rice,
bike riding, and tailoring to name but a few. The district is also known for its gold and
diamond mining both nationally and internationally as the major economic activities for the
district.

3.3 STUDY POPULATION

Population in statistics is the universe of units from which a sample is to be selected whilst
sampling is the process of selecting units (e.g. People, organizations) from a population of
interest so that by studying the sample we may fairly generalize our results back to the
population from which they are chosen (Tochim, 2012)

The population for this study comprises of all students, pupils, and academic staff
(Teachers and lecturers) within Bo city as at the time of research.

3.4 SAMPLE FRAME

In statistics, a sampling frame is the source material or device from which a sample is
drawn. It is a list of all those within a population who can be sample and may include
individuals, households or institutions (https:// en.m.wikipedia.org 25/07/2019). The
sample frame which was drawn from the study population represents 300 students and
pupils with 100 academic staff and teachers which was done through listing.
34
3.5 SAMPLE SIZE

The sample size selected for this study is 70 respondents which consist of 55 students and
15 academic staff (lecturers). This was done to ensure representatives of the population in
terms of reliability and validity of the study result.

3.6 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

In order to avoid bias in the selection of the respondents of both academic staff and
students, a simple random sampling technique was employed by the researcher. The
starting point from the sampling frame was obtained by using lottery methods, the study
participants were selected using systematic random sampling techniques until the desired
sample size was obtained.

Also, in selecting respondents for questionnaire administration, random sampling was done,
this involved the random selection of staff and students using a ballot technique. Those
that were chosen in the process were then interviewed for the study.

3.7 SOURCES OF DATA

For the purpose of this study, there were two main sources from which information was
obtained. The made used of primary and secondary sources of data. The secondary data
gave the researcher vital information that the respondents were unable to give about the
study area. Therefore, the data were gathered from text books by using the libraries
(Institute of Geography Library, Njala University Bo campus and the main Njala University
Library), to assess, articles, journals, past student’s dissertations, as well as the internet
(google search engine).

The primary data was collected directly in the field through the administering of semi-
structured questionnaires from the sampled population. This procedure was followed with a
formal and informal personal interview from residents.

3.8 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

The instrument used for primary data collection for the study was semi-structured
questionnaire. Both open ended and closed ended questions were asked. Sometimes when

35
open ended questions were asked, the respondents will give more answers than closed
ended questions. The questions were asked based on the research objectives of the study.
A notepad and pen were also used by the researcher to record observations and personal
discussions to enhance the research.

3.9 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES

This study was conducted in 2022-2023 academic year. The researcher therefore made
used of secondary and primary data using different procedures. Secondary data was
collected from textbooks and search web engines. This helps the researcher to have vital
information which was used in the background of the study and the review of relevant
literature.

Also, the primary data collection was done by first making a preliminary visit to educational
institutions within Bo city. The researcher met with the various stakeholders in October,
2022 and that was used as an opportunity to collect data for the sample frame. Finally, the
questionnaire was administered through a formal face-to-face interview with respondents
to elicit first hand data for the study.

In conducting this study, all ethical considerations such as voluntary participation (intrusion
in to people’s lives), No harm to participants (emotional stress, embarrassment, danger of
being identified), No harm to participants (emotional stress, embarrassment,) Informed
consent (subjects in a study must base their voluntary participation on a full understanding
of the possible risks involved). Anonymity and confidentiality (can’t be identified only
researchers know) were observed. I further told them that it was an academic requirement
and any information gathered from my respondents would be treated personal and
academic.

3.10 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

In analysing and interpreting of the data, a template was developed where the data was
analyse using Statistical Package for Social Scientist (20.0 version) and Excel (2010)
computer program to present the frequencies, percentages and charts in a form of spread
sheet for the analysis of the results. Also, data analysis was done according to study
objectives and it took the form of both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Qualitatively,
words were used and numbers was used quantitatively for the analysis and presentation of
36
data.

37
3.10.1 Coding and Summary of Data

When the data was collected from the field, the answers to each question on the recording
schedule were coded, tallied, summarized and inputted into the Statistical Package for
Social Scientist (SPSS 20.0 version). The data that was coded for both closed and open-
ended questions. The coded answers were inputted into the SPSS spread sheet. Also, open
questions were manually typed as variables into the micro-soft Excel program which aid the
research in the statistical analysis of the data collected into frequencies and percentages in
the form of spread sheet.

3.10.2 Statistics

The collected data were coded into numerical, complied, tabulated and analysed keeping
the objectives in mind. In order to categorize and explain the data, various statistical
measures such as frequencies, percentage and graph were used in describing the selected
variables, where ever applicable. Also, tables were used in presenting data for clarify of
understanding.

3.10.3 Interpretation of Data

The statistics that were calculated from the summarised table were interpreted.
Frequencies and percentages were used to interpret the data on tables and graphs and
later describe in words; with the highest value obtained in each figure and table represent
majority; while the lowest value represent minority.

38
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents the result and discussions on data collected in the field. The data
collected was analyzed according to the objectives of the study. Furthermore, the results
are discussed in relation to existing research findings in the review of literature.

4.1.0 SOCIO - DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Socio-demographics are nothing more than characteristics of a population. This explains

the population characteristics of respondents covered in the study area. These
characteristics are: sex, age, educational status, household size, occupation, and religion of
respondents interviewed in the study area by the researcher.

4.1.1 SEX OF RESPONDENTS

This includes norms, behaviors and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy.
This reflected the population dynamics of men and women in the study area. Respondents
were asked to state their sex and the responses are presented in table 1 above.

Table 1 Distribution of respondents by sex

SEX OF RESPONDENTS FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Male 42 60.0

Female 28 40.0

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field survey data 2022

From the above table, result in the field explained that majorities (60.0%) of the
respondents were male and minority (40.0%) was female respectively. The result shows
that men are more interested in pursuing education than the females. This result is in line
and agrees with
39
Koroma (2016), who revealed that many are males in education institutions than female as
males are mostly interested in education than women.

4.1.2 EDUCATIONAL STATUS OF RESPONDENTS

This describes the formal and non- formal processes by which knowledge is acquired. The
level of education is believed to influence decision making, level of understanding and
practices of individuals. The table below illustrates the percentage distribution of education
level of respondents.

Table 2 The Distribution of respondents by educational status

EDUCATIONAL LEVEL FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

Secondary 20 28.6

Tertiary 50 71.4

TOTAL 70 100.0

Source: Field survey 2022

Result from the above table revealed that there are more people in the study area that
have acquired tertiary education which comprises of (71.4%) respondents while the
minority respondents (28.6%) attained secondary education. This implies that most
computer friendly in the study area most have attained tertiary education.

