1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
The rapid growth in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) has
brought remarkable changes in our contemporary society. The use of ICT is already
indispensable in the area of education especially in tertiary and secondary schools.
ICTs are the technologies used in conveying, manipulating and storing of data by
electronic means. They provide an array of powerful tools that may help in
transforming the present isolated teacher-centered and text-bound classrooms into
rich, student-focused, interactive knowledge environments.
Valasidou, Sidiropoulos, Hatzis, and Bousiou-Makridou, (2005) stated that
students frequently use ICT resources especially internet for their studies, and that
internet has huge impact in improving students study habits. Innovation involves
learning to do something in a completely different way by developing new practices
which are both personal and social in that they relate our own practice with the
practices of others. It is often associated with new technologies which provide tools
that make it possible to do things differently. If one is already skilled in doing
something in one way it is likely to seem pointless initially to do it in a different
way(Somekh, 2007).
Two major assumptions underlie the role of ICT: the first is that the
proliferation of these technologies is causing rapid transformations in all areas of life;
the second is that ICT function to unify and standardize culture. It is on the basis of
these assumptions that the term media culture, incorporating the phenomena of
informationalism and globalization (Robins& Webster, 1999).
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) includes computers, the
Internet, and electronic delivery systems such as radios, televisions, and projectors
among others, and is widely used in todays education field. Kent and Facer (2004)
indicated that school is an important environment in which students participate in a
wide range of computer activities, while the home serves as a complementary site for
regular engagement in a narrower set of computer activities. Increasingly, ICT is
being applied successfully in instruction, learning, and assessment.ICT is considered a
powerful tool for educational change and reform. A number of previous studies have
shown that an appropriate use of ICT can raise educational quality and connect

learning to real-life situations (Lowther, Inan, Strahl,& Ross, 2008; Weert & Tatnall,
2005).
Weert andTatnall (2005) have pointed out, learning is an ongoing lifelong
activity where learners change their expectations by seeking knowledge, which
departs from traditional approaches. As time goes by, they will have to expect and be
willing to seek out new sources of knowledge. Skills in using ICT will be an
indispensable prerequisite for these learners.
ICT tends to expand access to education. Through ICT, learning can occur
anytime and anywhere. Online course materials, for example, can be accessible 24
hours a day, seven days week. Teleconferencing classrooms allow both learner and
teacher to interact simultaneously with ease and convenience. Based on ICT, learning
and teaching no longer depend exclusively on printed materials. Multiple resources
are abundant on the Internet, and knowledge can be acquired through video clips,
audio sounds, and visual presentation and so on. Current research has indicated that
ICT assists in transforming a teaching environment into a learner-centered one (Castro
Snchez & Alemn, 2011). Since learners are actively involved in the learning
processes in ICT classrooms, they are authorized by the teacher to make decisions,
plans, also forth (Lu, Hou& Huang, 2010). ICT therefore provides both learners and
instructors with more educational affordances and possibilities.
2.1

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

ICT plays an important role in learning process there is a strong relationship in

between ICT and teaching learning process. To find out this the current studies has
been design to investigate the issues of ICTs in classroom management.
2.2

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The following research objectives were used for the current research study:

i.

To find out the use of ICTs in different departments by the students of the

ii.

university
To find out the level of using ICTs on behalf of the teachers in different

iii.

subjects
To find out the issues related to the use of ICTs in university

2.3

RESRARCH QUESTIONS
The following research questions guided the study:

i.

How much do the students use ICTs in different departments of the university?

ii.
iii.
2.4

How much do the teachers use ICTs in different subjects?

What is the issue of using ICTs in university?
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
1. The study will be beneficial for teachers to understand the value of using ICTs
in teaching based upon their knowledge about the students use of different
technological equipment. The teachers may adjust their lectures, assignments
and even their advices to the students based upon the findings of this study
because this way they can better guess the mindset of the students.
2. The findings of this study will help in expanding the knowledge of the
students about the use of ICTs.
3. The students may be benefited by the respective administration in terms of
solving their problems right after coming to know the intensity of the issue
they face in the use of ICTs.
4. The future researchers will be benefited by the results of this study. They will
easily come to know the various research gaps related to the use of ICTs by
the students.

2.5

DELIMITIONS OF STUDY
There are basically 13 departments working in University of Haripur.This

study was delimited to only 10 departments of university of Haripur due to lack of

resources and lack of time.

Chapter2

LITERATURE REVIEW
Information and communication technology (ICT) is a force that has changed
many aspects of the way we live. If one was to compare such fields as medicine,
tourism, travel business, law, banking, engineering and architecture, the impact of ICT
across the past two or three decades has been enormous. The way these fields operate
today is vastly different from the ways they operated in the past. But when one looks
at education, there seems to have been an uncanny lack of influence and far less
change than other fields have experienced. A number of people have attempted to
explore this lack of activity and influence (Soloway & Prior, 1996; Collis, 2002).
There have been a number of factors impeding the wholesale uptake of ICT in
education across all sectors. These have included such factors as a lack of funding to
support the purchase of the technology, a lack of training among established teaching
practitioners, a lack of motivation and need among teachers to adopt ICT as teaching
tools (Starr, 2001). But in recent times, factors have emerged which have strengthened
and encouraged moves to adopt ICTs into classrooms and learning settings. These
have included a growing need to explore efficiencies in terms of program delivery, the
opportunities for flexible delivery provided by ICTs (Oliver &Short, 1997) the
capacity of technology to provide support for customized educational programs to
meet the needs of individual learners (Kennedy &McNaught, 1997) and the growing
use of the internet and www as tools for information access and communication.
As we move into the 21st century, these factors and many others are bringing
strong forces to bear on the adoption of ICTs in education and contemporary trends
suggest we will soon see large scale changes in the way education is planned and
delivered as a consequence of the opportunities and affordances of ICT. This paper
seeks to explore the likely changes we will see in education as ICT acts as a powerful
agent to change many of the educational practices to which we have become
accustomed. In particular, the paper will explore the impact both current and emerging
information and communication technologies will be likely to have in coming years
on what is learned, when and where learning will take place and how the learning will
occur.
2.1

INFORMATION COMMUNICATIONTECHNOLOGY (ICT)

Information Communication Technology (ICT) is the application computers

and telecommunication equipment to store, retrieve, transmit and manipulate data
often in the context of a business or other enterprise (Daintith & John, 2009). ICT is
an umbrella term that includes any communication device or application,
encompassing: radio, television, cellular phones, computer and network hardware and
software, satellite systems and so on, as well as the various services and applications
associated with them, such as videoconferencing and distance learning. ICTs are often
spoken of in a -particular context, such as ICTs in education, health care, or libraries
(Abe & Adu, 2007). A branch of engineering dealing with the use of computers and
telecommunications equipment to store, retrieve, transmit and manipulate data
(Daintith, 2009).
2.2

ICT ENHANCING TEACHING AND LEARNING PROCESS

The field of education has been affected by ICTs, which have undoubtedly

affected teaching, learning and research (Yusuf, 2005).ICTs have the potential to
accelerate, enrich, and deepen skills, to motivate and engage students, to help relate
school experience to work practices, create economic viability for tomorrow's
workers, as well as strengthening teaching and helping schools change (Davis and
Tearle, 1999; Lemke and Coughlin, 1998; cited by Yusuf, 2005). In a rapidly changing
world, basic education is essential for an individual be able to access and apply
information. Such ability must find include ICTs in the global village.
Conventional teaching has emphasized content. For many years course have
been written around textbooks. Teachers have taught through lectures and
presentations interspersed with tutorials and learning activities designed to
consolidate and rehearse the content. Contemporary settings are now favoring
curricula that promote competency and performance. Curricula are starting to
emphasize capabilities and to be concerned more with how the information will be
used than with what the information is. Contemporary ICTs are able to provide strong
support for all these requirements and there are now many outstanding examples of
world class settings for competency and performance-based curricula that make sound
use of the affordances of these technologies (Oliver, 2000).
The integration of information and communication technologies can help
revitalize teachers and students. This can help to improve and develop the quality of
education by providing curricular support in difficult subject areas. To achieve these

objectives, teachers need to be involved in collaborative projects and development of

intervention change strategies, which would include teaching partnerships with ICT as
a tool. According to Zhao and Cziko (2001) three conditions are necessary for
teachers to introduce ICT into their classrooms: teachers should believe in the
effectiveness of technology, teachers should believe that the use of technology will
not cause any disturbances, and finally teachers should believe that they have control
over technology. However, research studies show that most teachers do not make use
of the potential of ICT to contribute to the quality of learning environments, although
they value this potential quite significantly (Smeets, 2005).
Harris (2002) conducted case studies in three primary and three secondary
schools, which focused on innovative pedagogical practices involving ICT. Harris
(2002) concludes that the benefits of ICT will be gained when confident teachers are
willing to explore new opportunities for changing their classroom practices by using
ICT. As a consequence, the use of ICT will not only enhance learning environments
but also prepare next generation for future lives and careers (Wheeler, 2001).
Changed pool of teachers will come changed responsibilities and skill sets for future
teaching involving high levels of ICT and the need for more facilitative than didactic
teaching roles (Littlejohn et al., 2002).
The flexibilization time-space accounted for by the integration of ICT into
teaching and learning processes contributes to increase the interaction and reception
of information. Such possibilities suggest changes in the communication models and
the teaching and learning methods used by teachers, giving way to new scenarios
which favour both individual and collaborative learning. The use of ICT in
educational settings, by itself acts as a catalyst for change in this domain. ICTs by
their very nature are tools that encourage and support independent learning. Students
using ICTs for learning purposes become immersed in the process of learning and as
more and more students use computers as information sources and cognitive tools
(Reeves & Jonassen, 1996), the influence of the technology on supporting how
students learn will continue to increase.
In the past, the conventional process of teaching has revolved around teachers
planning and leading students through a series of instructional sequences to achieve a
desired learning outcome. Typically, these forms of teaching have revolved around the
planned transmission of a body of knowledge followed by some forms of interaction

with the content as a means to consolidate the knowledge acquisition. Contemporary

learning theory is based on the notion that learning is an active process of constructing
knowledge rather than acquiring knowledge and that instruction is the process by
which this knowledge construction is supported rather than a process of knowledge
transmission (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). In this domain learning is viewed as the
construction of meaning rather than as the memorization of facts (Lebow, 1993;
Jonassen & Reeves, 1996).
Learning approaches using contemporary ICTs provide many opportunities for
constructivist learning through their provision and support for resource-based, student
centered settings and by enabling learning to be related to context and to practice
(Berge, 1998; Barron, 1998). As mentioned previously, any use of ICT in learning
settings can act to support various aspects of knowledge construction and as more and
more students employ ICTs in their learning processes, the more pronounced the
impact of this will become. Teachers generate meaningful and engaging learning
experiences for their students, strategically using ICT to enhance learning. Students
enjoy learning, and the independent enquiry which innovative and appropriate use of
ICT can foster. They begin to acquire the important 21st century skills which they will
need in their future lives.
2.3

QUALITY AND ACCESSIBILITY OF EDUCATION

ICT increases the flexibility of delivery of education so that learners can

access knowledge anytime and from anywhere. It can influence the way students are
taught and how they learn as now the processes are learner driven and not by teachers.
This in turn would better prepare the learners for lifelong learning as well as to
improve the quality of learning. In concert with geographical flexibility, technologyfacilitated educational programs also remove many of the temporal constraints that
face learners with special needs (Moore & Kearsley, 1996). Students are starting to
appreciate the capability to undertake education anywhere, anytime and anyplace.
One of the most vital contributions of ICT in the field of education is- Easy
Access to Learning. With the help of ICT, students can now browse through e-books,
sample examination papers, previous year papers etc. and can also have an easy
access to resource persons, mentors, experts, researchers, professionals, and peers-all
over the world. This flexibility has heightened the availability of just-in-time learning
and provided learning opportunities for many more learners who previously were

constrained by other commitments (Young, 2002). Wider availability of best practices

and best course material in education, which can be shared by means of ICT, can
foster better teaching. ICT also allows the academic institutions to reach
disadvantaged groups and new international educational markets. As well as learning
at anytime, teachers are also finding the capabilities of teaching at any time to be
opportunistic and able to be used to advantage. Mobile technologies and seamless
communications technologies support 24x7 teaching and learning. Choosing how
much time will be used within the 24x7 envelope and what periods of time are
challenges that will face the educators of the future (Young, 2002). Thus, ICT enabled
education will ultimately lead to the democratization of education. Especially in
developing countries like India, effective use of ICT for the purpose of education has
the potential to bridge the digital divide.
India has a billion-plus population and a high proportion of the young and
hence it has a large formal education system. The demand for education in developing
countries like India has skyrocketed as education is still regarded as an important
bridge of social, economic and political mobility (Amutabi & Oketch, 2003). There
exist infrastructure, socio- economic, linguistic and physical barriers in India for
people who wish to access education (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007). This includes
infrastructure, teacher and the processes quality. There exist drawbacks in general
education in India as well as all over the world like lack of learning materials,
teachers, remoteness of education facilities, high dropout rate etc.(UNESCO,2002).
Innovative use of Information and Communication Technology can potentially
solve this problem. Internet usage in home and work place has grown exponentially
(McGorry, 2002). ICT has the potential to remove the barriers that are causing the
problems of low rate of education in any country. It can be used as a tool to overcome
the issues of cost, less number of teachers, and poor quality of education as well as to
overcome time and distance barriers (McGorry, 2002).
People have to access knowledge via ICT to keep pace with the latest
developments (Plomp, Pelgrum & Law, 2007). ICT can be used to remove
communication barriers such as that of space and time (Lim and Chai, 2004). ICTs
also allow for the creation of digital resources like digital libraries where the students,
teachers and professionals can access research material and course material from any
place at any time (Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007; Cholin, 2005). Such facilities allow

the networking of academics and researchers and hence sharing of scholarly material.
This avoids duplication of work (Cholin, 2005).ICT eliminating time barriers in
education for learners as well as teacher. It eliminates geographical barriers as
learners can log on from any place (Sanyal, 2001; Mooij, 2007; Cross & Adam, 2007;
UNESCO, 2002; Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007).
ICT provides new educational approaches (Sanyal, 2001). It can provide
speedy dissemination of education to target disadvantaged groups (UNESCO,
2002;Chandra& Patkar, 2007).ICT enhances the international dimension of
educational services. It can also be used for non-formal education like health
campaigns and literacy campaigns (UNESCO, 2002). Use of ICT in education
develops higher order skills such as collaborating across time and place and solving
complex real world problems (Bottino, 2003; Bhattacharya & Sharma, 2007; Mason,
2000).
It improves the perception and understanding of the world of the student.
Thus, ICT can be used to prepare the workforce for the information society and the
new global economy (Kozma, 2005). Plomp et al., (2007) state that the experience of
many teachers, who are early innovators, is that the use of ICT is motivating for the
students as well as for the teachers themselves. Bottino (2003) and Sharma (2003)
mention that the use of ICT can improve performance, teaching, administration, and
develop relevant skills in the disadvantaged communities.
It also improves the quality of education by facilitating learning by doing, real
time conversation, delayed time conversation, directed instruction, self-learning,
problem solving, information seeking and analysis, and critical thinking, as well as
the ability to communicate, collaborate and learn (Yuen, et al, 2003). A great deal of
research has proven the benefits to the quality of education (Al-Ansari,
2006).Hepp,Hinostroza, Laval and Rehbein (2004) state that the literature contains
many unsubstantiated claims about the revolutionary potential of ICTs to improve the
quality of education. They also note that some claims are now deferred to a near
future when hardware will be presumably more affordable and software will become,
at last, an effective learning tool.
2.3

ICT AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

ICT presents an entirely new learning environment for students, thus requiring

a different skill set to be successful. Critical thinking, research, and evaluation skills

10

are growing in importance as students have increasing volumes of information from a

variety of sources to sort through (New Media Consortium, 2007).ICT is changing
processes of teaching and learning by adding elements of vitality to learning
environments including virtual environments for the purpose. ICT is a potentially
powerful tool for offering educational opportunities. It is difficult and maybe even
impossible to imagine future learning environments that are not supported, in one way
or another, by Information and Communication Technologies (ICT).
When looking at the current widespread diffusion and use of ICT in modern
societies, especially by the young the so-called digital generation then it should be
clear that ICT will affect the complete learning process today and in the future.
Authenticity is an important issue which should be addressed in the design and
development of learning environments (Collins, 1996). Learning environments need
to reflect the potential uses of knowledge that pupils are expected to master, in order
to prevent the acquired knowledge from becoming inert (Bransford, Sherwood,
Hasselbring, Kinzer, and Williams, 1990). In addition, teachers should stimulate
pupils to engage in active knowledge construction. This calls for open-ended learning
environments instead of learning environments which focus on a mere transmission of
facts (Collins, 1996; Hannafin, Hall, Land, & Hill, 1994; Jonassen, Peck, & Wilson,
1999).
ICT may contribute to creating powerful learning environments in numerous
ways.ICT provides opportunities to access an abundance of information using
multiple information resources and viewing information from multiple perspectives,
thus fostering the authenticity of learning environments. ICT may also make complex
processes easier to understand through simulations that, again, contribute to authentic
learning environments. Thus, ICT may function as a facilitator of active learning and
higher-order thinking (Alexander, 1999; Jonassen, 1999).
The use of ICT may foster co-operative learning and reflection about the
content Furthermore, ICT may serve as a tool to curriculum differentiation, providing
opportunities for adapting the learning content and tasks to the needs and capabilities
of each individual pupil and by providing tailored feedback (Mooij, 1999).As
Stoddart and Niederhauser (1993) point out, ICT may fit into a spectrum of
instructional approaches, varying from traditional to innovative.

