Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
EFFECTIVENESS OF E-TOOLS S IN TEACHING SOCIAL STUDIES IN
NEPALESE SCHOOLS- A CASE STUDY
Dr. Mustafa Harun CAN
Nema Dorje Lama
Nepal
Abstract: This research is related to use of E-tools in teaching social studies. It is based on the
experimental research done on the students of Kavrepalanchock district in different two groups.
Firstly 40 students were selected from different 10 schools by the help of pre-test as a sample
group for the research purposes. Students of grade (10) were selected and made two groups.
One group of student was taught social lesson without using any E –tool but another group of
student was taught by using e- tools. The research lasted in six month .During the research
different 3-tests were taken to compare the effectiveness of teaching in e tool using and teaching
without e tool.
Keyword: eTools, High School, Nepal, Social Studies
1. INTRODUCTION:
1.1 Background
Social studies is one of the multi-dimensional subject .It is the composition of economics,
sociology, political science, geography, history, civics, archeology, etc. Main aim of social
studies is to produce intelligent, dutiful, honest and good citizen of the nation. It cultivates the
students by informing geographical changes of the world, past events and encourages
contextualizing in the present situation of the world and helps to work in group with feeling of
brotherhood in the world.
It has become a big challenge to teach the social studies lessons in an effective way. In
teaching social lesson, teachers should be more conscious to select the best method of teaching.
On the other hand, Nepal is a developing nation. In such country, it is more difficult to make the
effective social lesson, since teachers are not getting sufficient training in teaching social studies.
In the world, there is a high development of science and technology. It has been found that for
teaching social studies there are lots of using E-tools like computer, smart board, videos,
documentary show,3D class, mobile apps, Television Internet, web sites, Facebook, blog sites
etc. in developed nation. In contrary, in Nepal, we find very limited educational institutions are
using e- tools in teaching social studies. In those school as well, there is the lack of trained
teachers and lack of sufficient e- tools s. If we see the history of computer education in Nepal, it
was started in Nepal in the year 1972 only. That means development of technology was very late
in Nepal. Similarly, use of technology in teaching field was also introduced very lately in Nepal.
Therefore, in Nepal it is the matter of new experiment for using e-tools in teaching social lesson.
This research is fully devoted to find out the effectiveness of using e-tools s in teaching social
studies. So that, it will be easy to apply in teaching social studies. In Nepal, we have very
traditional method of teaching social studies. Generally in Nepal, social studies is taught in
traditional way of teaching method followed by few projects and field visit. But in this research,
a sample class is taught in modern method where teacher uses e-tools in teaching social lessons.
But on the other hand other sample class is not using e-tools for teaching social lessons. Both the
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 53
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
group A and group B are kept under the strict supervision of the teacher. For forming the sample
class, researcher visited ten schools of Kavrepalanchock district which are more remote and not
reachable by the modern technology. For the selection of students researcher had taken a test so
that researcher could take the students of same level, age group and capacity. Those students
were of all grade 10. While selecting the students many students were encouraged to take the test
of selection round. Students were selected in such a way that they all were of similar age group
and same grade so that there will not be any difference in the objectives of the research. In the
course of research, both the groups A and B were kept in a strict monitoring mechanism so that
there will not be influence of any factors in the research. Among two sample group of students,
Group “A” students were taught social studies without e-tools and other group “B” students were
taught by using E-tools . In this research 0nly specific lessons were taught. Research was
conducted till 6 months in which three times exams were taken for both the group and analyzed
and compared the results.
1.2 Purpose of Study
Development of technology is very slow in Nepal as Nepal is a developing country.
Similarly, use of technology in the field of education is also introduced very lately in Nepal. On
the other hand, use of technology in teaching social studies is also very rare and in the phase of
experiment in Nepal. Therefore, the main objective of this research is to:
 Find out the effectiveness of e-tools s in teaching social lessons in Nepal.
