THE CORRELATION OF USING SMART PHONES IN ACADEMIC

PERFORMANCE OF THE GRADE 12 STUDENTS OF BINTAOGAN NATIONAL

HIGH SCHOOL, SAN ISIDRO, DAVAO ORIENTAL
Background of the Study

In today’s generation, technology has affected and changed the way people

live. Technology has made people’s lives more proficient and at ease. There is

hardly anyone who has not been changed by the advances in technology and

computers of today’s society. In today’s civilization, transportation, communication,

and education have been greatly developed from new technological

advancements. Many people have lesser stress in their lives because there are

new useful hi-tech inventions created each day to help them do things quicker and

easier. Some of these helpful technologies are cell phones, computers, and the

Internet.

Technology also has negative effects in the lives of the user, and in his/her

or her immediate friends and family members. It affects the individuals’ personal

health, family, social, financial, and academic life. Over using gadgets negatively

affects the mind of an individual. The individual loses focus as he/she only

concentrates on using gadgets or technology. He/she tends to forget other aspect

of life that is important, concentration reduces and the individual cannot focus on

other issues for long enough.

The use of technology in schools has opened up a new path of effective

learning. Technology plays a great role in developing everyone’s future and

professional career. Technology is becoming a major part of the world today. It has

developed and become more central to learning.

 The researchers want to know the impact of using smart phones in students’

learning. It is along this rationale that this study will be conducted.

Statement of the Problem

This study determined the impact of smart phones in learning of Bintaogan

National High School, San Isidro, Davao Oriental

Specifically, it answered the following sub-problems:

1. What is the students’ frequency of use smart phones in learning?

2. What is the impact of the use of smart phones in learning as perceived by

the students?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the frequency of use and impact

of smart phones?

Hypothesis

1. There is no significant relationship between the frequency of use of smart

phones and the impact of smart phones.

Scope and Delimitation

This study mainly focused on the impact of smart phones in learning among

students in Grade 12 of Bintaogan National High School, San Isidro, Davao

Oriental. It was delimited to the students of the Grade 12 only.

Significance of the Study

This study determined the impact of using smart phones amongst the

students’ learning at Bintaogan National High School, San Isidro, Davao Oriental.

This was significant to the following:

Students. They will know the benefits of using gadgets in learning and help

them study effectively.

Teachers. This will give awareness to teachers to allow students to use

gadgets more freely and also to guide them in using the gadgets.

School Administrator. This study may be included in school policy. Re:

The use of technology in the classroom.

Future Researchers. This study may help future researchers on their own

research. They may widen the scope of their own study or improve this research

study.

Definition of Terms

To make the study easier to understand, the following terms are defined

operationally and/ or lexically:

Smartphone. a cellular telephone with an integrated computer and other

features not originally associated with telephones, such as an operating system,

web browsing and the ability to run software applications. which are used by the

respondents in learning.

Impact. This refers to the effect of gadgets on the respondents in their

learning.

Frequency of use. This refers to the number of times or how often the

gadgets are used by the respondents in learning.

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter contains the literature and studies related to the impact of

gadgets in learning.

Related Literature

Gadgets

A gadget is a small tool or device with a specific useful purpose and

function. Gadgets tend to be more unusual or cleverly designed than normal

technology. In today’s life, tasks are maximized with the use of modern gadgets. It

is easier to accomplish daily tasks and people are also able to do work with
efficiency. One cannot even dare to imagine life without smart phones, cell phones,

laptops, tablets, iPods and so on (Tech Crates, 2012). Today’s gadgets are one of

the ways to make life more comfortable and easier. Shy (2010) says that no one

can deny the fact that gadgets have not only simplified the lives of people but also

made them more comfortable and luxurious. Indeed, these gadgets really made a

huge impact in people’s lives and became part of it.

Gadgets used in Learning

According to Gammuac (2013), today’s classrooms are equipped with the

latest technology to enhance instruction. Smartphone use in the classroom is still

somewhat controversial, but the Calgary Board of Education actually encourages

it as a learning tool. In an interview with CTV, Queen’s University National Scholar

and Associate Professor Sidneyeve Matrix compared the situation to when

calculators were first used by students in the classroom. “We had a whole new

level of computational skill, and now we’re going to have a whole new level of

mobile digital skills when we turn to mobile learning on the handhelds.”