This agrees with finding of Kamara (2019) who observed that, information and
communication technological facilities are mostly common in tertiary institutions than
secondary schools.

4.1.3 OCCUPAATION OF RESPONDENTS

This denotes a definite means of earning to sustain a livelihood and explain whether a
person employed or unemployed.

40
In order to determine the kind of occupation engaged by respondent, they were asked to
the major livelihood activity they are engaged in. Result obtained from their responses is
distributed in the table below.

41
Table 3 Distribution of respondents by occupation

OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Student 33 47.1

Trader 2 4.2

Pupil 29 41.4

Okada rider 3 5.2

An NGO worker 3 2.1

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From table 3 above, finding from the field explains that majorities (47.1%) of the
respondents are students from tertiary institution and 41.4% of the respondents are pupils.
The minority respondents are trader, okada rider and NGO worker. This finding is in line
with Bah (2020) who revealed that majority of technology user’s friendly pupil must have
acquired some form of formal education. Again, Koroma (2018) in his study observe that
since ICT has been introduced in educational systems, majority pupils and students have
acquired vast understanding and knowledge on computer operation.

4.1.4 HOUSEHOLD SIZE OF RESPONDENTS

The researcher asked the respondent the number of people in their household. In other
words, people eating from the same pot and living together as family. The table provided
was recorded in predetermined range of numbers. Respondents were asked to know their
household population; the result obtained from their responses is presented in the table 5
below.

42
Table 4 The Distribution of respondents by household size

HOUSEHOLD SIZE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

5-9 51 72.9

10-14 19 27.1

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From table 4 above, the result shows that majority (72.9%) of the households has
populations that range from 5-9 and minority (27.1%) of respondents has a household size
of 10-14 members. The average household size of respondents is 7 reflecting a large
household population in the study area. This result supports Jalloh (2020) who reveals that
most households with students or pupils have a large household size as most people
migrate to acquire quality and higher education.

4.1.5 RELIGION OF RESONDENTS

Respondents were asked to state their religion and the responses are presented in table 5
below

Table 5 The Distribution of respondents by religion.

RELIGION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

Christianity 37 52.9

Islam 33 47.7

TOTAL 70 100.0

Source: Field Survey data 2022

43
From table 5 above majority of the respondent are practicing Christianity (52.9%) and the
minority (47.7%) practice Islam. This result is in discordance with the expected result,
which states that Islam is the dominant religion in the study area. Since it was postulated
by Pew Research Center in (2015) that is Islam has got (78%) of the population serving as
majority in the country.

4.1.6 AGE BRACKET OF RESPONDENTS

Age is defined as the number of years or birthday’s one spent on earth. Age is a
fundamental characteristic of a population; therefore, the age bracket of respondents
explained the members that were interviewed. The sample respondents were asked what
their age is. Though their ages were given in a whole number, they were determined by
age brackets. The result obtained from their responses was presented in table 6 below.

Table 6 Distribution of respondents by age bracket

AGE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

11-20 23 32.9

21-30 39 55.7

31-40 8 11.4

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From table 6 above, it is obvious that nearly half of the respondents (55.7%) are in the
range of 21-30years, and the minorities (32.9%) are between 11-20years from the
findings, this could be the fact that the average age bracket of the respondents is 30yrs
which reflects a youthful, young adult and abled population within the study area. It be
found out that majority of the respondents are in the tertiary institution were as the
minority are in secondary pursuing their education

44
4.2.0 THE IMPACTS OF INFORMATION COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY (ICT)
TO INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES
IN TERTIARY EDUCATION DELIVERY

This section presents and discusses to understand the impacts of information

communication technology to institutional capacity and access to technological resources in
tertiary education delivery in the study area, it deals with the following, technology device
usage, availability of technological device, the available technology device, computer lab
availability, number of computer available, whether tutors are skilled in using technological
devices and internet facility availability in institutions.

4.2.1 TECHNOLOGY DEVICE USAGE

Respondents were asked if they have ever used any technological device in their secondary
school or tertiary institution and responses are represented in figure 3.

Technology device usage

NO
30%

YES
70%

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Figure 3 Illustration of respondents by use of technological device

45
From figure3 above, it is illustrated that most (70%) of the respondents use technology
device in their school schools or institutions whilst the minority (30%) did not use
technological devices in their learning process. This result implies that most education
institutions have adopted information and communication technology in their education
service delivery.

This agrees with Conteh (2015), who reveals that majority senior secondary schools and
tertiary institutions have been given ICT support to boost their system.

In a study conducted by Attwell, et, al,(2010) on pedagogic approaches to using

technology for learning, when students were asked to rate themselves in term of utilizing
technology in their learning visa-vis cumulatively 84.9%rated themselves at a percentage of
above 50% implying that most students felt they were more technology users than
traditional users. Therefore, it is expected that majority of students utilizes more of
technological devices/ tool rather than the effective used of traditional method.

4.2.2 AVAILABILITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES

Respondents were asked if there are provisions for the availability of technological devices
in their secondary school and tertiary institution their responses are represented figure four
below presents the result of their responses.

YESNO

36%

64%

Source: Field Survey data 2022

46
Figure 4 Illustration of respondents of those that have provisions for
technological devices available in their secondary school and tertiary institution.

From the above figure, finding from the field reveals that majority (64%) of the
respondents admitted to the availability of technology devices in their schools and
institution while 36% respondents reported that they do not have technology devices in
their schools and institutions.

This is in line with finding of Koroma (2018) who reveals that most school and tertiary
institutions own technological devices and have ICT departments.

Also, the result from the field agrees with Ritzhaupt et al., (2012), emphasized that
although researchers have advice that there is need for schools and learning institutions to
purchase technological devices and equipment to be place in classrooms, libraries, and
labs; nonetheless, teachers are reporting a short fall in training and lack of competency in
using current educational technology.

4.2.3 THE AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES.

Respondents were asked for the type of technological devices available in their institutions,
the result of their responses is represented in the table below.

type of technology device

internetprinterprojectorcomputer

14%

21%
58%

7%

Field Survey data 2022

Figure 5 illustration of respondents by the type of technology devices present

47
From the above figure, finding from the field illustrates that majority (57%) of the
respondents admitted to have computers in their schools and institutions, 22% of the
respondents have printers, 14% respondent’s own internet and the minority (7%) admitted
to have projector in their schools and institutions. This implies that technology use has
been diffused in the educational system of Sierra Leone. This support the result of Karim
(2020), who explains that since the nation has transformed from analog to digital.

4.2.4 COMPUTER LAB AVAILABILITY

Respondents were asked if they have computer lab available in their secondary school and
tertiary institution there given responses is represented in figure 6 below.

availability of computer lab

YESNO

68.6

31.4

Category 1

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Figure 6 illustration of respondents on whether they have computer lab.