11

Another aspect which may of course influence the use of ICT is access to
technology (Kennewell, Parkinson, & Tanner, 2000). This refers not only to the
number of computers, but also to the placement of the equipment, e.g. in the
classroom or in a computer room. Kennewell et al. (2000) feel it is essential that
computers be placed in the classroom, in order to maximize the opportunities for
curriculum activity. ICT environment improves the experience of the students and
teachers and to use intensively the learning time for better results. The ICT
environment has been developed by using different software and also the extended
experience in developing web based and multimedia materials. ICTs have an
important role to play in changing and modernizing education system and way of
learning.
2.4

ICT AND LEARNING MOTIVATION

ICTs can enhance the quality of education in several ways, by increasing

learner motivation and engagement, by facilitating the acquisition of basic skills, and
by enhancing teacher training. ICTs are also transformational tools which, when used
appropriately, can promote the shift to a learner centered environment. ICTs,
especially computers and Internet technologies, enable new ways of teaching and
learning rather than simply allow teachers and students to do what they have done
before in a better way. ICT has an impact not only on what students should learn, but
it also plays a major role on how the students should learn.
Along with a shift of curricula from content-centered to competencebased, the mode of curricula delivery has now shifted from teacher centered forms
of delivery to student-centered forms of delivery. ICT provides- Motivation to
Learn. ICTs such as videos, television and multimedia computer software that
combine text, sound, and colorful moving images can be used to provide challenging
and authentic content that will engage the student in the learning process. Interactive
radio likewise makes use of sound effects, songs, dramatizations, comic skits, and
other performance conventions to compel the students to listen and become more
involved in the lessons being delivered. Some of the parents of the respondents opined
that their children were feeling more motivated than before in such type of teaching in
the classroom rather than the stereotype 45 minutes lecture.
They were of the view that this type of learning process is much more
effective than the monotonous monologue classroom situation where the teacher just

12

lectures from a raised platform and the students just listen to the teacher ICT changes
the characteristics of problems and learning tasks, and hence play an important task as
mediator of cognitive development, enhancing the acquisition of generic cognitive
competencies as essential for life in our knowledge society. Students using ICTs for
learning purposes become immersed in the process of learning and as more and more
students use computers as information sources and cognitive tools (Reeves and
Jonassen, 1996), the influence of the technology on supporting how students learn
will continue to increase. Learning approaches using contemporary ICTs provide
many opportunities for constructivist learning through their provision and support for
resource-based, student centered settings and by enabling learning to be related to
context and to practice (Berge, 1998;Barron, 1998).The teachers could make their
lecture more attractive and lively by using multi-media and on the other hand the
students were able to capture the lessons taught to them easily.
As they found the class very interesting, the teachings also retained in their
mind for a longer span which supported them during the time of examination. More
so than any other type of ICT, networked computers with Internet connectivity can
increase learner motivation as it combines the media richness and interactivity of
other ICTs with the opportunity to connect with real people and to participate in real
world events. ICT-enhanced learning is student-directed and diagnostic. Unlike static,
text- or print-based educational technologies, ICT-enhanced learning recognizes that
there are many different learning pathways and many different articulations of
knowledge. ICTs allow learners to explore and discover rather than merely listen and
remember. The World Wide Web (WWW) also provides a virtual international gallery
for students work (Loveless, 2003). ICT can engage and inspire students, and this has
been cited as a factor influencing ready adaptors of ICT (Long, 2001).
Based on the extensive usage of ICTs in education the need appeared to
unravel the myth that surrounds the use of information and communication
technology (ICT) as an aid to teaching and learning, and the impact it has on students
academic performance. ICTs are said to help expand access to education, strengthen
the relevance of education to the increasingly digital workplace, and raise educational
quality. However, the experience of introducing different ICTs in the classroom and
other educational settings all over the world over the past several decades suggests
that the full realization of the potential educational benefits of ICT. The direct link

13

between ICT use and students academic performance has been the focus of extensive
literature during the last two decades. ICT helps students to their learning by
improving the communication between them and the instructors (Valasidou
&Bousiou, 2005).
The analysis of the effects of the methodological and technological
innovations on the students attitude towards the learning process and on students
performance seems to be evolving towards a consensus, according to which an
appropriate use of digital technologies in education can have significant positive
effects both on students attitude and their achievement. Research has shown that the
appropriate use of ICTs can catalyze the paradigmatic shift in both content and
pedagogy that is at the heart of education reform in the 21st century. Meta-analysis
study revealed that, on average, students who used ICT-based instruction scored
higher than students without computers.
The students also learned more in less time and liked their classes more when
ICT-based instruction was included. Fuchs (2004) used international data from the
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), they showed that while the
bivariate correlation between the availability of ICT and students performance is
strongly and significantly positive, the correlation becomes small and insignificant
when other student environment characteristics are taken into consideration.
Attwell and Battle (1999) examined the relationship between having a home
computer and school performance, their findings suggest that students who have
access to a computer at home for educational purposes, have improved scores in
reading and math. Becker (2000) found that ICT increases student engagement, which
leads to an increased amount of time students spend working outside class. Coates
etal. (2004) showed that students in on-campus courses usually score better than their
online counterparts, but this difference is not significant here. ICTs especially
computers and Internet technologies enable new ways of teaching and learning rather
than simply allow teachers and students to do what they have done before in a better
way.
ICT helps in providing a catalyst for rethinking teaching practice
(Flecknoe,2002) developing the kind of graduates and citizens required in an
information society Department of Education improving educational outcomes

14

especially pass rates and enhancing and improving the quality of teaching and
learning (Wagner, 2001).
ICT can help students content knowledge, engage them in constructing their
own knowledge, and support the development of complex thinking skills (Kozma,
2005; Kulik, 2003; Webb & Cox, 2004).Studies have identified a variety of
constructivist learning strategies (e.g., students work in collaborative groups or
students create products that represent what they are learning) that can change the
way students interact with the content (Windschitl, 2002).
Albert Bandura, Girasoli and Hannafin (2008) urge the use of asynchronous
CMC tools to promote student self-efficacy and hence academic performance. Fisteret
al., (2008) also depict the power of tablet PCs to improve mathematics instruction.
ICTs have the potential for increasing access to and improving the relevance and
quality of education.
The use of ICT in educational settings, by itself acts as a catalyst for change in
this domain. Students using ICTs for learning purposes become immersed in the
process of learning and as more and more students use computers as information
sources and cognitive tools (Reeves & Jonassen, 1996) the influence of the
technology on supporting how students learn will continue to increase.

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

15

This chapter includes research methodology, sample, research tool, data

collection and data analysis of the study.The survey research design was applied for
the current research endeavor. It aimed issues of ICT in classroom management by
student for higher education.
3.1

POPULATION
The population of study comprised of all undergraduate students enrolled in

the department of the Psychology, Agriculture, Geology, Forestay and Wildlife,

Environmental Sciences, Microbiology, Economics, IT, Management Sciences, MLT,
Education, Islamiyat.
3.2

SAMPLE
There are thirteen departments in the university two department Islamiyat

MPH has no undergraduate program the student of Education department refused to

participate in the surrey of the study from ten participating departments ten students
from each department selected as sample so 100 students are taken as sample.
3.3

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
In this research questionnaire was used to collect the data. The questionnaire is

comprised of three sections demographic information, frequency of the use of

different issues of ICT (on four point strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly
disagree), feeling of the student about use of issues of ICT (on ratio scale positive,
unsure, negative) and one open ended question: What suggestion(s) if any, would you
like to give to make better utilization of ICT in teaching learning?
3.4

DATA COLLECTION
The data was collected from the students of university of Haripur through

questionnaire. The gathered bits of information were then computerized by using MS

excel spread sheets for the ready use of further processing. The researcher himself
distributed and collected the filled questionnaire from the respondents.

3.5

DATA ANALYSIS
The collected data was tabulated and analyzed using statistical tool like

percentage for the interpretation of data.

16

Chapter 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The results of this study have been produced via analysis after collecting the
data from the students of different departments of University of Haripur. The

17

researcher herself elected the data from the students of various departments. The study
aims to explore the issues of ICT in classroom on the part of the student. The result of
the study has been given below.
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmenta
l Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

Uncomfortable
3
27.3%
8
38.1%
0
.0%
4
36.4%
3
42.9%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
27
27.0%

Comfortable Very Comfortable

4
4
36.4%
36.4%
12
1
57.1%
4.8%
8
3
72.7%
27.3%
2
5
18.2%
45.5%
4
0
57.1%
.0%
6
0
85.7%
.0%
8
2
72.7%
18.2%
5
2
45.5%
18.2%
2
1
40.0%
20.0%
4
0
80.0%
.0%
55
18
55.0%
18.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.1
Comfortability use of ICT in departments
Table4.1 shows that the students of department of Forestry and Wildlife 3(27.3%),
4(36.4%) and 4(36.4%) were uncomfortable, comfortable, very comfortable respectively with
the use of computer in department. The students of the department of Microbiology 8(38.1%),
12(57.1%) and1(4.8 %.) were uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
The students of the department of Economic 0(0%), 12(72.7%) and 3(27.3%) were
uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively. The students of the
department of Agriculture4 (42.9%), 2(8.2%) and 5(45.5%) were uncomfortable, comfortable
and very comfortable respectively. The students of the department of psychology 3(42.9%),
4(57.1%) and 0(0%) were uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively. The
students of the department of IT 1(14.3%), 6(85.7%) and 0 (0%) were uncomfortable,

18

comfortable and very comfortable. The students of the department of Environmental Sciences
1(9.1%), 8(72.7%) and 2(18.2%) uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable
respectively. The students of the department of Geology 4(36.4%), 5(45.5%) and 2(18.2%)
were uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively. The students of the
department of Management Sciences 2(40.0%), 2(40.0%) and 1(20.0%) were uncomfortable,
comfortable

and

very

comfortable.

The

students

of

the

department

of

MLT

1(20.0%),4(80.0%) and 0(0%) were uncomfortable, comfortable and very uncomfortable.

Table 4.2
Use of Word processing skills
Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
3
27.3%
11
52.4%
3
27.3%
8
72.7%
2
28.6%
2
28.6%
6
54.5%
5
71.45
3
60.0%
5
100.0%
48
48.0%

Yes
8
72.7%
10
47.6%
8
72.7%
3
27.3%
5
71.4%
5
71.4%
5
71.4%
6
54.5%
2
40.0%
0
0.0%
52
52.0%

Total
11
100.o%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.2 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife
8(72.7%) say yes and 3(27.3%) say no for word processing skill. The students of the
department of Microbiology 10(47.6%) say yes and 11(52.45%) say no for word
processing skill. The students of the department of Economics 8(72.7%) say yes and
3(27.3%) say no for word processing skill. The students of the department of
Agriculture 3(27.3%) say yes and 8(72.7%) say no. The students of the department of
Psychology 5(71.4%) say yes and 2(28.6%) say no above skill. The students of the

19

department of IT 5(71.4%) say yes and 2(28.6%) say no above skills. The students of
the department of Environmental Sciences5 (45.5%) say yes and 6(54.5%) say no for
word processing. The students of the department of Geology 6(54.5%) say yes and
5(71.5 %) say no for word processing skill. The students of the department of
Management Sciences 2(40.0%) say yes and3(60.0%) say no. The students of
department of MLT 0(0.0%)say yes and 5(100.0%) say no for word processing skill.
Table 4.3
Use of spread sheet
Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
8
72.7%
18
85.7%
4
36.4%
6
54.5%
5
71.4%
2
28.6%
9
81.8%
8
72.7%
3
60.0%
5
100.0%
68
68.0%

Yes
3
27.3%
3
14.3%
7
63.6%
5
45.5%
2
28.6%
5
71.4%
2
18.2%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
32
32.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.3 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and wildlife3 (27.3%)
say yes and8 (72.7%)say no for spread sheet. The students of the department of
Microbiology3 (14.3%)say yes and18 (85.7%)say no. The students of the department
of Economics7 (63.6%) say yes and4(36.4%) say no for The students of the
department of Agriculture 4(45.5%) say yes and6(54.5%) say no for spread sheet. The
students of the department of psychology 2(28.6%) say yes and 5(45.5%) say no for
spread sheet The students of the department of IT5 (71.4%)say yes and2(28.6%) say

20

no for spread sheet skills. The student of the department of Environmental Sciences
2(18.2%) say yes and 9(81.8%) say no for spread sheet skill. The student of the
department of Geology3 (27.3%) say yes and 8(72.7%) say no. The students of the
department of Management Sciences 2(40.0%) say yes and 3(60.0%) say no. The
students of the department of MLT 5(100%) say no for spread sheet.
Table 4.4
Use of presentation tool skill
Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
7
63.6%
17
81.0%
5
45.5%
10
90.9%
5
71.4%
3
42.9%
2
18.2%
7
63.6%
0
0%
4
80.0%
60
60.0%

Yes
4
36.4%
4
19.0%
6
54.5%
1
9.1%
2
28.6%
4
57.1%
9
81.8%
4
36.4%
5
100.0%
1
20.0%
40
40.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.4 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and wildlife
4(36.4%)say yes and7 (63.6%)say no for presentation tool skill. The students of the
department of Microbiology 4(19.0%) say yes and17 (81.0%) say no. The students of
the department of Economics6 (54.5%) say yes and5 (45.5%) say no. The students of
the department of Agriculture 1(9.1%) say yes and 10(90.9%) say no. The students of
the department of psychology 2(28.6%) say yes and5 (71.4%) say no. The students of
the department of 3(42.9%) say yes and4 (57.1%)say no. The students of the
department of Environmental Sciencessay9 (81.8%) yes and 3(18.2%)say no for

21

presentation tool skill. The students of the department of Geology4 (36.4%)say yes
and7(63.6%) say no. The students of the department of Management Sciences
5(100.0%) say yes and0 (0.0%) say no for presentation tool skills. The students of the
department of MLT1 (20.0%) say yes and4 (80.8%) say no for presentation tool skill.
Table 4.5
Use of e-mailing skill
Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
8
72.7%
12
57.1%
7
63.6%
7
63.6%
6
85.7%
3
42.9%
7
63.6%
5
45.5%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
60
60.0%

Yes
3
27.3%
9
42.9%
4
36.4%
4
36.4%
1
14.3%
4
57.1%
4
36.4%
6
54.5%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
40
40.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.5 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and wildlife3
(27.3%) say yes and8 (72.7%) say no for emailing skill. The students of the
department of Microbiology9 (42.9%) say yes and12 (57.1%) say no for emailing
skill. The students of the department of Economics4 (36.4%) say yes and7 (63.6%)
say no for emailing skill. The students of the department of Agriculture 4(36.4%) say
yes and7 (63.6%) say no for emailing skill. The students of the department of
psychology 1(14.3%) say yes and6 (85.7%) say no for emailing skill. The students of
the department of IT4 (57.1%) say yes and3 (2.9%) say no for emailing skills The
students of the department of Environmental Sciences4 (54.5%) say yes and7 (63.6%)

22

say no for emailing skill. The students of the department of Geology6 (54.5%) say yes
and5 (45.5%) say no emailing skill. The students of the department of Management
Sciences3 (60.0%) say yes and2 (40.0%) say no for emailing skills. The students of
the department of2 (40.0%) say yes and3 (60.0%)say no for emailing skill.
Table 4.6
Use of internet browsing skill
Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
5
45.5%
19
90.5%
2
18.2%
5
45.5%
7
100.0%
4
57.1%
6
54.5%
7
63.6%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
58
20.0%

Yes
6
54.5%
2
9.5%
9
81.8%
6
54.5%
0
.0%
3
42.9%
5
45.5%
4
36.4%
3
60.0%
4
80.0%
42
80.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.6 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and wildlife
say6 (54.5%) yes and5 (45.5%) say no for internet browsing skill. The students of the
department of Microbiology2 (9.5%) say yes and 19(90.5%) say no. The students of
the department of Economics9 (81.8%) say yes and 2(81.2%) say no. The students of
the department of Agriculture say 6(54.5%) yes and 5(45.5%) say no for internet
browsing skill. The students of the department of psychology0 (0.0%) say yes and7
(100.0%) say no for internet browsing skill. The students of the department of IT
3(42.9%) say yes and say no for internet browsing skill. The students of the
department of Environmental Sciences5 (45.5%) say yes and 6(54.5%) say no for

23

internet browsing skill. The students of the department of Geology4 (36.4%) say yes
and7 (63.6%) say no. for internet browsing. The students of the department of
Management Sciences3 (60.0%) say yes and 2(40.0%) say no for internet browsing
skills. The students of the department of MLT4 (80.0%) say yes and1 (20.05) say no.
Table 4.7
Use of graphics
Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
7
63.6%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
8
72.7%
3
60.0%
5
100.0%
91
91.0%

Yes
4
36.45%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
9
9.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.7 shows that the students of Forestry and Wildlife4 (36.4%) say yes
and7 (63.6%) say no for use of graphics. The students of Microbiology21 (100.0%)
say no. The students of the department of Economics11 (100.0%) say no for use of
graphics. The students of Agriculture11 (100.0%) say no. The students of Psychology
7(100.0%) say no. The students of IT 7(100.0%) say no for graphics skills. The
students of Environmental Sciences11 (100.0) say yes for graphics. The students of
Geology3 (27.3%) say yes and8 (72.7%) say no for graphics skill. The students of the
department of Management Sciences2 (40.0%) say yes and3 (60.0%) say no for
graphics. The students of the department of MLT5 (100.0%) say no for graphics

24

Table 4.8
Use web page designing
Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
8
72.7%
21
100.0%
7
63.6%
11
100.0%
6
85.7%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
3
60.0%
5
100.0%
90
90.0%

