THE IMPACT OF FACEBOOK ON STUDENTS’ ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE
 Introduction
Facebook is dominate possible –places among young person specially pupils. Most of pupils are passing more clip in utilizing Facebook which is lead to impact clip disbursement in instruction. This research is traveling to analyze whether Facebook impact on students’ public presentation or non in SLIATE. The SLIATE ( Sri Lanka Institute of Advanced Technological Education ) is one of the taking educational establishments in Sri Lanka for higher instruction and is a statutory organic structure coming under the horizon of Higher Education Division, Ministry of Education. SLIATE has been established by the Parliament Act 29 of 1995 concentrating on furthering Advanced Technical Education at a postsecondary degree and its caput is Director General appointed by the cabinet. It is mandated to set up Advanced Technical Institute ( ATI ) in every state for both Engineering and Business Studies. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www.sliate.net/about.htm )
 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Presents most of peoples use Facebook to do societal web among people all over the universe. And pupils besides passing most of their clip on such societal media called Facebook. Facebook.com ( Facebook ) , the most popular and normally used online societal web Web site, has created passion among college pupils in modern old ages. College pupils are become really involvement in online societal networking.
“Online societal web sites such as Facebook work as an of import amusement for undergraduates. Facebook, the most popular societal web site, was specifically designed for undergraduates and is the most normally used. Therefore, clip spent on Facebook may impact academic public presentation. For illustration, clip spent on Facebook may straight impact and/or sensible the students’ academic public presentation.
 Aim OF THE STUDY
The ultimate intent of this survey is traveling to analyze the usage of Facebook conditions it is impact on students’ academic public presentation or non. The nucleus research inquiry of this study is: what is the consequence of online societal networking site, Facebook, holding on students’ academic public presentation ( Examination Marks ) ? In other words does clip disbursement ( entree ) every twentyfour hours on Facebook have a important impact on academic public presentation ( Examination Marks ) ? In addon to that this study traveling to prove make Sex, age and position of the pupil impact on academic public presentation on them?
 Significance OF THE STUDY
The college schoolroom is used to presenting the merchandise ( student instruction ) of the college. The aim of instruction is to hold pupils larn and win. Therefore, it is of import to cognize and understand how pupil usage of online societal web sites ( i.e. Facebook ) affects academic success. Therefore, a critical scrutiny of the impact of Facebook on academic public presentation is really indispensable.
This utile presentation to assist pupils, lector, instructors and academic leaders. Students, specially, can acquire better understand the effects of Facebook site usage on educational public presentation. Lecturer, instructors and academic leaders can acquire valued understanding and information about the relationship between the pupils clip spend on Facebook and how it affects students’ academic public presentation. Besides, academicians can be acquire good prepared to steer and wise man pupils sing the negative impacts of Facebook sites on their academic public presentation.
 Methodology
This research is designed to prove the impact of utilizing Facebook on pupil academic success and public presentation in their test. Research can explicate through the aggregation of numerical informations, which is so analyzed utilizing computerized statistical bundle. With study research, I can choose a group of respondents, collect informations, and analyze the information to reply the research inquiry. I have collected quantitative every bit good as qualitative informations from a sample utilizing questionnaire technique. This research is an appropriate probe tool for doing generalised readings about a big group of people based on informations collected from a smaller figure of persons from that group.
 POPULATION AND SAMPLE
The population for this survey is Higher National Diploma 2009 Batch pupils of SLIATE, Kandy. The students’ academic public presentation is evaluated through concluding Markss taken by pupils in Strategic Financial Management. The independent variable is usage of Facebook every twentyfour hours. This information was taken from the several pupil through little inquirer during the category. Furthermore some demographic informations besides have been collected such as: gender, age, and pupil position weather full clip or portion clip. They described the sample features. The pupil ( sample ) selected the replies from the study that best described them.
 DATA ANALYSIS
I used SPSS 16.0 to execute the statistical analysis. Basic frequence analyses were conducted utilizing demographic information. The inquiries were analyzed utilizing descriptive statistical analysing techniques. Descriptive statistics was another statistical technique which is used in this survey to specify the mean, lower limit value, maximal value, and standard divergence for all the demographic variables. SPSS is presented in tabular arraies and charts. Most significantly the nucleus research question’s reply is tested by utilizing Independent Samples Test and ANOVA trial besides is performed as statistical technique. I used this technique to happen the impact of utilizing ( disbursement clip every twentyfour hours ) Facebook on student’s public presentation, by comparing agencies Markss between student’s who are passing clip on Facebook and who are non. So I used SPSS 16.0 to analyse statistic and construe the consequence. This survey is intended to convey attending to and consciousness of the impact of utilizing Facebook on students’ academic public presentation.
 Findingss
This subdivision is presents the end product generated by SPSS 16 from informations collected for study.
Table 1:Facebook Time 

