IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rbs/ijbrss/v10y2021i4p383-390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender and teacher attitude toward digital literacy programme in Kisii county primary schools

Author

Listed:
  • Edwin Obwoge Makworo

    (Applied Sciences Department, Kisii National Polytechnic, Kisii, Kenya)

  • George Morara Nyakoe

    (School of Engineering & Innovative Technology, Kisii University, Kisii, Kenya)

  • Teresa Kwamboka Abuya

    (School of Information Science and Technology, Kisii University, Kisii, Kenya)

Abstract

Digital technologies have been associated with improved and enriched learning experiences which include more student-centered learning. These technologies have made teaching and learning experiences more interesting. In view of the crucial role of digital technologies in enhancing learning, this study sought to assess teacher attitudes towards the Digital Literacy Programme (DLP) in Kisii County based on gender differences. Does the gender of the teachers involved in the Digital Literacy Programme in Kisii County affect their readiness to uptake and implement the program? A survey research design was applied in the study. The population of the study constituted of 1,420 standard one and two teachers selected from randomly sampled schools of the county. The sample size was determined using the Fisher formula and the sample consisted of 302 standard one and two teachers. Purposive sampling was used to select the specific teachers. Simple random sampling was used to select the specific schools to include in the study and proportionate sampling was used to determine the number of respondents from each school. Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data. To ascertain the reliability of the research instruments, a pilot test was carried out and a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.76 was realized. Data were analyzed quantitatively using descriptive statistics in SPSS. The study established that difference in gender has no effect on the teachers’ attitude to the Digital Literacy Programme. Key Words:Digital Literacy Programme, Digital Technologies, Computer

Suggested Citation

  • Edwin Obwoge Makworo & George Morara Nyakoe & Teresa Kwamboka Abuya, 2021. "Gender and teacher attitude toward digital literacy programme in Kisii county primary schools," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(4), pages 383-390, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:rbs:ijbrss:v:10:y:2021:i:4:p:383-390
    DOI: 10.20525/ijrbs.v10i4.1183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs/article/view/1183/916
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v10i4.1183
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.20525/ijrbs.v10i4.1183?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karthik Muralidharan & Abhijeet Singh & Alejandro J. Ganimian, 2019. "Disrupting Education? Experimental Evidence on Technology-Aided Instruction in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(4), pages 1426-1460, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bharti Nandwani & cjain@3ieimpact.org, 2022. "Female representation in school management and school quality," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2022-002, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    2. Sabrin Beg & Waqas Halim & Adrienne M. Lucas & Umar Saif, 2022. "Engaging Teachers with Technology Increased Achievement, Bypassing Teachers Did Not," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 61-90, May.
    3. Ferman, Bruno & Lima, Lycia & Riva, Flávio, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence, Teacher Tasks and Individualized Pedagogy," SocArXiv qw249, Center for Open Science.
    4. Nerea Gómez-Fernández & Mauro Mediavilla, 2018. "Do information and communication technologies (ICT) improve educational outcomes? Evidence for Spain in PISA 2015," Working Papers 2018/20, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    5. Ferman, Bruno & Finamor, Lucas & Lima, Lycia, 2019. "Are Public Schools Ready to Integrate Math Classes with Khan Academy?," MPRA Paper 94736, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Daniel O. Gilligan & Naureen Karachiwalla & Ibrahim Kasirye & Adrienne M. Lucas & Derek Neal, 2022. "Educator Incentives and Educational Triage in Rural Primary Schools," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(1), pages 79-111.
    7. Islam, Asad & Kwon, Sungoh & Masood, Eema & Prakash, Nishith & Sabarwal, Shwetlena & Saraswat, Deepak, 2020. "When Goal-Setting Forges Ahead but Stops Short," GLO Discussion Paper Series 526, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Mo, Di & Bai, Yu & Shi, Yaojiang & Abbey, Cody & Zhang, Linxiu & Rozelle, Scott & Loyalka, Prashant, 2020. "Institutions, implementation, and program effectiveness: Evidence from a randomized evaluation of computer-assisted learning in rural China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    9. Yue-Yi Hwa & Clare Leaver, 2021. "Management in education systems," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 37(2), pages 367-391.
    10. Rodriguez-Segura, Daniel & Campton, Cole & Crouch, Luis & Slade, Timothy S., 2021. "Looking beyond changes in averages in evaluating foundational learning: Some inequality measures," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Cardim, Joana & Molina-Millán, Teresa & Vicente, Pedro C., 2023. "Can technology improve the classroom experience in primary education? An African experiment on a worldwide program," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    12. Chakraborty, Tanika & Jayaraman, Rajshri, 2019. "School feeding and learning achievement: Evidence from India's midday meal program," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 249-265.
    13. Tahir Andrabi & Jishnu Das & Asim I. Khwaja & Selcuk Ozyurt & Niharika Singh, 2020. "Upping the Ante: The Equilibrium Effects of Unconditional Grants to Private Schools," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(10), pages 3315-3349, October.
    14. Bianchi, Nicola & Lu, Yi & Song, Hong, 2022. "The effect of computer-assisted learning on students’ long-term development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    15. Maruyama, Takao & Kurosaki, Takashi, 2021. "Do remedial activities using math workbooks improve student learning? Empirical evidence from scaled-up interventions in Niger," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    16. Malamud, Ofer & Cueto, Santiago & Cristia, Julian & Beuermann, Diether W., 2019. "Do children benefit from internet access? Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 41-56.
    17. Eble, Alex & Hu, Feng, 2020. "Child beliefs, societal beliefs, and teacher-student identity match," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    18. Eric Bettinger & Robert Fairlie & Anastasia Kapuza & Elena Kardanova & Prashant Loyalka & Andrey Zakharov, 2023. "Diminishing Marginal Returns to Computer‐Assisted Learning," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(2), pages 552-570, March.
    19. Rosa Sanchis-Guarner & José Montalbán & Felix Weinhardt, 2021. "Home Broadband and Human Capital Formation," CESifo Working Paper Series 8846, CESifo.
    20. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "The wrong kind of AI? Artificial intelligence and the future of labour demand," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 13(1), pages 25-35.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rbs:ijbrss:v:10:y:2021:i:4:p:383-390. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Umit Hacioglu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbffea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.