Technology users are moving towards being more mobile, and teachers and

students are a significant part of that trend. On 2013, Lenovo, the world’s top PC

vendor reported that they sold more smartphones and tablets than PCs for the first

time ever. Calgary-based SMART Technologies’ SMART Boards are popular with

both teachers and students. Teachers can project presentations onto the SMART

Boards and they can write, touch and interact with their content. Document

cameras are also a fun way for teachers to show students new and interesting

ways of looking at objects. Whether they are zooming in on the smaller details of
a 3D object, or observing science experiments, students can share an equal view

of the lesson – without crowding the teacher’s desk. Whether a student is listening

to his own music while studying, or a teacher is playing an audio book to her

students, mp3 players are an increasingly common sight in schools. Both teachers

and students can make full use of mp3 players in their school activities (Gammuac,

2013).

Related Studies

New media technologies and a number of important studies were conducted

in the 2000’s on the impact of children’s intellectual development, and various

aspects of using such technologies. Many researches were conducted aimed to

organize understanding the change that took place by using these technologies,

and to explore the conversion in children’s behavior and focused to discover-what

extent children feel aggression, and how they react by using these modern

technologies e.g. video games, mobile phones with various applications

embedded using via Internet with Wi-Fi connections video games consoles and

internet.

Providing computers to schools increases the technology skills of teachers

and students in both the developed and the developing world. Laptop programs

increase students' engagement with academic work and school, improve

technology skills, and have positive effects on students' writing. Research in many

nations suggests that laptop programs will be most successful as part of

comprehensive initiatives that also address changes in education goals, curricula,

teacher training, and assessment (Zucker & Light 2009).

 An analysis of effective technology use for at-risk students found that simply

replacing teachers with computer-based instruction typically yields no learning

benefits. Rather, blending leads to higher engagement and learning gains (Darling-

Hammond et al., 2014).

Gross (2009) described in his article that people are very frequent in use of

media and modern technologies in communication at home or at work and feel

hard to survive in the absence of modern means of communications. With the

advent rapid new technologies; digital societies are shaping all across and people

are relying mainly on these resources from information, education, and

entertainment to social interaction.

The same are shaping social attitude in dealing with each other. The

reformed digital cultures and multi resources of communications have severe

effects on human beings especially on children; who have the immediate capacity

of learning. Technologies usability among youngsters and adolescent such as TV,

Internet, mobile phones are common particularly in developed countries (Gross,

2009).

Technology enhanced learning (TEL) aims to design, develop and test

socio-technical innovations that will support and enhance learning practices of both

individuals and organizations. It is therefore an application domain that generally

covers technologies that support all forms of teaching and learning activities. Since

information retrieval (in terms of searching for relevant learning resources to

support teachers or learners) is a pivotal activity in TEL, the deployment of

recommender systems has attracted increased interest. This chapter attempts to

provide an introduction to recommender systems for TEL settings, as well as to

highlight their particularities compared to recommender systems for other

application domains (Koper et al., 2010).

One study that was conducted to determine whether Wiki technology would

improve students’ writing skills in a college English as a foreign language writing

class showed benefits to using Wiki technology. Students were invited to join a

Wiki page where they would write and 5 post passages and then read and respond

to the passages of their fellow classmates. Students participating in the study

reported that their receiving immediate feedback from the instructor was a benefit

of using this form of technology. Students in the study also reported learning

vocabulary, spelling, and sentence structure by reading the work of their

classmates (Lin & Yang, 2011).

Another study found that integrating technology and peer-led discussions

of literature can produce increased student engagement and motivation.

Technology used in these small group discussions of literature includes wikis,

online literature circles, and online book clubs. With these technologies, students

were able to connect with readers from other schools, states, and even other

countries. This type of technology is an assessable and motivational way to expose

students to other ideas and cultures. These online literature discussions have the

ability to create a sense of community and foster positive social interaction (Coffey,

2012).