2. METHODOLOGY
Objective of this research is to find out the effectiveness of e-tools in teaching social
lessons. First of all, researcher took 40 students from different 10 schools. For the selection of
students researcher had taken a test so that researcher could take the students of same level, age
group and capacity. Those students were all from grade 10. While selecting the students many
students were encouraged to take the test of selection round. Then, students were categorized
into two groups i.e. Control group “A” and experimental group “B”. Here, by the use of Quasiexperimental method, research was made completed. Where two groups were taught same lesson
but in “Group B” E-tools like computer, internet, smart board documentary show was used for
teaching social lessons. But in the case of other group “A” no e-tools was used for teaching
social lessons. For both group same lesson were taught like:
 Election process.
 Importance of peace.
 United Nations and Its organs.
 Human rights and
 Subject of National Concern.
These lessons were taught in both the group. The main objectives of above lessons
were to:
i. Explain election process and role of citizen in election process.
ii. Describe the impact of peace in development and role of civil society and political parties in
maintaining peace in society.
iii. Explain the formation of UN, main objectives of UN, importance of UN and its special
agencies and their functions.
iv. Define human rights and explain the worldwide declaration of human rights.
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 54
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
v. Explain the matter of national concern like: national and territorial integrity, self-respect and
border security of the nation.
Three tests were conducted during the research time. Tests were taken after teaching each
two lessons. Questions were asked same for both the group and compared with each other.
2.1 Instrumentation and Data Collection
After each lessons test was taken. In this whole research only three tests were taken and
named as test 1, test 2 and test 3. While taking test, questions were designed and checked by the
professionals so that there would not be any partiality while rating the exam papers. After taking
test of students, exam papers were checked and obtained the marks of both the groups;
The instrument used for this study was designed by the researcher. The instrument is known
to be Unit Test, which was worth of 50 marks. The unit test consists of sections, A , B & C In
section A, 10 very short questions of 1 mark each were asked , In section B, 5 short questions of
5 marks each were asked and in section C, 1 long question of 10 marks was asked. The face and
content validity of the instrument was ascertained by given the instrument to inter–raters that are
experts of concern topic for ratings. The average score of the inter–rater coefficient yielded 0.82,
which is high enough to confirm the validity of the instrument. Test – re- test method was used
to obtain the reliability of the instruments and the reliability co-efficient was found to be 0.71
which was high enough to make the instrument reliable. The study used different types of e –
tools like computer, smart board, documentary show, presentation, internet etc. The students in
group A were taught without using the e-tools s, the second group B students were exposed to
modern method of teaching by using e-tools for six month. The students’ scores for pre-test and
post test were collected and the hypotheses generated for the study were analyzed.
2.2 Research Questions
The following research questions were raised for the purpose of this study.
1. Is there any difference between in the pre-test scores of the students taught with
conventional and e –tool using teaching for solving problems in social lessons?
2. Is there any difference between in the test 1, test 2 and test 3scores of the students
taught with conventional and teaching by the use of e-tools for solving problems in social
lessons?
2.3 Research Hypotheses
Based on the above research questions the following hypotheses were raised;
Hypothesis-1: There is no significant difference between in the pre test scores of students
exposed to the conventional and e-tools using approach.
Hypothesis-2: There is no significant difference between in the test 1, test 2 and test 3scores of
the students taught with conventional and teaching by the use of e-tools for solving problems in
social lessons?
2.4 Research Design
This study adopted quasi- experimental method. Firstly, pre-test was taken for the selection
of same level of students and later on during the research three tests were taken. Test 1, test 2
and test 3 were taken after completion of each two lessons. The experimental group (B) was
exposed to method of teaching using e-tools s, while the conventional group (A) represent the
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 55
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
control group was exposed to usual conventional approach. The design of the study was as
follows;
B treatment is given through e-tools using teaching approach.
A treatment is given through conventional method of teaching
2.5 Data Analysis
To test the null hypotheses, t-test was used on the difference between the pre-test mean score
and the post-test mean score of social students taught with e-tools using teaching method. The
alpha level of 0.05 was used as the acceptable significant level for rejecting or upholding all the
assumptions.