Figure 6 above illustrates that, most respondents (68.6%) admitted to that they have ICT
lab in their schools and tertiary institutions whilst the minority (31.4%) respondents do
not]t have computer lab in their schools and tertiary institutions. This agrees with Alpha
(2019) who reveals that schools and tertiary institutions with ICT lab and facilities dominate
those without the said facility.

48
Moreover, findings with (Kandeh, 2019) agrees that minority of the institutions are not
having a computer lab. Also, in establishing the challenges or barriers to ICT/technology
integration in Africa, teachers were asked to rate on a like scale of major, minor or not a
challenge a number of potential challenges (Johnbull et al., 2010). Other studies indicated
that most teachers were of the opinion that lack of adequate computer laboratory is a
challenge to ICT integration 45.7%.

4.2.5 NUMBER OF COMPUTER AVAILABLE.

Respondents were asked to state the numbers of computers present in their institutions
and their responses are represented in figure 7

49
 Number of computer available

Series 1

21.4

2.90%
11.40%
32.90%
10.00%
20-30
31-40
41-54
51-60
61 AND ABOVE

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Figure 7 illustration of respondents and the number of computers that are

present in their institution.

From the above figure, most of the respondents (32.9%) have about 41to 54 computers in
their institutions, 21.4% respondents have about 61 computers and above, also 11.4% of
the respondents have within 31-40 computers whilst the minority (2.9%) of respondents
have about 20-30 computers in their institutions. This also supports finding of Bangura
(2016) who in his research observed that 50% institutions in Sierra Leone own computers.

Also, the result is in line and agrees with the Evidence from a study conducted by Ayere et
al,(2010) on technology integration in Nyeri South District indicated that some secondary
schools (34%) had very few computers and that for most of the schools that had
reasonable number of computers, the main use was in teaching computer studies. Also,
majority of the students have access to computers during their learning while most of those
accessing the computers for learning purposes spend less than two hours per week. This
clearly indicates that schools and higher institutions in Africa are yet to fully tap on the vast
opportunities for learning using technology (Sesay, 2018).

50
4.2.5 INTERNET FACILITY AVAILABLE IN INSTITUTION

Respondents were asked whether they have internet facility available in their institution
and their given responses are represented in figure 8 below.

available internet facility

31%

69%

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Figure 8 illustration of respondents who have internet facility in their institution

From the above figure, finding reveals that most respondents (69%) have internet facilities
in their institutions, whilst minority (31%) of the respondents reported that they do not
have internet facility in their institutions. This implies that the internet use has been
adopted in education systems of Sierra Leone as most students use internet to research for
notes and do findings. This agrees with Kanneh (2012) that majority (70%) of the students
use internet facilities in their institution.

This result is also in line with (Johnson,2020) Technology has been perceived as a
communication platform in education systems. For past centuries, geographical distance
was a major hurdle when it came to communicating with people around the world.
Technology has changed that. Through network and the internet, it is now possible to
communicate with anyone in the world (Lawundeh, 2021). The establishment of
Directorate of ICT is making it possible for relevant course materials to be embedded on
the university’s website, but limited in terms of its capability to be used flexibly for
51
students to be able to interact

52
collaboratively with tutors/lecturers in producing and submitting online learning materials
(Conteh, 2020)

53
4.2.6 WHETHER TEACHERS/TUTORS ARE SKILLED IN USING TECHNOLOGICAL
DEVICES.

Respondents were asked to specify whether there are teachers/tutors that have skilled in
using technological devices in their institution as a result of their responses are represented
in figure

Whether teachers are skilled in using

technological devices
Series 1Column1Column2

0.928 0.085

YES NO

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Figure 9 illustration of respondents based on whether teachers/tutors are

skilled in using technological devices.

From figure nine above, respondents were asked to explain whether there are tutors that
have skilled in using technological devices result from the filed revealed that majority
(92%) attended institutions that have tutors/teachers who are skilled in using technological
devices while the minority (8%) respondents do not have lecturers who are skilled in the
use of technological devices. this implies that most lecturers in institution in the study area
but disagree with the finding of Kamara (2019) who also emphasized that less than 40% of
lecturers/teachers are skilled in use of technology device.

The result is also in line with (Jackson, 2015) by saying on regards to intercity or
frequency in which teachers made use of technology in performing basic teaching and

54
learning roles,

55
it emerged that the minority of teachers had never used technology in performance of
tasks such as: preparing record of works, using digital notes and lesson presentation in
class using projectors for students, most had never used technology for finding information
via internet, communication or networking with them or using specific subject software for
learning purposes. Empirically, evidence from a study in Nyeri South District of Kenya
revealed that 60% of teachers in Nyeri South District do not use the internet or computers
to prepare lesson materials.

4.3 FUNCTIONALITIES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF TECHNOLOGY TOOL IN

EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY

This section presents and discusses to understand the function and effectiveness of
technology tools in education service delivery in the study area. It deals with the following,
whether institutions curriculum accommodate ICT as a module, technology usage to apply
for admission, accessibility of grades and other document through the use of technology,
how often do you have access to computer in your institution, which teaching or lecture
method best applied to your institution, task performed by lecturers towards adopting
technology in education and the method adopted by lecturers to designed learning
materials.

4.3.1 WHETHER INSTITUTION CURRICULUM ACCOMMODATE ICT AS A

MOUDLE/SUBJECT.

Respondents were asked to state whether their curriculum incorporate ICT in their syllabus
and their responses were recorded in the table below.

56
institution curriculum accommodate ICT as moudle
YESNO

36%

64%

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Figure 10 illustration of respondents on whether institution curriculum

accommodate ICT as a module

From table 10 above, most respondents (64%) admitted that their institutions curriculum
adopts ICT as a subject whilst the minority (36%) respondents do not have ICT as a
module/subject in their institution. This implies that institutions that lecture ICT as subject
are dominant in the study area than those that do not adopt ICT in the syllabus. It agrees
with Koroma (2018) who conducted that since we are living in a technology advanced era,
most learning institutions have incorporated ICT in their school curriculum.

Meanwhile, additional research reports numerous schools are actively engaged in the
integration of technology in to the curriculum (Cakie, 2012). Educational administrators
recognize the evolution of technological integration as a logical step towards educational
reform (Berrett, Murphy et al, 2012). However, they are convinced that ICT, if properly
integrated, has the potential to enhance the teaching and learning process (Thompson,
2013). If properly integrated, ICT- enabled education has the potential to promote the
development of students’ decision-making and problem-solving skills, data processing skills,
and communication capabilities (Bockarie, 2020).

4.3.2 TECHNOLOGY USAGE TO APPLY FOR ADMISSION

Respondents in the study area were asked to state whether they use technology to apply
for admission in institutions and their responses are recorded in the table below.