The use of technology in education has significantly aided students in

performing their school-related tasks. Clegg and Bailey (2008) assert that with the
utilization of mobile devices such as laptops and tablet computers, the learning

process for the students become more fun and conducive due to the user-

interactivity and appealing visuals present in these learning tools. Additionally, a

vast collection of learning games and applications exist for these mobile devices,

and as a matter of fact, there are about 96,000 educational applications available

(App Store Metrics, 2013). The data collected by Apps in Education (2012)

confirmed that the subject areas covered by these applications include

Mathematics, Sciences, Grammar and Spelling and Arts and Humanities (Clegg &

Bailey, 2008).

In the Philippines, President Benigno Aquino announced during the launch

of the country’s K-12 curriculum that the government eyes the use of tablet

computers in public schools in lieu of traditional textbooks (Enterprise Innovation,

2012). Furthermore, there exist various programs by the government, non-

government organizations and private corporations in the Philippines that aim to

provide one laptop computer per child. With the presence of laptops in the

classrooms, students become more engaged and involved in school-related

activities (Oquias, 2011).

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on the Distributed Cognition Theory. In Distributed

Cognition Theory, the student is afforded more power. In other words it is a

student-centered approach to learning where the learners participate in a

systematically designed learning environment that supports interaction amongst

its participants (Bell & Winn, 2000). This theory promotes learning in a community

of learners or a system where interaction takes place. It is through this interaction

where cognition occurs. Distributed Cognition requires sharing of cognitive activity

among the parts and participants of this system, which can be other people or tools

such as devices, technologies or media. These participants distribute their

cognition among other learners and physical or digital tools by externally

representing their knowledge. At times, by using these tools, a little bit of the

information might stick with the user, this is known as cognitive residue. It is

through interaction with other members and tools that progresses learning.

Therefore communication among all participants is paramount in importance (Bell

& Winn, 2000).

The role of technology within this theory is an invaluable part of the system in

which the learners are interacting. This interaction can either help to distribute their

knowledge, off-load certain amounts of cognitive work making the cognitive load

less and or help to scaffold new capabilities (Bell & Winn, 2000). For example,

using camera to take a photo allows more time to learn instead of writing it on a

notebook. Also, in this theory, technology (gadgets) can be used to help extend

human capabilities. For example, calculator can be used to solve math problem

quickly instead of solving it manually. These gadgets help students to make their

learning more efficient. Another example of this is taken from a case study that

was conducted using robotics to produce solving problem skills. In this case study,

students were placed into small collaborative groups and were asked to construct
a robot, using Lego Mindstorm for schools kits, which would perform various tasks.

The groups were introduced to a tool known as a flowchart. They used these

flowcharts to map the programming instructions they would give the robot to

complete the given task. This allowed them to off-load some of the cognitive work

to the flowchart and then through its use, they were able to solve harder problems

(Chambers et al., 2007).

This learning theory supports the very skills needed by the 21st century.

Learners who are placed into a learning environment based on this theory would

be using their “knowledge and skills—by thinking critically, applying knowledge to

new situations, analyzing information, comprehending new ideas, communicating,

collaborating, solving problems, making decisions” (Honey et al., 2003).

Conceptual Framework

The researchers used Independent Variable- Dependent Variable paradigm

format, wherein the frequency of use of gadgets is the independent variable

because it will affect the corresponding dependent variable which is the impact of

gadgets.

Research Paradigm

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Frequency of Use of Gadgets Impact of Gadgets in Learning

 Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research methodology which includes the

research design used in conducting the study. It also includes the sources of data,

locale of the study, population/sampling, and the instrumentation and data

collection.

Research Design

This study used the quantitative research design. Quantitative research

design was used to collect and gather information about the impact of gadgets in

learning. Quantitative research design was used to describe and to test

relationships between objects. It was also presented in numerical form, and

analyzed through the use of statistics. It focused on gathering numerical data and

generalizing it across groups of people or to explain a particular phenomenon. This

research design was used by giving questionnaires to the respondents of this

study.

Sources of Data
 The data were gathered from eighty-nine (89) students of the Science,

Technology & Engineering & Mathematics (STEM) strand of the Urdaneta City

National High School.

Locale of the Study

The locale of the study was in the Senior High School of Urdaneta City

National High School (UCNHS).