Yes
3
27.3%
0
.0%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
10
10.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.8 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife
3(27.3%)say yes and8 (72.7%)say no for use of. designing The students of the
department of Microbiology0 (0.0%)say yes and21(100.0%)say no for use web page.
The students of the department of Economics4(36.5%) say yes and 7(63.6%) say no.
The students of the department of Agriculture 0(0.0%) say yes and 11(100.0%) say
no. The students of the department of psychology1 (14.3%) say yes and7 (100.0%)say
no. The students of the department of IT0 (0.0%) say yes and7(100.0%)say no for
web page. The students of the department of Environmental Sciences0 (0.0%) say yes
and 11(100.0%) say no. The students of the department of Geology0 (0.0%) say yes
and 11(100.0%) say no. The students of the department of Management Sciences2
(40.0%) say yes and 3(60.0%) say no for web page designing. The students of the
department of MLT0 (0.0%) say yes and5 (100.0%) say no for web page designing.
Table 4.9

25

Use of Chatting
Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
10
90.9%
20
95.2%
6
54.5%
10
90.9%
7
100.0%
6
85.7%
10
90.9%
7
63.6%
2
40.0%
5
100.0%
83
83.0%

Yes
1
9.1%
1
4.8%
5
45.5%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
3
60.0%
0
.0%
17
17.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.9 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and
Wildlife 1(9.1%) say yes and10 (90.0%) say no for use of chatting. The students of
the department of Microbiology1 (9.1%) say yes and20 (4.8%) say no. The students
of the department of Economics5 (45.5%) say yes and6 (54.5%) say no for use of
chatting. The students of the department of Agriculturesay1 (9.1%) yes and10 (90.9%)
say no for chatting. The students of the department of psychology0 (0.0%) say yes
and7 (100.0%) say no. The students of the department of IT 1(9.1%) say yes and6
(54.5%) say no. The students of the department of Environmental Sciencessay1
(9.1%) yes and0 (90.9%) say no for chatting The students of the department of
Geology4 (36.4%) say yes and2(40.0%) say no. The students of the department of
Management Sciences3 (60.0%) say yes and2 (40.0%) say no. The students the
department of MLT0 (0.0%) say yes and5 (100.0%) say no for chatting.
Table 4.10
Use of Web page

26

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
10
90.9%
18
85.7%
5
45.5%
6
54.5%
1
14.3%
4
57.1%
2
18.2%
5
45.5%
2
40.0%
4
80.0%
57
57.0%

Yes
1
9.1%
3
14.3%
6
54.5%
5
45.5%
6
85.7%
3
42.9%
8
72.7%
6
54.5%
3
60.0%
1
20.0%
42
42.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.10 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and wildlife
1(9.1%)say yes and 10(10%)say no for web page. The students of the department of
Microbiology 3(14.3%)say yes and 18(85.7%) say no for web page The students of
the department of Economics6(54.5%) say yes and5(45.5%) say no for web page. The
students of the department of Agriculture 5(45.5%) say yes and6 (54.5%) say no for
web page. The students of the department of psychology 6(54.5%) say yes and say no.
The students of the department of IT3 (42.9%) say yes and4 (36.4%)say no for web
page skills. The students of the department of Environmental Sciences8 (72.7%)say
yes and2(18.2%)say no for web page. The students of the department of Geology6
(54.5%) say yes and 5(45.5%)say no for web page. The students of the department of
Management Sciences3 (60.0%) say yes and 2(40.0) say no for web page The
students of the department of MLT 1(20.0%) say yes and 4(80.0%) say no for web
page
Table 4.11
Use of e-books

27

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
11
100.0%
20
95.2%
7
63.6%
10
90.9%
6
85.7%
4
57.1%
10
90.9%
7
63.6%
3
60.0%
5
100.0%
83
83.0%

Yes
0
.0%
1
4.8%
4
36.4%
1
9.1%
1
14.3%
3
42.9%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
16
16.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.11 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife
11(100.0%) say no for e-book skill. The students of Microbiology 1(4.8%) say yes
and20 (95.2%) say no. The students of Economics4 (36.4%) say yes and7 (63.6%) say
no for e- book skill. The students of Agriculture 1(9.1%) say yes and 1(9.1%) say no.
The students ofPsychology1 (14.3%) say yes and 6(85.7%) say no for e-books skill.
The students of the department of3 (42.9%) say yes and 4(57.1) say no for e-books
skills. The students of Environmental Sciences1 (9.1%) say yes and10(90.9%) say no
fore-books skill. The students of the department of 4(36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%) say
no. The students of Management Sciences2 (40.0%) say yes and 3(60.0) say no for ebooks skills. The students of MLT5 (100.0%) say no.
Table 4.12
Use of power point

28

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
0
.0%
16
76.2%
2
18.2%
7
63.6%
7
100.0%
2
28.6%
6
54.5%
7
63.6%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
51
51.0%

Yes
11
100.0%
5
23.8%
9
81.8%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
5
71.4%
5
45.5%
4
36.4%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
49
49.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.12 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife
11(100.0%) say yes and0 (0.0%) say no. for power point. The students of the
department of Microbiology5 (23.8%) say yes and 16(76.2%) say no. The students of
the department of Economics 9(81.8%) say yes and 2(18.2%) say no. The students of
the department of Agriculture 4(36.4%) say yes and7 (63.6%) say no The students of
the department of psychology 0(0.0%) say yes and 7(100.0%) say no for. The students
of the department of IT 5(71.4%) say yes and2 (28.6%) say no for. The student of the
department of Environmental Sciences 5(45.5%) say yes and6 (54.5%) say no. The
students of the department of Geology4 (36.4%) says yes and7(63.6%)say no The
students of the department of Management Sciences 3(60.0%) say yes
and2(40.0%)say no. The students of the department of MLT 3(60.0%) says yes and
2(40.0%) say no.
Table 4.13
Use of simulation skill

29

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
10
90.9%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
9
81.8%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
97
100.0%

Yes
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
0.0%
3
.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.13 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife
0(0.0%) say yes and11 (100.0%) say no. for simulation skill. The students of the
department of Microbiology0 (0.0%) say yes and21 (100.0%) say no. The students of
the department of Economics1 (9.1&) say yes and10 (100.0%) say no for simulation.
The students of the department of Agriculture0 (0.0%) say yes and11 (100.0%) say no
for simulation. The students of the department of psychology0(0.0%) say yes
and7(100.0%) say no for simulation skill The students of the department of IT
0(0.0%) say yes and7(100.0%)say no The students of the department of
Environmental Sciences0(0.0%)say yes and11(100.0%)say no. The students of the
department of Geology2 (18.2%) say yes and9 (81.8%) say no. The students of the
department of Management Sciences0 (0.0%) say yes and5 (100.0%) say no. The
students of. the department of MLT0(0.0%) say yes and5(100.0%) say no for
simulation.
Table 4.14
Use of computer based skill

30

Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

No
11
100.0%
15
71.4%
6
54.5%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
5
71.4%
11
100.0%
10
90.9%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
86
86.0%

Yes
0
.0%
6
28.6%
5
45.5%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
28.6%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
9.1%
0
.0%
14
14.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4 14 shows that the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife
0(0.0%) say yes and 11(100.0%) say no for computer based skill. The students of the
department of Microbiology 6(28.6%) say yesand15 (71.4%) say no for computer
based skill The students of the department of the Economics5(45.5%) say yes
and6(54.5%) say no. The students of the department of Agriculture0 (0.0%) say yes
and11(100.0%) say no for word processing skill The students of the department of
psychology0 (0.0%) say yes and7(100.0) say no for computer based skill. The
students of the department of IT 2(28.6%) say yes and5(71.4%)say no The students of
the department of Environmental Sciences0(0.0%) say yes and11(100.0%) say no for
computer based. The students of the department of Geology1 (9.1%) says yes
and10(90.0%) say no for computer based skill. The students of the department of
Management Sciences 0(0.0%) say yes and5 (100.0%)say no. The students of the
department of MLT 0(0.0%) say yes and5 (100.0%) say no for computer based skill.
Table 4.15
Use of ICT in classroom

31

Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

Table

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

4.15

Never
0
.0%
1
4.8%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
2.0%

shows

Rarely
0
.0%
2
9.5%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
4
57.1%
2
28.6%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
10
10.0%

that

the

Sometimes
4
36.4%
8
38.1%
9
81.8%
7
63.6%
3
42.9%
4
57.1%
11
100.0%
8
72.7%
4
80.0%
2
40.0%
60
60.0%

teachers

Often
7
63.6%
4
19.0%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
1
20.0%
2
40.0%
21
21.0%

of

only

Routinely
0
.0%
6
28.6%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
7
7.0%

two

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

departments

Microbiology(28.6%), and Geology (9.1%), use ICT whereas, rest of teachers do not
use ICT routinely in their classroom during teaching. The teacher of Forestry and
wildlife(63.6%),MLT(40.0%),Agriculture(36.4%),Management
,Microbiology

(19%),IT(14.3%),Economics(9.1%)use

ICT

Sciences
often

(20%)

whereas

in

Psychology and Environmental Sciences do not often use ICT in their classroom. The
teachers of Environmental Sciences (100.0%), Economics (81.8%), Management
Sciences(80.0%), Geology(72.7%), Agriculture(63.6%), IT(57.1%), Psychology
(42.9%), MLT(40.0%), Microbiology(38.1%), Forestry and Wildlife(36.6%) use ICT
sometimes. The teachers of the Psychology(57.1%), IT(28.6%) MLT (20.0%),
Microbiology (9.5%), Economics(9.1%), use ICT rarely whereas the rest of the
departments do not use ICT. Teacher of Geology(9.1%), Microbiology(4.8%), never
use ICT whereas the rest of the departments do use ICT in their class.
Table 4.16

Institution has sufficient infrastructure for ICT

32

Department

SDA

DA

SA

Total

Forestry and Wildlife

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
4
80.0%
9
9.0%

1
9.1%
1
4.8%
1
9.1%
1
9.1%
3
42.9%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
1
9.1%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
10
10.0%

5
45.5%
17
81.0%
9
81.8%
2
18.2%
3
42.9%
4
57.1%
7
63.6%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
53
53.0%

3
27.3%
3
14.3%
1
9.1%
8
72.7%
0
.0%
3
42.9%
3
27.3%
4
36.4%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
100
27.0%

11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
27
100.0%

Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

Table 4.16shows that the students of the departments Agriculture(72.7%),

IT(42.9%),

Management

Sciences(27.3%),

Sciences(40.0%),

Forestry

and

Geology(36.4%),

Wildlife(27.3%),

Environmental

Microbiology(14.3%),

Economics(9.1%), strongly agree with the statement. The students of the department
of

Microbiology(81.0%),

IT(57.1%),

Forestry

and

Economics(81.0%),
Wildlife(45.5%),

Environmental

Sciences(63.6%),

Psychology(42.9%),

Management

Sciences(40.0%), Geology(27.3%), Agriculture(18.2%) agree with the statement. The

students

of

the

psychology(42.9%),

Management

(20.0%),Forestry(9.1%),

Economics(9.1%),Agriculture(9.1%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Geology(9.1%),

disagree with the statement infrastructure has sufficient infrastructure for information
and communication technologies. The students of the department Psychology(42.9%),
Management Sciences(20.0%), Forestry and Wildlife, Microbiology, Economics,
Agriculture, Environmental Sciences and Geology(9.1%), strongly disagree ..
Table 4.17
Computers are available in the departments for student

33

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

f
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
4
36.4%
1
4.8%
0
0%
1
9.1%
3
42.9%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
3
27.3%
0
0%
4
80.0%
17
17.0%

DA
2
18.2%
1
4.8%
0
0%
2
18.2%
1
14.3%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
13
13.0%

A
2
18.2%
15
71.4%
10
90.9%
3
27.3%
3
42.9%
2
28.6%
8
72.7%
3
27.3%
3
60.0%
0
0%
49
49.0%

SA
3
27.3%
4
19.0%
1
9.1%
5
45.5%
0
0%
5
71.4%
1
9.1%
2
18.2%
0
0%
0
0%
21
21.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

4.17shows that the students of IT(71.4%), Agriculture(45.5%), Forestry and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

Geology(18.2%),

Economic

sand

Environmental Science(9.1%) are strongly agree with statement. The students of

Economics(90.9%),

Environmental

Science(72.7%),

Microbiology(71.4%),

Management Sciences(60.0%), Psychology(42.9%), IT(28.6), Agriculture and

Geology(27.3%), Forestry(18.2%), MLT(0%) are agree with. The students of
Management Sciences(40.0%), Geology(27.3%), MLT(20.2%), Forestry and Wildlife
and

Agriculture(18.2%),

Psychology(14.3%),

Environmental

Sciences(9.1%),

Microbiology(4.8%) are disagree and MLT(80.0%), psychology(42.9%), Forestry and

Wildlife(36.4%),

Geology(27.3%),

Agriculture(9.1%),

Environmental

Sciences(9.1%), Microbiology(4.8%) are strongly disagree with statement that

Computers are available in the departments for student.
Table 4.18
I know how to use computer in classroom

34

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%`
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
1
9.1%
1
4.8%
0
0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
3
27.3%
0
.0%
1

DA
2
18.2%
1
4.8%
3
27.3%
1
9.1%
1
14.3%
1
14.3%
3
27.3%
0
.0%
0

A
5
45.5%
10
47.6%
8
72.7%
5
45.5%
6
85.7%
5
71.4%
2
18.2%
4
36.4%
2

SA
3
27.3%
9
42.9%
0
.0%
5
45.5%
0
.0%
0
.0%
3
27.3%
7
63.6%
2

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5

20.0%

.0%

40.0%

40.0%

100.0%

N
5
N
%

0
.0%
7
7.0%

0
.0%
12
12.0%

5
100.0%
52
52.0%

0
.0%
29
29.0%

5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.18 show that the students of department IT(71.4%), Management

Sciences(60.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(45.5%), geology(63.4%),Economics(36.4%),
Agriculture(18.2%), Microbiology (14.2%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%), are
strongly agree with know how to use computer in classroom. The students of
Agriculture(72.7%),

Microbiology(66.7%),

Sciences(45.5%),

Geology(45.5%),

MLT(60.0%),
Management

Environmental
Science(40.0%),

Psychology(42.9%), Economic(36.4%), Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%), IT(14.3%) are

agree with the statement that how to use computer in classroom. The students of
Psychology(57.1%), Environmental Science(36.4%), Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%),
Economics(27.3%),
Agriculture(9.1%),

MLT(20.0%),
Geology(9.1%)

Microbiology(19.0%),
disagree.

The

students

IT(14.3%),
of

department

MLT(20.0%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Geology (9.1%) are strongly disagree

with the statement that how to use computer in classroom.
Table 4.19
Tools like e mail, forum and chat make communication with student colleagues

35

Department
Forestry and Wildlife
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
1
9.1%
0

DA
3
27.3%
4
19.0%
3
27.3%
1
9.1%
4
57.1%
1
14.3%
4
36.4%
1
9.1%
0

A
3
27.3%
14
66.7%
4
36.4%
8
72.7%
3
42.9%
1
14.3%
5
45.5%
5
45.5%
2

SA
5
45.5%
3
14.3%
4
36.4%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
5
71.4%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
3

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5

.0%

.0%

40.0%

60.0%

100.0%

N
%
N
%

1
20.0%
3
3.0%

1
20.0%
22
22.0%

3
60.0%
48
48.0%

0
.0%
27
27.0%

5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.19shows that the students of department Geology(63.6%),

Agriculture(45.5%), Microbiology(42.9%), Management Science(40.0%), Forestry
and Environmental Sciences(27.3%)are strongly agree with believe that tools like e
mail, forum and chat make communication with student colleagues and teacher easier.
The students of department MLT(100.0%), Psychology(85.7%), Economics(72.7%),
IT(71.4%), Microbiology(47.6%), Forestry and Wildlife, and Agriculture(45.5%),
Management Science(40.0%), Geology(36.4%), Environmental Sciences(18.2%), are
agree with believe. The students of department Economic(27.3%), Environmental
Sciences(27.3%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%), psychology(14.3%), IT(14.3%),
Agriculture(9.1%), Microbiology (4.8%)are disagree with believe. The students of
department Environmental Science(27.3%), Management Science(20.2%), IT(14.3%),
Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%), Microbiology (4.8%) strongly disagree `with believe
that tools make communication with student colleagues and teacher easier.
Table 4.20
I think that technology supported teaching and learning more effective

36

Department
Forestry and wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
psychology
IT
Environmental Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

f
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
0
.0%
2
9.5%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
3
3.0%

DA
2
18.2%
4
19.0%
0
.0%
5
45.5%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
13
13.0%

A
3
27.3%
8
38.1%
9
81.8%
2
18.2%
3
42.9%
4
57.1%
7
63.6%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
43
43.0%

SA
6
54.5%
7
33.3%
2
18.2%
4
36.4%
4
57.1%
3
42.9%
4
36.4%
6
54.5%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
41
41.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table4.20 shows that the students of the department Management

science(60.0%), Psychology(57.1%), Forestry and Wildlife, and Geology(54.5%),
IT(42.9%), MLT(40.0%), Agriculture(36.4%), Environmental Sciences(36.4%),
Microbiology (33.3%), Economics (18.2%) are strongly agree with the statement that
technology supported teaching make learning more effective. The students of
Economic(81.8%), Environmental Science(63.6%), IT(57.1%), Psychology(42.9%),
Management Science(40.0%), MLT(40.0%), Microbiology(38.1%), Forestry and
Geology(27.3%), Agriculture(18.2%)are agree that technology supported teaching
make learning more effective. The students of Agriculture(45.5%), MLT(20.0%),
Microbiology(19.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%), Geology(9.1%), are disagree
that technology supported teaching make learning more effective. The students of the
department Microbiology(9.5%), Geology(9.1%), are strongly disagree with
statement that technology supported teaching make learning more effective.
Table 4.21

I think the use of ICT enhance the interest of student in the courses

37

Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

f
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
2
18.2%
1
4.8%
0
.0%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
0

DA
2
18.2%
8
38.1%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
1
14.3%
0

A
2
18.2%
7
33.3%
7
63.6%
3
27.3%
4
57.1%
6

SA
5
45.5%
5
23.8%
4
36.4%
3
27.3%
2
28.6%
1

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7

.0%

.0%

85.7%

14.3%

100.0%

N
%
N
%
N

1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
0.0%
.0%
0
.0%
8
8.0%

2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
0.0%
.0%
1
20.0%
15
15.0%

6
54.5%
4
36.4%
1
20.0%
20.0%
1
20.0%
41
41.0%

2
18.2%
7
63.6%
4
80.0%
80.0%
3
60.0%
36
36.0%

11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100%
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

%
N
%
N
%

Table 4.21show that the students of Management Sciences(80.0%),

Geology(63.6%), MLT(60.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(45.5%), Economics(36.4%),
Psychology(28.6%),

Agriculture(27.3%),

Microbiology(23.8%),

environmental

Sciences(18.2%), IT(14.3%), are strongly agree with think, the use of ICTs enhances
the interest of student in the courses. The students of the department IT(85.7%),
Economics(63.6%),
Geology(36.4%),

Psychology(57.1%),
Microbiology(33.3%),

Environmental
Agriculture(27.3%),

Sciences(54.5%),
Management

Sciences(20.0%), MLT(20.0%), Forestery18.2%) are agree with think, the use of ICTs
enhances the interest of student in the courses. The students of the department
Microbiology(38.1%),

MLT(20.0%),

Forestry(18.2%),

Environmental

Science(18.2%), Psychology (14.3%), Agriculture (9.1%). The students of the

department Agriculture(36.4%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%), Environmental
Sciences(9.1%), Microbiology (4.8%)are strongly disagree with statement.
Table 4.22

38

I think that the use of ICT enhances the quality of education

Department
Forestry and
Wildlife

SDA
2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
5
5.0%

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
5
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

DA
3
27.3%
2
9.5%
1
9.1%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
6
54.5%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
.0%
17
17.0%

A
3
27.3%
11
52.4%
7
63.6%
4
36.4%
4
57.1%
5
71.4%
3
27.3%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
2
40.0%
41
41.0%

SA
3
27.3%
8
38.1%
3
27.3%
3
27.3%
3
42.9%
1
14.3%
2
18.2%
7
63.6%
4
80.0%
3
60.0%
37
37.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.22 shows that the students of Management Sciences(80.0%), Geology

(63.6%), MLT(60.0%), Psychology (42.9%), Microbiology(38.1%), Forestry and
Wildlife(27.3%),

Economics

(27.3%),

Agriculture(27.3%),

Environmental

science(18.2%), IT(14.3%), are strongly agree with that the use of ICTs enhances the
quality

of

education.

