Keywords
DepEd
digital rise program
post-pandemic education
digital
How to Cite
Abstract
This study examined the influence of technological factors on the academic performance of Grade 9 science learners who retained access to personal technological devices at Liminangcong National High School, with the aim of informing the Department of Education (DepEd), Philippines Digital Rise Program. In June 2022, school-issued tablets were abruptly retrieved. This created a critical research context by highlighting the consequences of reduced institutional technological support. The withdrawal of school-provided technology was the primary motivation for this study, as the school’s mean percentage score in the Grade 9 science quarterly examination declined sharply from 88% during the pandemic to 70% in the first quarter (Q1) of the 2022–2023 school year. This drop reflects an immediate academic disruption following the withdrawal. Using stratified random sampling, 81 learners with retained access to personal devices were selected from a population of 102 Grade 9 learners. The data were gathered through a survey questionnaire and learners’ academic records. The survey instrument underwent face and content validation and demonstrated high reliability. Correlation analyses were conducted using both the Q1 grade, which represents the immediate academic impact of technology withdrawal, and the annual average grade, which represents longer-term academic stability. The results revealed a significant positive correlation between access to technology and academic performance. Significant positive relationships were also found between academic performance and technology literacy, learner motivation and engagement, curriculum and pedagogy, socioeconomic status, and gender and cultural factors. Although teacher training and support were rated highly by students, they showed no significant correlation with either Q1 or annual academic performance. This indicates that while students perceived strong teacher support, potential institutional or resource-related barriers, such as limited access to electricity, internet, or devices, as reflected in the access-to-technology items of the questionnaire, may have prevented these supports from fully impacting academic outcomes.
References
Acar, I. H., Evans, M. Y. Q., Rudasill, K. M., & Yildiz, S. (2018). The contributions of relationships with parents and teachers of Turkish children's antisocial behavior. Educational Psychology, 38(7), 877–897.
Agricola, B. T., Prins, F. J., & Sluijsmans, D. M. (2012). Impact of feedback on student learning and satisfaction in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 37(6), 681–697.
American Psychological Association. (2021). Education and socioeconomic status. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/topics/socioeconomic-status/education
Aumentado, S. F. J. (2021). Technological factors and academic performance of Grade 9 high school students in mathematics. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 6(1), 1027–1034.
Deer, L. K., Hastings, P. D., & Hostinar, C. E. (2020). The role of childhood executive function in explaining income disparities in long-term academic achievement. Child Development, 91(5), e1046–e1063. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13383
Department of Education. (2020). DepEd Computeri-zation Program. https://www.deped.gov.ph/ programs-and-projects/computerization-program
Department of Education. (2022). DepEd Data Bits: Functional Computers and Internet Connectivity SY 2020–2021 (January 2022). https:// www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/
DepEd-Databits-Functional-Computers-and-Internet-Connectivity-4.pdf
Department of Education. (2022). DepEd Data Bits: Data on Electricity Supply as of 14 February 2022. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/ uploads/2022/04/Data-bits-Electricity-Supply-as-of-14-February-2022-2.pdf
Hackman, D. A., Farah, M. J., & Meaney, M. J. (2010). Socioeconomic status and the brain: Mechanistic insights from human and animal research. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(9), 651–659.
Neroni, J., Meijs, C., Gijselaers, H. J. M., Kirschner, P. A., & de Groot, R. H. M. (2019). Learning strategies and academic performance in distance education. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 1–9.
Park, S., & Weng, F. (2020). The effects of ICT on students’ academic performance in mathematics, reading, and science. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 586118. https://doi.org/[DOI
Park, S., & Weng, W. (2020). The relationship between ICT-related factors and student academic achievement and the moderating effect of coun-try economic indexes across 39 countries: Using multilevel structural equation modelling. Educa-tional Technology & Society, 23(3), 1–15.
Radovan, M. (2011). The relation between distance students' motivation, their use of learning strategies, and academic success. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 216–222.
Rodríguez-Hernández, C. F., Cascallar, E., & Kyndt, E. (2020). Socio-economic status and academic performance in higher education: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 29, 100305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100305
Sun, J. C.-Y., & Metros, S. E. (2011). The digital divide and its impact on academic performance. US-China Education Review A, 1(2), 153–161.
UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring re-port: technology in education – a tool on whose terms? Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2023). An Ed-Tech Tragedy? Educational Technologies and School Closures in the Time of COVID-19. Paris: UNESCO.
Zhou, M., & Wang, J. (2019). Challenges and strategies for promoting children’s education: A comparative analysis of Chinese immigrant parenting in the United States and Singapore. Genealogy, 3(2), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy3020020
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 WVSU Research Journal