57
Table 7 Distribution of respondents on technology use to apply for admission

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Yes 41 58.6

No 29 41.4

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, most of the respondents (58.6%) accepted that they apply for
admissions in to their institutions online or the use of computer and internet whilst the
minority (41.4%) respondents did not apply for admission through the use of technology.
This implies that most education institutions in the study area adopt the use of technology
for admission or enrollment purposes. This agrees with Minah (2020)., Jackson (2016) who
reveals that only few institutions in Sierra Leone adopted the use of online application for
admission. Also mentioned that, the integration of learning technology in Sierra Leone’s
higher education system, The University of Sierra Leone being the oldest HEI in the country
has three major institutions, namely Fouraah Bay College (FBC), Institute of Public
Administration and Management (IPAM) and the College of Medicine and Allied Health
Sciences (COHMAS). Currently, the university hosts a single website and from which the
three institutions are linked with essentials resources. The website lacked integrated
facilities to allow integrated learning resources for the enhancement of flexible learning in
the 21st century.

4.3.3 ACCESSIBILITY OF GRADES AND OTHER DOCUMENT THROUGH THE USE

OF TECHNOLOGY

Respondents in the study area whether they access grades and other documents through
the use of internet and the table below present the result of their responses.

Table 8 Distribution of respondents on whether they access grade and other

documents through the use of internet

58
 OPTION FREQUENCY PERCNETAGE (%)

Yes 46 65.7

No 24 34.3

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data2022

From the above table, majority (65.7%) respondents admit that they access grades and
other learning documents through the internet and the minority (34.3%) respondents did
not access neither grades nor essential documents from internet or online. This disagrees
with finding of Conteh (2020), who reported that the establishment of Directorate of ICT is
making it possible for relevant course materials to be embedded on the university’s
website, but limited in terms of its capability to be used flexibly for student to be able to
interact collaboratively with tutors/ lecturers in producing and submitting online learning
materials

4.3.4 HOW OFTEN DO YOU HAVE ACCESS TO COMPUTER

Respondents were asked on how often they access computer in their institutions and the
below presents the result of their responses.

Table 9 Distribution of respondents on how often they access computer in their

institution

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Daily 28 40.

Months and more 5 7.1

Weekly 23 32

59
 Monthly 14 20

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Feld Survey data 2020

From the above table, most of the respondents (40%) accept that they access computer
daily in their institutions, 32.9% of the respondent’s weekly access computer and 20%
respondent’s monthly access computers in their institution. Minority of the respondents
(7.1% admitted that they only access computers after two months or more in their
institutions. This result reveals that majority of the students in institutions frequently access
computer.

This is in line with Sheriff (2020), who reveals that most (60%) of education institutions
allow their students to frequently access computer to become user friendly. Also, majority
of the students had no access to computers during their learning while most of those
accessing the computers for learning purposes spend less than two hours per week. This
clearly indicates that schools and higher institutions in Africa are yet to fully tap on the vast
opportunities for learning using technology (Sesay, 2018).

4.3.5 WHICH TEACHING OR LECTURE METHOD BEST APPLY TO YOUR

INSTITUTION

Respondents were asked to know the teaching or lecture method they use for learning and
their responses are presented in the table below

Table 10 Distribution of respondents on which teaching or lecture method best

applied to your institution.

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Digital 10 14.3

Face to face 53 75.7

Texts 7 10.0

60
 TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, findings in the field reveals that the most of the respondents
(75.7%) acquired learning through face to face teaching and lectures, 14.3% respondents
adopt digital learning method in institutions and the minority respondents (10%)
experienced the use of text as a means through teachers or lecturers impact knowledge to
their students. This implies that despite the advancement in technology in education
system of our nation, most institutions still adopt traditional method of teaching and
lecturing that adoption of digital learning platform.

This result is in accordance with (Jackson, 2015) on regards to intensity or frequency in

which teachers made use of technology in performing basic teaching and learning roles, it
emerged that the majority of teachers had never used technology in performance of tasks
such as: preparing records of work, using digitalized notes and lessons presentation in class
using projectors for the students, most had never used technology for finding information
via internet, communication or net working with them or using specific subject software for
learning purposes. Empirically, evidence from a study in Nyeri South District of Kenya
revealed that 60% of teachers in Nyeri South District do not use the internet or computers
to prepare learning materials.

4.3.6 TASKS PERFORMED BY LECTURERS TOWARDS ADOPTING TECHNOLOGY

IN EDUCATION.

Respondents were asked to know the tasked performed by their lecturers and teachers
towards technology adoption in learning and their responses are presented in the table
below.

Table 11 Distribution of tasks performed by teachers or lecturers towards

adopting technology in education

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Preparing records of works 23 32.9

61
 Use projector to teach 22 31.4

Had never use technology 25 35.7

TOTAL 70 100.0

Source: Field Survey data 2022

Table 11 above illustrates that majority (35.7%) respondents admit that their and lecturers
had never use technology to teach, 32.9% respondents report that their lectures use
computer to prepare records and the minority (31.4%) of the respondents admit that their
lecturers use projector to teach and lecture. This implies that despite the advancement in
technology, most lecturers still adopt traditional method of teaching and lecturing than the
adoption of digital learning platform. This result is in accordance with (Jackson,2015.,
Sesay, 2018) on regards to intensity of frequency in which teachers made use of
technology in performing basic teaching and learning roles, it emerged that the majority of
teachers had never used technology in performance of tasks such as: preparing records of
work, using digitalized notes and lessons presentation in class using projectors for the
students, most had never used technology for finding information via internet,
communication or networking with them or using specific software for learning purposes.

4.3.7 METHODS ADOPTED BY TEACHERS/LECTURERS TO DESIGN LEARNING

MATERIALS.

Respondents were asked to explain the methods adopted by their lecturers to design
learning materials and their responses are represented in the table below.

62
Table 12 Distribution of respondents by the methods adopted by tutors to
design learning materials

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Use of internet 20 28.6

Use of computer 25 35.7

Textbooks 22 31.4

None 3 4.3

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, finding reveals that majority (35.7%) respondents admit that most
of the lecturers in their institution use computer to type their lesson notes or prepare
teaching materials whilst the minority respondents (4.3%) admit that their lecturers did not
use any technology device to prepare teaching materials. Again 31.4% of respondents
report that their tutor use textbook to prepare lesson notes or teaching materials and
28.6% respondents accept that their tutors use internet to prepare teaching materials. This
implies that, most and lecturers utilize technology to prepare teaching or lesson materials.