The

students

of

IT(71.4%),

Economics

(63.6%),

Psychology(57.1%),Microbiology(52.4%),MLT(40.0%), Agriculture(36.4%),Forestry
and Wildlife and Environmental Science(27.3%), Geology (18.2%) are agree with
statement. The student of Environmental Science (54.5%), Forestry and
Wildlife(27.3%), Agriculture and Geology(18.2%), IT(14.3%), Microbiology(9.5%),
Economics(9.1%), are disagree with statement. The students of Management
Sciences(20.0%), Forestry and Wildlife (18.2), Agriculture(18.2%) are strongly
disagree with statement.
Table 2.23

39

I think technology helps to use time effectively

Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
1
9.1%
1
4.8%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
0
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
6
6.0%

DA
1
9.1%
3
14.3%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
1
14.3%
2
18.2%
1
18.2%
0
.0%
0
.0%
11
11.0%

A
4
36.4%
12
57.1%
8
72.7%
6
54.5%
3
42.9%
3
42.9%
6
54.5%
4
54.5%
1
20.0%
3
60.0%
50
50.0%

SA
5
45.5%
5
23.8%
1
9.1%
3
27.3%
3
42.9%
2
28.6%
2
18.2%
6
18.2%
4
80.0%
2
40.0%
33
33.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.23shows that the students of Management Sciences (80.0%), Forestry

and Wildlife(45.5%), Psychology (42.9%), MLT(40.0%),IT (28.6%), Agriculture
(27.3%), Microbiology (23.8%), Environmental Sciences(18.2%), Geology(18.2%),
Economics(9.1%) are strongly agree with think, technology helps use of time
effectively. The students of the department Economics (72.7%), MLT(60.0%),
Microbiology(57.1%),

Agriculture(54.5%),Environmental

Science(54.5%),

Geology(54.5%), Psychology(42.9%), IT(42.9%), Forestry(36.4%), Management

Science(20.0%) are agree that technology helps use of time effectively. The students
of

Economics

(18.3%),

Environmental

Sciences(18.2%),

Geology(18.2%),

Microbiology(14.3%),Psychology(14.3%),IT(14.3%), Forestry (9.1%) are disagree

with statement. The students of IT(14.3%), Forestry and Wildlife, Geology,
Environmental Science(9.1%), Microbiology(4.8%)are strongly disagree with think,
technology helps use of time effectively.

40

Table 4.24
Lack of skills to use time effective learning
Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Forestry
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
5
45.5%
2
9.5%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
9
9.0%

DA
0
.0%
4
19.0%
3
27.3%
1
9.1%
5
71.4%
0
.0%
3
27.3%
3
27.3%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
20
20.0%

A
3
27.3%
11
52.4%
6
54.5%
3
27.3%
2
28.6%
6
85.7%
3
27.3%
1
9.1%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
40
40.0%

SA
3
27.3%
4
19.0%
2
18.2%
6
54.5%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
5
45.5%
7
63.6%
3
60.0%
0
.0%
31
31.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table4.24 show that the students of the department Geology(63.6%),

Management science(60.0%), Agriculture(54.5%), Environmental Sciences(45.5%),
Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%), Microbiology(19.0%), Economics (18.2%), IT (14.3%)
are strongly agree with Lack of skills to use technology affective learning. The
students

of

IT(85.7%),

MLT(60.0%),

Economics

(54.5%),

Microbiology(52.4%),Management science(40.0%), Psychology(28.6%),Forestry and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Agriculture(27.3%),

Environmental

Sciences(27.3%),

Geology(9.1%), are agree with Lack of skills to use technology affective learning.
The students of the department of Psychology(71.4%), Economics (27.3%),
Environmental

Science(27.3%),

Geology(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%), Agriculture (9.1%) are disagree with Lack of skills to use

technology affective learning. The students of the department Forestry and

41

Wildlife(45.5%), MLT (20.1%), Microbiology(9.5%), Agriculture(9.1%) are strongly

disagree with Lack of skills to use technology affective learning
Table 4.25
We face problem about accessibility to existing hardware e.g.(computer, multimedia)
Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
2
18.2%
3
14.3%
0
.0%
2
.0%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
3
27.3%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
13
13.0%

DA
3
27.3%
2
9.5%
1
9.1%
1
9.1%
2
28.6%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
1
9.1%
2
40.0%
0
0.0%
14
14.0%

A
0
.0%
9
42.9%
6
54.5%
6
54.5%
5
71.4%
4
57.1%
3
27.3%
6
54.5%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
45
45.0%

SA
6
54.5%
7
33.3%
4
36.4%
2
36.4%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
6
54.5%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
28
28.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.25 shows that the students of the department Forestry and
Wildlife(54.5%),Environmental
(36.4%),Microbiology(33.3%),

Science(54.5%),Economics(36.4%),
IT(14.3%),

Geology(9.1%),

Agriculture
MLT(9.1%),

Psychology(0%), Management Science(0%) are strongly agree with we face Problems

about accessibility to existing hardware (computer, multimedia).The students of
department

Psychology

(71.4%)

Management

Science(60.0%),

IT(57.1%),

Economics(54.4%), Geology(54.5%), Agriculture (54.5%), Microbiology(42.9%),

Environmental Sciences(27.3%) are agree with we face Problems about accessibility
to existing hardware (computer, multimedia).The students of Psychology(28.6%),
Forestry and wildlife(27.3%),IT(14.3%), Microbiology(9.5%), Economics (9.1%),
Agriculture(9.1%), Environmental Science(9.1%), Geology(9.1%), MLT(9.1%) are

42

disagree with statement. The students of the Geology(27.3%), Forestry(18.2%),

Microbiology(14.3%), IT(14.3%), Environmental Science (9.1%), MLT (9.1%) are
strongly disagree with statement.
Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
2
18.2%
2
9.5%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
2
28.6%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
8
8.0%

DA
2
18.2%
6
28.6%
4
36.4%
4
36.4%
4
57.1%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
2
18.2%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
25
25.0%

A
4
36.4%
10
47.6%
6
54.5%
2
18.2%
1
14.3%
5
71.4%
5
45.5%
6
54.5%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
45
45.0%

SA
3
27.3%
3
14.3%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
4
36.4%
3
27.3%
1
20.0%
2
40.0%
22
22.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.26
Lack of financial resources hampers the integration of technology in teaching
Table 4.26 shows that the students of Agriculture(36.4%), Environmental
science(36.4%),Forestry(27.3%), Geology(27.3%), Management science(20.0%),
Microbiology(14.3%), IT(14.3%), Economics (9.1%), Psychology(0%), MLT0%) are
strongly agree with the statement that lack of financial resources hamper the
integration of technology in teaching. The students of IT(71.4%), Management
science(60.0%),MLT(60.0%),

Economics

(54.5%),

Geology(54.5%),

Microbiology(47.6%), Environmental Science(45.5%), Forestry and Wildlife(36.4%),

Agriculture(36.4%), are agree with the statement that lack of financial resources
hamper the integration of technology in teaching. The students of the department

43

Psychology(57.1%),

Economics(36.4%),

(28.6%),Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Agriculture(36.4%),
Forestry

and

Microbiology
Wildlife(18.2%),

Geology(18.2%), IT(14.3%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%) are disagree with

statement. The students of the department Psychology (28.6%), Forestry and
Wildlife(18.2%), Microbiology(9.5%), Agriculture(9.1%), are strongly disagree with
statement.
Table 4.27
Lack of professional development opportunities for gaining knowledge and skill in
ICT in teaching and research
Department
Forestry
Microbiology
Economic
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Science
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
0
.0%
2
9.5%
1
9.1%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
7
7.0%

DA
2
18.2%
8
38.1%
4
36.4%
1
9.1%
4
57.1%
3
42.9%
4
36.4%
1
9.1%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
29
29.0%

A
3
27.3%
7
33.3%
5
45.5%
3
27.3%
3
42.9%
1
14.3%
6
54.5%
7
63.6%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
41
41.0%

SA
6
54.5%
4
19.0%
1
9.1%
5
45.5%
0
.0%
2
28.6%
0
.0%
3
27.3%
0
.0%
2
40.0%
23
23.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.27shows that the students of the department Forestry and

Wildlife(54.5%), Agriculture(45.5%), MLT(40.0%), IT(28.6%), Geology(27.3%),
Microbiology(19.0%), Economics (9.1%), are strongly agree with the statement that
lack of professional development opportunities for gaining knowledge and skill in
ICT in teaching and research. The students of Geology(63.6%), Management
Sciences(60.0%),Environmental Science(54.5%), Economics(45.5%), Psychology
(42.9%),

MLT(40.0%),

Microbiology(33.3%),Forestry

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

44

Agriculture(27.3%), IT(14.3%) are agree with the statement. The students of

Psychology(57.1%),IT(42.9%), Management Science(40.0%), Microbiology(38.1%),
Environmental

Sciences(36.4%),

Economics(36.4%),

Forestry(18.2%),

Agriculture(9.1%), Geology(9.1%)are disagree with the statement. The students of

Agriculture(18.2),

IT(14.3%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Economics

(9.1%),

Environmental Sciences(9.1%) are strongly disagree with the statement.

Table 4.28
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
2
18.2%
4
19.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
18.2%
0
.0%
2
40.0%
11
11.0%

DA
2
18.2%
10
47.6%
2
18.2%
4
36.4%
3
42.9%
4
57.1%
3
27.3%
2
27.3%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
32
32.0%

A
5
45.5%
5
23.8%
6
54.5%
6
54.5%
4
57.1%
2
28.6%
3
27.3%
6
27.3%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
42
42.0%

SA
2
18.2%
2
9.5%
3
27.3%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
3
27.3%
3
27.3%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
15
15.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Teacher show lack of interest in ICT usage

Table 4.28 shows that the students of department Economic(27.3%),Environmental
Sciences(27.3%), Geology(27.3%), Management Sciences(20.0%), Forestry and
Wildlife(18.2%), IT(14.3%), Microbiology(9.5%) are strongly agree with the
statement that teachers show lack of interest in ICT usage. The students of
Management

Sciences(60.0%),Psychology(57.1%),

Agriculture(54.5%),Forestry

and

Wildlife(45.5%),

Economics(54.5%),

MLT(40.0%),

IT(28.6%),

Environmental Sciences(27.3%), Geology(27.3%), Microbiology(23.8%) are agree

45

with

the

statement.

Psychology(42.9%),
Geology(27.3%),

The

students

of

Agriculture(36.4%),

Management

IT(57.1%),

Microbiology(47.6%),

Environmental

Sciences(20.0%),

Sciences(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(18.2%), Economics(18.2%) are disagree with the statement that teacher

show lack of interest in ICT usage. The students of the department
MLT(40.0%),Microbiology(19.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%),Environmental
Sciences(18.2%), Geology(18.2%), Agriculture(9.1%), are strongly disagree with the
statement.
Table4.29
Training of teachers are ineffective in teaching ICT
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

Table

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
1
9.1%
5
23.8%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
10
10.0%

4.29

shows

DA
1
9.1%
4
19.0%
3
27.3%
4
36.4%
1
14.3%
4
57.1%
4
36.4%
1
9.1%
3
60.0%
0
.0%
25
25.0%

that

the

A
6
54.5%
7
33.3%
5
45.5%
4
36.4%
5
71.4%
2
28.6%
2
18.2%
6
54.5%
1
20.0%
4
80.0%
42
42.0%

students

Geology(36.4%),Forestry(27.3%),

Economics(27.3%),

(27.3%),Microbiology(23.8%),

Management

SA
3
27.3%
5
23.8%
3
27.3%
2
18.2%
1
14.3%
1
14.3%
3
27.3%
4
36.4%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
23
23.0%

of

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Geology(36.4%),

Environmental

Sciences

Sciences(20.0%),Management

Sciences(20.0%), Agriculture(18.2%), Psychology(14.3%), IT(14.3%), MLT(0%) are

strongly agree The students of MLT(80.0%), Psychology(71.4%),Forestry and

46

Wildlife(54.5%), Geology (54.5%), Economics (45.5%), Agriculture(36.4%),

Microbiology(33.3%), IT(28.6%), Management

Sciences(20.0%),Environmental

Sciences(18.2%) are agree. The students of the department Management Sciences

(60.0%),IT(57.1%),Agriculture(36.4%),Environmental Sciences (36.4%) Economics
(27.3%), Microbiology (19.0%), Psychology(14.3%),Forestry and. Wildlife (9.1%),
Geology (9.1%) are disagree The students of Microbiology (23.8%), MLT (20.0%),
Environmental Sciences (18.2%) Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%)are
strongly disagree with the statement.
Table 4 30
I often use internet at university
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

Table

SDA
2
18.2%
1
4.8%
0
.0%
3
27.3%
0
0.0%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
7
7.0%

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

4.30

DA
1
9.1%
4
19.0%
2
18.2%
1
9.1%
0
0.0%
2
28.6%
3
27.3%
6
54.5%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
20
20.0%

shows

Economics(45.5%),MLT(40.0%),Forestry

A
4
36.4%
10
47.6%
4
36.4%
4
36.4%
6
85.7%
4
57.1%
5
45.5%
5
45.5%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
48
48.0%

that
and

SA
4
36.4%
6
28.6%
5
45.5%
3
27.3%
1
14.3%
1
14.3%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
2
40.0%
25
25.0%

the

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

students

Wildlife(36.4%),

of

Microbiology

(28.6%),Agriculture(27.3%),ManagementSciences(20.0%),Environmental

Sciences

(18.2%), Psychology (14.3%), IT(14.3%), are strongly agree with I often use internet
at university. The students of Psychology(85.7%), Management Sciences(60.0%),
MLT(60.0%), IT(57.1%),Microbiology(47.6%), Environmental Sciences(45.5%),

47

Forestry and Wildlife(36.4%), Economics(36.4%), Agriculture(36.4%) are agree with

the statement. The students of the department Geology(54.5%),IT(28.6%),
Environmental

Sciences(27.3%)Management

Sciences(20.0%),Microbiology(19.0%)

,Economics

(18.2%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%) are disagree with the statement that I often use
internet at university The students of the department Agriculture(27.3%)are strongly
disagree with the statement
Table 4.31
I am taught in the classroom which is equipped with multimedia
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
1
9.1%
1
4.8%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
8
8.0%

DA
1
9.1%
5
23.8%
2
18.2%
1
9.1%
1
14.3%
2
28.6%
3
27.3%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
17
17.0%

A
6
54.5%
7
33.3%
8
72.7%
2
18.2%
3
42.9%
4
57.1%
7
63.6%
3
27.3%
3
60.0%
4
80.0%
47
47.0%

SA
3
27.3%
8
38.1%
0
.0%
4
36.4%
3
42.9%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
7
63.6%
2
40.0%
0
.0%
28
28.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.31shows that the students of Geology(63.6%), Psychology(42.9%),

Management Sciences(40.0%),Microbiology(38.1%), Agriculture(36.4%), Forestry
and Wildlife(27.3%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%)are strongly agree with the
statement that I was fully supported to participate in the use of ICT in the class. The
students of Economics(72.7%), Environmental Sciences(63.6%),Environmental

48

Sciences(63.6%),

Management

Sciences(60.0%),

Wildlife(54.5%),

Psychology(42.9%),

IT(57.1%)Forestry

Microbiology(33.3%),

and

IT(28.6%),

Geology(27.3%),MLT(20.0%), Agriculture(18.2%) are agree with the statement. The

students

Management

Sciences

(40.0%),

Psychology(28.6%),Agriculture(27.3%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(36.4%),

Geology(27.3%),Microbiology(23.8%),

MLT(20.0%), Economics(18.2%), Environmental Sciences (18.2%), IT(14.3%) are

disagree with the statement. The students of Management Sciences (20.0%),
Microbiology(9.5%) are strongly disagree with the statement.
Table 4.32
I was fully supported in the use of ICT in the class
Department
Forestry
Microbiolog
y
Economic
Agriculture
psychology
IT
Environmen
tal Sciences
Geology
Managemen
t Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
0
.0%
3
14.3%
0
.0%
1
9.1%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
4
4.0%

DA
3
27.3%
3
14.3%
1
9.1%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
2
18.2%
2
18.2%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
15
15.0%

A
4
36.4%
7
33.3%
5
45.5%
3
27.3%
6
85.7%
4
57.1%
5
45.5%
5
45.5%
3
60.0%
4
80.0%
46
46.0%

SA
4
36.4%
8
38.1%
5
45.5%
5
45.5%
1
14.3%
2
28.6%
4
36.4%
4
36.4%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
35
35.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table shows that the students of the department Economic(45.5%),

Agriculture(45.5%),Microbiology(38.1%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(36.4%),

Geology(36.4%), Environmental Sciences(36.4%), IT(28.6%), Management Sciences

(20.0%),MLT(20.0%), Psychology(14.3%) are strongly agree with the statement that I
was fully supported to participate in the use of ICT in class. The students of

49

Psychology(85.7%),

MLT(80.0%),

Management

Sciences(60.0%)

,IT(57.1%)

,Economics(45.5%),Agriculture(45.5%), Environmental Sciences(45.5%) ,Geology

(45.5%),Forestry(36.4%),Microbiology (33.3%) are agree with the statement that I
was fully supported to participate in the use of ICT in class. The student of
Forestry(27.3%), Management Sciences(20.0%),Agriculture(18.2%), Environmental
Sciences(18.2%),

Geology(18.2%),

Microbiology(14.3%),

IT(14.3%),

Economic(9.1%)are strongly disagree with the statement.

