Software Tools and Skillshare Retain Distinct Links to Business Education Delivery

A Nigerian study of 306 lecturers and students found Google Forms most strongly associated with business education content delivery. Skillshare retained a distinct contribution alongside Google Forms, highlighting purposeful technology integration, staff training and infrastructure support, without proving teaching improved

An everyday platform for quizzes and feedback stood out in research on how Nigerian universities deliver business education, with Google Forms showing the strongest association among four software technologies examined.

The study, "Application of software technologies and delivery of business education content in federal universities," published in Frontiers in Education, investigated Cognitive Artificial Intelligence, Voice on PowerPoint lectures, Skillshare and Google Forms at three federal universities in South-South Nigeria.

Edet E. Okon and colleagues found positive relationships for every tool when analysed separately, with Google Forms and Skillshare retaining distinct associations when all four were considered together.

What the Researchers Measured Across Three Universities

The research involved 306 respondents from the University of Benin, University of Calabar and University of Uyo, including all 53 business education lecturers and 253 undergraduate students selected from a student population of 1,397 during the 2023/2024 academic session.

Lecturers and students answered the same questions about software applications and content delivery, giving the researchers a combined account of the teaching environment. Their responses were analysed together, without separate comparisons between staff and students.

A 39-item questionnaire used four response options, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree, to assess the technologies and different aspects of content delivery. These included clear explanations, understanding of practical skills, timely assessment, flexible teaching and exposure to workplace and digital skills across accounting, marketing and distribution, office management and entrepreneurship education.

Three experts reviewed the questionnaire, and a pilot involving 40 respondents produced an overall reliability coefficient of 0.83. The researchers used regression analysis to examine relationships in the survey responses, without introducing an experimental teaching intervention.

Google Forms Stands Out Among the Four Digital Tools

Google Forms recorded the strongest individual relationship with reported content delivery, with a correlation of 0.804 and a statistical model accounting for 64.6% of the variation in content-delivery scores. That percentage describes differences in questionnaire ratings rather than a measured improvement in student achievement.

The authors suggest that quizzes, formative assessments, surveys and feedback collection could help explain the finding, since these activities give lecturers information about students' understanding and opportunities to adjust their teaching.

Narrated PowerPoint lectures showed a moderate positive relationship, with a correlation of 0.626 and 39.2% of the variation accounted for in their separate model. Combining slides with a lecturer's recorded explanation can support topics that require sequential demonstrations or repeated review beyond the classroom. Cognitive AI, examined as technology supporting reasoning, information processing and learning activities, recorded a correlation of 0.574 and accounted for 33.0% of the variation in its individual model.

Skillshare's correlation was 0.578, with its separate model accounting for 33.5% of the variation in content delivery. Its potential contribution lies in video-based guidance and practical, project-oriented learning that can complement classroom teaching and give students opportunities to practise relevant skills. Every individual relationship was meaningful at p < 0.001, although the findings concern perceived content delivery, with no direct measurement of examination performance or graduate employment.

The Combined Findings Reveal Different Contributions

The model containing all four technologies accounted for 65.6% of the variation in reported content delivery, with a combined correlation of 0.810. The figure remained 65.2% after adjustment for the sample size and number of predictors. Roughly a third of the variation remained outside the model, leaving room for other influences on teaching that the study did not examine.

Google Forms retained the largest significant distinct association after the other technologies were taken into account, with a standardised coefficient of 0.808. Skillshare retained a smaller significant association, with a coefficient of 0.185 and p = 0.004. Cognitive AI and narrated PowerPoint did not contribute additional explanatory value in the combined analysis, despite their positive individual relationships.

The authors interpret this pattern as possible overlap between the software measures; the negative coefficients for AI and PowerPoint do not establish that either technology damages teaching. The results support choosing tools for their particular instructional functions, with careful attention to the evidence for their combined use.

Training and Institutional Support Shape Practical Use

The authors recommend clear university guidelines for AI use in content preparation, explanation and learner support, accompanied by training and procedures for checking generated material for accuracy and academic integrity. Narrated PowerPoint teaching needs recording facilities, technical assistance and dependable electricity, with concise presentations designed for difficult concepts and independent review. Skillshare activities should be selected for their relevance to coursework, linked to practical projects and monitored for student participation and completion.

Google Forms could be used more deliberately for quizzes, assignments, surveys and feedback, supported by training that helps lecturers design useful questions and respond to the answers. The wider recommendation is to integrate the four technologies into course plans according to their different purposes, backed by reliable internet access, staff development, technical support and regular evaluation. Curriculum planners and policymakers have a role in supporting relevant digital competencies and funding the conditions needed for effective use.

This approach reflects the study's Activity Theory framework, which treats learning as shaped by tools, users, institutional arrangements and teaching goals. The evidence needs careful interpretation because the research relied on self-reported perceptions from three universities and cannot establish that software use caused better content delivery.