This disagrees with a study conducted by Attwell, et al, (2010) on pedagogic approaches to
using technology for learning, when students were asked to rate themselves in terms of
utilizing technology in their learning visa-vis traditional methods of textbooks and hand
written notes, cumulatively 84.9% rated themselves at a percentage of below 50%
implying that most students felt they were more traditional users of learning methods than
technology users. Therefore, it is expected that majority of lectures and students utilizes
more of traditional methods of education rather than effective use of technological tools.

63
4.4 EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION

This section explains the impacts the adoption of technology has on education service
delivery in the study area. It deals with the following; has the adoption of technology in
education improves your learning competencies, how technology adoption in
college/university impact learning competency, and the level of performance on technology
device usage.

4.4.1 HAS THE ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION IMPROVES YOUR

LEARNING COMPETENCIES

Respondents were asked to know whether the adoption of technology in education system
improved their learning competencies and result obtained are illustrated in the table below.

Table 13 Distribution of respondents on whether technology improves learning

competencies

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Yes 45 64.3

No 25 35.7

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, finding from the field illustrates that most of the respondents
(64.3%) admit that the adoption of technology in education improved their learning
competencies whilst the minority the minority respondents (35.7%) report that technology
integration in education system did not improve their learning competencies. This implies
that technology adoption in education systems have helped in improving learning
competencies of lecturers and students. Hence this result supports findings that technology
has helped to improve education standard (Alpha, 2021).

64
This agrees with (Bockarie, 2020) much has been said and reported about the impact of
technology, especially computers, in education. Much research has been conducted
throughout the world to evaluate the positive effects of technology on learning, and to
investigate the kind of enhanced learning environment that technology provides in the
classroom. (Pratt, 2017) in short, considerable resource have been invested to justify the
place of technology in education, and many research studies have revealed the benefits
and gains that can be achieved by students, lecturers and administrators.

In addendum, technology creates an enhanced learning environment for learners.

Technology provides a motivating learning environment whereby learners are given the
opportunity to be constructively engaged with instruction (Thompson, 201).

4.4.2 HOW TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION IN INSTITUTION IMPACT LEARNING

COMPETENCY

Respondents were asked to state how technology adoption impact on their learning
competencies and their responses are presented in the table below.

65
Table 14 Distribution of respondents of how technology adoption in institution
impact their learning competency

RESPONSES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

The adoption of technology has 18 25.9

made me to be literates in a
computer and its programs

It has also helped me to acquired 15 21.5

more knowledge on doing a
research and analyzed data on my
own, in my device (computer,
phones, iPod)

Has also improved modern learning 8 4.8

and makes me to cultivate different
learning method in operating a
technological device

Helped me to acquired different 1 1.4

skills in dealing with electronic
digital devices

Not stated 25 35.7

Has helped me to know more about 3 7.2

my course study area (Information
Technology and Business
Information Technology)

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

66
From the above table, majority (35.7%) of respondents did not state how technology
advancement impact on their learning competencies and the minority (1.4%) admit that
technology advancement has improved their skills on the use of digital appliances. The
other respondents agree that ICT has improved their improved modern learning, allow
students to have in-depth on their course area, aid in research and improve their computer
literacy. This disagrees with Kamara (2019), who reveals that most (70%) of pupils and
students use technology to research for notes and tutorials within their course area.

4.4.3 LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE ON TECHNOLOGY DEVICE USAGE

Respondents were asked to explained their level of performance on technology device

usage and their and result obtained are illustrated in the table below.

Table 15 Distribution of respondents on their level of performance on

technology device usage

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Excellent 5 7.1

Very good 14 20.0

Fairly good 13 18.6

Good 13 18.6

Poor 25 35.7

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, finding revel that majority (35.7%) of the respondents there are
poor with regards computer usage, 20% respondents are very good in computer usage and
minority (7.1%) respondents are excellent in terms of computer usage. This agrees with

67
Barrie (2017) who explains that most students and pupils in Sierra Leone have limited
understanding and knowledge on computer package usage.

4.5 CHALLENGES OF TECHNOLOGY FRIEDLY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

Setbacks/challenges in achieving technologically friendly educational system is defined as

events that delays the progress or reverse some of the progress made in trying to integrate
technology into education.

4.5.1 INTERNAL OBSTICLES YOU FACE IN ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY

Respondents were asked to mention the internal obstacles face in adoption of technology
responses from the field were recorded in the table below.

Table 16 Distribution of respondents on the internal obstacles they faced in

technology adoption

RESPONSES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Not computer smart 18 25.7

Uneducated in ICT 23 32.9

Lack of financial resources 29 41.4

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From table 16 above, majority (41.4%) of the respondents admit that lack of training on
ICT is an obstacle they face in technology adoption, 32.9% of the respondents reported
computer illiteracy to be a barrier for the adoption of technology whilst the minority
respondents (25.7%) reported that they are not computer smart. This implies that students
still have low understanding and interest in the utilization of technology.

This result agrees with (Johnson 2020), at national and local level, lack of basic
technological infrastructure and inadequate manpower skills is also a challenge facing
educational institutions in Sierra Leone. Computer-based courses are delivered in most

68
education system

69
in Sierra Leone, but the state of systems seemed quite slow and old to support current
requirements in building an effective and integrated technology facility for schools and
tertiary institutions in the country (Kandeh, 2019). The major problem is attributed to the
lack of adequate planning in terms of meeting current rise in student’s population, and also
accessing needs requirements to support effective teaching and learning (DFID, 2014).

4.5.2 WHAT ARE THE INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS EXPERIENCE IN ADOPTION OF

TECHNOLOGY

Respondents were asked to analyze the institutional barriers experience in adoption of

technology and their responses are represented in the table below.

Table 17 Distribution of respondents by analyzing the institutional barriers in

adoption of technology

RESPONSES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Lack of specialist in ICT 7 10.0

Lack of financial resources 38 54.3

Lack of policies 25 35.7

TOTAL 70 100.0

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, finding from the field reveals that most (54.3%) institutions and
colleges lack financial resources to procure technology devices that can be used in learning.
Again, 37.7% of respondents report to lack policies that favor the adoption technology in
education system whilst the minority respondents (10%) admit that lack of specialists in
ICT in institutions have served as a barrier to the adoption of technology in education
system. The result is in line with the expected result which says it is expected that the
conservative nature of teachers, lack adequate technological tools and expertise would be
some of the setbacks in achieving technologically friendly education system in the study
area (Alpha, 2018)

70
This result supports the finding of Sesay (2020) who reveals that the common problems
affecting the adoption of technology in education system in Sierra Leone are lacked of
skilled personnel in ICT, and lack resources to acquire technology devices.