Table 4.33
I was trained how to browse specific information from internet
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

F
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
0
.0%
2
9.5%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
0
.0%
3
3.0%

DA
4
36.4%
5
23.8%
2
18.2%
3
27.3%
2
28.6%
1
14.3%
2
18.2%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
25
25.0%

A
4
36.4%
12
57.1%
8
72.7%
3
27.3%
4
57.1%
5
71.4%
6
54.5%
6
54.5%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
53
53.0%

SA
3
27.3%
2
9.5%
1
9.1%
5
45.5%
1
14.3%
1
14.3%
3
27.3%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
19
19.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table 4.33show that the students of the department Agriculture(45.5%), Forestry and
Wildlife(27.3%), Environmental Sciences(27.3%), MLT(20.0%), Geology(18.2%),
Psychology(14.3%),

IT(14.3%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Economics(9.1%),

Management Sciences(0%) are strongly agree The students of the department

Economics(72.7%), IT(71.4%), MLT(60.0%), Microbiology(57.1%), Psychology
(57.1%),

Environmental

Sciences(54.5%),

Geology(54.5%),

Management

50

Sciences(40.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(36.4%), Agriculture(27.3%) are agree The

students of department Management Sciences(40.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(36.4%),
Psychology(28.6%),

Agriculture(27.3%),

(23.8%),MLT(20.0%),

Geology(27.3%),

Economics(18.2%),

Environmental

Microbiology
Sciences(18.2%),

IT(14.3%) are disagree with the statement. The students of Management

Sciences(20.0%), Microbiology(9.5%), are strongly disagree with the statement
Table 4.34
I have leant in my ICT class barriers for effective ICT use in classroom
Department

SDA

DA

SA

Total

Forestry and
Wildlife

11

18.2%

36.4%

9.1%

36.4%

100.0%

Microbiology

21

23.8%

23.8%

33.3%

19.0%

100.0%

11

9.1%

36.4%

45.5%

9.1%

100.0%

11

9.1%

27.3%

36.4%

27.3%

100.0%

.0%

42.9%

57.1%

.0%

100.0%

.0%

28.6%

71.4%

.0%

100.0%

Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences

11

18.2%

27.3%

36.4%

18.2%

100.0%

Geology

11

18.2%

18.2%

45.5%

18.2%

100.0%

Management
Sciences

.0%

20.0%

60.0%

20.0%

100.0%

MLT

.0%

40.0%

40.0%

20.0%

100.0%

13

29

40

18

100

13.0%

29.0%

40.0%

18.0%

100.0%

Total

Table4.34

shows

that

Agriculture(27.3%),
,Microbiology(19.0%),

the

students

Management
Environmental

of

Forestry

Sciences

and

(20.0%),

Sciences(18.2%),

Wildlife (36.4%),
MLT(20.0%)
Geology(18.2%)

51

,Economics(9.1%), are strongly agree with the statement that. The students of
Forestry(36.4%),

Agriculture(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

Geology(18.2%), Management Sciences(18.2%), Economics(9.1%)are agree The

students

of

Psychology(42.9%),MLT(40.0%),Forestry

and

Wildlife(36.4%),

Economics(36.4%), IT(28.6%), Agriculture(27.3%), Environmental Sciences(27.3%),

Microbiology(23.8%), Management Sciences (20.0%), Geology(18.2%) are disagree
with that statement trained how to brows specific information from internet. The
students of Microbiology(23.8%), Environmental Sciences(18.2%), Geology(18.2%),
Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%) are strongly disagree with the statement.
Table 4.35
I had a chance to develop an understanding how to plan for ICT integration
Department
Forestry and
Wildlife
Microbiology
Economics
Agriculture
Psychology
IT
Environmental
Sciences
Geology
Management
Sciences
MLT
Total

N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%

SDA
6
54.5%
3
14.3%
1
9.1%
4
36.4%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
2
18.2%
1
9.1%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
22
22.0%

DA
0
.0%
5
23.8%
0
.0%
3
27.3%
6
85.7%
2
28.6%
2
18.2%
2
18.2%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
22
22.0%

A
4
36.4%
8
38.1%
10
90.9%
2
18.2%
1
14.3%
3
42.9%
4
36.4%
3
27.3%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
38
38.0%

SA
1
9.1%
4
19.0%
0
.0%
2
18.2%
0
.0%
1
14.3%
3
27.3%
5
45.5%
0
.0%
1
20.0%
17
17.0%

Total
11
100.0%
21
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
11
100.0%
11
100.0%
5
100.0%
5
100.0%
100
100.0%

Table shows that the students of Geology (45.5%), Environmental Sciences

(27.3%),

MLT

(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%),Agriculture(18.2%),

IT(14.3%),Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%)are strongly agree with that statement I had a

chance to develop an understanding how to plan for ICT integration (building support

52

network).

The

Sciences(40.0%),

students

of

Economics(90.0%),IT(42.9%),Management

Microbiology(38.1%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(36.4%),

Environmental Sciences(36.4%),Geology(27.3%), MLT (20.0%), Agriculture(18.2%),

Psychology(14.3%) are agree with that statement. The students of the department
Psychology

(85.7%),

IT(28.6%),

Agriculture(27.3%),

Microbiology(23.8%),

Management Sciences(20.0%),MLT (20.0%), Environmental Sciences(18.2%),

Geology(18.2%) are disagree with that statement I had a chance to develop an
understanding how to plan for ICT integration (building support network) The
students

of

the

Sciences(40.0%),

department

Forestry

and

Wildlife(54.5%),

MLT(40.0%),Agriculture(36.4%),

Management

Agriculture(36.4%),

Environmental Sciences(18.2%),IT(14.3%), Microbiology(14.3%), Economics(9.1%),

Geology(9.1%), Psychology(0.0%) are strongly disagree with that statement I had a
chance to develop an understanding how to plan for ICT integration (building support
network)

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMENDATIONS
SUMMARY

53

The study was survey and initially a trough review was conducted mainly
from internet available free source including websites, e-books, goggle, journal,
articles thesis and research paper. Primary and most authentic source mainly focused
during the review. The objectives of the study were to explore the issue of ICT in
classroom management and to find out the most and least frequently used strategy or
set of strategies, applied by University teacher.
The actual survey was conducted by questionnaire. The population
compromised the student of the University of Haripur. The sample was drawn on
convenience bases included girl and boys of the university who could be easily
accessed. Thus the total sample comprised 100 students included male and female.
Tool used data collected was questionnaire. The questions are contained 25
item addressing the issues of ICT in classroom management. The five points liker
scale was used with these categories never, rarely, sometimes, often, routinely.
FINDINGS
1. The students of Forestry and wildlife 3(27.3%), 4(36.4%) and 4(36.4%) were
uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable.
2. The students of Microbiology 8(38.1%), 12(57.1%) and 1(4.8%.) were
uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
3. The students of the department of Economic 12(72.7%) and 3(27.3%) were
comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
4. The students of Agriculture 4(42.9%), 2(A8.2%) and 5(45.5%) were
uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
5. The students of Psychology 3(42.9%) and 4(42.9%) were uncomfortable and
comfortable respectively.
6. The students of IT 1(14.3%) and 6(85.7%) were uncomfortable and comfortable
respectively.
7. The students of Environmental Sciences 1(9.1%), 8(72.7%), and 2(18.2%)
uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
8. The student of Geology 4(36.4%), 5(45.5%) and 2 (18.2%) were uncomfortable,
comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
9. The students of Management Sciences 2(40.0%) and 1(20.0%) were
uncomfortable, comfortable and very comfortable respectively.
10. The students of MLT 1(20.0%) and 4(80.0%)were comfortable, uncomfortable
and comfortable respectively.
11. The students of Forestry and Wildlife 8 (72.7%)say yes and 3(27.3)% say no for
word processing skill.

54

12. The students of Microbiology 10(47.6)say yes and 11(52.45) say no for word
processing skill.
13. The students of Economics 8(72.7%) says yes and 3 (27.3%) say no for word
processing skill.
14. The students of Agriculture 3(27.3%) say yes and 8 (72.7%) say no for word
processing skill.
15. The students of Psychology 5(71.4%) say yes and 2(28.6%) say no for word
processing skill.
16. The students of IT 5 (71.4%) say yes and 2(28.6%) say no for word processing
skills.
17. The students of Environmental Sciences5(45.5%) say yes and 6 (54.5) say no
for word processing.
18. The students of Geology 6(54.5%) say yes and 5 (45.5%) say no for word
processing skill.
19. The students of Management Sciences2(40.0%) say yes and3(60.0%) say no for
word processing skills.
20. The students of MLT 0(0.0%)say yes and 5 (100.0%) say no for word processing
skill.
21. The students of Forestry and Wildlife 3(27.3%) say yes and8(72.7%)say no
word processing sheet skill.
22. The students of Microbiology3(14.3%)say yes and18(85.7%)say no for word
processing skill.
23. The students of Economics7(63.6%) say yes and4(36.4%) say no for word
processing skill.
24. The students of Agriculture 4(45.5%) say yes and6(54.5%) say no for word
processing skill.
25. The students of Psychology 2(28.6%%) say yes and5 (71.4%) say no for word
processing skill
26. The students of IT5 (71.4%)say yes and2(28.6%) say no for word processing
skills
27. The students of Environmental Sciences2(18.2%) say yes and s9(81.8%) ay no
for word processing.
28. The students of Geology3(27.3%) say yes and 8(72.7%) say no for word
processing skill.
29. The students of Management Sciences2(40.0%) say yes and 3(60.0%) say no
for word processing skills.
30. The students of MLT 0(0.0%) say yes and 5(100%) say no for word processing
skill.

55

31. The students of Forestry and wildlife 4(36.4%)say yes and7(63.6%)say no for
presentation tool skill.
32. The students of Microbiology 4(19.0%)y say yes and17(81.0%) say no for word
processing skill.
33. The students of Economics 4(54.5%) says yes and6 (45.5%) say no for word
processing skill.
34. The students of Agriculture 1(9.1%)say yes and10(90.9%) say no for word
processing skill.
35. The students of Psychology2(28.6%) says yes and 5(71.4%) say no for word
processing skill
36. The students of IT 4(42.9%) say yes and3(57.1%)say no for word processing
skills
37. The students of Environmental Sciences say 9(81.8%) yes and 2 (18.2%)say no
for word processing.
38. The students of Geology 4 (36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%) say no for word
processing skill.
39. The students of Management Sciences5(100.0%) say yes and 0(0.0%) say no for
word processing skills.
40. The students of MLT 1(20.0%) says yes and 4(80.8%) say no for word
processing skill.
5. The students of Forestry and wildlife 3 (27.3%) say yes and 8(72.7%) say no for
emailing skill.
41. The students of Microbiology 9 (42.9%) say yes and 12 (57.1%)say no for
emailing skill.
42. The students of Economics4 (36.4%) says yes and 7(63.6%) say no for emailing
skill.
43. The students of Agriculture 4 (36.4%) say yes and 7 (63.6%)say no for emailing
skill.
44. The students of Psychology 1(14.3%) says yes and6 (85.7%) say no for emailing
45. The students of IT 4(57.1%) says yes and 3(2.9%) say no for emailing skills
46. The students of Environmental Sciences4(54.5%)say yes and7(63.6%) say no
for emailing
47. The students of Geology (54.5%) say yes and5(45.5%)say no skill.
48. Table 5 show that the students of the department of Management Sciences5
(60.0%)say yes and2(40.0%)say no for emailing skills.
49. The students of MLT (40.0%)say yes and3(60.0%)say no for emailing skill.
6. The students of Forestry and wildlife say6(54.5%) yes and5(45.5%)say no for
internet browsing skill.
50. The students of Microbiology2(9.5%)say yes and 19(90.5%) say no for internet
browsing skill.

56

51. The students of Economics9(81.8%) say yes and 2(81.2%) say no for internet
browsing skill.
52. The students of Agriculture say 6(54.5%) yes and 5(45.5%) say no for internet
browsing skill.
53. The students of Psychology7(100.0%) say no for internet browsing skill.
54. The students of IT3(42.9%) say yes and 4(57.1%) say no for internet browsing
skill
55. The students of Environmental Sciences5(45.5%)say yes and 6(54.5%)say no
for internet browsing skill.
56. The students of Geology4(36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%) say no for internet
browsing skill.
57. The students of Management Sciences3(60.0%) say yes and 2(40.0%)say no for
internet browsing skills.
58. The students of MLT4(80.0%) say yes and1(20.05) say no for internet browsing
skill
59. The students of Forestry and Wildlife 4(36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%)say no for
graphics skill.
60. The students of Microbiology21(100.0%),Economics 11(100.0%), Agriculture
11(100.0%), Psychology 7(100.0%), IT 7(100.0%), Environmental Sciences
11(100.0) and MLT 5(100.0%) say no for graphics skill.
61. The students of Geology3(27.3%)say yes and8(72.7%)say no for graphics skill.
62. The students of Management Sciences2(40.0%) say yes and3(60.0%) say no for
graphics skills.
63. The students of Forestry and wildlife 3(27.3%) say yes and8(72.7%)say no for
web page designing skill.
64. The students of Microbiology21(100.0%),

Agriculture

11(100.0%),

Environmental Sciences 11(100.0%), Psychology 7(100.0%), IT 7(100.0%),

Geology 11(100.0%) and MLT 5(100.0%)say no for web page designing skill
65. The students of Economics 4(36.5%) say yes and 7(63.6%)say no for web page
designing skill.
66. The students of Management Sciences2(40.0%) say yes and 3(60.0%)say no for
web page designing skills.
7. The students of Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%)say yes and10(90.0%)say no for
chatting skill.
67. The students of Microbiology say 1(9.1%) yes and20(4.8%) no for chatting
skill.
68. The students of Economics say 5(45.5%) yes and6(54.5%) no for chatting skill.
69. The students of Agriculturesay1(9.1%) yes and10(90.9%) no for chatting skill.
70. The students of Psychology say 7(100.0%) no for chatting skill.
71. The students IT 1(9.1%) say yes and6(54.5%) say no for chatting skills.

57

72. The students of Environmental Sciences say1(9.1%) yes and10(90.9%)say no

for chatting skill .
73. The students of Geology4(36.4%) say yes and(40.0%)2 say no for chatting skill.
74. The students of Management Sciences3(60.0%) say yes and2(40.0%)say no for
chatting skills.
75. The students of MLT0(0.0%) say yes and5(100.0%) say no for chatting skill.
76. The students of Forestry and wildlife 1(9.1%) say yes and 10(90.9%)say no for
web page skill.
77. The students of Microbiology3(14.3%) say yes and18(85.7%) say no for web
page skill.
78. The students of Economics6 (54.5%) say yes and5(45.5%) say no for web page
skill.
79. The students of Agriculture5(45.5%) say yes and6(54.5%)say no for web page
skill.
80. The students of Psychology 6(54.5%)say yes and 5(45.5%)say no for web page
skill
81. The students of IT3(42.9%)say yes and4(36.4%)say no for web page skills
82. The students of Environmental Sciences8(72.7%)say yes and2(18.2%)say no for
web page skill.
83. The students of Geology6(54.5%)say yes and 5(45.5%)say no for web page
skill.
84. The students of Management Sciences3(60.0%) say yes and 2(40.0)say no for
web page skills.
85. The students of MLT 1(20.0%)say yes and 4(80.0%) say no for web page skill.
86. The students of Forestry and Wild life 0(0.0%)say yes and11(100.0%)say no for
e-books skill.
87. The students of Microbiology1 (4.8%) say yes and20(95.2%) say no for e - book
skill.
88. The students of Economics4 (36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%) say no for e-books
skill.
89. The students of Agriculture1 (9.1%) say yes and10(90.9%) say no for e-books
skill.
90. The students of Psychology1 (14.3%) say yes and (85.7%) say no for e-books
skill.
91. The students of IT 3(42.9%)say yes and4(57.1) say no for e-books skills
92. The students of Environmental Sciences10(90.9%) say no fore-books skill.
93. The students of Geology4(36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%)say no for e-books skill.
94. The students of Management Sciences2(40.0%) say yes and3(60.0)say no for ebooks skills.
95. The students of MLT5(100.0%) say no for e-books skill.

