Article Sidebar

Submitted
January 20, 2026
Accepted
February 10, 2026
Published
February 12, 2026
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 482 Download : 270

Main Article Content

Abstract

This comprehensive empirical study investigates the impact of PowerPoint projector technology on academic performance in Physics and Chemistry across diverse secondary school settings in Malawi. Utilizing a quasi-experimental design with paired observations, the research analyses examination scores from 247 students across Forms 1–4 in five educational institutions. The findings reveal a statistically significant improvement in Chemistry performance with projector use (mean increase of 2.6 points, p=0.03, Cohen's d=0.22), while Physics shows minimal overall gains (mean increase of 1.6 points, p=0.12). Crucially, the study identifies a systematic pattern of teacher qualification mismatch, where Physics classes using projectors were predominantly taught by teachers with Chemistry qualifications. This misalignment potentially undermines technological benefits. The research demonstrates that lower-performing students benefit disproportionately from projector instruction, suggesting equity-enhancing potential. The study concludes that Power Point projector effectiveness is mediated by pedagogical alignment, teacher expertise, and subject-specific requirements rather than being an inherent property of the technology. Recommendations include integrated teacher training programs, strategic resource allocation aligned with teacher specialization, and development of context-appropriate digital content.


[Studi empiris komprehensif ini menyelidiki dampak teknologi proyektor PowerPoint terhadap performa akademik dalam mata pelajaran Fisika dan Kimia di berbagai setting sekolah menengah di Malawi. Menggunakan desain kuasi-eksperimental dengan observasi berpasangan, penelitian ini menganalisis skor ujian dari 247 siswa di Kelas 1–4 (Form 1–4) di lima institusi pendidikan. Temuan menunjukkan peningkatan yang signifikan secara statistik pada performa Kimia dengan penggunaan proyektor (peningkatan rata-rata 2,6 poin, $p=0,03$, Cohen's $d=0,22$), sementara Fisika menunjukkan keuntungan keseluruhan yang minimal (peningkatan rata-rata 1,6 poin, $p=0,12$). Hal yang krusial, studi ini mengidentifikasi pola sistematis ketidaksesuaian kualifikasi guru, di mana kelas Fisika yang menggunakan proyektor didominasi oleh guru dengan kualifikasi Kimia. Ketidaksesuaian ini berpotensi merusak manfaat teknologi. Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa siswa dengan performa rendah mendapat manfaat yang jauh lebih besar dari pengajaran menggunakan proyektor, yang menunjukkan potensi peningkatan ekuitas. Studi ini menyimpulkan bahwa efektivitas proyektor PowerPoint dimediasi oleh keselarasan pedagogis, keahlian guru, dan persyaratan khusus mata pelajaran, alih-alih menjadi sifat bawaan dari teknologi tersebut. Rekomendasi mencakup program pelatihan guru yang terintegrasi, alokasi sumber daya strategis yang diselaraskan dengan spesialisasi guru, dan pengembangan konten digital yang sesuai dengan konteks.]

Keywords

Academic performance chemistry education educational technology physics education projector integration teacher qualifications

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Arnold Valaro, Sydney Kamtukule, Moses Nyasulu (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
How to Cite
Empirical Analysis of PowerPoint Projector Use on Secondary School Performance in Physics and Chemistry in Malawi: Analisis Empiris Penggunaan Proyektor PowerPoint terhadap Performa Siswa Sekolah Menengah pada Mata Pelajaran Fisika dan Kimia di Malawi. (2026). SiRad: Pelita Wawasan, 2(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.64728/sirad.v2i1.art6
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

How to Cite

Empirical Analysis of PowerPoint Projector Use on Secondary School Performance in Physics and Chemistry in Malawi: Analisis Empiris Penggunaan Proyektor PowerPoint terhadap Performa Siswa Sekolah Menengah pada Mata Pelajaran Fisika dan Kimia di Malawi. (2026). SiRad: Pelita Wawasan, 2(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.64728/sirad.v2i1.art6

References

  1. Chawinga, W. D., & Zozie, P. P. (2016). Increasing access to higher education through open and distance learning: Empirical findings from Mzuzu University, Malawi. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 1-20.
  2. Kadzamira, M. A. (2021). Dynamics of teaching and learning science in Malawian secondary schools: A systemic review. Journal of Educational Development in Malawi, 8(1), 22-40.
  3. Kaliyati, E. F. (2021). Barriers to pedagogical integration of ICT in secondary schools in Malawi: A case of Blantyre district. African Journal of Teacher Education, 10(1), 112-135.
  4. Malawi National Examinations Board (MANEB). (2022). 2021 Malawi School Certificate of Education (MSCE) Examination Report. Lilongwe: MANEB Publications.
  5. Mayer, R. E. (2020). Multimedia learning* (3rd Ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  6. Mbebe, Y. B. (2020). Infrastructure challenges and ICT integration in Malawian public secondary schools. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 16 (2), 209-225.
  7. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (Malawi). (2018). National Education Sector Plan (NESP) 2018-2022. Lilongwe: Government of Malawi.
  8. Muyoya, C., & Brugha, M. (2021). The role of digital projectors in enhancing STEM education in rural Kenya: An exploratory study. Journal of Learning for Development, 8 (3), 550-567.
  9. Phillip, F. (2022). The private-public dichotomy in educational resource allocation and student outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Malawi and Tanzania. Comparative Education Review, 66 (2), 234-259.
  10. Xie, H., Wang, F., & Liu, J. (2022). The effects of multimedia teaching on students' science achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(3), 393-406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09964-1
  11. Chirwa, G. (2019). ICT integration in Malawian secondary schools: Challenges and opportunities. Malawi Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 45-62.
  12. Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students' understanding of electromagnetism concepts? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243-279.
  13. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
  14. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). Teachers College Press.
  15. Hennessy, S., Halter, B., & Hofmann, R. (2010). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(2), 1-28.
  16. Kadzamira, E., & Rose, P. (2003). Can free primary education meet the needs of the poor? Evidence from Malawi. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(5), 501-516.
  17. Kadyampakeni, D. M. (2014). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on mathematics achievement among Malawian students (Doctoral dissertation). University of Malawi.
  18. Kozma, R. B. (2003). Technology and classroom practices: An international study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 1-14.
  19. Malawi Ministry of Education. (2023). Education sector performance report 2022-2023. Lilongwe: Government of Malawi.
  20. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  21. Mhango, N. (2021). Integrating presentation technologies in Malawian teacher education. Blantyre: Montfort Press.
  22. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  23. Mulkeen, A. (2010). Teachers in Anglophone Africa: Issues in teacher supply, training, and management. World Bank Publications.
  24. Schmid, R. F., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R. M., Abram, P. C., Surkes, M. A. & Woods, J. (2014). The effects of technology use in postsecondary education: A meta-analysis of classroom applications. Computers & Education, 72, 271-291.
  25. Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1337-1370.
  26. Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 29-47). Cambridge University Press.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.