4.5.3 WHETEHER THERE IS SUPPORTS FROM GOVERNMENT AND

ORGANIZATION OR AGENCIES FOR INTEGRATION OF TECHNOLOGY IN YOUR
INSTITUTION

Respondents were asked to know whether they have received ant support from
government, agencies and organizations towards the integration of technology and their
responses are presented in the table below.

Table 18 Distribution of respondents on whether there are supports from

government and organization or agencies for integration of technology in
institution

OPTION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Yes 45 64.3

No 25 35.7

TOTAL 70 100

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From table 18 above, majority (64.3%) of the respondents agree to have received support
from organizations and government towards improving the integration of technology in
institution, whilst the minority (35.7%) respondents do not receive any support from either
government or organizations. This implies that there is a growing interest by organizations
and government to support the adoption of technology in education system of Sierra Leone

So therefore, the result is in discordance with (Jackson, 2015) cited again, lack of adequate
funding provision from government is an obvious problem facing learning institutions and
schools in Sub-Saharan region of Africa, in comparison to developed nations where funding
is normal based of accessible use per students. The current lack of technology funding id
making it quite impossible for education institutions to see the reality of meeting their

71
dreams of implementing effective technology to support flexible teaching and learning
(DFID).

72
4.5.4 SUPPORTS RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENT AND ORGANIZATION

Respondents were asked to explain the type of support they received from the government
and organization in their institution the result is presented on the table below

Table 19 Distribution of respondents by the type of support received from

government and organization.

RESPONSES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)

Construction of a computer 10 17.1

lab and provision of
computers.

Provision of technological 12 17.4

gadgets/instruments

Did not state 25 35.7

Internet facility 11 14.1

Conducting trainings on 3 1.4

computer package

Provision of projectors and 9 14.3

board markers

Total 70 100.0

Source: Field Survey data 2022

From the above table, majority of the respondents (35.7%) did not state the type of
support they received from government or other organizations and 14.3% respondents
report that they benefit from construction of computer lab and provision of computers.
Others admit to benefit from supports such as provision of technology gadgets, internet
facility and conducting trainings on computer packages.

73
The result is in accordance with the expected result which says. It is expected that
institutions have access to technological resources needed to improve educational delivery
through government policies, self-provisions and support from other organizations in the
study area.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Summary

Educational technology focuses on technological tools and media that assist in the
communication of knowledge and its development and exchange. Technology in Higher
education is shifting the dynamics of delivery methods from traditional face-to-face to
online to blended (mixed) modes. The changing of the guard is shifting from traditional
instruction to technology-driven interactive online education. The most used tools in this
new educational era are multimedia technology, online learning or e-learning, mobile
learning or m-learning, blogs, and social networks. In recent years, countries in Africa have
tremendously experienced significant growth in the area of technology adoption in their
education systems. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of educational
technological advancement in improving educational delivery. The specific objectives are:
identify institutional capacity or access to technological resources needed for educational
delivery, examine the functionality/effectiveness of technological tools in educational
delivery and assess the setbacks in achieving technologically friendly educational system.
This study is significant to social change because the results of this study reflect how the
advancement of education technology impact educational delivery and add to existing body
of knowledge on how schools and tertiary institutions become more effective in education
service delivery. The study failed to sample all education institutions in the nation
considering the fact that work has to be done alongside other academic work. Review of
related literature focus on access to technological resources required for education,
effectiveness of technology in education system, setbacks in achieving technological

74
friendly education and summary of expected results. The study was designed to be carried
out in Bo city. The research was a case study

75
design and adopts both qualitative and quantitative research methods. The study
population targets all students and pupils in the study area. The sample size consists of 65
pupils and students who were selected randomly. The study utilizes both primary and
secondary sources of data through administration of questionnaire, use of internets,
dissertations, articles and journals. Data was analyzed using EXCEL. For the socio-
demographic characteristics, much focus was on information of the respondents’ sex,
educational status, occupation, household size, religion and age. With regards the access to
technology, focus was on whether schools and tertiary institutions’ access or own
technology devices, the availability of ICT lab and internet facilities, number of computers
and other devices present and level of understanding of tutors on technology device
utilization. Focus was also on the functionalities or effectiveness of technology devices in
education service delivery, effects of technological advancement on education and
challenges to technology friendly education system.

5.2 Conclusion

 For socio-demographic characteristics, majority of the pupils and students in Bo city

are males and most of them must have attained up to tertiary level of education.
Since the population of interest was non-working class, the major occupations of
respondents were students and pupils. The household population in the study
community is relatively high with an average of 7 members per household.
Christians dominates Muslim students and pupils in the study area and majority of
the respondents were youths.
 With regards institutional capacity and access to technology resources, most schools
and tertiary institutions have access to and own some technology devices and the
most common technology devices used are computers and printers. Again, most
education institutions have computer (ICT) labs with internet facility accommodating
more than 20 computers. Most schools and colleges in Bo have teacher and lecturers
that are skilled in using these technology devices.
 For the functionalities and effectiveness of technology devices in education service
delivery, findings concluded that most schools and higher institutions have adopted
ICT in their curriculum. Schools and higher education institutions have transited from
traditional methods of admission to online application although there are difficulties

76
to access grades except for public exams. Majority of the respondents frequently
access

77
 computers in schools and colleges. The most adopted teaching or lecture method is
face to face, although some use computers and projectors for teaching. Majority
tutors hardly use computer to prepare teaching and learning materials.
 Findings on the effects of technological advancement on education system
concluded that, most of the students and pupils experienced improvement in their
learning competencies through adoption of technology as it aids in research for
documents, tutorials, notes and improved their ICT skills. Again, majority pupils and
students in the study area were very good in using computers and other technology
devices used in the education system.
 With regards the challenges to technology friendly education system, majority
students and pupils in the study area suffer from lack of training in ICT as a major
obstacle to in technology adoption. Again, most education institutions lack financial
resources to procure the required technology devices used for learning and teaching
although government provides some form of support such as provision of computer,
projectors, internet facilities and construction of computer labs.

5.3 Recommendations

5.1.1 Recommendation for policy implication

 Government and NGOs need to step up to increase the number of technological

tools available at schools and tertiary institutions and measure ICT usage and
potential outcomes which may help in retention and learning.
 Government should strengthen the potential of public-private partnership in order to
have the most relevant content, infrastructure, capacity building-plan and other
resources in the process of ICT integration in teaching and learning
 There is need for government to ensure an uninterrupted power supply to enable
proper integration of ICT into schools and tertiary institutions
 There is need for government and organizations to focus on teacher technological
training programs and increase in technological infrastructure at schools and higher
institutions.
 Government should increase the reach and quality of campus Wi-Fi networks.

78
5.1.2 Recommendation for further research

 Further research should be focuses on technology adoption in schools and tertiary

institutions, modeling, measuring and supporting knowledge appropriation. This
helps teachers create new teaching and learning methods and adopt them for
classroom use

79
 REFERENCES

 Adams, (2016). Education and social development. Definition of social development.