58

96. The students of Forestry and Wildlife11 (100.0%) say yes and0(0.0%) say no for
power point skill.
97. The students of Microbiology5(23.8%)say yes and 16(76.2%)say no for power
point skill.
98. The students of Economics9(81.8%) say yes and 2(18.2%)say no for power
point skill.
99. The students Agriculture4(36.4%) say yes and7(63.6%) say no for power point
skill.
100. The students of psychology0(0.0%) say yes and 7(100.0%)d say no for power
point skill
101. The students of IT 5(71.4%) say yes and2(28.6%)say no for power point skills
102. The students Environmental Sciences 5(45.5%) say yes and6(54.5%) say no
for power point skill.
103. The students of Management Sciences3(60.0%) say yes and2(40.0%)say no
for power point skills.
104.
The students of MLT 3(60.0%) say yes and 2(40.0%) say no for power point skill.
105.
The students of Forestry and Wildlife11(100.0%), Microbiology
21(100.0%), Agriculture 11(100.0%), IT 21(100.0%), Environmental Sciences
11(100.0%), Management Sciences 5(100.0%) and MLT 5(100.0%) say no. for
simulation skill.
106. Table 13 shows that the students of the department of Economics1(9.1%) say
yes and10(100.0%) say no for simulation skill.
107. Table 13 shows that the students of the department of Geology2(18.2%)say
yes and9(81.8%) say no for simulation skill.
108.
The students of Forestry 11(100.0%), Agriculture 11(100.0%),
Psychology 7(100.0)%

Environmental Sciences 11(100.0%) Management

Sciences 5(100.0%) and MLT 5(100.0%) say no. for computer based skill.
109. The students of Forestry and Wildlife,. Microbiology 6(28.6%) say
yesand15(71.4%) say no for computer based skill
110. The students of Economics5 (45.5%) say yes and6 (54.5%) say no for
computer based skill.
111. The students of IT 2(28.6%)say yes and5(71.4%)say no for computer based
skills
112. The students of Geology1(9.1%) say yes and10(90.0%) say no for computer
based skill.
113. The students of Microbiology (28.6%) and Geology(9.1%) use ICT whereas
teachers of rest of the departments do not use ICT routinely in their classroom
during teaching.

59

114. The

teachers

of

Agriculture(36.4%),

Forestry

Management

and

Wildlife(63.6%),

Sciences(20%),

IT(14.3%), Economics(9.1%)use ICT often

MLT(40.0%),

Microbiology

(19%),

whereas in Psychology and

Environmental Sciences do not often use ICT in their classroom.

115. The teacher of Environmental Sciences(100.0%), Economics(81.8%),
Management

Sciences(80.0%),

Geology(72.7%),

Agriculture(63.6%)

,IT(57.1%), Psychology (42.9%), MLT(40.0%), Microbiology (38.1%), Forestry

(36.6%) use ICT sometimes in their classroom during teaching.
116. The teachers of the Psychology(57.1%), IT(28.6%),

MLT(20.0%)

Microbiology (9.5%) Economics(9.1%) use ICT rarely whereas the rest of the
departments do not use ICT in their classroom during teaching.
117. The teachers of Geology (9.1%), Microbiology (4.8%) never use ICT where as
the rest of the departments do use ICT in their classroom during teaching
118.
The teachers of only two departments

of

Microbiology(28.6%), Geology (9.1%) use ICT whereas teachers of rest of the

departments do not use ICT in their classroom during teaching.
119.
The teachers of the Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%),
MLT(40.0%),

Agriculture(18.2%)

Microbiology(28.6%),IT(28.6%),Economics(9.1%) use ICT routinely whereas

the Psychology and Environmental Sciences departments dont use ICT rarely
in their classroom during teaching.
120.
The teachers of the Management Sciences(80.0%)
Forestry

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

Geology(18.2%) ,IT(14.3%) ,Environmental Sciences(14.3%) use ICT often

whereas rest of the department do not use ICT in classroom during teaching.
121.
The
teachers
of
Economics(63.6%),
Agriculture(54.5%),
Psychology(28.6%),

Geology(36.4%),
Management

Microbiology(23.8%),

Sciences(20.0%)

,Forestry((18.2%)

IT(14.3%) , Environmental Sciences(14.3%) use ICT sometimes in classroom

during teaching .
122.

The

teachers

of

IT(42.9%),

Environmental

Sciences(20.0%), Economics(18.2%), Microbiology (9.5%) Forestry and

Wildlife(9.1%) use ICT whereas rest of the departments never use ICT in
classroom during teaching.
123. The teachers of MLT(40.0%),Microbiology
Agriculture(18.2%),

Economics(9.1%),

Forestry

(28.6%),
and

IT(28.6%),

Wildlife(9.1%),

60

Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Geology(9.1%), Management Sciences(9.1%)

use ICT whereas the Psychology departments do not use ICT routinely in
classroom during their teaching.
124. The teachers of Forestry
Microbiology(19.0%),

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Geology(18.2%),

MLT(20.0%),

Management

Science(18.2%),

IT(14.3%) use ICT whereas the rest of the departments do not use ICT often in
classroom during their teaching.
125. The teachers of Economics(63.6%), Agriculture(54.5%), Geology(36.4%),
Management

Sciences(36.4%),

Environmental

Sciences(27.3%),

Psychology(28.6%), Microbiology(23.8%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%),

IT(14.3%)use ICT whereas MLT department do not use ICT sometimes in their
classroom during teaching .
126. The teachers of psychology (71.4%), Environmental Sciences (57.1%),
Forestry and Wildlife(36.4%), Geology(27.3%), Management Sciences (27.3%),
Agriculture(27.3%), MLT(20%), Microbiology(19.0%), Economics(9.1%), use
ICT whereas the rest of the departments do not use ICT in their classroom
during teaching.
127. The teachers of IT (42.9%), MLT (20.0%), Economics(18.2%), Forestry and
Wildlife(9.1%), Environmental Sciences (9.1%) use ICT whereas the rest of the
departments never use ICT in their classroom during teaching.
128. Table shows that the teacher of the departments

MLT(40.0%),

Microbiology(33.3%), Forestry and Wildlife (27.3%), Economics(27.3%),

Agriculture(9.1%), IT, (9.1%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Geology (9.1%)
use ICT routinely in their classroom during teaching.
129. The teacher of Forestry and Wildlife(54.5%), Geology(36.4%), Management
Sciences

(20.0%),

IT(18.2%),

Environmental

Sciences(18.2%),

Economics(9.1%), Agriculture (9.1%), use ICT where as rest of the department

do not use ICT often in their classroom during teaching.
130. The teacher of the department Agriculture(63.6%),
Sciences(40.0%),

MLT(40.0%),

psychology(28.6%),

Management

Geology(27.3%),

Economics(27.3%), Microbiology(23.8%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%), IT

(9.1%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%) use ICT sometimes in their classroom
during teaching.
131. The teacher of Psychology (71.4%), IT (63.6%), Environmental Sciences
(63.6%), Economics(27.3%), Management Sciences(20.0%), MLT (20.0%),

61

Microbiology(9.5%), Agriculture(9.1%), Geology(9.1%) use ICT whereas rest

of the department do not use ICT in their classroom during teaching.
132. The teacher of Management Sciences (20.0%), Microbiology(14.3%),
Economics(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%), Geology(9.1%) use ICT where as rest of
the department never use ICT in their classroom during teaching.
133. 19. Table shows that the teachers of Forestry and Wildlife(72.7%), IT(42.9%),
Environmental Sciences(36.4%), Agriculture(27.3%), Microbiology(23.8%),
Economic(9.1%), Geology(9.1%),use ICT where as the rest of the department
do not use ICT routinely in their classroom during teaching.
134. The teachers of Geology(27.3%), Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%), Agriculture(18.2%),

Environmental Sciences(18.2%) ,IT(14.3%) use ICT

whereas rest of the

department do not use ICT often in their classroom during teaching.

135. The teacher of Management Sciences(60.0%), Microbiology(42.9%),
Psychology(42.9%),

Economics(36.4%),

Geology(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

IT(14.3), Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%) use ICT

sometimes in their classroom during teaching .
136. The teachers of MLT (60.0%), Geology (27.3%), Economics(18.2%),
Agriculture(18.2%), Environmental Sciences(18.2%), Psychology (14.3%) use
ICT whereas rest of the department do not use ICT often in their classroom
during teaching.
137. The teachers
MLT(20.0%),

of

Psychology(42.9%),

Economics(18.2%),

Management

Environmental

Sciences(20.0%),
Sciences(18.2%),

Microbiology(4.8%) use ICT whereas rest of the department never use ICT in
their classroom during teaching.
138. 20. Table 6 shows that the teachers of the departments IT(50, 0%), Geology
(27.3%), MLT(20.0%), Microbiology(19.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%),
Agriculture (18.2%), Economics(9.1%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%)use ICT
whereas the rest of the department do not use ICT routinely in their classroom
during their teaching.
139. The teachers of the Geology(54.5%), Environmental Sciences(27.3%),
Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

Forestry(18.2%),

Economics(18.2%), Agriculture(9.1%)use ICT whereas rest of the department

do not use ICT often in their classroom during teaching.
140. The teachers of Forestry (63.6%), Agriculture(54.5%), Microbiology(47.6%),
Economics(45.5%),

Psychology(28.6%),

MLT(20.0%),

Environmental

62

Sciences(18.2%), Geology(18.2%) use ICT where as the rest of the departments

do not use ICT sometimes in their classroom during teaching.
141. The teachers of MLT(40.0%), Environmental Sciences(36.4%), IT(33.3%),
Psychology(28.6%),

Agriculture(18.2%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Economics

(9.1%) use ICT whereas rest of the department do not use ICT rarely in
classroom.
142. The teachers

of

Management

Sciences(80.%),

Psychology(42.9%),

MLT(20.0%), Economics(18.2%), IT(16.7%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%),

Microbiology(4.8%) use ICT whereas rest of the department never use ICT in
their classroom during teaching.
143.
The students of Agriculture (72.7%), IT (42.9%),
Management

Sciences

Sciences(27.3%),

(40.0%),

Forestry

and

Geology

(36.4%),

Wildlife(27.3%),

Environmental

Microbiology(14.3%),

Economics(9.1%), strongly agree with the statement infrastructure has sufficient

infrastructure for information and communication technologies.
144.
The
students
of
the
department

of

Microbiology(81.0%), Economics(81.0%), Environmental Sciences (63.6%), IT

(57.1%), Forestry and Wildlife(45.5%), Psychology(42.9%), Management
Sciences(40.0%), Geology(27.3%), Agriculture(18.2%)
statement

agree with the

infrastructure has sufficient infrastructure for information and

communication technologies.
145.
The students of Psychology(42.9%), Management
(20.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%), Economics(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%),
Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Geology (9.1%), disagree with the statement
infrastructure has sufficient infrastructure for information and communication
technologies.
146.
Management

The students of the department Psychology(42.9%),

Sciences(20.0%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(9.1%),

.Microbiology(9.1%), Economics(9.1%), Economic(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%),

Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Geology(9.1%), strongly disagree with the
statement infrastructure has sufficient infrastructure for information and
communication technologies.
147.
The

students

of

department

IT(71.4%),

Agriculture(45.5%), Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%), Microbiology(19.0%),

Geology(18.2%),

Economics(9.1%),

Environmental

Science(9.1%),

63

Psychology(0%), Management science(0%), MLT(0%) are strongly agree with

computer are available in the department for students.
148.
The
students
of
Economic(90.9%),Environmental
Management

Science(72.7%),

Science(60.0%),

department

of

Microbiology(71.4%),

Psychology(42.9%),

IT(28.6),

Agriculture(27.3%),Geology(27.3%), statement infrastructure has sufficient

infrastructure for information and communication technologies.
149.
The
students
of
department

Management

Sciences(40.0%), Geology(27.3%), MLT(20.2%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%),

Agriculture(18.2%),

Psychology(14.3%),

Environmental

Sciences(9.1%),

Microbiology(4.8%), Economics(0%), IT(0%), are disagree with computer are

available in the department for students.
150.
The students
Psychology(42.9%),

Forestry

Agriculture(9.1%),

and

of

department

of

Wildlife(36.4%),

Environmental

Science(9.1%),

MLT(80.0%),

Geology(27.3%),

Microbiology(4.8%),

Economics(0%), IT(0%), Management science(0%) are strongly disagree with

computer are available in the department for students.
151.
The students of department IT(71.4%), Management
Sciences(60.0%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(45.5%),

geology(63.4%),

Economics(36.4%), Agriculture(18.2%), Microbiology(14.2%), Environmental

Sciences(9.1%), Psychology(0%), MLT(0%) are strongly agree with know how
to use computer in classroom.
152.
The students of department Agriculture(72.7%),
Microbiology(66.7%),
Geology(45.5%),

MLT(60.0%),

Management

Environmental

science(40.0%),

science(45.5%),
Psychology(42.9%),

Economics(36.4%), Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%), IT(14.3%) are agree with

know how to use computer in classroom.
153.
The students of department Psychology(57.1%),
Environmental

Science(36.4%),

Economics(27.3%),
Agriculture(9.1%),

MLT(20.0%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

IT(14.3%),

Geology(9.1%), Management Science(0%) are disagree

with know how to use computer in classroom.

154.
The
students
of

department

MLT(20.0%),

Environmental Science(9.1%), Geology(9.1%), Forestry and Wildlife(0%),

Microbiology(0%), Economic(0%), Agriculture(0%), Psychology(0%), IT(0%),

64

Management Science(0%) are strongly disagree with know how to use computer
in classroom management.
155. The students of department
Microbiology(42.9%),

Geology(63.6%),

Management

Agriculture(45.5%),

Science(40.0%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(27.3%), Environmental Sciences(27.3are strongly agree with believe

that tools like e mail, forum and chat make communication with students
colleagues and teacher easier.
156. The students of department MLT(100.0%), Psychology(85.7%), Economics
(72.7%), IT(71.4%), Microbiology(47.6%), Forestry and Wildlife(45.5%),
Agriculture(45.5%),

Management

Science(40.0%),

Geology(36.4%),

Environmental Sciences(18.2%), are agree with believe that tools like e mail,
forum and chat make communication with students colleagues and teacher
easier.
157. The

students

Sciences(27.3%),
IT(14.3%),

of

department

Forestry

and

Economics(27.3%),
Wildlife(18.2%),

Agriculture(9.1%),

Environmental

Psychology(14.3%),

Microbiology(4.8%),

Geology(0%),

Management Sciences(0%), MLT(0%) are disagree with believe that tools like e
mail, forum and chat make communication with students colleagues and teacher
easier.
158. The students of department Environmental Sciences(27.3%), Management
Science(20.2%), IT(14.3%), Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%), Microbiology(4.8%),
Economics(0%), Agriculture(0%), Psychology(0%), Geology(0%), MLT(0%)
are strongly disagree with believe that tools like e mail, forum and chat make
communication with students colleagues and teacher easier
159. The
students
of
department
Management
Sciences

(60.0%),

Psychology(57.1%), Forestry and Wildlife(54.5%), Geology(54.5%), IT(42.9%),

MLT(40.0%),

Agriculture(36.4%),

Environmental

Sciences(36.4%),

Microbiology(33.3%), Economics(18.2%) are strongly agree with think, that

technology supported teaching make learning more effective.
160. The
students
of
department
Economic(81.8%),

Environmental

Science(63.6%), IT(57.1%), Psychology(42.9%), Management Science(40.0%),

MLT(40.0%),

Microbiology(38.1%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Geology(27.3%), Agriculture(18.2%)
161. are agree with think, that technology supported teaching make learning more
effective.

65

162. The

students

of

department

Microbiology(19.0%),
Economics(0%),

Forestry

Agriculture(45.5%),

and

Psychology(0%),

MLT(20.0%),

Wildlife(18.2%),

IT(0%),

Geology(9.1%),

Environmental

Science(0%),

management Sciences(0%) are disagree that technology supported teaching

make learning more effective.
163. The students of department Microbiology(9.5%), Geology(9.1%), Forestry
and Wildlife(0%), Economics(0%), Agriculture(0%), Psychology(0%), IT(0%),
Environmental science(0%), management Science(0%), MLT(0%) are strongly
disagree with think, that technology supported teaching make learning more
effective.
164. The students
MLT(60.0%),

of

Management

Forestry(45.5%),

Sciences(80.0%),

Economic(36.4%),

Geology(63.6%),
psychology(28.6%),

Agriculture(27.3%), Microbiology(23.8%), Environmental Sciences(18.2%),

IT(14.3%), are strongly agree with that the use of ICTs enhances the interest of
students in the courses.
165. The
students
of
Psychology(57.1%),

department

Environmental

IT(85.7%),

Economics(63.6%),

Sciences(54.5%),

Microbiology(33.3%), Agriculture(27.3%),

Geology(36.4%),

Management

Sciences(20.0%),

MLT(20.0%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%) are agree that the use of ICTs
enhances the interest of students in the courses.
166. The students of department Microbiology(38.1%), MLT(20.0%), Forestry and
Wildlife(18.2%),

Environmental

Science(18.2%),

Psychology(14.3%),

Agriculture(9.1%), Economics(0%), IT(0%), Geology(0%), Management

science(0%) are disagree that, the use of ICTs enhances the interest of students
in the courses.
167. The students of department Agriculture(36.4%), Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%),
Environmental

Sciences(9.1%),

Microbiology(4.8%),

Economics(0%),

Psychology(0%), IT(0%), Geology(0%), Management science(0%), MLT(0%)

are strongly disagree that, the use of ICTs enhances the interest of students in the
course.
168.
Sciences(80.0%),

The

students

Geology(63.6%),

Microbiology(38.1%),

of

department

MLT(60.0%),

Management

Psychology(42.9%),

Forestry(27.3%),

Economics(27.3%),

Agriculture(27.3%), Environmental science(18.2%), IT(14.3%), are strongly

agree that, the use of ICTs enhances the quality of education.