3. RESULTS/ FINDINGS
3.1 Experiment 1
Hypothesis-1: There is no significant difference in the pre test scores of students exposed to the
conventional and e-tools using teaching approach. To test hypothesis one, pre-test was given to
both experimental and conventional class.Table 1 showed that t- calculated (1.19) < t-table value
(2.92), (N=40, Mean (24, 26), SD (5.40, 5.21), Df= 98) at 0.05 level of significance. Hence, the
null hypothesis is therefore upheld. This implies that the two groups selected for the study were
homogeneous since there is no different in their performance.
3.2 Experiment 2
Hypothesis-2: There is no significant difference in the post test scores of students exposed to etools using teaching approach treatment and conventional approach. To test this hypothesis, the
performance of students in the two groups after treatment were collected and tested using t-test
as presented in the Table 2. Table 2 showed that t-calculated (3.28) is greater than the t-table
(2.92), (N=40, __ (27, 32), SD (4.43, 5.26), Df= 98) at 0.05 level of significance; the null
hypothesis was therefore rejected, contrary to the Hypothesis stated. This implies that there is
significant difference in the performance of the two groups. The experimental and the
conventional groups were found with differences in the analysis of their performance in favour
of the experimental group. The total mean for the treatment group (A) is 32 and conventional
group (B) is 27 showed that the performance of e-tools using group was far better than the
performance of conventional group. By implication, the students that were taught with e-tools
using teaching outperformed the students that were exposed to the traditional method of
teaching. This is an indication that the treatment given to the experimental group is effective and
responsible for the differences in the performance of students in favour of the treatment class.
Table 1. t-test summary on students’ pre-test score in groups
Variables
N
Mean
SD
t-calculated
t-table
Group A(control group)
20
24
5.40
Group B(treatment
group)
20
26
5.21
1.19
2.29
Df= 98
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 56
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
Table 2. t-Test summary on students test1 scores in groups
Df = 98
Variables
N
Mean
SD
t-calculated
t-table
Group
20
27
4.34
A(control
group)
Group
20
32
5.26
3.28
2.92
B(treatment
group)
4. DISCUSSION
The findings prevailed that the e-tools used in social lessons to the experimental group i
produced greater academic performance in the test1 using e-tools therefore enhances learning of
social science lessons. This finding is consistent with those of test2 and test 3 as well. The study
proves that using e-tools in teaching social lessons lead to more efficient knowledge acquisition.
Students feel a sense of reality in what they learn, which is long lasting in learning. Another
finding was on knowledge acquisition and application as well as short term retention is better
supported by the use of e-tools in teaching social lessons.
5. LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH
This study involved only two variables and used only fixed e-tools s like computer, smart
board, documentary show, and internet. In addition, this study only took a sample of high school
students (grade-10) in Kavrepalanchock District, so the conclusion of the study is limited to the
range of generalizations.
6. CONCLUSION
The use of e-tools like computers, smart boards, and videos available on You-Tube etc. in
teaching is an innovative approach for teaching social science. This method improves the
teaching and learning of social studies in schools since students studying social subject
performed poorly in their external examination. In an attempt to curb this ugly trend of student
failure in social studies exam in secondary school, the use of e-tools would enable the students to
retrieve or recall the previously learnt subject quickly and thereby enhance their fortune in
teaching and learning social subject. These approaches can be effective additions to regular
social studies instruction and can help students visualize unseen phenomena, develop scientific
language, improve understanding of the sociological process and contribute to the development
of scientific thinking. Based on the findings the following recommendations are hereby offered:
(i) Government should procure e-tools s and organize seminars for social teacher on the need to
imbibe latest teaching culture.
(ii) Social studies teachers should incorporate the use of e- tools s in teaching to compliment
their traditional chalk-talk method of instructional delivery.
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 57
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
(iii) Social studies teachers should use frequently e-tools s during Instructional development,
especially when it is inevitable.
(iv) School authorities should invite specialists (educational technologists, instructional material
technicians, computer experts, etc.) to assist social teachers with their e-tools packages that are
relevant to the subject.