International Development Education, 38(3), 243-263
 Ahmed, (2011) Urbanization and the challenges of development controls in Ghana: A
case study of Wa Township. Journal of Sustainable Development. Clarion University
of Pennsylvania. USA: Pennsylvania
 Ahmed, (2011) Urbanization and the challenges of development controls in Ghana: A
case study of Wa Township. Journal of Sustainable Development. Clarion University
of Pennsylvania. USA: Pennsylvania.
 Alma (2012,), Report: Schools not meeting students’ technology needs. The Journal.
Retrieved from http://thejournal.com.
 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, 275–289.
doi:10.1080/08832323.2011.622814.
 Chen, Spears, S. A. (2012). Technology-enhanced learning: The effects of 1:1
technology on student performance and motivation (Doctoral thesis). University of
West Florida.
 Chudowsky, N., & Ginsburg, A. (2012, December). Who attends charter schools and
how are those students doing? Exploratory analysis of NAEP data. Retrieved from
National Assessment Governing Board website:
https://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets /documents/what-we-do/quarterly-
board-meeting-materials/2012-11/charter-schoolsnaep-data-analysis.pdf.
 Daudi, Gensburg, R., & Herman, B. (2016). An analysis of the theory of
constructivism as it relates to pre-service and in-service teachers and technology.
Retrieved fromhttps://sites.google.com/a/boisestate.edu/edtechtheories/an-analysis-
of-the- theory ofconstructivism-as-it-relates-to-pre-service-and-in-service-
teachers-and- technology.
 Donovan, L., Hartley, K., & Strudler, N. (2007). Teacher concerns during initial
Implementation of a one-to-one laptop initiative at the middle school level. Journal
of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 263-286.

80
 Ebert, A., K. (2015). Behaviorism vs. constructivism in the technological
secondary education classroom. Retrieved from
https://sites.google.com/a/boisestate.edu/edtechtheories/behaviorismvs-
constructivism-in-the-technological-secondary-education-classroom-1
 Egbert, J. (2017). Supporting learning with technology: Essentials of classroom
practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
 Ehrlich, S. B., Sporte, S. E., & Sebring, P. (2013, April). The use of technology in
Chicago public schools 2011: Perspectives from students, teachers, and principals.
Retrieved from University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research
website: https://consortium.
uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Technology%20Report%202013_0.pdf.
 Ehrmann, Koshino, M., Kojima, Y., & Kanedera, N. (2011). Development and
evaluation of educational materials for embedded systems to increase the learning
motivation. US-China Education. Retrieved from
http://www.davidpublishing.com/journals
 Foitik (2014). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on
technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and
practices. International Society for Technology in Education, 39(1), 22-43.
 Koroma, (2019). The impact of school inspection in selected secondary schools in
the east-end of Freetown. An under graduate dissertation submitted to the school of
education, Njala university
 Kusano, Godzicki, L., Godzicki, N., Krofel, M., & Michaels, R. (2013). Increasing
motivation and engagement in elementary and middle school students through
technology-supported learning environments (Master’s research project, Saint Xavier
University). Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED541343).
Masterman (2016). Academic publishing and its digital binds: Beyond the paywall
towards ethical executions of code. Culture Unbound: Journal of Current t
ep.liu.se/v9
/a17/ cu17v9a17
.pdf
 Ritzhaupt, Flanagan, S., Bouck, E. C., & Richardson, J. (2012). Middle school special
education teachers’ perceptions and use of assistive technology in literacy

81
instruction. Assistive Technology, 25, 24–30. doi:10.1080/10400435.2012.682697

82
 Schuwer Meyer, E. J., Abrami, P. C., Wade, A. A., & Scherzer, R. R. (2017).
Electronic portfolios in the classroom: Factors impacting teachers’ integration of new
technologies and new pedagogies. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20, 191–
207.
doi:10.1080/1475939X.2011.588415.
 UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2011), Global Education Digest 2011, UNESCO
Publishing, Montreal. http://stats.uis.unesco.org
 Adams, S. C. (2016). Improving teacher comfort levels and self-efficacy with
technology integration and application of technology into the elementary education
curriculum through the tech buddy program (Order No. 10120866). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
 Adams, S., & Burns, M. (1999). Connecting student learning and technology.
Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
 Ahmed, K., & Nasser, O. (2015). Incorporating iPad Technology: Creating More
Effective Language Classrooms. TESOL Journal,6(4), 751-765. doi:10.1002/tesj.192.
 Anderson, G. L., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A. S. (1994). Studying your own school: An
educator's guide to qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
 Anderson, R. E., & Becker, H. J. (2001). School investments in instructional
technology. Irvine, CA: Centre for Research on Information Technology and
Organizations, University of California, Irvine
 Autio, O. O. (2016). Changes in attitudes toward craft and technology during the
last 20 years. Journal of Technology Education, 28(1), 53-70.
 Bebell, D. (2005). Technology promoting student excellence: An investigation of the
first year of 1:1 computing in New Hampshire middle schools. Boston: Technology
and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College.
 Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J. L., & Wong, Y. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed
student use of computers and software. Irvine, CA: Centre for Research on
Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine
 Bitner, N., Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: eight keys
to success. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10 (1), 95-100.
 Bitter, G. G., & Pierson, M. (2005) Using technology in the classroom. Boston:
Pearson.
83
 Corkett, J.K., & Benevides, T. (2016). iPad versus handwriting: pilot study exploring
the writing abilities of students with learning disabilities. Journal of International
Special Needs Education, 19(1), 15-24.
 Costabile, A., Spears, B. (Eds.) (2012) The impact of technology on relationships in
educational settings. Abingdon, Oxon.; New York, NY:
 Cuban, L. (1996, October 9). Techno-reformers and classroom teachers. Education
Week on the Web. Retrieved March 22, 2004, from
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1996/10/09/06cuban.h16.html
 Cuban, L. (1997, May 21). High-tech schools and low-tech teaching. Education Week
on the Web. Retrieved March 22, 2004, from
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1997/05/21/34cuban.h16.htm
 Dias, L. B. (1999). Integrating technology. Learning & Leading with Technology,
27(3), 10-13, 21. Dirksen, D. J., & Tharp, D. (2000, June). Moving beyond the
crossroads: Teachers as agents for change. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the National Educational Computing Conference, Atlanta, GA.
 Dwyer, D. C. (1994). Apple classrooms of tomorrow: What we've learned.
Educational Leadership, 51(7), 4-10. Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J. H.
(1990a). Teacher beliefs and practices - Part I: Patterns of change. Cupertino, CA:
Apple Computer
 Eyyam, R., & Yaratan, H. S. (2014). Impact of use of technology in mathematics
lessons on student achievement and attitudes. Social Behavior & Personality: An
International Journal, 4231-42. doi:10.2224/sbp.2014.42.0. S31 Fisher, A.,
 Exley, K., & Ciobanu, D. (2014). Using technology to support learning and teaching.
London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Gardner, D. (2013). Motivating pre-
service teachers to incorporate technology into the classroom (Order No. 3691044).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1667457129). Retrieved
July 14, 2020,
 Heafner, T. (2004). Using technology to motivate students to learn social studies.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 4(1).
Retrieved July 20, 2020, from
http://www.citejournal.org/volume-4/issue-1-04/social- studies/using-technology-to-
motivate-studentsto-learn-social-studies