66

169.

The

students

of

department

IT(71.4%),

Economic(63.6%), Psychology(57.1%),

Microbiology(52.4%), MLT(40.0%),

Agriculture(36.4%),Forestry

Wildlife(27.3%),

and

Environmental

Science(27.3%), Geology(18.2%), Management Science(0%) are agree that, the

use of ICTs enhances the quality of education.
170.
The
students
of
science(54.5%),

Forestry

Geology(18.2%),

and

IT(14.3%),

department

Wildlife(27.3%),

Environment

Agriculture(18.2%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Economics(9.1%),

psychology(0%), Management Science(0%), MLT(0%) are disagree that, the use

of ICTs enhances the quality of education.
171. The students of department Management Sciences(20.0%), Forestry and
Wildlife(18.2),

Agriculture(18.2%),

Microbiology(0%),

Economic(0%),

Psychology(0%), IT(0%), Environmental science(0%), Geology(0%), MLT(0%)

are strongly disagree that, the use of ICTs enhances the quality of education.
172. 28. Table show that the students of department Geology(63.6%), Management
science(60.0%),

Agriculture(54.5%),

Environmental

Forestry(27.3%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

Sciences(45.5%),

Economic(18.2%),

IT(14.3%),

Psychology(0%), MLT(0%), are strongly agree with Lack of skills to use

technology affective learning.
173. The students of department IT(85.7%), MLT(60.0%), Economics(54.5%),
Microbiology(52.4%),
Forestry(27.3%),

Management

Agriculture(27.3%),

Science(40.0%),

Psychology(28.6%),

Environmental

Sciences(27.3%),

Geology(9.1%), are agree with Lack of skills to use technology affective

learning.
174. The students of department of Psychology(71.4%), Economic(27.3%),
Environmental

Science(27.3%),

Geology(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%), Agriculture(9.1%), Forestry and Wildlife(0%), IT(0%),

Management Science(0%), are disagree with Lack of skills to use technology
affective learning.
175. The students of department Forestry and Wildlife(45.5%), MLT(20.1%),
Microbiology(9.5%), Agriculture(9.1%), Economics(0%), Psychology(0%),
IT(0%), Environmental science(0%), Geology(0%), Management science(0%)
are strongly disagree with Lack of skills to use technology affective learning.
176. The students of department Forestry(54.5%),Environmental science(54.5%),
Economic(36.4%),

Agriculture(36.4%),Microbiology(33.3%),

IT(14.3%),

67

Geology(9.1%), MLT(9.1%), Psychology(0%), Management science(0%) are

strongly agree that there are Problems about accessibility to existing hardware
(computer, multimedia).
177. The students of department Psychology(71.4%),Management science(60.0%),
IT(57.1%),

Economics(54.4%),

Microbiology(42.9%),

Geology(54.5%),

Environmental

Agriculture(54.5%),

Sciences(27.3%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(0%), MLT(0%) are agree that there are Problems about accessibility to
existing hardware (computer, multimedia).
178. The students of department Management Science(0%),Psychology(28.6%),
Forestry

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Economics(9.1%),

IT(14.3%),

Agriculture(9.1%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Environmental

Science(9.1%),

Geology(9.1%), MLT(9.1%) are disagree that there are Problems about

accessibility to existing hardware (computer, multimedia).
179. The
students
of
department
Geology(27.3%),

Forestry(18.2%),

Microbiology(14.3%), IT(14.3%), Environmental Science(9.1%), MLT(9.1%),

Economic(0%), Agriculture(0%), Psychology(0%), Management science(0%)
are strongly disagree that there are Problems about accessibility to existing
hardware (computer, multimedia).
180. The students of department

Agriculture(36.4%),

Environmental

science(36.4%), Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%), Geology(27.3%), Management

science(20.0%),

Microbiology(14.3%),

IT(14.3%),

Economic(9.1%),

Psychology(0%), MLT0%) are strongly agree with lack of technical

infrastructure for instructional technology.
181. The
students
of
department
science(60.0%),MLT(60.0%),
Microbiology(47.6%),

IT(71.4%),

Management

Economics(54.5%),

Environmental

Geology(54.5%),

science(45.5%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(36.4%), Agriculture(36.4%), Psychology(0%) are agree lack of

technical infrastructure for instructional technology.
182. The students of department Psychology(57.1%),
Agriculture(36.4%),

Microbiology(28.6%),

Economic(36.4%),

Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Forestry and Wildlife(18.2%), Geology(18.2%), IT(14.3%), Environmental

Sciences(9.1%), MLT(0%) are disagree with lack of technical infrastructure for
instructional technology.
183. The students of department

Psychology

(28.6%),

Forestry

and

Wildlife(18.2%), Microbiology(9.5%), Agriculture(9.1%), Economics(0%),

68

IT(0%), Environmental Sciences(0%), Geology(0%), Management science(0%),

MLT(0%) are strongly disagree with lack of technical infrastructure for
instructional technology.
184. The students of department
MLT(40.0%),

IT(28.6%),

Forestry(54.5%),
Geology(27.3%),

Agriculture(45.5%),
Microbiology(19.0%),

Economic(9.1%), Psychology(0%), Environmental science(0%), Management

Science(0%) are strongly agree with lack of financial recourses for technology
integration in teaching.
185. The students of department Geology(63.6%), Management Sciences(60.0%),
Environmental

science(54.5%),

Economics(45.5%),

MLT(40.0%),

Microbiology(33.3%),

Forestry

Psychology(42.9%),

and

Wildlife(27.3%),

Agriculture(27.3%), IT(14.3%) are agree with lack of financial recourses for

technology integration in teaching.
186. The students of department Psychology(57.1%),IT(42.9%), Management
science(40.0%),

Microbiology(38.1%),

Economics(36.4%),

Forestry

and

Environmental

Wildlife(18.2%),

Sciences(36.4%),
Agriculture(9.1%),

Geology(9.1%), MLT(0%) are disagree with agree with lack of financial

recourses for technology integration in teaching.
187. The
students
of
department
Agriculture(18.2),

IT(14.3%),

Microbiology(9.5%), Economics(9.1%), Environmental Sciences(9.1%), are

strongly disagree with lack of financial recourses for technology integration in
teaching.
188. The
students

of

department

Economics(27.3%),

Environmental

Sciences(27.3%), Geology(27.3%), Management Sciences(20.0%), Forestry and

Wildlife(18.2%),

IT(14.3%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Agriculture(0%),

Psychology(0%), MLT(0%) are strongly agree with lack of instructional

software/electronic resources.
189. The
students
of
department

Management

Sciences(60.0%),

Psychology(57.1%), Economics(54.5%), Agriculture(54.5%), Forestry and

Wildlife(45.5%), MLT(40.0%), IT(28.6%), Environmental Sciences(27.3%),
Geology(27.3%), Microbiology(23.8%) are agree with lack of instructional
software/electronic resources.
190. The
students
of
department
Psychology(42.9%),

Agriculture(36.4%),

IT(57.1%),

Microbiology(47.6%),

Environmental

Sciences(27.3%),

Geology(27.3%), Management Sciences(20.0%), MLT(20.0%), Forestry and

69

Wildlife(18.2%), Economics(18.2%) are disagree with lack of instructional

software/electronic resources.
191. The students of department MLT(40.0%),Microbiology(19.0%), Forestry and
Wildlife(18.2%),

Environmental

Sciences(18.2%),

Geology(18.2%),

Agriculture(9.1%), Economics(0%), Psychology(0%), IT(0%), Management

Sciences(0%) are strongly disagree with lack of instructional software/electronic
resources.
192. The
students

of

Forestry(27.3%),

department

Economic(27.3%),

Microbiology(23.8%),
Sciences(20.0%),

Geology(36.4%),

Geology(36.4%),

Environmental

Sciences(27.3%),

Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Agriculture(18.2%),

Management

Psychology(14.3%),

IT(14.3%),

MLT(0%) are strongly agree with lack of professional development

opportunities for gaining knowledge and skill in ICT in teaching and research.
193. The
students
of
department
MLT(80.0%),
Psychology(71.4%),
Forestry(54.5%), Geology(54.5%), Economic(45.5%), Agriculture(36.4%),
Microbiology(33.3%),
Environmental

IT(28.6%),

Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Sciences(18.2%) are agree with lack of professional

development opportunities for gaining knowledge and skill in ICT in teaching

and research.
194. The students of department Management Sciences(60.0%), IT(57.1%),
Agriculture(36.4%),

Environmental

Sciences(36.4%),

Economic(27.3%),

Microbiology(19.0%), psychology(14.3%), Forestry(9.1%), Geology(9.1%),

MLT(0%) are disagree with lack of professional development opportunities for
gaining knowledge and skill in ICT in teaching and research.
195. The
students
of
department
Microbiology(23.8%),MLT(20.0%),
Environmental
Economics(0%),
Sciences(0%) are

Sciences(18.2%),Forestry(9.1%),
Psychology(0%),

IT(0%),

Agriculture(9.1%),

Geology(0%),

Management

strongly disagree with lack of professional development

opportunities for gaining knowledge and skill in ICT in teaching and research.
196. The students of department Economic(45.5%), MLT(40.0%), Forestry(36.4%),
Microbiology(28.6%), Agriculture(27.3%),

Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Environmental Sciences(18.2%), psychology (14.3%), IT(14.3%), Geology(0%)

are strongly agree with lack of interest of teachers in ICT usage.
197. The
students
of
department
Psychology(85.7%),
Sciences(60.0%),

MLT(60.0%),

IT(57.1%),

Management

Microbiology(47.6%),

70

Environmental

Sciences(45.5%),

Forestry(36.4%),

Economic(36.4%),

Agriculture(36.4%) are agree with lack of interest of teachers in ICT usage.

198. The students of department Geology(54.5%),IT(28.6%),Environmental
Sciences(27.3%),

Management

Sciences(20.0%),

Microbiology(19.0%),

Economic(18.2%), Forestry(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%)are disagree with lack of

interest of teachers in ICT usage.
199. The students of department

Agriculture(27.3%),

Forestry(18.2%),

Environmental Sciences(9.1%), Microbiology(4.8%) are strongly disagree with

lack of interest of teachers in ICT usage.
200. The students of department Geology(63.6%),
Management

Sciences(40.0%),Microbiology(38.1%),

Forestry(27.3%),

Environmental

Psychology(42.9%),
Agriculture(36.4%),

Sciences(9.1%),

Economic(0%),

IT(0%),MLT(0%) are strongly agree with Ineffective training of teacher in ICT.

201. The
students
of
department
Economic(72.7%),
Environmental
Sciences(63.6%),

Environmental

Sciences(63.6%),

Sciences(60.0%),

IT(57.1%),

Psychology(42.9%),

Microbiology(33.3%),

Forestry

Management

and

Wildlife(54.5%),

IT(28.6%),

Geology(27.3%),

MLT(20.0%), Agriculture(18.2%) are agree with Ineffective training of teacher

in ICT.
202. The students of the department IT(28.6%), Environmental Sciences (27.3%),
Microbiology (23.8%), MLT (20.0%), Economics(18.2%), Psychology(14.3%),
Forestry and Wildlife(9.1%), Agriculture(9.1%), Geology(9.1%),are disagree
with that statement Ineffective training of teacher in ICT.
203. Table shoes that the students of the department Agriculture(36.4%),
IT(14.3%),

Forestry

Microbiology(4.8%),

and

Wildlife(9.1%),

Psychology(0.0%),

Economics(9.1%),

Geology(0.0%),

Management

Sciences(0.0%), MLT(0.0%), Environmental Sciences(0.0%) are strongly

disagree with that statement Ineffective training of teacher in ICT.
204. The students of department Economics(45.5%), Agriculture(45.5%),
Microbiology(38.1%),

Forestry(36.4%),

Geology(36.4%),

Environmental

Sciences(36.4%), IT(28.6%), Management Sciences (20.0%),

MLT(20.0%),

psychology(14.3%) are strongly agree with am taught in the classroom which is

equipped with multimedia.
205. The students of department Psychology(85.7%), MLT(80.0%), Management
Sciences(60.0%),
Environmental

IT(57.1%),

Economics(45.5%),

Sciences(45.5%),

Geology(45.5%),

Agriculture(45.5%),
Forestry(36.4%),

71

Microbiology(33.3%) are agree with am taught in the classroom which is

equipped with multimedia.
206. The students of department Forestry(27.3%), Management Sciences(20.0%),
Agriculture(18.2%),

Environmental

Microbiology(14.3%),

IT(14.3%),

Sciences(18.2%),
Economics(9.1%

Geology(18.2%),

),

psychology(0%),

MLT(0%) are disagree with am taught in the classroom which is equipped with
multimedia.
207. The students of department Forestry(0%), Economics(0%), Psychology(0%),
IT(0%),Environmental

Sciences(0%),

Geology(0%),

Management

Sciences(0%), MLT(0%) are strongly disagree with am taught in the classroom

which is equipped with multimedia.
208. The students of department Agriculture(45.5%), Forestry and Wildlife(27.3%),
Environmental

Sciences(27.3%),

Psychology(14.3%),

IT(14.3%),

MLT(20.0%),

Geology(18.2%),

Microbiology(9.5%),

Economics(9.1%),

Management Sciences(0%) are strongly agree with fully supported to participate

in the use of ICT in the class.
209. The students of department Economics(72.7%), IT(71.4%), MLT(60.0%),
Microbiology(57.1%), Psychology(57.1%), Environmental Sciences(54.5%),
Geology(54.5%),

Management

Sciences(40.0%),

Forestry(36.4%),

Agriculture(27.3%) are agree with fully supported to participate in the use of

ICT in the class.
210. The students of department Management Sciences (40.0%), Forestry(36.4%),
psychology

(28.6%) ,Agriculture (27.3%), Geology (27.3%),Microbiology

(23.8%), MLT (20.0%), Economic (18.2%), Environmental Sciences (18.2%),

IT (14.3%) are disagree with fully supported to participate in the use of ICT in
the class.
211. The students

of

Microbiology(9.5%),

department
Forestry

(0%),

Management

Sciences

Economics(0%),

(20.0%),

Agriculture(0%),

Psychology (0%), IT(0%), Environmental Sciences (0%), Geology (0.0%), MLT

(0%) are strongly disagree with fully supported to participate in the use of ICT
in the class.
212. 38. Table show that the students of department Forestry (36.4%), Agriculture
(27.3%), Management Sciences (20.0%), MLT (20.0%), Microbiology (19.0%),
Environmental Sciences (18.2%), Geology (18.2%), Economics (9.1%), are
strongly agree with trained how to brows specific information from internet.

72

213. The students of the department Forestry (36.4%), Agriculture (27.3%),

MLT(20.0%), Microbiology (19.0%), Geology (18.2%), Management Sciences
(18.2%), Economics (9.1%),IT (0.0%), Psychology (0.0%), Environmental
Sciences (0.0%) are agree with that statement trained how to browse specific
information from internet.
214. The students of the department Psychology (42.9%), MLT(40.0%), Forestry
(36.4%), Economics (36.4%), IT (28.6%), Agriculture (27.3 ), Environmental
Sciences (27.3%), Microbiology(23.8%), Management Sciences (20.0%),
Geology (18.2%) are disagree with that statement trained how to browse
specific information from internet.
215. The students of the department Microbiology (23.8%), Environmental
Sciences (18.2%), Geology (18.2%), Forestry (18.2%) are strongly disagree
with that statement trained how to browse specific information from internet.
216. The students of the department Geology (45.5%), Environmental Sciences
(27.3%), MLT (20.0%), Microbiology (19.0%), Agriculture (18.2%), IT(14.3%),
Forestry (9.1%)are strongly agree with statement I use internet at university.
217. The students of Economics (90.0%), IT (42.9%) Management
Sciences(40.0%), Microbiology(38.1%),Forestry(36.4%),Environment Sciences
(36.4%), Geology (27.3%), MLT (20.0%), Agriculture (18.2%), Psychology
(14.3%) are agree with that statement I use internet at university.
218. The
students
Psychology
(85.7%),
IT(28.6%),
(27.3%),Microbiology

(23.8%),

Management

Science

Agriculture

s(20.0%),

MLT

(20.0%).Environmental Sciences (18.2%), Geology (18.2%), Forestry (0.0%),

Economics (0.0%) are disagree with that statement I use internet at university.
219. The students of Forestry (54.5%), Management Sciences(40.0%),
MLT(40.0%),Agriculture(36.4%), Environmental Sciences (18.2%), IT (14.3%),
Microbiology (14.3%), Economics (9.1%), Geology (9.1%) are strongly
disagree with that statement to use internet at university.