Population/ Sampling

The study was conducted on the total population of Science, Technology,

Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) students who were enrolled in the S.Y.

2017-2018 which is equivalent to eighty-nine (89).

Table 1: Distribution of Respondents

Sections of STEM Number of Actual Number of

Strand Students Respondents

Descartes 45 45

Tesla 44 44

Total 89 89

Instrumentation and Data Collection

The instrument used in gathering the data was a questionnaire. The

questionnaire was prepared by the researchers. Quantitative research

questionnaire was used to gather the data and information about the impact of

gadgets in learning.
Statistical Tool

Different statistical tools were used to determine the impact of gadgets in

learning. The frequency of use of gadgets and the impact of gadgets in learning

were determined using the Average Weighted Mean method (AWM). In

interpreting the computed AWM point obtained, the formula is as follows,

AWM = FX / N

where AWM = Average Weighted Mean

F = Frequency

X = Weighted Value

N = total number of respondents’

For the Frequency of Use of Gadgets, this was the scale:

Scale Average Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation

5 4.21- 5.00 Always

4 3.41- 4.20 Very Often

3 2.61- 3.40 Sometimes

2 1.81- 2.60 Seldom

1 1.00- 1.80 Never

For the Impact of Gadgets in Students’ Learning, this was the scale:
Scale Average Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation

4 3.26- 4.00 High Impact

 3 2.51- 3.25 Moderate Impact

2 1.76- 2.50 Slight Impact

1 1.00- 1.75 Low Impact

For the relationship between the frequency of use and impact of gadgets

in learning, Pearson Correlation Coefficient was used. The computed value was

interpreted using the scale below.

Value Descriptive Value

Interpretation

-0.80 to -1.00 Strong Correlation 0.80 to 1.00

-0.50 to -0.79 Moderate Correlation 0.50 to 0.79

-0.20 to -0.49 Weak Correlation 0.20 to 0.49

0 to -0.19 No Correlation 0 to 0.19

 Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter describes the analysis of data followed by the discussion of

the research findings. The finding can relate to the research questions that guided

the study.

Table 2: Frequency of Use of Gadgets in Students’ Learning

Gadget Average Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation

Cellphone 4.56 Always

Computer 3.18 Sometimes

Tablet 2.18 Seldom

The results of the survey conducted showed that Cellphones were always

used by the students in learning with an Average Weighted Mean of 4.56.

Computers were sometimes used by students with an Average Weighted Mean of

3.18 and Tablets were seldom used by students with an Average Weighted Mean

of 2.18.

Table 3 and 4 presented the tabulation of the impact of use of gadgets in

learning among Grade 11-STEM students with the corresponding weighted mean

(WM) and the descriptive interpretation (DI) of each indicators including the

average weighted mean (AWM) of each area.

Table 3: Positive Impact of Gadgets in Students’ Learning
Indicators WM DI
1. I am able to stimulate my senses and imagination better. 3.01 MI
2. I am encouraged to develop my analytical skills. 2.99 MI
3. I am more creative. 2.88 MI
4. I am more knowledgeable in using computers. 3.00 MI
5. I am able to relieve stress and use it for entertainment
3.09 MI
purposes.
6. My hand – eye coordination improved. 2.62 MI
7. My mathematical skills improved. 2.30 SI
8. I am having more fun learning. 3.20 MI
9. I can research topics easier. 3.51 HI
10. I can search for information anywhere. 3.57 HI
AWM 3.02 MI

The positive indicators arranged in order according to their weighted mean

and descriptive interpretation are as follows: “I can search for information

anywhere” (WM = 3.57, DI = HI), “I can research topics easier” (WM = 3.51, DI =

HI), “I am having more fun learning” (WM = 3.20, DI = MI), “I am able to relieve

stress and use it for entertainment purposes” (WM = 3.09, DI = MI), “I am able to

stimulate my senses and imagination better” (WM = 3.01, DI = MI), “I am more

knowledgeable in using computers” (WM = 3.00, DI = MI), “I am encouraged to

develop my analytical skills” (WM = 2.99, DI = MI), “I am more creative” (WM =

2.88, DI = MI), “My hand – eye coordination improved” (WM = 2.62, DI = MI), and

“My mathematical skills improved” (WM = 2.30, DI = SI).