84
 Idaho Council for Technology in Learning. (1999). The Idaho technology initiative:
An accountability report to the Idaho Legislature on the effects of monies spent
through the Idaho Council for Technology in Learning. Boise, ID: Author.
Integrating New Technologies into the Methods of Education. (1999). Students at
the center of their own learning. Author. Retrieved April 29, 2006, from
http://www.intime.uni.edu/model/center_of_learning_files/definition.html
 Ivers, K. S. (2002, April). Changing teachers' perceptions and use of technology in
the classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, New Orleans, LA
 Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Groff, J., & Hass, J. (2009). The instructional power of
digital games, social networking, simulation, and how teachers can leverage
them. The Education Arcade, 1-21. Retrieved August 10, 2020, from
http://education.mit.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2015/01/GamesSimsSocNets_EdArcade
.pdf
 Lisy, J. G. (2015, January 9). Examining the impact of technology on primary
students' revision of written work. Online Submission. Retrieved August 24, 2020,
from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED568695.pdf.
 Millar, E. (2013). The pros and cons of digital classrooms. Globe & Mail (Toronto,
Canada). Plano Clark, V. L. & Creswell, J. W. (2010). Understanding research: A
consumer’s guide. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
 A. Koroma (2018) Impact of ICT in education service delivery in Freetown.
 Kandeh (2019) Benefits of technology in school curriculum in Bo District
 Conteh A (2020) Attitude perception and knowledge of student on technology
adoption in education system in urban areas.
 Alpha K 2018 Relevance of technology for teaching in tertiary institutions of sierra
Leone.
 Conteh 2018 factors that improve the quality of education in urban areas.
 M Kanneh 2019 Importance of ICT in secondary schools a case study of Bo city.

85
 APPENDICES

QUESTIONAIRE SAMPLE

SEMI-STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY ON

EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY

I am a final year student of Limkokwing University of Creative Technology pursuing a

bachelor’s degree in Rural Business Information Technology. I am currently conducting
research on the impact of information communication technology on tertiary education
service delivery in Bo District. You have been chosen to be part of this study as a
respondent. I therefore request you to kindly give me your honest views on the few
questions below. Where you feel you can’t answer, feel free to skip.

Are you interested or not?

a) Yes b) No

RESEARCH CONTROL

Name of respondent: ………………………………………………………...

District: ……………………………………………………………………...

Name of community: ………………………………………………………...

Chiefdom: …………………………………………………………………...

Questionnaire number: ………………… Place of interview………………………

Date of interview………………...…….

Time started: …………………... Time ended: …………………………...

SECTION A: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

1. Sex: a) Male b) Female c) others (state): ………………………………………………

2. How old are you? ……………………………………………………………………………

86
 3. Which of these bests describes your highest level of education? a) Non-formal b)
primary c) secondary d) tertiary e) Quranic
4. What is your occupation? ……………………………
5. Household size: ……………………………………
6. What is your religion? a) Christianity b) Islam c) others, specify:
………………………

SECTION B: INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL

RESOURCES IN EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY

7. Have you ever used any technological device in your senior secondary school or
tertiary institution? a) Yes b) No
8. Are there provisions for technological devices in your senior secondary school or
tertiary institution? a) Yes b) No
9. If yes from above, state the devices available in your school or learning institution
……………………………
10. Do you have computer lab (ICT lab) in your school or college? a) Yes b) No
11. How many computers are there in your school or tertiary institution? …………….
12. Do you have internet facility in your school? a) Yes b) No
13. Do you have teachers that are skilled in using technological devices? a) Yes b) No

SECTION C: FUNCTIONALITIES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF TECHNOLOGY TOOL IN

EDUCATION SERVICE DELIVERY

14. Does your school curriculum accommodate ICT as a subject? a) Yes b) No

15. Did you use technology to apply for admission in school/institution? a) Yes b) No
16. Do you access grades and other documents through the use of technology? a) Yes
b) No
17.How often do you have access to computers in your school? a) daily b) weekly d)
monthly e) any other please specify: ……………………………………………………….
18.Which teaching or lecture method best applies to your school or institution? a)
Digital b) Face-to-face c) others, specify: ……………………………….………………………

87
 19.Select the appropriate option for the tasks your teachers or lecturers perform
adopting technology in schools? a) preparing records of work b) use projector to
teach c) Had never used technology d) others, state:
……………………………………………...
20.Which method is adopted by teachers or lecturers to design learning materials? a)
use of internet b) use of computer c) textbooks d) hand written notes e)
others, specify:
…………………………………………………………....
21. Are there existing policies that favors the integration of technology in education
service delivery?
22. If yes from above, state the policies: ……………….………………………………………...

SECTION D: EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION

23.Has the adoption of technology in schools and tertiary institutions improved your
working skills to compete in job market a) Yes b) No
24. If yes from above question, how does technology prepare you for job market?
……………………………………..………………
25. Has the adoption of technology in education improved your learning competencies?
a) Yes
b) No
If yes from the above question, how has technology adoption in your school or
college impact your learning competency? …………………………………………………..
……………….
What is your level of performance on technology device usage? a) excellent b) very
good c) fairly good d) good e) poor f) others, specify: ……………………….
……

SECTION E: CHALLENGES OF TECHNOLOGY FRIENDLY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

26.What are the internal obstacles you face in the adoption of technology? a) not
computer smart b) uneducated in ICT c) lack of trainings on ICT d) others
specify: …………………………
88
27.What are the institutional barriers experienced in the adoption of technology in
educational systems? a) Lack of specialists in ICT b) Lack of financial resources
c) Lack of policies d) others, please state: ………………………...……………………………….

89
28.Has your institution or school ever benefited from technical support in technology
sector? a) Yes b) No
29. If yes from above question, state the benefit ………………………………………………….
30.Do you have support from government and organizations or agencies for integration
of technology in your schools or institution? a) Yes b) No
31. If yes from above, what are the supports? ………………………………………………………

90