CONCLUSIONS
1. The majority of the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife,
Microbiology, Agriculture, IT, Psychology, Environmental Sciences, Geology,

73

Management Sciences and MLT were comfortable with departmental computer

labs whereas all students of the department of Economics were comfortable with
departmental computer labs.
2. The majority of the students of the department of Economics, Forestry and
Wildlife, IT, Psychology, Geology can use word processing. The majority of the
students of the department of Microbiology, Agriculture, Environmental Sciences,
Management Sciences and MLT cannot use word processing.
3. The majority of the students of the department of Economics, IT can use spread
sheet. The majority of the students of the department of Forestry and wildlife
Microbiology, Agriculture, Environmental Sciences, Management Sciences and
MLT, Geology, Psychology cannot use spread sheet.
4. The majority of the students of the department of Economics, IT, Environmental
Sciences, Management Sciences can use presentation tool. The majority of the
students of the department of Forestry and wildlife Microbiology, Agriculture,
MLT, Geology and Psychology cannot use presentation tools.
5. The majority of the students of the department of Geology, IT, Management
Sciences can use emailing skill. The majority of the students of the department of
Forestry and wildlife Microbiology, Agriculture, MLT, Environmental Sciences,
Economics and Psychology cannot use emailing skill.
6. The majority of the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife,
Economics, MLT and Management Sciences can use internet browsing. The
majority of the students of the department of Microbiology, Agriculture, IT,
Environmental Sciences, and Psychology cannot use internet browsing.
7. All the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife, Economics, MLT,
Management Sciences, Microbiology, Agriculture, IT, Environmental Sciences,
and Psychology cannot use graphics skill.
8. All the students of the department of Forestry and Wildlife, Economics, MLT,
Management Sciences, Microbiology, Agriculture, IT, Environmental Sciences,
and Psychology cannot use web page designing.
9. The majority of the students of the department of Management Sciences can use
chatting skill. The majority of the students of the department of Microbiology,
Agriculture, IT, Environmental Sciences, Psychology, Economics, Forestry and
Wildlife, MLT, Geology cannot use chatting skill.
10. The majority of the students of the department of Management Sciences,
Economics, Psychology, Environmental Sciences, Geology, and MLT can use web

74

page. The majority of the students of the department of Microbiology, IT,

Psychology, Forestry and Wildlife, cannot web page
11. All the students of the department of Management Sciences, Microbiology,
Agriculture, IT, Environmental Sciences, Psychology, Economics, Forestry and
Wildlife, MLT, Geology cannot use eBook skill.
12. . The majority of the students of the department of Management Sciences, MLT,
Forestry and Wildlife, IT, MLT, Economics can use power point. The majority of
the students of the department of Microbiology, Agriculture, Psychology, Geology
cannot use power point.
13. All the students of the department of Management Sciences, MLT, Forestry and
Wildlife, IT, MLT, Economics, Microbiology, Agriculture, Psychology, Geology
cannot use power point.
14. The majority of the students of the department of Management Sciences, MLT,
Forestry and Wildlife, IT, MLT, Economics can use power point. The majority of
the students of the department of Microbiology, Agriculture, Psychology, and
Geology cannot use power point.
15. Teachers of two departments Microbiology and Geology use ICT routinely.
Maximum teachers of Forestry and Wildlife and MLT use ICT often .the teachers
of Microbiology, Economics, Agriculture, IT, Environmental Sciences (all),
Geology, Management Sciences and MLT use ICT sometimes. The teachers of
Psychology use ICT rarely.
16. Majority of the students of only Agriculture department strongly agreed whereas
the majority of the department of the Microbiology, Economics, and
Environmental Sciences are agreed Institution has sufficient infrastructure for
information and communication technologies (ICT).
17. Majority of the students of only IT department strongly agreed whereas the
majority of the department of the Microbiology, Economics, Management
Sciences is agreed and MLT department are strongly disagree Computers are
available in the department for students.
18. Majority of the students of only IT, Management Sciences department strongly
agreed whereas the majority of the department of the Microbiology, MLT,
Agriculture are agreed I know how to use computer in classroom..
19. Majority of the students of only Geology department strongly agreed whereas the
majority of the department of the Economics, Psychology, and MLT are agreed. I
believe that tools like e mail, forum and chat make communication with students
colleagues and teacher easier.

75

20. Majority of the students of only Management Sciences, Forestry, Psychology,

Geology department strongly agreed whereas the majority of the department of
the, Environmental Sciences, IT department are agree I think, that technology
supported teaching make learning more effective.
21. .Majority of the students of only Management Sciences, Geology, MLT
department strongly agreed whereas the majority of the department of the,
Environmental Sciences, IT, Psychology, Economics department are agreed I
think, the use of ICTs enhances the interest of students in the courses
22. .Majority of the students of only Management Sciences, Geology, MLT
department strongly agreed whereas the majority of the department of the
Microbiology, IT, Psychology, Economics department are agreed whereas
Environmental Sciences are disagreed. I think, the use of ICTs enhances the
quality of education.
23. Majority of the students of only Management Sciences department strongly agreed
whereas the majority of the department of the Microbiology, Agriculture,
Geology, Economics department agreed. I think, technology helps use of time
effectively.
24. .Majority of the students of only Management Sciences department strongly
agreed whereas the majority of the department of the Microbiology, Agriculture,
Geology, Economics department agreed. Lack of skills to use technology affective
learning.
25. Majority of the students of only Management Sciences, Agriculture, Geology
department strongly agreed whereas the majority of the department of the
Microbiology, IT, Economics, Multidepartment agreed whereas the Psychology
department disagreed. We Problems about accessibility to existing hardware
(computer, multimedia).
26. Majority of the students of only Environmental Sciences, Forestry department
strongly agreed whereas the majority of the department of the Microbiology, IT,
Economics, MLT, Geology, Psychology, department agreed. Lack of financial
resources hampers the integration of technology in teaching.
27. Majority of the students of only Economics, IT, Geology, Management Sciences,
MLT department agreed whereas the majority of the department of the
Psychology, department agreed. Lack of professional development opportunities
for gaining knowledge and skill in ICT in teaching and research.
28. Majority of the students of only Forestry department agreed whereas the majority
of the department of the Geology, Management Sciences, MLT department agreed

76

whereas the department of Psychology department disagreed teacher show lack of

interest in ICT usage.
29. Majority of the students of only Economics, Agriculture, Psychology,
Management Sciences department agreed whereas the majority of the department
of IT disagreed teachers training is effective in ICT.
30. Majority of the students of only Psychology, Geology, MLT department agreed
whereas the majority of the department of the Management Sciences, IT
disagreed I often use internet at university
31. Majority of the students of only IT, MLT, Psychology, department agreed whereas
the majority of the department of Geology disagreed am taught in the classroom
which was equipped with multimedia.
32. Majority of the students of only Geology department agreed whereas the majority
of the department of Economics, IT, Management Sciences, MLT agreed I was
fully supported to participate in the use of ICT in class.
33. Majority of the students of only Psychology, IT, MLT department agreed I was
trained how to browse specific information from internet.
34. Majority of the students of only Psychology, IT, Economics, Environmental
Sciences, Geology, Microbiology department agreed I have learnt in my
classroom barriers for effective ICT use in classroom.
35. Majority of the students of only Psychology, IT, department agreed I had a chance
to develop an understanding how to plan for ICT integration (building support
network)

35. Majority of the students of only Economics department agreed whereas the
majority of the department of Psychology disagreed whereas the majority of the
department of Forestry is strongly disagreed I use internet at university.

REOMENDATIONS
1. It is recommended to the teachers to use computers for preparing their
presentations which will improve the performance of their students.
2. It is recommended for the students to use information communication
technologies for the purpose of enhancing their learning and knowledge.
3. The teachers can guide the students to use ICTs for solving the problems faced
by them.
4. It is recommended to the administration for arranging teachers training in
using ICTs at classroom and for effective teaching and learning.

77

REFERENCES
Abe, T. O. & Adu, E.T. (2007). Impact of information and Communication technology
(ICT) on teacher education in Ikere, Journal of Education, Ikere-Ekiti, 5, 169175.
Al-Ansari, H. (2006). Internet use by the faculty members of Kuwait University. The
Electronic Library, 24 (6), 791-803.
Alexander, J.O. (1999). Collaborative design, constructivist learning, information
technology immersion, & electronic communities: A case study. Interpersonal
Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 7, 1
2.
Amutabi, M. N. & Oketch, M. O. (2003). Experimenting in distance education: the
African Virtual University (AVU) and the paradox of the World Bank in
Kenya. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(1), 57-73.
Attwell, P; Battle, J. (1999). Home computers and school performance. The
Information Society, 15, 1-10
Barron, A. (1998). Designing web-based training. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 29 (4), 355-371
Becker, H. J. (2000). Pedagogical Motivations for student computer use that leads to
student engagement. Education Technology, 40(5), 5-17
Berge, Z. (1998). Guiding principles in web-based instructional design. Education
Media International, 3(2),72-76.
Bhattacharya, I. & Sharma, K. (2007). India in the knowledge economy an electronic
paradigm, International Journal of Educational Management, 21(6), 543-568.
Bottino, R. M. (2003). ICT national policies, and impact on schools and teachers
development CRPIT 03: Proceedings of the 3.1 and 3.3 working groups
conference on International federation for information processing Australian
Computer Society, Inc., Darlinghurst, Australia.
Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Williams, S.
M. (1990). Anchored instruction: why we need it and how technology can
help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro 10 (Eds.), Cognition, education, multimedia
Exploring ideas in high technology (pp. 115141). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates
Castro Snchez, J. J. & Alemn, E., C. (2011). Teachers opinion survey on the use of
ICT tools to support attendance-based teaching. Journal Computers and
Education, 56, 911-915.
Chandra, S. & Patkar, V. (2007). ICTS: A catalyst for enriching the learning process
and library services in India. The International Information & Library Review
39(1), 1-11.

78

Cholin,V. S. (2005). Study of the application of information technology for effective

access to resources in Indian university libraries. The International
Information & Library Review 37(3), 189-197
Coates, D., Humphreys, B. R., Kane, J., Vachris, M., Agarwal, R., & Day, E. (2004).
No significant distance between face-to-face and online instruction:
Evidence from principles of economic. Economics of Education Review, 23(6),
533-546
Collins, A. (1996). Design issues for learning environment. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.),
International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning
environments 347361. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Collis, B. (2002). Information technologies for education and training. In Adelsberger,
H., Collis, B, & Pawlowski, J. (Eds.) Handbook on Technologies for
Information and Training. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Cross, M. & Adam, F. (2007). ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in
South Africa: National and Institutional Pathways, Higher Education Policy
20(1), 73-95
Daintith, J. (Ed.). (2009). A Dictionary of Physics, Oxford University Press
Davis, N.E., & Tearle, P. (Eds.). (1999). A core curriculum for telematics in teacher
training. Available: www.ex.ac.uk/telematics.T3/corecurr/tteach98.htm
Duffy, T., & Cunningham, D. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and
delivery of instruction, Handbook of research for educational
telecommunications and technology 170-198. New York: MacMillan
Fister, K. R., & McCarthy, M. L. (2008). Mathematics instruction and the tablet.
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology,
39(3) 285-292.
Flecknoe, M. (2002). How can ICT help us to improve education? Innovations in
Education & Teaching International, 39(4), 271-280
Fuchs, W. l. (2004). Computers and student learning: Bivariate and Multivariate
evidence on the availability and Use of Computers at Home and at School.
CESifo Working Paper. 1321. November. Munich
Girasoli, A. J. & Hannafin, R. D. (2008). Using asynchronous AV communication
tools to increase academic self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 51(4), 16761682.
Hannafin, M. J., Hall, C., Land, S., & Hill, J. (1994). Learning in open-ended
environments: assumptions, methods and implications. Educational
Technology, 34(8), 4855.
Harris, S. (2002). Innovative pedagogical practices using ICT in schools in England.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 449-458

79

Hepp, K. P., Hinostroza, S.E., Laval, M.E., Rehbein, L. F. (2004) Technology in

Schools: Education, ICT and the Knowledge Society OECD. Available
www1.worldbank.org/education/pdf/ICT_report_oct04a.pdf. 11
Jonassen, D. & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: using computers as
cognitive tools. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research Educational on
Educational Communications and Technology 693-719. New York: Macmillan
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Computers as mind tools for schools: Engaging critical
thinking (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Journal of Educational
and Social Research MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A
constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Kasper, L. F. (1997). The impact of content-based instructional programs on the
academic progress of ESL Students. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 30920.
Kennedy, D. & McNaught, C. (1997). Design elements for interactive multimedia.
Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 1-22.
Kennewell, S., Parkinson, J., & Tanner, H. (2000). Developing the ICT capable school
London: Routledge Falmer.
Kent, N. & Facer, K. (2004). Different worlds? A comparison of young peoples home
and school ICT use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20.440-455.
Kozma, R. (2005). National Policies that connect ICT-Based education reform to
economic and social development. Human Technology, 1(2), 117-156
Kulik, J. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and
secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say (Final Report No.
P10446.001). Arlington, VA: SRI International
Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five
principles toward a new mindset. Educational Technology, Research and
Development 41(3), 4-16.
Lemke, C., & Coughlin, E. C. (1998). Technology in American schools. Available:
www.mff.org/pnbs/ME158.pdf.
Lim, C. P. & Chai, C.S. (2004). An activity-theoretical approach to research of ICT
integration in Singapore schools: Orienting activities and learner autonomy.
Computers & Education,43(3), 215236
Littlejohn, A., Suckling, C., Campbell, L. & McNicol, D. (2002). The amazingly
patient tutor: Students interactions with an online carbohydrate chemistry
course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 313-321

80

Long, S. (2001). Multimedia in the art curriculum: Crossing boundaries. Journal of

Art and Design Education, 20(3), 255-263.
Loveless, A. (2003). Making a difference? An evaluation of professional knowledge
and pedagogy in art and ICT. Journal of Art and Design Education, 22(2),
145-154.
Lowther, D. L., Inan, F. A., Strahl, J. D. & Ross, S. M., (2008). Does technology
integration work when key barriers are removed? Educational Media
International, 45, 195-213
Lu, Z., Hou, L & Huang, X., (2010). A research on a student-centered teaching model
in and ICT based English audio-video speaking class. International Journal of
Education and Development using Information and Communication
Technology, 6, 101-123.
Mason, R. (2000). From distance education to online education. The Internet and
Higher Education, 3(1-2), 63-74.
McGorry, S. Y. (2002). Online, but on target? Internet-based MBA courses: A case
study, The Internet and Higher Education, 5(2), 167-175.
Media Consortium (2007) Horizon Report. Retrieved from www.nmc.org/pdf /
2007_Horizon_Report.pdf
Mooij, T. (1999). Guidelines to pedagogical use of ICT in education. Paper presented
at the 8th Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning
and Instruction (EARLI). Goteborg, Sweden, August 1999.
Mooij, T. (2007). Design of educational and ICT conditions to integrate differences in
learning: Contextual learning theory and a first transformation step in early
education. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23(3), 1499-1530.
Moore, M. & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A Systems View. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.New
Oliver, R. & Short, G. (1997). The Western Australian Telecentres Network: A model
for enhancing access to education and training in rural areas. International
Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 2(4), 311-328.
Oliver, R. & Towers, S. (2000). Benchmarking ICT literacy in tertiary learning
settings. In R. Sims, M. O Reilly, & S Sawkins (Eds.). Learning to choose:
Choosing to learn. proceedings of the 17th annual ASCILITE conference
(381-390). Lismore, NSW: Southern Cross University Press.
Oliver, R. (2000). Creating meaningful contexts for learning in web-based settings.
Proceedings of Open Learning 2000 (53-62). Brisbane: Learning Network,
Queensland.

81

Plomp, T, Pelgrum, W. J. & Law, N. (2007). SITES 2006International comparative

survey of pedagogical practices and ICT in education, Education and
Information Technologies,12(2), 83-92.
Reeves, T. & Jonassen, D. (1996). Learning with technology: using computers as
cognitive tools. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research Educational on
Educational Communications and Technology 693-719. New York: Macmillan
Robins, K. & Webster, K. (1999). Times of Technoculture. New York and London:
Routledge
Sanyal, B. C. (2001). New functions of higher education and ICT to achieve
education for all, paper prepared for the expert roundtable on University and
Technology-For- Literacy and Education Partnership in Developing
Countries, International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO,
September 10 to 12, Paris.
Sharma, R. (2003). Barriers in using technology for education in developing
countries, IEEE0-7803-7724-9103.Singapore schools, Computers &
Education, 41(1) 49-63.
Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary
education? Computers & Education, 44,343-355.
Soloway, E., & Pryor, A. (1996). The next generation in human-computer interaction.
Communications of the ACM, 39(4), 16-18.
Somekh, B. (2007). Pedagogy and learning with ICT: Researching the art of
innovation. New York: Routledge.
Starr, L. (2001). Same time this year. Retrieved from http://www.educationworld.com/a_tech/tech075.shtml.
Stoddart, T., & Niederhauser, D. L. (1993). Technology and educational change.
Computers in the Schools, 9, 522
Valasidou, A., Sidiropoulos, D., Hatzis, T., & Bousiou-Makridou, D. (2005).
Guidelines for the design and implementation of e-learning programmes.
Proceedings of the IADIS. International Conference IADIS E-Society 2005,
27-30 June, Qawra, Malta.
Wagner, A., D. (2001). IT and education for the poorest of the poor: constraints,
possibilities, and principle. Tech Know Logia, July/August, 48-50
Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A review of pedagogy related to information and
communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3),
235286.
Weert, T. V. & Tatnall, A., (2005). Information and communication technologies and
real-life Learning: New Education for the New Knowledge Society, Springer,
New York

82

Wheeler, S. (2001). Information and communication technologies and the changing

role of the teacher. Journal of Educational Media 26(1), 7-17.
Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of
dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political
challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131175.
Young, J. (2002). The 24-hour professor. The chronicle of Higher Education,48(38),
31-33
Yuen, A., Law, N. & Wong, K. (2003). ICT implementation and school leadership
Case studies of ICT integration in teaching and learning, Journal of
Educational Administration 41(2), 158-170
Yusuf, M.O. (2005). Information and communication education: Analyzing the
Nigerian national policy for information technology. International Education
Journal 6(3), 316-321.
Zhao, Y. & Cziko, G., A. (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: a perceptual control
theory perspective. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 5-30