This indicates that the use of gadgets extends the ability of students to

search information, develop and entertain their selves with its features like the

internet, student-friendly websites and educational applications.

Table 4: Negative Impact of Gadgets in Students’ Learning
Indicators WM DI
1. I am more likely to procrastinate. 2.63 MI
2. I am spending less time outdoors. 2.74 MI
3. I am more short-tempered towards my classmates and
2.01 SI
teachers.
4. I am having difficulty concentrating on my studies. 2.35 SI
5. I am having problems socializing with my friends and SI
1.94
classmates.
6. I am more reliant to plagiarism. 1.73 LI
7. My hand writing became worse. 1.78 SI
8. I am too lazy to go to school. 1.66 LI
9. I am having trouble falling asleep. 2.26 SI
10. I sleep less than usual. 2.57 MI
AWM 2.17 SI

The negative indicators arranged in order according to their weighted mean

and descriptive interpretation are as follows: “I am spending less time outdoors”

(WM = 2.74, DI = MI), “I am more likely to procrastinate” (WM = 2.63, DI = MI), “I

sleep less than usual” (WM = 2.57, DI = MI), “I am having difficulty concentrating

on my studies” (WM = 2.35, DI = 2.35), “I am having trouble falling asleep” (WM =

2.26, DI = SI), “I am more short-tempered towards my classmates and teachers”

(WM = 2.01, DI = SI), “I am having problems socializing with my friends and

classmates” (WM = 1.94, DI = SI), “My hand writing became worse” (WM = 1.78,

DI = SI), “I am more reliant to plagiarism” (WM = 1.73, DI = LI), and “I am too lazy

to go to school” (WM = 1.66, DI = LI).

This indicates that the students often get distracted by gadgets instead of

doing such things much important and more beneficial to them and on their studies.
Table 5: Impact of Gadgets in Students’ Learning
Impact Average Weighted Mean Descriptive Interpretation

Positive 3.02 Moderate Impact

Negative 2.17 Slight Impact

Based on the survey conducted by the researchers, the results showed that

the use of gadgets in learning has a Moderately Positive Impact in the students’

learning with an Average Weighted Mean of 3.02. It also shows that the use of

gadgets in learning has a Slightly Negative Impact with an Average Weighted

Mean of 2.17.

Table 6: Relationship between Frequency of Use and Impact of Gadgets

positive negative

frequency Pearson Correlation .139 .162

Sig. (2-tailed) .194 .130

N 89 89

The result of the Pearson Correlation showed that there was no correlation

on both positive impact with 0.139 and negative impact with 0.162 between the

frequency of use and the impact of gadgets in learning.

Graph 1: Pearson Correlation between Frequency of Use and Positive Impact

Graph 2:
Pearson Correlation between Frequency of Use and Negative Impact
 This indicates that the frequency of use does not affect the impact of

gadgets in students’ learning.

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions, and

recommendations based from the findings undertaken by the researchers from the

study entitled “The Impact of Gadgets in Leaning among Grade 11 Students”.

Summary

The main purpose of the study was to determine the impact of gadgets in

learning among Grade 11-STEM students at Urdaneta City National High School

during the school year 2017-2018. It sought answers to the following problems: 1.

the frequency of use of the following gadgets in learning: cellphone, computer, and

tablet; 2. the impact of gadgets in learning as perceived by the students; 3. the

significant relationship between the frequency of use and the impact of gadgets.

The study was conducted at Urdaneta City National High School, Urdaneta

City which included 70 Grade 11 student respondents who are enrolled in the

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) strand during the

school year 2017-2018. This study made use of the quantitative research design

with the questionnaire as the main gathering tool.

 The data were tabulated into a contingency table and treated with the proper

statistical measures.

For problem number 1 and 2, the Average Weighted Mean method was

used; a four-point scale and five-point scale Likert scale was used in the analysis.

The problem number 3 and the null hypothesis were tested for its significance

using the Pearson Product Correlation method.

Conclusions

Relative to the analyses and interpretation of data, the following conclusions

were drawn:

1. Cellphones were always used by the students, computers were sometimes

used by the students and tablets were seldom used by the students in

learning.