Frequency 
Percentage 
Valid Percentage 
Accumulative Percentage 

Valid 
Yes 
45 
42.5 
42.5 
42.5 
No 
61 
57.5 
57.5 
100.0 

Entire 
106 
100.0 
100.0 

Table 1 represents the entire figure of respondents included in the sample of 106 pupils. Among them 45 pupils are passing clip on Facebook every twentyfour hours which represent 42.5 % . But 61 pupils ( 57.5 % ) are non spending clip on Facebook every twentyfour hours.
Table 2:Status 

Frequency 
Percentage 
Valid Percentage 
Accumulative Percentage 

Valid 
Full Time 
43 
40.6 
40.6 
40.6 
Part Time 
63 
59.4 
59.4 
100.0 

Entire 
106 
100.0 
100.0 

Table 2 represents the position of the pupils such as whether full clip or Part clip pupils. 43 pupils are prosecuting in Full Time and 63 pupils are engaged in portion clip class.
Table 3:Sexual activity 

Frequency 
Percentage 
Valid Percentage 
Accumulative Percentage 

Valid 
Female 
64 
60.4 
60.4 
60.4 
Male 
42 
39.6 
39.6 
100.0 

Entire 
106 
100.0 
100.0 

Table 3 represents the entire sample consist of 64 pupils are female ( 60.4 % ) and 42 pupils are male ( 39.6 % ) .
Table 4:Age 

Frequency 
Percentage 
Valid Percentage 
Accumulative Percentage 

Valid 
24 
10 
9.4 
9.4 
9.4 
25 
68 
64.2 
64.2 
73.6 

26 
16 
15.1 
15.1 
88.7 

27 
12 
11.3 
11.3 
100.0 

Entire 
106 
100.0 
100.0 

Table 4 represents the age group of the sample. 68 % of the sample pupils represents the age group of 25 Old ages. 15.1 % of pupils in 26 old ages age group. Other age groups are about similar to 10 % .
Table 5: Drumhead 

Facebook Time 

Yes 
No 

Status 
Status 

Full Time 
Part Time 
Full Time 
Part Time 

Sexual activity 
Sexual activity 
Sexual activity 
Sexual activity 

Female 
Male 
Female 
Male 
Female 
Male 
Female 
Male 

Count 
11 
10 
16 
8 
11 
11 
26 
13 

Table 5 represents sumup of respondents. 11 female and 10 male Fulltime pupils, and 16 female and 8 Male parttime pupils are passing clip on Facebook every twentyfour hours. But 11 female and 11 male Fulltime pupils, and 26 female and 13 Male parttime pupils are non spending clip on Facebook every twentyfour hours.
Table 6:Descriptive 

Facebook Time 
Statistic 
Std. Mistake 

Marks 
Yes 
Mean 
77.36 
1.406 

95 % Confidence Interval for Mean 
Lower Boundary 
74.52 

Upper Bound 
80.19 

5 % Trimmed Mean 
77.60 

Median 
78.00 

Discrepancy 
88.962 

Std. Deviation 
9.432 

Minimum 
57 

Maximum 
94 

Scope 
37 

Interquartile Range 
14 

Lopsidedness 
.592 
.354 

Kurtosis 
.426 
.695 

No 
Mean 
77.93 
.989 

95 % Confidence Interval for Mean 
Lower Boundary 
75.96 

Upper Bound 
79.91 

5 % Trimmed Mean 
78.02 

Median 
78.00 

Discrepancy 
59.696 

Std. Deviation 
7.726 

Minimum 
60 

Maximum 
94 

Scope 
34 

Interquartile Range 
10 

Lopsidedness 
.276 
.306 

Kurtosis 
.550 
.604 

Table: 6 represents the descriptive statistics of the sample with a variable of Facebook use on student’s public presentation which is represented by Marks. The pupils mean Markss those who are passing clip on Facebook is 77.36. At 95 % assurance degree the average Markss of the student’s lies between 74.52 to 80.19 Markss. But there is a 5 % alteration to the mean marks non prevarications within the scope. And the standard divergence of Markss is 9.432, median is 78.00, normal distribution is negatively skewed to go forth at .592.
The pupils mean Markss those who are non spending clip on Facebook is 77.93. At 95 % assurance degree the average Markss of the pupils lies Between 75.96 to 79.91. But there is a 5 % alteration to the mean Markss is non prevarications in the scope. And the standard divergence of Markss is 7.726. , median is 78.00, normal distribution is negatively skewed to go forth at .276.
Trials of Normality
Hydrogen_{0}: Student’s Markss are usually distributed
Hydrogen_{1}: Student’s Markss are non usually distributed
Table 7: Trials of Normality 

FacebookTime 
KolmogorovSmirnov^{a} 
ShapiroWilk 

Statistic 
df 
Sig. 
Statistic 
df 
Sig. 