REFERENCES
Association of Advancement in Computer Education. Journal. 2007;14(1):3-30.
Amael A, Eric J. Using Video and Static Pictures to Improve Learning of Procedural Contents.
Computer in Human Behavior. 2009;25:354-359.
Bosco A. ICT resources in the teaching of mathematics: Between computer and school
technologies. A case-study. The Curriculum Journal. 2004;15(3):265-280.
Brashears,T.,Akers C, Smith, J. The Effects of Multimedia Cues on Students
Cognition in an Electronically Delivered High School Unit of Instruction. Journal of Biological
Education Research. 2005 55(1):5-18.
Dike HI. A Textbook of Educational Technology. Port-Harcourt: University of Port- Harcourt;
2008.
Eamon MK. Social-demographic, School, Neighborhood and Parenting Influences on Academic
Achievement in Latino Young Adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2005; 34(2):163175.
Elliot SN, Kratochiwill TR, Cook JL, Travers JF. Educational Psychology effective Teaching.
Effective Learning. 3rd Ed New York: McGraw Hill Book Co.; 2001.
Fundamental Educational curriculum: 2069, Curriculum Development Center of Nepal
Hoffer TN, Luther D. Instructional animation versus static pictures. Ameta-Analysis Learning
and Instruction. 2007; 17:722-738.
Ijhedo JA. A Quasi-experimental Research on the Effect of Synchronized Instructional
Resources in Automobile Education. A Case Study University of London; 1995.
Kellerman A. Multimedia Technology Education. 2004;(11):110-14.
Available: http/www.suite101.com/articjeetm/multimedia education.
Publishers, Ibadan; 2006.
Kimberly VH. Gender differences in computer technology achievement. Meridian Journal.
2002;5(2):4-6.
Kaiyum Abdul: Auther, Teaching social studies,Readmore publication
Lamsal Matrika and Mukhiya S.N.:Authors, New social studies :Readmore Publication
Mayer RE, Chandler R. When learning is just a click away. Does simple user Interaction foster
deeper interaction of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology. 2001; 93:390397.
Mayer RE. Multimedia Learning. Cambridge, U. K: Cambridge University Press. 2001
National Council for the Social Studies. (1997). National Council for the Social Studies
standards for social studies teachers . Washington DC: Author.
Nepal Education policies, curriculum design and implementation at the general secondary level,
Curriculum Development Center of Nepal
Osokoya JA. Towards a New Generation of Multimedia Learning Research.
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 58
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
Okwo FA. Effects of a Multi-media on Students’ Achievement in Poetry. WCCI Nigeria
Chapter Forum. 1994;4(2).
Pryor, B., & Bitter, G. (1996). Lessons learned for integrating technology into teacher
education. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 12 (2), 13-17.
Secondary Education curriculum: 2064, Curriculum Development Center of Nepal
The International Society for Technology in Education (1996). National educational technology
standards [Brochure]. Eugene, OR: Author
Thebe Sangeeta:Auther, a social studies grade 10, Shubharambh Publication.
Wilson, E.K., & Marsh, G.E. (1995). Social studies and the Internet revolution. Social
Education, 59 (4), 198-202.
White, C. (1996). Relevant social studies education: Integrating technology and
constructivism. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 4 (1), 69-76.
White, C. (1995). 'Remaking' social studies: The importance of integrating technology into social
studies. Southern Social Studies Journal, 20 (3), 44-53.
APPENDEX
Questionnaire for T1
Answer the following questions:
Group A
Choose the correct option :( 10X1=10)
1. What is an election?
2. Why is peace regarded as the infrastructure of development?
3. Write any two reasons of conflict?
4. Write any two role of civil society to maintain the peace.
5. What is ballot paper?
6. What is proxy vote?
7. What do you understand by polling centre?
8. How can you help to election commission? Write any two ways.
9. Who are responsible to maintain peace in the society?
10. What do you mean by invalid votes?
Group B
Short answer questions
11. Mention any six steps to put forward in bringing about sustainable peace in your community?
12. Explain the role of political parties for maintaining the peace in the country?
13 Make a list of advantages of Advantages of peace and Disadvantages of conflict.
14 A good citizen must participate in an election. Prepare a dialogue on it.
15 What are the responsibilities of the polling officer?
Group C
Long answer question:
16. What is electoral roll? Write any four roles that should be played by the citizen before the
election and four roles during the election.