2. The use of gadgets has a moderately positive impact in learning because

of its features that extend the ability of the students to do more things but it

also has a slightly negative impact because students are most likely to be

distracted by it.

3. There was no significant correlation between the frequency of use and the

impact of gadgets which means the frequency of the use of gadgets does

not affect its impact but instead, it was based on how we use it.
Recommendations

With all of the foregoing analysis, interpretation, and conclusions of this

study, the following are strongly recommended for possible course of action.

1. Future researchers can conduct a similar study and improve some flaws.

2. Another research should be conducted as follow-up study to investigate

further the impact of gadgets in learning.

3. Future researchers can use this study for references.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. BOOKS

Bell, P., & Winn, W. (2000). Distributed cognitions, by nature and by design. In D.
Jonassen, & L. S. M., Thoretical Foundations of Learning
Environment (pp. 123-145). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.

Coffey, G. (2012). Literacy and Technology: Integrating Technology with Small

Group, Peer-led Discussions of Literature. International Electronic
Journal of Elementary Education, 4(2), 395-405.

Lin, W., & Yang, S. (2011). Exploring students’ perceptions of integrating Wiki
technology and peer feedback into English writing courses. English
Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(2), 88-103.

B. INTERNET SOURCES

Abdullayev, Orxan. Introduction of Essay about Technology. Retrieved from:

https://essayforum.com/essays/introduction-technology-48784/ on
February 17, 2017.
Emerging Theories of Learning and the Role of Technology. Retrieved
from:https://sites.google.com/a/boisestate.edu/edtechtheories/Home/emer
ging-theories-of-learning-and-the-role-of-technology on February 24,
2017.

Essay on Modern Technology. Retrieved from: http://www.studymode.com/

essays/Modern-Gadgets-48092808.html on February 17, 2017.
Gammuac, Heidi. Classroom Gadgets – Using Technology to Enhance
Learning. Retrieved from: http://calgaryherald.com/technology/classroom-
gadgets-using-technology-to-enhance-learning on February 17, 2017.
Impact of Modern Technologies on Youngsters. Retrieved from:
http://uniofbeds.wikidot.com on March 11, 2017.
Koper, Hendrik, Drachsler, Manouselis, Vuorikari, Hammel. Retrieved from:
https://link.springer.com on March 16, 2017.
Macasaet, Rufino. Uplifting Education in the Philippines Through
Technology. Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/4954448/
Uplifting_Education_in_the_Philippines_Through_Technology_Report on
March 16, 2017.
Vega, Vanessa. Technology Integration Research Review: Annotated
Bibliography. Retrieved from: https://www.edutopia.org/technology-
integration-research-annotated-bibliography#meansh on October 21, 2017
 APPENDIX C
Questionnaire

I. Respondent’s Profile
Name: ________________________
Section: Descartes Tesla
Age:
Sex: Male Female

Put a check (✓) on the appropriate box that corresponds to your answer.

II. Usage of Gadget.

1. How often do you use gadgets (cellphones, computers, and tablets)
per day?

Cellphones

Computer

Tablets

III. Impact of gadget in student’s learning

2. What is the impact of using these gadgets in your learning?

4 – High Impact 3 – Moderate Impact 2 – Slight Impact 1 – Low Impact
 When I use my gadget….. 4 3 2 1

1. I am able to stimulate my senses and

imagination better.
2. I am encouraged to develop my analytical
skills.
3. I am more creative.

4. I am more knowledgeable in using

computers.
5. I am able to relieve stress and use it for
entertainment purposes.
6. My hand – eye coordination improved.

7. My mathematical skills improved.

8. I am having more fun learning.

9. I can research topics easier.

When I use my gadget ….. 4 3 2 1
10. I can search for information anywhere.
1. I am more likely to procrastinate.

2. I am spending less time outdoors.

3. I am more short-tempered towards my

classmates and teachers.
4. I am having difficulty concentrating on my
studies.
5. I am having problems socializing with my
friends and classmates.
6. I am more reliant to plagiarism.

7. My hand writing became worse.

8. I am too lazy to go to school.

9. I am having trouble falling asleep.

10. I sleep less than usual.