Marks 
Yes 
.117 
45 
.142 
.947 
45 
.040 
No 
.097 
61 
.200^{*} 
.977 
61 
.294 

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction 

* . This is a lower edge of the true significance. 

The Trials of Normality are shown in the tabular array 7. Here two trials for normalcy. For dataset little than 2000 elements, we use the ShapiroWilk trial, otherwise, the KolmogorovSmirnov trial is used. In our instance, since we have merely 106 elements, the ShapiroWilk trial is used. From the tabular array Group Yes pvalue is.040 and Group No P value is.294. So in group yes, we can reject void hypothesis and we can reason that the information comes is non normal distribution. But in instance of Group No, We can non reject the void hypothesis and conclude that the informations comes from a normal distribution.
However when analyze the Normal QQ secret plan of Markss in Figure: 1 Group yes is about usually distributed. So we can presume that informations are usually distributed to utilize the independent sample trial.
Figure: 1 Figure: 2
Figure: 3
Statistical Hypothesis
Hydrogen_{0}: Student’s Markss of two groups are equal ( µ=µ )
Hydrogen_{1}: Student’s Markss of two groups are non equal ( µ?µ )
Research Hypothesis
Hydrogen_{0}: Use of Facebook is non significantly affect the students’ public presentation
Hydrogen_{1}: Use of Facebook is significantly affect the students’ public presentation
Table 8: Mugwump Samples Test 

Levene ‘s Test for Equality of Discrepancies 
ttest for Equality of Means 

F 
Sig. 
T 
df 
Sig. ( 2tailed ) 
Average Difference 
Std. Error Difference 
95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference 

Lower 
Upper 

Marks 
Equal discrepancies assumed 
1.844 
.177 
.347 
104 
.729 
.579 
1.668 
3.887 
2.729 

Equal discrepancies non assumed 
.337 
83.363 
.737 
.579 
1.719 
3.998 
2.840 

This tabular array 8, represents the consequences of the independentsamples ttest. The Levene’s consequences had an Fstatistic of 1.844 with a significance value ( P ) of 0.177. Because, P & A ; gt ; ? ( 0.177 & A ; gt ; .05 ) , the two variables has statistically equal discrepancy distributions. Therefore, we can utilize the first row of ttest information to find if the two group mean Markss are statistically different from each other. The tstatistic value is 0.347. The grades of freedom is 104. The 2tailed significance value is 0.729. The difference between the agencies of two group is 0.579 and the standard mistake of this difference is 1.668. The 95 % assurance interval of the difference ranged from 3.887 to 2.729.
Because P & A ; gt ; ? ( 0.729 & A ; gt ; 0.05 ) , we can non reject void hypothesis i.e. there is no important grounds that two groups students’ mean Markss are different, so we can come to the decision that usage of Facebook is non significantly impact on students’ public presentation.
Research Hypothesis
Hydrogen_{0}: Sexual activity non significantly affect the students’ public presentation ( µ=µ )
Hydrogen_{1}: Sexual activity is significantly affect the students’ public presentation ( µ?µ )
Table 9:Group Statisticss 

Sexual activity 
Nitrogen 
Mean 
Std. Deviation 
Std. Error Mean 

Marks 
Female 
64 
78.03 
7.607 
.951 
Male 
42 
77.17 
9.678 
1.493 

Table 9:Independent Samples Test 

Levene ‘s Test for Equality of Discrepancies 
ttest for Equality of Means 

F 
Sig. 
T 
df 
Sig. ( 2tailed ) 
Average Difference 
Std. Error Difference 
95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference 

Lower 
Upper 

Marks 
Equal discrepancies assumed 
5.194 
.025 
.513 
104 
.609 
.865 
1.685 
2.476 
4.206 
Equal discrepancies non assumed 
.488 
73.165 
.627 
.865 
1.770 
2.664 
4.393 