Questionnaire for T2
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 59
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
Answer the following questions:
Group A
Choose the correct option :( 10X1=10)
1. What is Atlantic Charter?
2. Why was United Nations established?
3. What is General Assembly?
4. Write any two functions of IMF.
5. What is UNMIN?
6. What is the UN peace keeping force?
7. What is the main function of World Meteorological Organization?
8. Who is the present general secretary of UN?
9. What is Veto?
10. Write any two functions of ITU.
Group B
Short answer questions
11. How is the Security Council composed of? Describe its functions.
12. Mention the advantages for Nepal being a member of the UNO.
13What are the functions of the secretariat?
14. List the UN agencies working in Nepal to solve various problems.
15. Describe the major duties of peace keeping force.
Group C
Long answer question:
16. Critically analyze the functions of UN.
Questionnaire for T3
Answer the following questions:
Group A
Choose the correct option :( 10X1=10)
1. What are human rights?
2. When was Universal Declaration of Human Rights issued by the general assembly of the UN?
3. How many articles are there in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
4. How are you exercising your rights in your classroom?
5. What is Yalta Conference?
6. When did Nepal establish Human Rights Commission?
7. What do you mean by National Integrity?
8. When did Nepal become the member of UNO?
9. What is Dashgaja area?
10. What is principle of panchasheel ?
Group B
Short answer questions
11. Mention the activities done by 5the Human Rights organizations to protect human rights.
12. What fundamental rights are Nepalese people enjoying as the human rights? Discuss.
13Why do more criminal activities take place in the southern border of Nepal? Make a list.
14 How would you solve the problem of the encroachment of borders if you become the minister
of foreign affairs?
15. What should we do if anyone attacks on the nationality of our country?
ISSN: 2408-1906
Page 60
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
Group C
Long answer question:
16. Give the introduction of Universal Declaration of human rights and mention it’s any seven
provisions.
Marks. Group A F.M=50
Name of students
Pre-Test
Test-1
1.Neman Lama
35
36
2.Nimesh lama
25
28
3.Prabin lama
21
23
4.Ramesh Shrestha
18
24
5.Depesh Malla
6.Arjun Poudel
7.Aayush Sharma
Name of students
8.Akash Bal
1.Laxu Waiba
9.Aalok Gautam
2.Kanchi
Tamang
10.Nira lama
17
28
21
Pre-Test1
25
36
27
27
26
21
26
30
Test1
27
38
24
39
32
3.Aman
11.ShantiRai
Maya Tamang
24
28
36
35
4.Sambridi
Malla
12.Indra Waiba
20
21
22
25
13.Norbu KC
5.Shanker Shrestha
14.Saran
KC
6.Dhiraj KC.
15.Thule Rai
7.Daile Gurung
16.Amar KC
8.Narayan
Shrama
17.Aman Joshi
9.Kul Bahadur Magar
18.Shakti Bom
10.Hom Magar
19.Purna Ghale
11.Dol Bahadhur Magar
20. Ram Ghale.
12.Bol Bahadur Thapa
36
16
24
29
16
23
21
26
26
28
26
30
18
26
20
25
32
24
30
39
23
34
29
30
24
28
23
35
24
36
30
28
13. Ram Chandra Thapa
39
34
14.Marichman Lama
15.Chhedup Waiba.
27
19
34
24
ISSN: 2408-1906
Marks. Group B
F.M=50
Page 61
Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research (AU-eJIR)
16.Padam Awosti
17. Haste Gurung.
24
27
33
37
18. Dinesh Katuwal
29
34
19.Dependra Rimal
26
26
20. Rabina Adhikari.
24
35
ISSN: 2408-1906
Vol. 1. Issue.1 2015
Page 62