The Levene’s consequences had an Fstatistic of 5.194 with a significance value ( P ) of 0.025. Because, P & A ; lt ; ? ( 0.025 & A ; lt ; .05 ) , the two variables has statistically non equal discrepancy distributions. Therefore, we can utilize the 2nd row of ttest information to find if the two group mean Markss are statistically different from each other. The tstatistic value is 0.488. The grades of freedom is 73.165. The 2tailed significance value is 0.627. The difference between the agencies of two group is.865 and the standard mistake of this difference is 1.770. At 95 % assurance interval difference ranged from 2.664 to 4.393. Because P & A ; gt ; ? ( 0.627 & A ; gt ; 0.05 ) , we can non reject void hypothesis, so we can come to the decision that the mean Markss is statistically non significantly different in sex of pupils. So sex of the pupils are non impact on students’ public presentation.
Research Hypothesis
Hydrogen_{0}: usage of Facebook is non significantly affect the students’ public presentation ( µ=µ )
Hydrogen_{1}: usage of Facebook is significantly affect the students’ public presentation ( µ?µ )
Table 10:Group Statisticss 

Status 
Nitrogen 
Mean 
Std. Deviation 
Std. Error Mean 

Marks 
Full Time 
43 
77.53 
8.486 
1.294 

Part Time 
63 
77.79 
8.499 
1.071 

Table 11:Independent Samples Test 

Levene ‘s Test for Equality of Discrepancies 
ttest for Equality of Means 

F 
Sig. 
T 
df 
Sig. ( 2tailed ) 
Average Difference 
Std. Error Difference 
95 % Confidence Interval of the Difference 

Lower 
Upper 

Marks 
Equal discrepancies assumed 
.023 
.879 
.154 
104 
.878 
.259 
1.680 
3.591 
3.073 

Equal discrepancies non assumed 
.154 
90.467 
.878 
.259 
1.680 
3.596 
3.078 

Table 11 represents the consequences of the independentsamples ttest. The Levene’s consequences had an Fstatistic of 0.023 with a significance value ( P ) of 0.879. Because, P & A ; gt ; ? ( 0. 879 & A ; gt ; .05 ) , the two variables has statistically equal discrepancy distributions. Therefore, we can utilize the first row of ttest information to find if the two group mean Markss are statistically different from each other. The tstatistic value is 0.154. The grades of freedom is 104. The 2tailed significance value is 0. 878. The difference between the agencies of two group is 0.259 and the standard mistake of this difference is 1.668. At 95 % assurance interval difference ranged from 3.591to 3.073.because P & A ; gt ; ? ( 0.878 & A ; gt ; 0.05 ) , we can non reject void hypothesis, so we can come to the decision that the mean Markss of the two group ( Full clip and Part Time ) of pupils are statistically non significantly different. In other words student’s position is non impact on student’s public presentation.
Research Hypothesis
Hydrogen_{0}: Age is non significantly affect the students’ public presentation ( µ=µ )
Hydrogen_{1}: Age is significantly affect the students’ public presentation ( µ?µ )
Table 12:Analysis of variance 

Marks 

Sum of Squares 
df 
Mean Square 
F 
Sig. 

Between Groups 
162.710 
3 
54.237 
.753 
.523 
Within Groups 
7342.017 
102 
71.981 

Entire 
7504.726 
105 

Table 12 is represent ANOVA end product. Which is used to compare average differnces between age groups of the sample. The Fstatistic is 0.753, The Sig value is 0.523.P & A ; gt ; ? ( 0.523 & A ; gt ; 0.05 ) , we can non reject void hypothesis i.e there is no important grounds to reject that age of students’ mean Markss are different, so we can come to the decision that the mean Markss of students’ age are statistically non significantly different. So student’s age is non impact on students’ public presentation.
 Overall CONCLUSION
The usage of Facebook is statistically non impact of student’s public presentation. Even sex, Age, or Status besides statistically non impact on students’ public presentation.
 Restriction
The selected variables are non significantly impact on students’ public presentation. To cognize what are the factors are impacting students’ public presentation, we have to include more variable in addon to this variable and include more samples into the study. The possible restriction of this survey is that the participants are sampled from merely one institute. Therefore, the findings may can non be represents to all academic institutes in Sri Lanka. I selected the institute because of convenient, size, acquaintance, multiplicity of pupils, and costeffectiveness. Besides restriction of this survey is I can non state whether the pupils fill out the questionnaire precisely and suitably. Students sometimes undervalue or overestimate the clip they spend on the activities listed on the survey. Students might besides hold problem separating between being logged on and actively utilizing their Facebook site.
List of mentions
Mentions
Moon, A. L. , June 2011.The impact of Facebook on undergraduate academic public presentation: deductions for educational leaders,Mount Pleasant, Michigan: Central Michigan University.
1